Possible solution to past CM examination question

Question 2 - April 2009

Hazardous Liquid Storage Building

by Dr Peter Gardner

The information provided should be seen as an interpretation of the brief and a possible solution to a past question offered by
an experienced engineer with knowledge of the examiners’ expectations (i.e. it's an individual's interpretation of the brief
leading to one of a number of possible solutions rather than the definitive "correct" or "model" answer).
 Chartered Membership Examination 7

Question 2. Hazardous Liquid Storage Building

Client’s requirements
1. A waterproof building is required to store two tanks containing hazardous liquids.
2. The tanks are 2 metres in diameter, 5 metres long and each weigh 400kN.
3. The tanks must be stored so that the underside of each tank is at an elevation of 5.0m above ground level.
No internal columns are permitted either within the building or beneath the tanks. A 6.0 m clear space is
required around each tank for inspection and the tanks must have at least 4.0m clear space between them.
4. The building is to be situated at the centre of an island approximately 100.0m square protected by sheet piling.
5. The tanks will be delivered by barge at a minimum distance of 5.0m from the edge of the island and then
stored in the building for approximately one month. During this period the access doors of the building must
be kept shut.

Imposed loading
6. Roof loading 1.5kN/m2 (including imposed and services)

Floor loading
Candidate to advise

Site conditions
7. The site is located in a river estuary. Basic wind speed is 46m/s based on a 3 second gust; the equivalent
mean hourly wind speed is 23m/s.
8. Mobile crane capacity on the island is limited to 20 tonnes due to the poor ground conditions. No suitable
barge mounted cranes are available in this location.
9. Borehole 1 at island edge Ground level – 1.5 m River silt
1.5 m to 6.0 m – Soft clay C = 25 kN/m2
6.0 m - depth – Rock – allowable safe bearing pressure 1000 kN/m2
Water was found at 4.0m depth
Borehole 2 at island centre Ground level – 0.5 m – Topsoil
0.5 m – 3.0 m Soft clay C = 25 kN/m2

3.0 m - depth Rock – allowable safe bearing pressure 1000 kN/m2

Water was found at 2.0m depth

Omit from consideration
10. Detailed design of cranes although any support structure must be considered.

SECTION 1 (50 marks)

a. Prepare a design appraisal with appropriate sketches indicating two distinct and viable solutions for the
proposed structure including a suitable structure to enable the tanks to be lifted from the Barge and
transported to their final postion within the building. Indicate clearly the functional framing, load transfer and
stability aspects of each scheme. Identify the solution you recommend, giving reasons for your choice. (40 marks)
b. After your design is complete, the client explains that he wishes to store a third tank inside the building at
ground level for a week. Write a letter to your client advising him of the implications of this change. (10 marks)

SECTION 2 (50 marks)

For the solution recommended in Section 1(a):
c. Prepare sufficient design calculations to establish the form and size of all the principal structural elements
including the foundations. (20 marks)
d. Prepare general arrangement plans, sections and elevations to show the dimensions, layout and disposition
of the structural elements and critical details for estimating purposes. (20 marks)
e. Prepare a detailed method statement for the safe construction of the building and an outline construction
programme. (10 marks)
6 Chartered Membership Examination
Introduction

This is an interesting question that requires the design of a building to store substantial tanks
containing hazardous liquids and the transport mechanisms needed to move them from
delivery barges to the building.

The question sets a fairly complex scenario that takes some time to understand. Under
examination conditions, this itself can be problematic, as time is a valuable commodity. It's a
recipe for disaster to start formulating a solution before you fully understand every aspect of
the brief, and have a clear understanding of the structural implications of every part of the
question, however pressed you are for time!

Despite the title of the question, "hazardous liquid storage building", the question includes
the design of the transport mechanisms, which require significant thought and probably
contains as much work as the building itself. The question therefore deals with two, inter-
related, but effectively separate, structures.

The issues
• very poor quality ground
• tanks delivered by barge that need moving to a storage building
• substantial loads supported mid-span, with no internal columns
• waterproof access to the building for the tanks

Summary of main conditions

• two tanks, each two metres in diameter and five metres long, weighing 400 kN
(presumably when full)
• tanks stored five metres above ground level
• no internal columns within the building, including underneath the tanks.
• six metre clear space required around each tank, four metre clear space between tanks.
• island, one hundred metres square, with sheet pile walls.
• tanks delivered by barge, five metres from edge of island.
• mobile crane capacity limited to 20 tonnes.
• soil conditions: topsoil, silts and clay with rock under, with a safe ground bearing
pressure of 1000 kN/m2

This is a complex scenario that takes some time to digest. The initial approach would
probably be to sketch out the various elements with the constraints (see fig 1).

The building basically needs to support the two tanks without any internal columns, with
clear space around the tanks for access.

The loading structure needs to facilitate the pick-up of the tanks from barges and transport
them to their storage position within the building.

The very poor ground above the rock needs to be considered for both the cranes and building
(ie the crane structure will need engineered foundations). Additionally, the sheet pile wall
needs to be considered in relation to any surcharge from the crane structure. Two distinct and

CM Q2 2009
viable solutions are required for both the building and the lifting arrangement, making this a
fairly substantial question.

The scale and complexity of the proposed structure is actually not particularly onerous, so for
those candidates who are familiar with crane systems and industrial buildings, the brief
shouldn't present any particular problems. The difficulty with this question, it seems to me, is
understanding the brief and devising two distinct and viable solutions taking into account all
the constraints, in a relatively short period of time, especially at the very beginning of the
exam when you're possibly scanning a number of questions in an attempt to find the one most
suited to your skills and experience.

Possible solutions

The ground and foundations

The ground conditions are so poor that the only realistic option is to found everything on the
rock. Assuming that you offer two distinct and viable solutions for the building and the
transport mechanism, it's probably worth making the foundations very straightforward with a
single proposal of piles on the rock, both for the building and the transport mechanism.
There would be some opportunity to provide some variation in the foundation system, for
instance pads on the rock in lieu of piles, but in reality this is just a variation on a theme. It is
probably not worth the time spending additional effort on the foundations as there is more
than enough to do with the rest of this question!

The building

The building itself is actually fairly straightforward. We need to address: the support
mechanism for the tanks, creating openings to allow the tanks to be installed and removed
(which obviously must link to the transport mechanism proposed), stability and the main
columns and roof structure.

The building, although simple in its geometry, is fairly large bearing in mind that there are no
internal columns and there is substantial load involved. Because the building is fully clad,
stability will not be a problem as traditional diagonal bracing can be incorporated as required,
as long as the loading doors are accommodated. However we are still required to provide two
distinct and viable schemes. The main options revolve around the buildings framing, its
stability and the supports for the tank. As far as the tank supports are concerned, deep beams
could run in either direction (or both in the form of a grid) but the span is significant. An
alternative would be to support the tanks from the roof (see fig 2). This would significantly
reduce the span of the supports; however the crane would need to run inside the hangers to
ensure they don't clash. The building itself could utilise a portalised roof in one case and a
lattice girder in the other (see fig 3). A mix of these elements would provide two different
(distinct and viable) structural arrangements.

The loading mechanism

As far as the loading mechanism is concerned, it needs to be able to pick a tank off the barge,
move it across the island and lift the tank into the building. Everything connected with this
mechanism needs to be on piled foundations. Additionally we need to be careful that the

CM Q2 2009
sheet pile island wall is not adversely affected by the loading activity by ensuring that the
edge of the island (sheet piles) is not surcharged by the crane when offloading the tanks.

The lifting operation has three elements: lifting off the barge, transporting across the island
and lifting into position within the building. Probably the two most straightforward ways of
doing this would be: a high-level crane rail, cantilevered over the river, which would run
directly into the building (of a similar construction to overhead cranes used in materials
handling situations) (see fig 4) and as an alternative, a ground level track system with a
separate arrangement to offload from the barge and a crane mechanism inside the building to
lift the tanks into their storage position (see fig 5).

Lateral stability of the high-level crane system needs to be assessed. This will necessitate
cantilevered braced columns to resist the lateral, surge forces from the crane

The question mentions a limited-capacity mobile crane, and this is probably intended to stop
you just specifying an off-the-shelf crane. This does however present a third possible option
of a built-in version of a "standard crane", although the distances and weights involved are
considerable, so the two options mentioned above are probably the most practical. The
mobile crane would of course be necessary to erect the building.

Although crane buildings follow the same fundamental principles as any other building, it
might be difficult to approach this particular question without specific knowledge of cranes,
especially in relation to the dynamic load induced by the movement of the crane (in three
directions, using appropriate multiplication factors to take account of the dynamic effect of
the loads).

The letter

The letter relates to the client wishing to store a third tank inside the building at ground level
for a week. This is fairly straightforward in that the lifting mechanism is already in place but
clearly the third tank adds substantial additional weight.

As the scenario you are presented with states that the design (rather than the construction) is
complete, this allows the option of recommending a low-level storage arrangement (ie the
third tank supported by the floor rather than the building) as a way of keeping the cost of the
construction to a minimum whilst still facilitating the storage of a third tank.

Whether the additional tank will put any extra load on the structure depends on whether the
high-level gantry or the low-level track has been selected as the preferred scheme and the
sequence of moving the tanks. If the building already contains two tanks, and the third is
manoeuvred by the internal crane, this will put an extra 400kN on the building. However, if
the additional tank can be manoeuvred and stored at ground level, before the other two are in
place, this would avoid the need for a higher load capacity building (saving the client
money). Of course this is the significance of the shorter storage duration of the third tank: if
the other two tanks are stored for a month and the third tank only a week, then at some point
the building will be subjected to the load of all three tanks at the same time. If the low-level
loading arrangement is adopted, then the additional tank could be left on the transport
mechanism, but stored inside the building, in which case it will not impose any additional
load on the structure, other than the ground floor and associated foundations. The only

CM Q2 2009
limitation of this option is that the two tanks at high level could not be moved while the third
tank is in-situ (because the third tank is using the transport mechanism).

Of course, what actually happens is immaterial, as that's the client's decision. What the letter
is testing is your ability to articulate the structural options to the client in a clear and concise
way. Clients will always be interested in lower-cost options, even if they provide some
constraints. This therefore presents an ideal opportunity to explain some fairly complex
options to the client, and should result in fairly easily earned marks.

Summary

This is a complex brief. Although the question itself is not particularly demanding, it does
necessitate knowledge of dynamic loads imposed by cranes and an understanding of typical
crane arrangements. Once this is mastered, there is plenty in the question to enable a
competent and experienced candidate to demonstrate their ability to work-up a scheme in
response to a brief and show the depth of their engineering knowledge and understanding of
structural behaviour.

This is not a question for the faint-hearted, but it does not contain any insurmountable
challenges, or require any interpretation of the brief, so it should provide an opportunity to
provide a full answer and therefore a respectable pass mark. It does however require
knowledge of crane structures. I think the most difficult element of this question is managing
your time in such a way as to ensure you fully understand the brief and can then work quickly
enough to provide a complete answer. If you can, this is an ideal question.

CM Q2 2009