Journal of Structural Technology

e-ISSN: 2581-950X
Volume 4 Issue 3

Analysis and Design of Intze Water Tank Using Sap2000

Software
Naveen Kumar S M1, Kavana K. N2, H. Eramma3
1
Assistant Professor, 2P.G Student
Department of Civil Engineering, A.I.T, Karnataka, India
3
Associate Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University BDT College of Engineering,
Davangere, Karnataka, India
Email: 1smnaveen75@gmail.com, 2kavanakn1995@gmail.com, 3h.eramma@gmail.com
DOI:

Abstract
The present study emphasis is placed on the analysis and design of elevated water tank
structures by manual method and by using SAP2000 software for gravity and lateral loading.
A typical intze water tank is considered for the study. The structure is modeled using
SAP2000 software using a combination of plate and line elements. The gravity loading
consists of vertical and horizontal water pressure along with the self weight of the structure.
The lateral loading is in the form of seismic loading as per the provisions of IS 1893. The
structure is analyzed for combinations involving gravity and lateral loading. Push over
analysis is also performed. The structure is then designed for the internal forces using
SAP2000 and manual methods. The results of the present study reveal that SAP2000 is
convenient and efficient tool for the analysis and design of water tank structures. The push
over curve reveals the ductility of the structure. The results of design from SAP2000 and
manual methods are in good agreement with each other.

Keywords: Intze tank, I.S. codes, seismic load, SAP2000, wind load

INTRODUCTION  Staging system required to take the

A water tank is used to save water to tide
over the day-to-day obligation. A proper
storage and supply of water is the sign of a
civilized society. In the modern era, water
tanks play a vital role in the planning of
any city or town. Hence, it is very
important that water tanks are built with
utmost care towards their structural
integrity and safety. In the building of
concrete construction for the storing of
water and additional fluids the
unreceptiveness of concrete is supreme
necessary. The permeability of some
unchanging and methodically compressed
concrete of assumed mix parts is mostly
reliant on water cement ratio. The proper
selection of water cement ratio is
necessary to avoid cracks in the structure.
Any elevated water tank consists of two
parts. Namely,
 Dome or frustum that stores the water
water storage to a desirable elevation.
Dome portion will be in contact with water
and is generally consist of reinforced
concrete walls. The staging system can be
made up of vertical columns and
intermediate beams. In certain water tanks
the staging system is made up of conical or
tubular single column consist of reinforced
concrete wall
Classification of Water Tank
Based on the configuration, water tanks
shall be classified as follows.
 Rectangular tanks
 Circular tanks
 Intze tanks
 Spherical tanks
 Domed bottom tanks
 Conical bottom tanks

12 Page 5-11 © MAT Journals 2019. All Rights Reserved

 Journal of Structural Technology
e-ISSN: 2581-950X
Volume 4 Issue 3

Figure 1: Classification of water tanks.

Intze Tanks arch action hence greatly minimizing the

This represents the optimum shape for a stresses. Intze tanks are the most
circular water tank. The bottom portion economical for circular water tanks. The
resists the vertical water pressure by the different components of intze water tank.

Figure 2: Components of intze tank.

LITERATURE REVIEW K.S.K Karthik Reddy et.al (2015),

H.S. Patel et.al (2012), Reported on
behavior of supporting system which is
more effective under different earthquake
time history records with SAP 2000
software. Here two different supporting
systems such as radial bracing and cross
bracing are compared with basic
supporting system for various fluid level
conditions by observing base shear,
overturning moment, roof displacement.
Reported on Design and analysis of
elevated intze water tank both manually
and by using SAP2000 software. Wind
analysis of reinforced concrete Intze tank
is carried out at different staging heights of
tank and in different wind zones in India
of different terrain categories and
concluded that of all the 4 terrain
categories wind zones, the terrain
category1 is observed to be unsafe because

13 Page 12-21 © MAT Journals 2019. All Rights Reserved


it is open terrain with no obstruction and is
designed for more steel.
Bugatha Adilakshmi et.al (2016) presented
Manual design of water tank working
stress method is used to design an Intze
tank and staging elements of the Intze tank
are designed by limit state method for a
given capacity. This project gives best
estimates of the required quantity of
concrete and steel for a given water
holding capacity.
Rupal Gondalia et.al (2017), presented
nonlinear static analysis for evaluate
seismic demand for 250m3 and 500m3
capacity of tank with zone ii, zone iii, zone
iv, zone v in empty case and full water
load condition using SAP2000. This gives
plots the total base shear versus top
displacement curve, and concluded that
base shear increases with increases in
height of tank and increase in percentage
of filling in storage tank.
METHODOLOGY
 A typical Intze tank is for the required
PRELIMINARY DIMENSIONS THE STRUCTURE
Table 1: Preliminary dimensions of the water tank structure.
Component
Top dome
Top ring beam
Cylindrical walll
iBottom ring beami
Conical domei
Bottom domei
Circular ring beam
Braces
Column
MANUAL DESIGN
Dome portion is designed by working
stress method and staging elements are
designed by limit state method using code
books IS: 3370-2009, IS: 456-2000, IS:
1893-2002, SP: 16-1980
Top Dome
 Thickness = 100 mm
 Force = 4.0 KN/m²
14 Page 12-21 © MAT Journals 2019. All Rights Reserved
Journal of Structural Technology
e-ISSN: 2581-950X
Volume 4 Issue 3
capacity is chosen for the present
study. The preliminary dimensions of
the tank are calculated for the capacity
requirement.
 The water tank structure is then
designed by manual method using
relevant provisions of Indian code
following working stress method of
design for un-cracked concrete section.
 The water tank structure is then
modelled and analyzed using SAP
2000 software. The staging part of the
tank is modelled using line elements
and the tank part is modelled using
shell elements. The water tank
structure is analyzed for gravity load
including the dead load and water load
and also lateral load in the form of
seismic loads.
 The results design results by manual
method and that from the SAP 2000
software are compared.
 Hence, a more refined non-linear static
analysis in the form of pushover
analysis is performed in order to assess
the non-linear behavior of the water
tank structure.
Size (mm)
100
300*300
400
1300*650
650
300
650*1300
550*550
650
 Hoop Stress = 0.11 N/mm²
 Meridonial stress = 0.25 N/mm²
 Reinforcement = 300 mm²
Top Ring Beam
 Size = 300 x 300 (mm)
 Meridonial Thrust = 25.5 KN/m²
 Hoop tension = 135 KN
 Tensile stress = 1.01 N/mm²
 Reinforcement = 900 mm²

Cylindrical Wall
 Height = 8m
 Thickness = 400 mm
 Hoop tension = 540 KN/m
 Reinforcement = 3600 mm²
Middle Ring Beam
 Size = 1300 x 650 (mm)
 Hoop tension = 992.52 KN
 Reinforcement = 6616.8mm²
 Tensile Stress = 1.09 N/mm²
Conical Dome
 Thickness = 650 mm
 Meridonial thrust = 652.27 KN/m
 Hoop tension = 868.95 KN/m
 Tensile stress = 1.23 N/mm²
 Reinforcement = 5793.16mm²
Bottom Spherical Dome
 Thickness = 300 mm
 Meridonial thrust = 383.67 KN/m
 Meridonial stress = 1.28 N/mm²
 Hoop stress = 0.317 N/mm²
 Reinforcement = 600 mm²
Bottom Ring Beam
 Size =650 x 1300 (mm)
 Load = 611.1 KN/m
 Hoop Compression = 217.39 KN
 Hoop stress = 0.257 N/mm²
 Reinforcement = 3822.4 mm²
Column
 Size =650 x 650 (mm)
 Analysis results from SAP2000
 Pu= 2397.9kN
 Mu= 987.1 kN-m
 Reinforcement = 8028mm²
 Ties=10mm dia ties @ 300 mm c/c
Bracing
 Size =550 x 550 (mm)
 Mu =372 kN-m.
15 Page 12-21 © MAT Journals 2019. All Rights Reserved
Journal of Structural Technology
e-ISSN: 2581-950X
Volume 4 Issue 3
 Vu =108.2 kN
 Reinforcement = 1896mm²
Foundation
 Totallload = 21101.8 kNl
 SBC = 196 kN/m²
 Area of the foundation=107.66 m²
 Width of raft slab =4m
Circular girder
 b = 650mm
 D = 1250mm
 Cover = 70
 Reinforcement =3330.29 mm²
Raft slab
 b=1.6 m
 D=650 mm
 Main Reinforcement=1985.6mm2
 Distribution Reinforcement =1248mm2
SAP 2000
Structural Analysis Program (SAP)
2000 (v.20.0.1) is a powerful finite
element analysis tools that are the products
of Computers and Structures Inc, SAP
2000 is a general purpose software which
can be used for the analysis of any
structural system with many advanced
options for many higher order analyses
The step by step procedure for modeling of
water tank structure using SAP 2000
software is explained as follows
 Model Initialization using Storage
structure template for quick modeling
of water tank
 Creating Geometry
 Defining and Assigning Material and
Section Properties
 Defining Boundary Condition
 Defining Load cases
 Defining load combinations
 Assigning the load and load
combination
 Analyze the model
 Journal of Structural Technology
e-ISSN: 2581-950X
Volume 4 Issue 3

Figure 3: FE Model of water tank. Figure 4: Extruded view of the water tank structure.

PUSHOVER ANALYSIS IN SAP 2000 introduction of frame non-linear hinges.

The SAP 2000 model created for the
analysis and design of the water tank
structure is a linear model. In order to run
a pushover analysis, the linear model
needs to be converted in to a non-linear
model. It is accomplished by the
Beams are assigned with flexural (M3)
hinges and columns are assigned with
coupled flexural and moment hinges
(PMM) hinges. The assignment of hinges
for the present structure is shown in the
figure below.

Figure 5: Assignment of frame non-linear hinges to the water tank structure.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION SAP2000 software also presented below. The

The response of the structure in terms of deflected shape of structure under gravity and
deflection of the structure and internal forces seismic loading shown in fig. 5 and fig. 6.
determined using SAP 2000. The comparison The maximum structural deformations is
of design results of manual method and presented in Table 2.

16 Page 12-21 © MAT Journals 2019. All Rights Reserved

 Journal of Structural Technology
e-ISSN: 2581-950X
Volume 4 Issue 3

Figure 6: Deflected shape under gravity load. Figure 7: Deflected shape under seismic load.

Table 2: Maximum Structural deformations

Maximum Structure Displacements
Ux Uy Uz Rx Ry Rz
(mm) (mm) (mm) (Rad) (Rad) (Rad)
16.341 15.801 6.863 0.0448 0.0478 0.00488

OBSERVATION direction that is 0.0488 radians. Therefore

The axial deformation of the structure is
maximum in x coordinate that is 16.34mm
the radial deformation is maximum in y
The internal forces interms of stresses
acting meridionaly and circumferencially
in the area elements determined for
the structure is designed to resist these
deformations.
different load combinations using SAP
2000 software are shown in fig. 8.

Figure 8: Stress contour in tank portion.

17 Page 12-21 © MAT Journals 2019. All Rights Reserved

 Journal of Structural Technology
e-ISSN: 2581-950X
Volume 4 Issue 3

Table 3: Comparison of analysis results from SAP 2000 and manual method.
Manual Method SAP2000
Stess in the top dome 0.36 MPa 0.345 MPa
Stress in cylindrical wall 1.35 MPa 1.29 MPa
Stress in conical dome 2.23 MPa 2.145 MPa
Stess in the bottom dome 1.596 MPa 1.53 MPa

OBSERVATION DESIGN OF STAGING USING SAP

The maximum stresses in top dome,
cylindrical wall, conical dome, bottom
dome calculated both from manual and
SAP 2000 are within the codal provisions
hence the structure is safe.
2000
The design the staging element of the
structure using IS: 456-2000. The figure 9
shows the longitudinal reinforcements for the
structure as given by SAP 2000 software.

Figure 9: Longitudinal reinforcement for staging elements.

Table 4: Bracing beam longitudinal reinforcement summary data.

Frame text Design section Design type Load combination Top area(mm2) Bottom area(mm2)
101 Bracing beam Beam DCON2 701 540
102 Bracing beam Beam DCON2 954 784
103 Bracing beam Beam DCON2 695 564
105 Bracing beam Beam DCON2 795 771
106 Bracing beam Beam DCON2 985 886
109 Bracing beam Beam DCON2 671 565
111 Bracing beam Beam DCON2 717 534
112 Bracing beam Beam DCON2 1014 821
114 Bracing beam Beam DCON2 872 706
115 Bracing beam Beam DCON2 856 941

Observation reinforcement is 1014 mm2 and bottom

It has been observed from the above area of reinforcement is 821mm 2.
table that the maximum top area of

18 Page 12-21 © MAT Journals 2019. All Rights Reserved

 Journal of Structural Technology
e-ISSN: 2581-950X
Volume 4 Issue 3

Table 5: Column longitudinal reinforcement summary data.

Frame text Design sect Location PMM combo PMM area Tie bars
text mm text mm2 mm2/mm
50 Column 4000 DCON2 6972 0.26
51 Column 4000 DCON2 7028 0.26
53 Column 4000 DCON2 5475 0.26
54 Column 4000 DCON2 7527 0.26
55 Column 4000 DCON2 7036 0.26
64 Column 4000 DCON2 7595 0.26
75 Column 4000 DCON2 7630 0.26
83 Column 4000 DCON2 7527 0.26
84 Column 4000 DCON2 7587 0.26
85 Column 4000 DCON2 6180 0.26

Observation column is 7630mm2, tie reinforcement in

From the above table it has been observed column 0.26 mm2/mm.
that the maximum area of steel in the

Table 6: Comparison of area of steel from manual method and SAP2000.

From Manual calculations (mm2) From SAP 2000 (mm2)
Bracing beam 1896 1835
Columns 8024 7630

RESULTS OF PUSHOVER loading is assessed using SAP2000

ANALYSIS USING SAP 2000 software. The capacity curve or the
The non-linear behavior of the intze water pushover curve for the water tank structure
tank under both gravity and seismic can be seen in the figure below.

PUSHOVER CURVE
60

50
BASE SHEAR (1000xkN)

40

30
PUSHOVER CURVE
20

10

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
ROOF TOP DISPLACEMENT (m)

Figure 10: Pushover curve for the water tank structure.

OBSERVATION the ratio of ultimate displacement to yield

From the above fig. 10, it can be seen that displacement which is about 6.
non-linear behavior of the structure starts
after the base shear of about 40000kN. It The capacity and the demand curves in the
can be seen that the structure has good ADRS format are displayed in the figure
ductility characteristics characterized by below.

19 Page 12-21 © MAT Journals 2019. All Rights Reserved


0.007
0.006
SPECTRAL ACCELARATION
0.005
0.004
0.003
0.002
0.001
0
0 0.2
Figure 11: Capacity and demand curves in ADRS format.
OBSERVATION
From the above fig. 11, it can be seen that
the performance point is well within the
elastic part of the capacity curve. Hence,
CONCLUSIONS
The present study concentrates on the
analysis and design of a water tank
structure for gravity and seismic loading
by SAP2000 and Manual methods.
Following are the conclusions drawn from
the present study.
 Water tanks are important structures
and hence they should be properly
analyzed and designed for gravity and
earthquake loading. SAP2000 is a
convenient tool for the analysis and
design of water tank structures.
 A comparison made between the
internal forces in terms of stresses
calculated from manual analysis and
that calculated by SAP2000 It was
found that the difference in stress
calculated from manual and SAP2000
analysis was about 4.15% for top
dome, 4.44% for cylindrical tank wall,
3.8% for conical dome and 4.13% for
bottom dome. The difference is within
acceptable limits of engineering
practice.
 The difference in the area of the steel
required from manual calculations and
SAP2000 shows a difference of 3.21%
20
Journal of Structural Technology
e-ISSN: 2581-950X
Volume 4 Issue 3
Capacity Curve
Demand curve
0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
SPECTRAL DICEPLACEMENT
the structure is likely to remain elastic and
sustain minimum damages during the
earthquake for zone 2.
for the staging beams. Hence, there is a
fair agreement between the results
calculated from the two approaches.
 A comparison of area of steel required
from manual calculations and from that
of SAP2000 for the columns shows a
difference of 4.9% which is well
within the acceptable limits of the
engineering practice.
 The structure has good ductility
characteristics characterized by the
ratio of ultimate displacement to yield
displacement which is about 6. The
performance point is well within the
elastic part of the capacity curve.
Hence, the structure is likely to remain
elastic and sustain minimum damages
during the earthquake for zone 2.
REFERENCES
1. Sudhir K. Jain, O R Jaiswal (2007),
“IITK-GSDMA Guidelines for Seismic
Design of Liquid Storage Tanks”,
2. Dr. Jagadish. G. Kori, Pavan. S.
Ekbote (August 2013), “Seismic
Behavior of RC Elevated Water Tank
under Different Types of Staging
Pattern”, Journal of Engineering,
Computers & Applied Sciences
Page 12-21 © MAT Journals 2019. All Rights Reserved

(JEC&AS), ISSN No: 2319-5606
Volume 2, Issue 8.
3. Nitesh J Singh, Mohammad Ishtiyaque
(2015), “Design Analysis & “User’s manual, Computers and
Comparison of Intze Type Water Tank
For Different Wind Speed And
Seismic Zones As Per Indian Codes”,
International Journal of Research in
Engineering and Technology, Volume
04,
4. K. S. K Karthik Reddy, Harsh kaviti
(2015), “Analysis and Design of
Elevated Intze Water tank and its
Comparative Study in Different Wind
Zones - using SAP2000”, Volume 2,
Issue 2,
5. Bugatha Adilakshmi, Paliki Suribabu
(2016), “Design, Analysis and
Optimization of Intze type water tank
for different parameters as per Indian
Codes”, International Journal Of
Advanced Research In Science And
Engineering, Volume 5, Issue 1,
6. Ms. Rupal Gondalia1, Asst. Prof.
Dhananjay Patel (2017), “Non-Linear
Static Pushover Analysis on Elevated
21 Page 12-21 © MAT Journals 2019. All Rights Reserved
Journal of Structural Technology
e-ISSN: 2581-950X
Volume 4 Issue 3
Storage Reservoir”, Scientific Journal
Of Impact Factor, Volume 4, Issue 4.
7. Structural Analysis Program SAP2000.
Structures, Inc., Berkley
8. IS: 1893-2002 (Part I), “Criteria for
Earthquake Resistant Design of
structures”, Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi.
9. IS: 456-2000, “Indian Standard Code
of practice for Plain and Reinforced
Concrete”, Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi.
10. IS: 875 (Part 2), (part3) (1987), “Code
of practice for design loads other than
earthquake for buildings and
structures: Imposed loads”, Bureau of
Indian Standards, New Delhi.
11. SP: 16 (1980), “Design aids for
reinforced concrete to IS: 456-1978”,
Indian Standard Institution, New
Delhi.
12. IS: 3370 (Part 1)-2009, “Code of
practice concrete structures for the
storage of liquids”.