See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/354077271

Evaluation of the adequacy of a spring-mass model in analyses of liquid sloshing

in anchored storage tanks

Article  in  Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics · August 2021

DOI: 10.1002/eqe.3539

CITATIONS READS

7 149

3 authors, including:

Diego Hernandez-Hernandez Tam Larkin

University of Auckland University of Auckland
12 PUBLICATIONS   63 CITATIONS    81 PUBLICATIONS   699 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Earthquake-resistant structures made of natural fibre reinforced polymer and cementitious composites View project

Marginal aggregates View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Diego Hernandez-Hernandez on 23 August 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 1 EVALUATION OF THE ADEQUACY OF A SPRING-MASS MODEL IN ANALYSES
2 OF LIQUID SLOSHING IN ANCHORED STORAGE TANKS
3
4 Diego Hernandez-Hernandez*1, Tam Larkin1, and Nawawi Chouw1
5
1
6 Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, the University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
7
8 This research addresses the influence of the load characteristics, i.e., frequency content and maximum acceleration,
9 on the wall stresses of an anchored water storage tank. A low-density polyethylene tank with a range of six different
10 aspect ratios (water height to tank radius) was tested using a shake table. Eight sine excitations that cover the lowest
11 free vibration frequency of the tank-water system were applied. Additionally, two sets of five Ricker wavelet
12 excitations were utilized. Each set represents potential earthquakes with a bandwidth between a low and a high
13 dominant frequency. The experimentally determined maximum stresses and those obtained from calculations using a
14 common spring-mass model employed for seismic analysis of tanks were compared. The results reveal that the
15 relationship between the excitation frequency and the wall stresses strongly depends on the sloshing behavior,
16 especially when the frequency of loading is in the vicinity of the lowest free–vibration frequency of the tank–water
17 system. When the frequencies are dissimilar, there is a proportional relationship between stress and the maximum
18 acceleration of the excitation. The spring-mass model was found to underestimate both the maximum hoop stress (for
19 aspect ratios greater than two) and axial stress (for aspect ratios equal to 0.5). The occurs because is the spring-mass
20 model cannot capture, in all cases, the contribution of chaotic sloshing to wall stress.
21
22 KEYWORDS
23
24 Liquid storage tanks, frequency content, sloshing, tank wall stress, shake table, spring-mass model
25
26 Correspondence
27
28 *Diego Hernandez-Hernandez, Civil and Environmental Department,
29 The University of Auckland
30 314-390 Khyber Pass Road, Newmarket, Auckland
31 Building 906, Room 313
32 Auckland, New Zealand, 1023
33 Email: dher840@aucklanduni.ac.nz
34
35 1. INTRODUCTION
36
37 Vertical cylindrical liquid storage tanks are structures commonly built in both residential and industrial areas. The size
38 of these structures can be massive, e.g., those built in 2006 in Shenzhen, China1, with a capacity of 160 000 m3 and a
39 diameter larger than 20 m. The integrity of these structures following strong earthquakes is a crucial factor in
40 developing resilient communities. However, post-earthquake observations2–5 have repeatedly shown the vulnerability
41 of storage tanks to strong ground motion. Recorded observations have provided indisputable evidence of the
42 complexities of understanding the seismic response of these large structures. Key points of vulnerability, identified
43 from observations, help in the development of design guides and codes of practice.
44
45 Difficulties in understanding, and hence mathematically modeling, tank seismic response comes from several factors.
46 These are, among others:
47
48 1) The interaction between the fluid and tank wall (fluid-structure interaction FSI), which determines the
49 sloshing behavior, see e.g.,6,7.
50 2) The transient partial separation (uplift) of the tank from the support base8–12.
51 3) The characteristics of the seismic excitation, e.g., frequency content, amplitude and duration13–16.
52 4) The interaction between the soil and tank (soil-structure interaction SSI)17–20.
53
54 This work focuses on factor 3) of the list above, i.e., the effects of the frequency content of an excitation on the
55 response of anchored tanks placed on a rigid base.
 56
57 In current tank design practice, simplifications are necessarily made due to the complex nature of the response.
58 Consequently, the real behavior of a tank, considering all the factors mentioned above, is still some way from being
59 practically incorporated in design guides and codes of practice. The motivation of this work stems from an evaluation
60 of the procedures recommended in the guidelines for the seismic design of liquid storage tanks, e.g.,21–24. The
61 procedures in references21–24 consist of a quasi-static analysis using a spring-mass model proposed by Housner25. The
62 model assumes the essential nature of the seismic response of liquid storage tanks can be represented by two distinct
63 vibration modes, i.e., impulsive and convective. The impulsive mode represents the portion of the liquid that moves
64 in unison with the tank wall, while the convective mode corresponds to the sloshing of the liquid. In most cases, the
65 first impulsive and the first convective modes are enough for a reasonably accurate engineering prediction, i.e., design
66 purposes, of the response of anchored cylindrical tanks on a rigid supporting base 26–28.
67
68 Failure of tanks in the past earthquakes has demonstrated that the tank response depends heavily on three factors 29: 1)
69 the aspect ratio (liquid height ℎ to tank radius 𝑟), 2) the sloshing pattern, and 3) the excitation characteristics. In
70 partially filled vertical cylindrical tanks, three generic sloshing patterns have been identified 30, i.e., planar, nonplanar
71 and chaotic. Figure 1(a) shows the first pattern of liquid displacement. This corresponds to small oscillations where
72 the water surface remains essentially planar. The second pattern refers to a more considerable liquid movement that
73 creates larger sloshing heights than the first pattern, and the water surface is nonplanar, see Figure 1(b). Figure 1(c)
74 shows the third pattern associated with abrupt velocity changes of the liquid that leads to chaotic sloshing. The
75 excitation characteristics, i.e., frequency content, amplitude and duration, affect the sloshing pattern significantly. A
76 strong excitation can be defined as that leading to a sloshing pattern that involves a change in the pattern from planar
77 to nonplanar in a tank, and the water surface subsequentially breaks, leading to chaotic sloshing. If this pattern does
78 not eventuate, then the excitation can be defined as weak. Under weak excitations, the spring-mass model may offer
79 relatively accurate results for tank design. The spring-mass model for an anchored tank can only describe the response
80 under unidirectional motion of small amplitude, i.e., within the linear range of displacement.
81
82 A number of numerical studies31–35 analyzed the effects of the characteristics of the excitation on the response of
83 storage tanks, e.g., the horizontal and vertical displacement of the tank, shear force and bending moment at the base
84 of the tank, the maximum sloshing height and the hydrodynamic force on the tank wall. These numerical studies31–35
85 were carried out independently and stated that the tank response is more susceptible to the excitation frequencies than
86 the maximum amplitude. However, this research did not solely address the effect of the excitation frequencies on the
87 maximum hoop and axial stresses in a tank wall.
88
89 Experimental studies that consider the frequency content of the excitation in the context of partially filled, upright,
90 cylindrical liquid storage tanks are scarce in the literature. Manos and Clough15 studied an aluminum tank subjected
91 to the El-Centro earthquake, with 0.125 g, 0.250 g and 0.375 g peak ground accelerations. Fang et al.14 tested a steel
92 tank subjected to four sine excitations with different frequencies and maximum acceleration amplitude. In both studies,
93 only broad tanks were considered, i.e., an aspect ratio ℎ/𝑟 < 2. Their collective results reveal that when the dominant
94 frequency of the excitation is close to the natural frequency of the tank–water system, both horizontal and vertical
95 displacements increase considerably. Niwa16 analyzed a tall aluminum tank, with an aspect ratio of about four,
96 subjected to sine excitations and three recorded ground accelerations, i.e., the El-Centro, Pacoima and Parkfield
97 earthquakes. The results reveal that the characteristics of the excitation are significant for the development of
98 displacement, acceleration and axial stress of the tank wall. The reason behind the amplification of stress was thought
99 to be the activation of higher modes of breathing vibrations (in the circumferential direction). Yet, none of the
100 references14–16 analyzed the effect of the frequency content on the maximum hoop and axial stresses in the tank wall.
101 This lack of knowledge concerning the relationship between the load frequencies and tank wall stress is a motivation
102 for the present work.
103
104 The novelty of the present work is to experimentally determine the relationship between the excitation frequency and
105 the development of stresses in the wall of a cylindrical upright water tank. In setting this objective for meaningful and
106 valuable results, it is necessary to ascertain the dependency of the stress development on the water level in both broad
107 and tall tanks. This is accomplished by using time-histories and their associated spectrograms. A spectrogram reflects
108 the frequency content of a signal in a moving short-time window. This graphical medium enables a visualization of
109 the frequencies involved in the development of stress in the tank wall. Sine and Ricker wavelet excitations are
110 intentionally selected to make possible a wider based evaluation and interpretation of results. The results are then
111 employed to evaluate the adequacy of the commonly used spring-mass model in tank analysis.
112
113 2. EXPERIMENTAL METHODOLOGY
114
115 2.1 Tank model
116
117 Figure 2(a) shows a low–density polyethylene (LDPE) tank of 450 mm diameter and 750 mm height, fixed to a shake
118 table. The tank is used to represent a prototype steel tank of 9 m in diameter and 15 m height. Table 1 displays the
119 properties of the model and prototype. The Young’s modulus and Poisson’s ratio of the LDPE model were determined
120 by tensile coupon tests, with a specimen extracted from the top of the tank. The anchor mechanism is explained in
121 Section 2.3. It is assumed that the tank behaves elastically. The fundamental period was calculated according to the
122 procedure described by Malhotra et al.26, with the tank having an aspect ratio of three.
123
124 The tank can be modeled as a single degree-of-freedom (SDOF) system, as initiated by Housner 25, and refined by
125 Malhotra et al.26 and Veletsos et al.36. The Buckingham 𝜋 theorem37 along with the Cauchy number38 are employed
126 to meet the similitude requirements. For the tank-water SDOF system, the Cauchy number is defined by the ratio of
127 inertia force 𝐹𝑖𝑛 to restoring elastic force 𝐹𝑒 , as presented in Equation (1).
128
𝐹𝑖𝑛 𝑚𝑖 ∙𝑎𝑖
129 𝜋1 = = (1)
𝐹𝑒 𝑘𝑖 ∙𝑢𝑖
130
131 where 𝑚𝑖 , 𝑎𝑖 , 𝑘𝑖 and 𝑢𝑖 is respectively the mass, acceleration, stiffness and lateral displacement of the SDOF system
132 that describes the impulsive mode and its response.
133
134 The three fundamental independent dimensions used in the analysis are: 𝑁𝑚 – mass, 𝑁𝐿 – length, and 𝑁𝑡 – time. The
135 length scale factor 𝑁𝐿 , given by the ratio of tank radii (prototype/model), also determines the mass scale factor 𝑁𝑚
136 because the model and prototype store the same liquid, i.e., water. The stiffness scale factor 𝑁𝑘 is defined by the
137 mechanical properties of the tank, which depends on the similitude between 𝑁𝑚 , acceleration 𝑁𝑎 and 𝑁𝐿 . The
138 dimension of the acceleration scale factor 𝑁𝑎 is determined from 𝑁𝐿 and 𝑁𝑡2 . The time scale factor 𝑁𝑡 is defined by
139 the ratio of the period of vibration of the impulsive mode 𝑇𝑖𝑝 of the prototype to that of the model 𝑇𝑖𝑚 . Table 2 shows
140 the scale factors for the experiments.
141
142 2.2 Instrumentation and tank set-up
143
144 As a rule of thumb, the wall of a storage tank (shell structure) can be classified as thick if 𝑡𝑤 /𝑟 > 0.05, or thin if
145 𝑡𝑤 /𝑟 ≤ 0.0539. In this work, both the model and prototype are thin-walled tanks, i.e., 𝑡𝑤𝑚 /𝑟𝑚 = 4 mm/ 225 mm <
146 0.05 and tw p /rp = 9.53 mm / 4.5 m < 0.05. A useful simplification for thin-walled tanks is that hoop and axial
147 stresses can be assumed to be uniformly distributed across the wall thickness, i.e., the axial and circumferential strains
148 of the inner and outer face are assumed the same for the same elevation. The simplification is justifiable because the
149 contribution of shear strain is negligbile40. Consequently, Figure 2(b) shows the two columns of strain gauges attached
150 to the external face of the tank, co-linear with the direction of the shaking table, i.e., 0° and 180°. Each column had
151 eight strain gauges for measuring axial strain and eight for recording hoop strain. Closely spaced strain gauges are
152 attached near the base, compared to the upper half of the tank, because it was anticipated that higher stress gradients
153 would occur near the base. According to thin shell theory, hoop 𝜎𝜙 and axial 𝜎𝑥 stresses can be calculated using
154 Hooke’s Law, Equations (2) and (3), respectively40.
155
𝐸
156 𝜎𝜙 = (𝜖𝜙 + 𝜈𝜖𝑥 ) (2)
1−𝜈2
157
𝐸
158 𝜎𝑥 = (𝜖𝑥 + 𝜈𝜖𝜙 ) (3)
1−𝜈2
159
160 where 𝐸 is the modulus of elasticity, ν is the Poisson’s ratio, ϵx is the axial strain, and ϵ𝜙 is the hoop strain.

161 An accelerometer was fixed on an outer steel plate screwed to the shake table to measure the input acceleration. The
162 tank was filled with water mixed with brown dye to reduce the reflection of the laboratory roof light and improve the
163 quality of the photos taken from above the tank. Six different aspect ratios were considered, ℎ/r =
164 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5 and 3, corresponding to water levels of 113, 225, 338, 450, 563 and 675 mm, respectively. The tank
165 top was covered by plastic to avoid any loss of water during the shaking. However, the plastic cover was not rigid
166 enough to restrict the deformation at the top of the tank.
167
168 2.3 Anchorage
169
170 The LDPE model tank was fixed to an outer steel plate of 25 mm thickness by eight M8 bolts. Figure 3 shows the
171 bolts distributed circumferentially near the edge of the tank wall. The outer steel plate was also fixed to the shake table
172 by four M20 bolts, see Figure 2(a). An additional round steel plate of 3 mm thickness was located inside the tank,
173 without touching the tank wall, to maintain an anchored condition and avoid damage to the LDPE base of the tank
174 due to the M8 bolts, see Figure 3(b).
175
176 2.4 Theoretical maximum stresses in the tank wall
177
178 According to the procedure in the NZSEE 2009 guidelines for the design of storage tanks, the contribution of the
179 impulsive and the convective mode to the tank response can be estimated independently. Thus, two separate systems
180 of a single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) were initially considered27. According to28,41, the flexibility of the tank wall,
181 as indicated by the thickness ratio (𝑡𝑤 /𝑟) and material properties, affects the tank response significantly. The reason
182 is the impulsive force increases with the acceleration of the tank wall. Haroun and Housner 41 found a way to uncouple
183 the response and determine the contribution of the impulsive and convective modes. As a further refinement, the
184 impulsive mass was divided into two masses, i.e., one representing the mass associated with the rigid part of the tank
185 wall, 𝑚𝑟 and the second associated with the flexible part of the tank wall, 𝑚𝑓 . The values of 𝑚𝑟 and 𝑚𝑓 depend on
186 both the thickness and the aspect ratio41. The sum of the two impulsive masses and one convective mass (sloshing)
187 𝑚𝑐 corresponds to the total mass of liquid in the tank. The magnitudes and heights of these masses are selected to lead
188 to the same base shear and bending moment produced by the fundamental mode of vibration of the tank-water system.
189
190 The response spectrum acceleration 𝑆𝑎 of each excitation is used to estimate the maximum shear force 𝑄𝑚𝑎𝑥 and
191 overturning moment 𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 for each mode at the section immediately above the base plate. The estimation of the
192 maximum values is obtained by applying the square root of the sum of squares (SRSS), see Equations (4) and (5). The
193 response spectra of the excitations were calculated assuming 2% and 0.5% of critical damping for the impulsive and
194 convective mode26, respectively. The values of the assumed rigid, flexible, and convective masses and their
195 corresponding heights were estimated according to the procedure described in 28,41.
196
2 2
197 𝑄𝑚𝑎𝑥 = √(𝑚𝑐 𝑆𝑎𝑐 )2 + (𝑚𝑓 𝑆𝑎𝑖 ) + ((𝑚𝑓 − 𝑚𝑟 )𝑥̈ 𝑚𝑎𝑥 ) (4)
198
2 2
199 𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 = √(𝑚𝑐 ℎ𝑐 𝑆𝑎𝑐 )2 + (𝑚𝑓 ℎ𝑓 𝑆𝑎𝑖 ) + ((𝑚𝑓 ℎ𝑓 − 𝑚𝑟 ℎ𝑟 )𝑥̈ 𝑚𝑎𝑥 ) (5)
200
201 where 𝑆𝑎𝑖 and 𝑆𝑎𝑐 are the corresponding spectral acceleration of the first impulsive and the first convective periods of
202 vibration, respectively; 𝑥̈ 𝑚𝑎𝑥 is the maximum acceleration of the ground motion, i.e., the shake table acceleration;
203 ℎ𝑟 , ℎ𝑓 and ℎ𝑐 are the heights from the base of the tank to the center of gravity of the rigid, flexible, and convective
204 masses, respectively.
205
206 The maximum hoop stress 𝜎𝜙 and axial stress 𝜎𝑥 using the spring-mass model can be estimated using Equations (6)
207 and (7)28, respectively.
208
𝑄𝑚𝑎𝑥
209 𝜎𝜙 = (6)
𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝜋 ℎ 𝑡𝑤
210
𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥
211 𝜎𝑥 𝑚𝑎𝑥 = (7)
𝜋 𝑟 2 𝑡𝑤
212
213 The first impulsive 𝑓𝑖𝑚𝑝 and convective 𝑓𝑐𝑜𝑛 frequencies of the LDPE tank-water system were calculated using
214 Equations (8) and (9).
 𝑡
𝐶𝑖 √ 𝑤 √𝐸
𝑟
215 𝑓𝑖𝑚𝑝 = (8)
ℎ√𝜌
216
1
217 𝑓𝑐𝑜𝑛 = (9)
𝐶𝑐 √𝑟
218
219 where 𝐶𝑖 and 𝐶𝑐 are coefficients to calculate the impulsive and convective frequencies given in reference26, and 𝜌 is
220 the density of the water, 𝜌 = 1000 kg/m3 .
221
222 2.5 Excitations
223
224 2.5.1 Sine excitations
225
226 The shake table platform is 3.6 m long and 2.4 m wide with a maximum horizontal displacement of ± 200 mm. The
227 maximum actuator force is 262 kN operating at the maximum velocity of 0.276 m/s. A series of eight harmonic
228 excitations, each with an initial zero velocity, i.e., a sine displacement, were generated by the shake table. The duration
229 of each sine excitation was 50 cycles to ensure that a close approximation to the generic steady-state response of the
230 tank–water system was achieved. To further limit the number of factors with the potential to affect the tank-water
231 system response, a constant acceleration amplitude of 3 mm/s 2 for all excitations was selected. The excitations had
232 frequencies of (0.6 Hz − 2 Hz), which covers the first convective frequency of the LDPE model for all the aspect
233 ratios. Table 3 displays the properties of the sine excitations.
234
235 2.5.2 Ricker wavelet excitations
236
237 Ricker wavelets have been used to study the seismic response of storage tanks33,35. Two sets of Ricker wavelets were
238 employed to assess the influence of low and high dominant–frequency excitations on the development of wall stress.
239 The low dominant–frequency excitations have frequencies in the vicinity of the first free–vibration frequency of the
240 tank–water system (1.4 Hz). In contrast, the high dominant–frequency excitations have frequencies higher than the
241 first free–vibration frequency of the tank–water system (4.9 Hz). The low frequency is the driver that first produces a
242 zone of planar response, progressing to nonplanar response and finally developing into chaotic sloshing. The high
243 frequency activates only nonplanar sloshing response. The free-vibration frequencies of the tank-water system,
244 identified above, are discussed in Section 3.1.
245
246 Equation (10) is the mathematical definition of a Ricker wavelet. However, because the initial and final movements
247 of the shake table must be performed smoothly, i.e., rapid change in velocity is not desirable, Ricker wavelets are then
248 contracted by the continuous one-dimension wavelet transform defined by Equation (11), which essentially provides
249 a smooth ramp of amplification and attenuation.
250
251 𝑓(𝑡) = (1 − 2𝜋 2 𝑓𝑀2 𝑡 2 ) exp(−𝜋 2 𝑓𝑀2 𝑡 2 ) (10)
252
253 where 𝑓(𝑡) is the wavelet amplitude, and 𝑓𝑀 is the dominant frequency at time 𝑡.
254
1 𝑡−𝜏
255 𝐶(𝐴, 𝜏) = ∫ Ψ( ) 𝑓(𝑡)𝑑𝑡 (11)
√𝐴 𝐴
256
257 where Ψ(𝑡) is the wavelet that is shifted by 𝜏 and contracted by the factor 𝐴 before computing its correlation with the
258 original wavelet 𝑓(𝑡). The correlation between the original wavelet and the modified wavelet is defined as the integral
259 of their product42.
260
261 Figure 4 shows the theoretical Ricker wavelets and the modified wavelets due to the one-dimensional wavelet
262 transform. The waveforms shown in Figure 4 are those with the maximum acceleration of the set of five Ricker
263 modified wavelets for low and high dominant–frequency excitations. Figure 5 displays the whole group of waveforms
264 for low and high dominant frequencies. The excitation with the lowest acceleration amplitude of 0.04 𝑚/𝑠 2 is known
265 as Scale one (Sc 1); the second excitation (Sc 2) doubles the amplitude of Sc 1; the third excitation (Sc 3) is threefold
266 the amplitude of Sc 1 etc. The dominant frequency of each excitation remains the same, but the maximum acceleration
267 of each subsequent excitation is increased. This is corroborated in Figures 5(c) and (d) that show the Fourier amplitude
268 of the Ricker wavelet excitations. In Figure 5(c), the highest Fourier amplitude is related to a frequency of 1.4 Hz
269 (vertical solid line). For high dominant–frequency excitations in Figure 5(d), the highest Fourier amplitude
270 corresponds to a frequency of 4.9 Hz.
271
272 3 RESULTS
273
274 3.1 Free-vibration frequencies of the tank-water system
275
276 Table 4 shows the first impulsive (𝑓𝑖𝑚𝑝 ) and the first convective (𝑓𝑐𝑜𝑛 ) frequencies as well as the experimentally
277 obtained free-vibration frequencies of the tank-water system, for all the aspect ratios. The impulsive and convective
278 frequencies were computed using Equations (8) and (9), respectively. As anticipated, the impulsive frequency
279 decreases with increasing aspect ratio significantly. However, the convective frequencies show only small variation
280 as the aspect ratio raises.
281
282 The experimental free-vibration frequencies were determined by a pulse test. The shake table was displaced 20 mm
283 in 1/100 s and abruptly held in that position. The sharp and rapid single pulse produced a high acceleration of the
284 tank–water system and caused free vibration. The Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) was applied to the time–history
285 records of the 32 strain gauges during the free vibration. As an example, Figure 6 shows the Power Spectral Density
286 (PSD) of four circumferential strain gauges, located at the top and the bottom for each azimuth for a tank with ℎ/𝑟 =
287 2 and normalized by the corresponding maximum intensity. The six frequencies at the peaks of the PSD, i.e.,
288 1.4 Hz, 1.9 Hz, 2.8 Hz, 15 Hz, 32 Hz, and 50 Hz, are the free-vibration frequencies of the tank-water system for the
289 considered aspect ratio. These frequencies were considered to be the free-vibration frequencies because all 32 PSD
290 peaks in all measurement locations coincide. In addition to those six peaks, other frequencies also appear, but not at
291 all measurement locations. These experimentally obtained frequencies are indicated in bold in Table 4. For ℎ/𝑟 >
292 1.5, all experimental frequencies do not significantly change, i.e., for high aspect ratios, the free–vibration frequencies
293 are independent of the water level.
294
295 Figure 7 highlights the differences between the theoretically and experimentally obtained frequencies. The theoretical
296 frequencies for the impulsive mode somewhat agree with those determined experimentally, especially for ℎ/𝑟 > 1.5.
297 In contrast, the frequencies of the convective mode agree with the first experimental frequencies of the tank–water
298 system. A note of caution is due here because the impulsive and the convective mode cannot be identified in the
299 experiment due to the nature of the tank–water system, i.e., it is impossible to determine which experimental
300 frequencies correspond to higher frequencies of the impulsive mode and which ones to the convective mode.
301
302 3.2 Response to sine excitations
303
304 To assess the relationship between the sine excitation frequency and wall stress development, an aspect ratio of ℎ/𝑟 =
305 2 , under a sine excitation with a frequency of 1.4 Hz, is selected as an example. The excitation is chosen because it
306 causes the highest hoop stress for that aspect ratio. The aspect ratio is selected because there is enough space above
307 the water line for sloshing to develop freely without impacting the plastic cover.
308
309 Figure 8 shows the time–history of the hoop stress 𝜎𝜙 and the shake table acceleration AST . The hoop stress is
310 determined by Equation (2) using both hoop and axial strain records located 50 mm above the tank base. The
311 accelerometer on the steel plate records the input acceleration, see Figure 2(b). Figure 8 shows that AST has a small
312 amplitude of approximately ± 3 mm/s 2 during the experiment. Since the frequency of the excitation (1.4 Hz) is
313 remarkably close to the first frequency of the tank–water system (1.44 Hz), rotary sloshing, i.e., rotation of the liquid,
314 occurs. The rotation occurs because the water accumulates energy due to a narrow band horizontal harmonic
315 excitation, i.e., ± 5% of the first free-vibration frequency43, that leads to a breaking wave. At this stage, chaotic
316 sloshing may take over, enhancing the development of both hoop and axial strains in the tank wall and also the
317 acceleration in the horizontal direction perpendicular to the excitation direction 44,45. The maximum hoop stress
318 (23 kPa) occurs in the first rotary cycle of the response, as indicated by an arrow. When t ≈ 28 s and ≈ 38 s, the
319 hoop stress development decreases significantly, shown circled in the figure. This is a consequence of a change in the
320 direction of water rotation44,45.
321
322 Figure 9 shows the spectrograms of the hoop stress at 50 mm above the base of the tank, with an aspect ratio ℎ/𝑟 =
323 2, for excitation frequencies of 0.6 Hz, 1.4 Hz, and 2 Hz. A spectrogram is the short-term time-localized frequency
324 content of the chosen signal, computed using the Power Spectral Density (PSD), which is a short-time Fast Fourier
325 Transform (S-T FFT). The results for the hoop stress are presented because its magnitude is higher than the
326 corresponding axial stress, making the fluctuations clearer.
327
328 As anticipated, Figure 9(a), (c) and (e) show during the entire excitation period the same excitation frequency of
329 0.6 Hz, 1.4 Hz, and 2 Hz, respectively. In contrast, Figure 9(b), (d) and (f) display the corresponding hoop stress.
330 Figure 9(b) shows a widespread collection of frequencies over the time window, with two strong frequencies around
331 0.6 Hz and 1.4 Hz. The activation of a wide bandwidth of frequencies, displaying the activated higher modes
332 (breathing vibrations) of the tank-water system, is caused by the excitation and the interaction between the water and
333 the boundaries. Figure 9(d) exhibits two notable and intermittent response frequencies of 1.4 Hz and 2.8 Hz. Table
334 4 shows these frequencies correspond to the first and second free–vibration frequencies of the tank–water system,
335 respectively. The excitation also activates a widespread group of frequencies similar to those in Figure 9(b). Figure
336 9(f) displays that the highest amplitude of the spectrogram is associated with the frequency of 2 Hz. The spectrogram
337 also shows standout intensity for frequencies between 10 Hz and 15 Hz. The amplitude of the above frequency band
338 is higher than those shown in Figures 9(b) and (d). Hence, the contribution of other frequencies (in addition to that of
339 the excitation) to the stress development increases with excitation frequency.
340
341 3.2.1 Maximum stresses in the tank wall due to sine excitations
342
343 Figure 10 displays the relationship between the excitation frequency and the stress development for all aspect ratios
344 considered. The maximum absolute magnitudes of both the hoop σϕ and axial σx stresses were extracted from the
345 time–history records. The maximum stresses occur at 50 mm from the tank base for all the excitations. The prominent
346 peaks of the maximum hoop stress for each aspect ratio shown in Figure 10(a) are a consequence of the coincidence
347 of the first free–vibration frequency of the tank–water system with that of the excitation. For ℎ/𝑟 = 0.5, the highest
348 maximum hoop stress occurs when the excitation has a frequency of 1.2 Hz, see the circular dot in Figure 10(a). In
349 contrast, for ℎ/𝑟 > 0.5, the largest maximum hoop stress occurs when the sine excitation has a frequency of 1.4 Hz.
350 In this case, the magnitude of hoop stress increases with increasing aspect ratio.
351
352 Considering the maximum axial stress σ𝑥 , Figure 10(b) shows the aspect ratio of 2.5 yields the highest magnitude of
353 stress for all aspect ratios at the excitation frequency of 1.4 Hz. The axial stress for ℎ/𝑟 = 2.5 (27.8 kPa) is 12%
354 higher than that for ℎ/𝑟 = 3 (24.7 kPa). This is because, for ℎ/𝑟 = 3, the occurrence of nonplanar sloshing is
355 interrupted when the sloshing impacted the plastic cover. In contrast, for ℎ/𝑟 = 2.5, the vertical distance between the
356 water surface and the top of the tank is large enough that sloshing can develop freely. The results indicate that the
357 occurrence of nonplanar sloshing increases the development of axial stress considerably. When the tank experiences
358 only planar sloshing, i.e., when the sine frequency is different to 1.2 H𝑧 and 1.4 Hz, the highest aspect ratio, ℎ/𝑟 = 3
359 yields the highest axial stress. Hence, if nonplanar or chaotic sloshing occurs, the contribution of sloshing to the
360 development of both hoop and axial stress is significant.
361
362 3.2.2 Comparison between theoretical and experimental results
363
364 Figure 11 shows the ratio of the stress 𝜎 obtained from the spring-mass model (S-M) to that from the experiments
365 (Exp), as a function of the frequency of the sinusoidal excitation. Figure 11(a) shows the spring-mass model
366 underestimates the maximum hoop stress, regardless of the excitation frequency for all aspect ratios except ℎ/𝑟 =
367 0.5. For the aspect ratio of 0.5, the maximum stress given by the spring-mass model is up to fourfold that from the
368 experiments. The disparity between the spring-mass model and experimental results is due to the assumptions made
369 in the numerical model, e.g., the absence of higher modes of vibration of the tank-water system. The assumptions in
370 the numerical model do not reflect the behavior observed in the experiments.
371
372 Figure 11(b) shows that the spring-mass model underestimates the maximum axial stress for an aspect ratio ℎ/𝑟 = 0.5
373 for all frequencies. For the rest of the aspect ratios, except for ℎ/𝑟 = 1 in the frequency range of 0.6 Hz to 1 Hz, the
374 spring-mass model overestimates the maximum axial stress. In a broad sense, the deviation increases with increasing
375 frequency for ℎ/𝑟 values between 1.5 and 3. The overestimation of stress is due to an inaccurate portrayal of the
376 sloshing water volume. The mass of the water associated with the convective mode is more significant for squat
377 tanks15,46, where ℎ/𝑟 < 2. Considering the spring-mass model, the contribution of sloshing to the maximum axial
378 stress is more in line with the experimental results for squat tanks (ℎ/𝑟 = 0.5) than for slender tanks (ℎ/𝑟 = 3). The
379 spring-mass model, described in reference15, does not adequately represent the influence of sloshing on the
380 development of axial stress for squat tanks. A reason given in reference15 is that the equation used to estimate the axial
381 stress, see Equation (7), assumes that the tank behaves as a fixed vertical cantilever. For the flexible LDPE tank with
382 ℎ/𝑟 = 0.5, the cantilever behavior is shown to be inadequate since it underrepresents the maximum axial stress.
383
384 3.3 Response to Ricker wavelet excitations
385
386 3.3.1 Low dominant-frequency excitations
387
388 Figure 12 shows the time–history of both the acceleration of the shake table 𝐴ST and the hoop stress 𝜎𝜙𝐿 due to low
389 dominant–frequency Ricker wavelet excitation Sc 5 when the tank has an aspect ratio of 2. Figure 12(a) shows the
390 effects of both the excitation when 0 s ≤ 𝑡 ≤ 5 s, and chaotic sloshing when 𝑡 > 5 𝑠 on the development of hoop
391 stress. Figure 12(b) is an enlargement of the time window 0 s ≤ 𝑡 ≤ 6 s.
392
393 Two key points are observable from Figure 12(a). Firstly, using the logarithmic decrement expression, the damping
394 ratio of the tank-water system during free vibration is relatively small, i.e., 𝜉 = ln (𝜎𝜙𝐿 /𝜎𝜙𝐿 )/(2𝜋𝑛) = 0.9%,
𝑛 𝑛+1
395 where 𝜎𝜙𝐿 is the hoop stress at the nth peak. This damping ratio differs from the numerical model assumed for the
𝑛
396 convective mode, i.e., 0.5%. Secondly, considering the hoop stress for 𝑡 > 5 s, it can be inferred that wave mixing is
397 occurring, which suggests that chaotic sloshing occurs.
398
399 Figure 12(b) exhibits a delay of 0.25 seconds between the development of cyclic hoop stress and the acceleration of
400 the shake table. The delay is attributed to the transition to cyclic sloshing behavior. Initially, the hoop stress and the
401 shake table acceleration are anti-phase, followed by a transition that leads into a short period of phase alignment before
402 the forcing excitation ceases. Figure 13 shows the evolution of the sloshing from planar to chaotic when the tank has
403 an aspect ratio of two and is subjected to the low dominant-frequency Ricker wavelet Sc 5. For all aspect ratios, under
404 low dominant–frequency excitations, sloshing starts as planar, then evolves into nonplanar, which may transition into
405 chaotic behavior during the duration of the experiment. The time span for transforming sloshing depends on the
406 maximum amplitude of acceleration of the Ricker wavelet excitation. The maximum sloshing height occurs an instant
407 before the wave breaks, i.e., when the energy in the water is a maximum, see Figure 13(b). Figure 13(c) shows chaotic
408 sloshing after the breaking of the wave. Note that the maximum sloshing height does not continue to be aligned with
409 the direction of the excitation, as given by the measuring tape attached to the inner side of the tank wall. Because
410 sloshing is still active after the passage of the excitation, i.e., 𝑡 > 4.5 s, sloshing may be said to dominate the tank
411 response. In this case, the maximum hoop stress produced by sloshing after the excitation, i.e., −22 kPa, is higher
412 than that produced during the excitation (+20 kPa), both are indicated by arrows in Figure 12(b). The results are
413 evidence that the contribution of sloshing to the tank response can be substantial after the passage of the excitation,
414 i.e., during the tank-free vibration.
415
416 To aid visualization of the relationship between low dominant–frequency excitations and the development of hoop
417 stress, Figure 14 shows the spectrograms of the time–history of hoop stress 50 mm above the tank base. Figures 14(a)
418 and (b) refer to the Ricker wavelet with the lowest acceleration 𝐴max = 0.04 m/s 2 of the set of five, i.e., Sc 1, whereas
419 Figures 14(c) and (d) correspond to the excitations with the highest acceleration 𝐴max = 0.2 m/s 2 , i.e., Sc 5. In both
420 cases, the data is extracted when the tank has an aspect ratio ℎ/𝑟 = 2.
421
422 Figures 14(a) and (c) clearly show the excitation frequency at 1.4 Hz. However, the corresponding hoop stress presents
423 a more complex behavior. The development of stress for the Ricker wavelet Sc 1 in Figure 14(b) shows a dominant
424 frequency of 1.4 Hz and a widespread collection of frequencies over the central domain of the time window, some of
425 which last for the duration of the excitation, i.e., 0 ≤ t ≤ 4 s. These frequencies are thought to be a consequence of
426 the transformation of the sloshing pattern, i.e., from planar to nonplanar and chaotic. When the effects of the excitation
427 end, i.e., t > 4 s, the widespread collection of frequencies vanish, and the frequency of 1.4 Hz is the only one that
428 prevails, which is the first free–vibration frequency of the tank–water system.
429
430 Figure 14(d) shows more active frequency patterns that increase with the implementation of the Ricker wavelet with
431 the maximum acceleration. The amplitude of these frequencies is higher than those in Figure 14(b), which was
432 anticipated. Also, the amplitudes of three frequencies, i.e., 1.4 Hz, 2.8 Hz, and 4.1 Hz, prevail once the excitation
433 finishes, i.e., when t > 4 s, as indicated by a square box in Figure 14(d). Thus, the free vibration is comprised of more
434 than one frequency. The frequencies of 2.8 Hz and 4.1 Hz prevail as residual frequencies due to the continuation of
435 chaotic sloshing.
436
437 3.3.2 High dominant-frequency excitations
438
439 In the case of the high dominant–frequency excitation (see Figure 15), no apparent delay is visible between the shake
440 table acceleration 𝐴ST and the development of hoop stress 𝜎𝜙𝐻 . The tank response is probably dominated by the inertia
441 of the tank–water system. Figure 16 shows the evolution of the nonplanar sloshing for a tank with an aspect ratio of
442 two when subjected to a high dominant–frequency Sc 5 excitation. Under high dominant–frequency excitations, the
443 water circles concentrically from the tank wall to the center of the tank for all aspect ratios, see Figure 16(b). The
444 sloshing starts as nonplanar and remains nonplanar for the duration of the excitation.
445
446 At the center of the tank, when the waves collide, water is ejected upwards, see Figure 16(c). The results reveal that
447 planar sloshing, which produces the highest sloshing, is not activated. The time to suppress sloshing following the
448 excitation is relatively short due to damping arising from interaction with the tank wall and mixing of the waves.
449 Hence, the water does not vibrate with a perceptible vertical amplitude once the excitation ceases, see Figure 15 for
450 the period 𝑡 > 2 s.
451
452 Figure 17 shows the spectrograms of the time–history of hoop stress at 50 mm above the base of the tank under a high
453 dominant–frequency Ricker wavelet excitation. Figures 17(a) and (b) correspond to the Ricker wavelet excitation with
454 the lowest acceleration, i.e. 𝐴max = 0.04 m/s 2 , (Sc 1) and Figures 17(c) and (d) refer to the excitation with the highest
455 acceleration, i.e. 𝐴max = 0.2 m/s 2 , (Sc 5). The tank had an aspect ratio of 2.
456
457 Figures 17(a) and (c) show evidence of the effect of the excitation frequency, i.e., the dominant frequency of 4.9 Hz.
458 In contrast, Figures 17(b) and (d) show a similar pattern of activated frequencies but with different intensities. The
459 intensity is highest for excitation Sc 5 and lowest for Sc 1, e.g., the intensity at the frequency of 16 Hz is −134 dB/Hz
460 and −115 dB/Hz in Figures 17(b) and (d), respectively. Hence, the magnitude of the maximum acceleration of the
461 Ricker excitation does not affect the presence of the activated frequencies but does influence the intensity of the
462 response. The limited existence of the two frequencies 4.9 Hz and 16 Hz suggest that tank free vibration is rapidly
463 damped following the passage of the excitation because there are no substantial frequencies in the spectrogram after
464 𝑡 > 2 s.
465
466 3.3.3 Maximum stress in the tank wall due to Ricker wavelet excitations
467
468 Figure 18 shows the relationship between the maximum stresses and the maximum acceleration of low and high
469 dominant-frequency excitations. The superscripts on the stress 𝜎, “L” and “H”, refer to the results of the low and high
470 dominant-frequency excitations, respectively.
471
472 Figures 18(a) and (b) show that in the case of low dominant–frequency excitations the relationship between the
473 maximum hoop and axial stress and the maximum acceleration of the excitation depends on the aspect ratio. As the
474 aspect ratio increases, a nonlinear relationship becomes evident, especially for the maximum axial stress, as seen in
475 Figure 18(b). The change in the sloshing pattern, from planar to nonplanar, and at times to chaotic, causes this
476 nonlinear relationship. Additionally, as both the maximum excitation and the aspect ratio increase, more frequencies
477 are involved in the development of stress in the tank wall due to wave mixing, see Figure 14
478
479 Equations (6) and (7) show the hoop stress is a function of the shear force and the axial stress arising from the bending
480 moment. In these experiments, the eccentricity of the resultant hydrodynamic force from the tank base varies according
481 to the type of sloshing pattern. This eccentricity affects the magnitude of the bending moment, whereas the shear force
482 remains largely unaffected. The variation of the eccentricity is seen to be dependent on the aspect ratio because the
483 nonlinear tendency, shown in Figure 18(b), is only evident for aspect ratios of 2.5 and 3. For these aspect ratios, a loss
484 of energy occurred when, due to sloshing, the water hit the plastic cover. Consequently, the magnitude of the bending
485 moment and the maximum axial stress decreased. As the scale of the excitation increased, it is more probable that
486 sloshing water would impact the plastic cover, increasing the loss of energy with time.
487
488 Figures 18(c) and (d) show the results for high dominant frequency excitations. A linear tendency of the relationship
489 between the maximum stresses and the maximum acceleration of the excitation is evident, regardless of the aspect
490 ratio. The slope of the tendency increases as the aspect ratio increases, i.e., higher aspect ratios lead to higher stresses.
491 This is supported by observing Figures 17(b) and (d) where the activated spectrogram frequencies are very similar
492 regardless of the maximum acceleration of the Ricker wavelet excitation. Thus, if the sloshing pattern does not change
493 during the excitation, as observed in Figure 16, the relationship between the maximum stress and the maximum
494 acceleration of the excitation can be assumed to be linear.
495
496 3.3.4 Comparison between theoretical and experimental results for Ricker Wavelets
497
498 Figure 19 shows the disparity between the maximum experimental and theoretical stresses under low and high
499 dominant-frequency excitations. Figures 19(a) and (c) show that, regardless of the dominant frequency of the
500 excitation, the spring-mass model overestimates the maximum hoop stress for ℎ/𝑟 ≤ 2. For ℎ/𝑟 > 2, the maximum
501 hoop stress of the spring-mass model is lower than the corresponding experimental value.
502
503 Figures 19(b) and (d) show that the maximum axial stress from the spring-mass model is higher than that of the
504 corresponding experimental axial stress for all aspect ratios except ℎ/𝑟 = 0.5. These results are similar to those due
505 to the sine excitations shown in Figure 11. The overestimation of both hoop and axial stresses could be anticipated
506 due to the simplifications of the spring-mass model for the reasons mentioned in Section 3.2.2.
507
508 4. CONCLUSIONS
509
510 A low-density polyethylene cylindrical tank partially filled with water and fixed to a shake table was tested under
511 horizontal excitations. The main goal was to determine the relationship between the frequency content of an excitation
512 and the maximum stress in the tank wall. Six aspect ratios between 0.5 ≤ ℎ/𝑟 ≤ 3 were considered. Eight sine
513 excitations with different frequency, but equal acceleration amplitude, and two sets of Ricker wavelets with two
514 dominant frequencies and different amplitudes were applied. In total, 48 experiments under sine excitations and 60
515 experiments with Ricker wavelets have been performed. The experimental results are then compared with those from
516 a spring–mass model commonly used in the seismic analysis of storage tanks. As with any study involving physical
517 experiments, there are limitations to the applicability of this work to structures of different geometry and material
518 properties to those employed in this study.
519
520 The results from applying the sine excitations reveal:
521
522 1) The coincidence of the first free–vibration frequency of the tank–water system with that of the excitation
523 increases the maximum hoop and axial stresses considerably. The reason is that sloshing transforms from
524 being planar to nonplanar, and at times, further transition to chaotic occurs.
525
526 2) In addition to the frequency of the excitation, bands of frequencies are activated in the development of hoop
527 and axial stress in the tank wall due to the interaction at the interface between the water, tank wall and the
528 free surface. The band of activated frequencies depends on the excitation frequency.
529
530 3) The results from the spring-mass model and those from the experiments diverge due to the limitations of the
531 spring-mass model in representing the reality (the physical experiments). The limitations are more evident in
532 the estimation of (i) the maximum hoop stress when ℎ/𝑟 ≥ 2, and (ii) the maximum axial stress for ℎ/𝑟 =
533 0.5.
534
535 The results due to the Ricker wavelet excitations reveal:
536
537 4) Under low dominant–frequency excitations, the frequencies activated in the development of wall stresses
538 depend on both the maximum acceleration and dominant frequency of the excitation. As the maximum
539 acceleration increases, more frequencies are activated. Following the excitation, the free vibration of the
540 tank-water system can be composed of more than one frequency.
541
542 5) The relationship between the maximum axial stress and the maximum acceleration of low dominant-
543 frequency excitations tends to be nonlinear, with the degree depending on the aspect ratio. In contrast, the
544 relationship between the maximum hoop stress and the maximum acceleration can, to a reasonable degree,
545 be considered linear, regardless of the aspect ratio.
546
547 6) For high dominant-frequency excitations, the activated frequencies of wall stress are independent of the
548 maximum acceleration, even though the intensity increases with increasing excitation magnitude. After the
549 passage of the excitation, no significant frequencies are activated.
550
551 7) The relationship between both hoop and axial stresses and the maximum acceleration of high dominant–
552 frequency excitations can be taken to be linear, regardless of the aspect ratio.
553
554 8) The spring-mass model overestimates the maximum hoop stress for ℎ/𝑟 ≤ 2, regardless of the frequency of
555 the excitation. This characteristic is reversed for the maximum axial stress where the spring-mass model
556 underestimates the stress when the aspect ratio is ℎ/𝑟 = 0.5.
557
558 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
559
560 The authors wish to thank the Mexican government for awarding the first author the doctoral scholarship “CONACyT-
561 SENER Hidrocarburos” for his PhD research at the University of Auckland, New Zealand.
562
563 This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit
564 sectors.
565
566 REFERENCES
567
568 1. Zhao M, Zhou J. Review of seismic studies of liquid storage tanks. Struct Eng Mech. 2018;65(5):557-572.
569 doi:10.12989/sem.2018.65.5.557
570 2. Hatayama K. Lessons from the 2003 Tokachi-oki, Japan, earthquake for prediction of long-period strong
571 ground motions and sloshing damage to oil storage tanks. J Seismol. 2008;12(2):255-263.
572 doi:10.1007/s10950-007-9066-y
573 3. Cooper TW. A study of the performance of petroleum storage tanks during earthquakes 1933-1995. Rep NIST
574 GCR 97-720. 1997.
575 4. Chouw N. Effect of the earthquake on 17th of January 1995 on Kobe. In: D-A-CH Meeting of the German,
576 Austrian and Swiss Society for Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics. University of Graz Austria;
577 1996:135-169.
578 5. Manos GC, Clough RW. Tank damage during the May 1983 Coalinga earthquake. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn.
579 1985;13:449-466. doi:10.1002/bdrb.20340
580 6. Matsui T, Nagaya T. Nonlinear sloshing in a floating-roofed oil storage tank under long-period seismic ground
581 motion. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2013;42(7):973-991. doi:10.1002/eqe.2254
582 7. Chen W, Haroun MA, Liu F. Large amplitude liquid sloshing in seismically excited tanks. Earthq Eng Struct
583 Dyn. 1996;25(7):653-669. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199607)25:7<653::AID-EQE513>3.0.CO;2-H
584 8. Ormeño M, Larkin T, Chouw N. The effect of seismic uplift on the shell stresses of liquid-storage tanks.
585 Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2015;44(12):1979-1996. doi:10.1002/eqe
586 9. Bakalis K, Karamanos SA. Uplift mechanics of unanchored liquid storage tanks subjected to lateral earthquake
587 loading. Thin-Walled Struct. 2021;158(September 2020):107145. doi:10.1016/j.tws.2020.107145
588 10. Niwa A, Clough RW. Buckling of cylindrical liquid-storage tanks under earthquake loading. Earthq Eng
589 Struct Dyn. 1982;10(1):107-122. doi:10.1002/eqe.4290100108
590 11. Hernandez-Hernandez D, Larkin T, Chouw N. Impact of the excitation frequencies on wall stresses in a
591 storage tank. Eng Struct. 2021;244(June):112775. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112775
592 12. Hernandez-Hernandez D, Larkin T, Chouw N. Influence of base plate bending stiffness on the seismic
593 performance of liquid storage tanks. Procedia Eng. 2017;199:170-175. doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2017.09.214
594 13. Clough DP. Experimental evaluation of seismic design methods for broad cylindrical tanks. Earthq Eng Res
595 Cent UCB/EERC - 77/10. 1977.
596 14. Fang Z, Chen Z, Yan S, Cao G, Wang J. Dynamic experimental investigation on the uplift response of liquid
597 storage tanks under seismic excitations with different characteristics. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part C J Mech Eng
598 Sci. 2012;227(7):1525-1534. doi:10.1177/0954406212461590
599 15. Manos GC, Clough RW. Further study of the earthquake response of a broad cylindrical liquid-storage tank
600 model. Earthq Eng Res Cent UCB/EERC 82/07. 1982.
601 16. Niwa A. Seismic Behavior of Tall Liquid Storage Tanks. Report No. UCB/EERC - 78/04, Berkeley, California;
602 1978.
603 17. Hernandez-Hernandez D, Larkin T, Chouw N. Simultaneous effect of uplift and soil-structure interaction on
604 seismic performance of storage tanks. In: VII International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical
605 Engineering. Rome, Italy, 17-20 June; 2019.
606 18. Hernandez-Hernandez D, Larkin T, Chouw N. Impact of seismic uplift and soil support on the acceleration of
607 a liquid storage tank. In: Papadrakakis M, Fragiadakis M, eds. 7th ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on
608 Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. Vol 3. Crete, Greece, 24-26
609 June; 2019.
610 19. Ormeño M, Larkin T, Chouw N. Experimental study of the effect of a flexible base on the seismic response
611 of a liquid storage tank. Thin-Walled Struct. 2019;139:334-346. doi:http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2019.03.013
612 20. Hernandez-Hernandez D, Larkin T, Chouw N. Shake table investigation of nonlinear soil–structure–fluid
613 interaction of a thin-walled storage tank under earthquake load. Thin-Walled Struct. 2021;167:108143.
614 doi:10.1016/j.tws.2021.108143
615 21. NZSEE. Seismic Design of Storage Tanks, 2009: Recommendations of a Study Group of the New Zealand
616 Society for Earthquake Engineering. Wellington: New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering; 2009.
617 22. EN 1998-4:2006. Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance - Part 4: Silos, tanks and
618 pipelines. In: European Committee for Standardization. Brussels: The European Standard; 2006.
619 23. American Petroleum Institute. API 650: Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage. Eleventh. Washington, D.C.:
620 API 650; 2007.
621 24. Bandyopadhyay K, Cornell A, Costantino C, Kennedy R, Miller C, Veletsos A. Seismic Design and
622 Evaluation Guidelines for the Department of Energy High-Level Waste Storage Tanks and Appurtenances.
623 Upton, NY; 1993. doi:10.2172/146793
624 25. Housner GW. Dynamic pressures on accelerated fluid containers. Bull Seismol Soc Am. 1957;47(1):15-35.
625 26. Malhotra PK, Wenk T, Wieland M. Simple procedure for seismic analysis of liquid-storage tanks. Struct Eng
626 Int. 2000;10(3):197-201. doi:10.2749/101686600780481509
627 27. Haroun MA. Dynamic Analyses of Liquid Storage Tanks. EERL Report 80-04, Pasadena, California; 1980.
628 28. Veletsos AS. Seismic response and design of liquid storage tanks. In: Guidelines for the Seismic Design of
629 Oil and Gas Pipelines Systems. New York: Technical Council on Lifetime Earthquake Engineering, ASCE;
630 1984:255-370.
631 29. Chiba M. Experimental studies on a nonlinear hydroelastic vibration of a clamped cylindrical tank partially
632 filled with liquid. J Press Vessel Technol. 1993;115:381-388.
633 30. Ibrahim RA. Liquid Sloshing Dynamics: Theory and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press;
634 2005.
635 31. Kianoush MR, Ghaemmaghami AR. The effect of earthquake frequency content on the seismic behavior of
636 concrete rectangular liquid tanks using the finite element method incorporating soil–structure interaction. Eng
637 Struct. 2011;33(7):2186-2200. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2011.03.009
638 32. Bagheri S, Farajian M. The effects of input earthquake characteristics on the nonlinear dynamic behavior of
639 FPS isolated liquid storage tanks. J Vib Control. 2018;24(7):1264-1282. doi:10.1177/1077546316655914
640 33. Kalogerakou ME, Maniatakis CA, Spyrakos CC, Psarropoulos PN. Seismic response of liquid-containing
641 tanks with emphasis on the hydrodynamic response and near-fault phenomena. Eng Struct. 2017;153:383-
642 403. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.09.026
643 34. Kang TW, Yang HI, Jeon JS. Earthquake-induced sloshing effects on the hydrodynamic pressure response of
644 rigid cylindrical liquid storage tanks using CFD simulation. Eng Struct. 2019;197(July):109376.
645 doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.109376
646 35. Uckan E, Umut Ö, Sisman FN, Karimzadeh S, Askan A. Seismic response of base isolated liquid storage tanks
647 to real and simulated near fault pulse type ground motions. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng. 2018;112(April 2017):58-
648 68. doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.04.030
649 36. Veletsos AS, Tang Y, Tang HT. Dynamic response of flexibly supported liquid-storage tanks. J Struct Eng
650 (United States). 1992;118(1):264-283. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1992)118:1(264)
651 37. Buckingham E. On physically similar systems; Illustrations of the use of dimensional equations. Phys Rev.
652 1914;4(4):345-376. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.4.345
653 38. Qin X, Chen Y, Chouw N. Effect of uplift and soil nonlinearity on plastic hinge development and induced
654 vibrations in structures. Adv Struct Eng. 2013;16(1):135-147. doi:10.1260/1369-4332.16.1.135
655 39. Heyman J. Equilibrium of Shell Structures. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1977.
656 40. Flügge W. Stresses in Shells. Second Edi. New York, USA: Springer-Verlag; 1973.
657 41. Haroun MA, Housner GW. Seismic design of liquid storage tanks. J Tech Counc ASCE. 1981;107(TC1):191-
658 207.
659 42. Jun-Wei B, Zuo-Ju W, Zhi-Jia W, Fang O, Yuan C. Wavelet transform and its application in earthquake
660 engineering. In: 2014 Fifth International Conference on Intelligent Systems Design and Engineering
661 Applications. IEEE; 2014:1126-1128. doi:10.1109/ISDEA.2014.250
662 43. Royon-Lebeaud A, Hopfinger EJ, Cartellier A. Liquid sloshing and wave breaking in circular and square-base
663 cylindrical containers. J Fluid Mech. 2007;577:467. doi:10.1017/S0022112007004764
664 44. Hernandez-Hernandez D, Larkin T, Chouw N, Banide Y. Experimental findings of the suppression of rotary
665 sloshing on the dynamic response of a liquid storage tank. J Fluids Struct. 2020;96:103007.
666 doi:10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2020.103007
667 45. Hernandez-Hern andez D, Mammeri C, Larkin T, Chouw N. Estudio experimental de un tanque cilíndrico
668 para almacenar líquidos considerando la interacción fluído-structura-suelo. In: XXII Congreso Nacional de
669 Ingeniería Sísmica. Monterrey, México. 20-23 November; 2019.
670 46. Larkin T. Seismic response of liquid storage tanks incorporating soil structure interaction. J Geotech
671 Geoenvironmental Eng. 2008;134(12):1804-1814.
672
 hwave
hwave hwave
H H H
h h h

r r r
(a) Planar (b) Nonplanar (c) Chaotic
FIGURE 1 Generic sloshing patterns in upright cylindrical tanks
673

x (mm) 180° 0°
Strain gauge
675

500

350

250
150 Accelerometer
75
50
0 20
Outer steel plate

Direction of the motion

(a) (b)
FIGURE 2 (a) Physical LDPE model and (b) measurement locations
674

(a) Frontal view (b) Top view

FIGURE 3 Anchor mechanism for the LDPE tank, mm
675
676
 (a) Low dominant–frequency Ricker wavelet (b) High dominant–frequency Ricker wavelet
FIGURE 4 Ricker and modified wavelets employed for the maximum acceleration of the set of five, Sc 5
677

Sc 5 Sc 5

)
Sc 4
)

Sc 4
Sc 2 Sc 3 Sc 2 Sc 3
Sc 1 Sc 1

Acceleration
Acceleration

(a) Low dominant–frequency Ricker wavelets (b) High dominant–frequency Ricker wavelets
1.4 Hz 4.9 Hz

(c) Low dominant–frequency Ricker wavelet (d) High dominant–frequency Richer wavelet
FIGURE 5 Employed Ricker wavelets. (a)(b) Time history and (c)(d) their corresponding Fourier amplitude
678
 0 180 180
0 Top
Bottom Top Bottom
1
1.9 Hz 16 Hz

50 Hz

PSD
32Hz
1.4 Hz 2.8 Hz

0
679
680 FIGURE 6 Experimental free-vibration frequencies of the tank-water system with 𝒉/𝒓 = 𝟐
681

Experiment
Theory
3rd
2nd
1st fimp
6th 1st
5th 1st fcon
4th

682

683 FIGURE 7 Dependency of theoretical and experimental frequencies of the tank–water system on the aspect
684 ratio 𝒉/𝒓 (left), and a zoom of the frequencies between 0 Hz and 5 Hz (right)
685

Hoop stress Shake table acceleration

23 kPa

686
687 FIGURE 8 Time–history of the shake table acceleration 𝑨𝐒𝐓 and the hoop stress 𝝈𝝓 near the base of the tank
688 with an aspect ratio 𝒉/𝒓 = 𝟐 due to a sine excitation of 𝟏. 𝟒 𝐇𝐳
689
 .
(a) 𝒇 = 𝟎. 𝟔 𝐇𝐳 (b) 𝝈𝝓 due to the excitation with a frequency of 𝟎. 𝟔 𝐇𝐳

(c) 𝒇 = 𝟏. 𝟒 𝐇𝐳 (d) 𝝈𝝓 due to the excitation with a frequency of 1.4 𝐇𝐳

(e) 𝒇 = 𝟐 𝐇𝐳 (f) 𝝈𝝓 due to the excitation with a frequency of 2 𝐇𝐳

FIGURE 9 Relationship between the sine excitation frequency and the development of hoop stress
690

h/r h/r

(a) Maximum hoop stress (b) Maximum axial stress

FIGURE 10 Effect of the sinusoidal excitation on the maximum stresses
691
 h/r h/r
Hoop stress Axial stress

(a) Hoop stress (b) Axial stress

FIGURE 11 Disparity between the maximum experimental and spring-mass model (a) hoop and (b) axial
stresses under sine excitations
692

20 kPa

22 kPa

(a) Time window 𝒕 = [𝟎 − 𝟏𝟓] 𝐬 (b) Time window 𝒕 = [𝟎 − 𝟔] 𝐬

FIGURE 12 Effect of low dominant-frequency excitation Sc 5 on the hoop stress when 𝒉/𝒓 = 𝟐
693

(a) Water level before shaking (b) Breaking wave (c) Chaotic sloshing
FIGURE 13 Evolution of sloshing due to low dominant–frequency excitation Sc 5 when 𝒉/𝒓 = 𝟐
694
 (a) Sc 1 (b) 𝝈𝝓 due to low dominant–frequency Sc 1

(c) Sc 5 (d) 𝝈𝝓 due to low dominant–frequency Sc 5

FIGURE 14 Effect of the strength of a low dominant–frequency Ricker wavelet excitation on hoop stress for
𝒉/𝒓 = 𝟐
695

14 kPa

696
697 FIGURE 15 Effect of high dominant-frequency excitation Sc 5 on the hoop stress for 𝒉/𝒓 = 𝟐
698
699
700
701
 a) Initial water level (before (b) Concentric circles from the tank (c) Concentric waves colliding at the
shaking) wall to the center center of the tank
FIGURE 16 Nonplanar sloshing due to high dominant–frequency excitation Sc 5 for 𝒉/𝒓 = 𝟐
702

(a) Sc 1 (b) 𝝈𝝓 due to high dominant–frequency Sc1

(c) Sc 5 (d) 𝝈𝝓 due to high dominant–frequency Sc5

FIGURE 17 Effect of the strength of high dominant–frequency Ricker wavelet excitations on hoop stress for
𝒉/𝒓 = 𝟐
703
 h/r h/r

(a) 𝛔𝑳𝝓 (b) 𝝈𝑳𝒙

h/r h/r

(c) 𝛔𝑯
𝝓 (d) 𝝈𝑯
𝒙
FIGURE 18 Relationship between the maximum acceleration 𝐀𝐒𝐓 and the development of wall stress 𝛔
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
 h/r

h/r

(a) Low dominant-frequency, hoop stress (b) Low dominant-frequency, axial stress
h/r
h/r

(c) High dominant-frequency, hoop stress (d) High dominant-frequency, axial stress
FIGURE 19 Disparity between the maximum experimental and spring-mass model (a)(c) hoop and (b)(d)
axial stresses under low and high dominant–frequency Ricker wavelet excitations
719
720
721
722 TABLE 1 Properties of the LDPE model and steel prototype
723
Model Prototype
Property
LDPE Steel
Young’s modulus (GPa) Em = 1.115 Ep = 206.8
Radius (m) rm = 0.225 rp = 4.5
Maximum water level* (m) hm = 0.675 hp = 13.5
First impulsive
Tm = 0.034 Tp = 0.143
period of vibration* (s)
Poisson’s ratio (-) νm = 0.41 νp = 0.3
Mass (water only) * (kg) mm = 107 mp = 858 835
724 *For an aspect ratio of three
725
726
727 TABLE 2 Scale factors
728
Physical quantity Similitude Scale factor
Mass (Nm ) Nm = mp /mm 8000
Time (Nt ) Nt = TP /Tm 4.2
Length (NL ) NL = rp /rm 20
Acceleration (Na ) Na = NL /Nt2 1.13
Stiffness (Nk ) Nk = Nm ∙ Na /NL 452
Stress (Ns ) Ns = Nm ∙ Na /NL2 22.6
729
730
731 TABLE 3 Properties of sine excitations
732
# sine excitation Frequency Displacement Acceleration
(Hz) amplitude amplitude
(mm) (mm/s 2 )
1 0.6 8.33
2 0.8 4.69
3 1.0 3.00
4 1.2 2.08
3.0
5 1.4 1.53
6 1.6 1.17
7 1.8 0.93
8 2.0 0.75
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749 TABLE 4 Experimentally and theoretically obtained frequencies f of the tank–water system in [𝐇𝐳]
750
Experimental Theoretical
𝑓= 1 2 3 4 5 6 𝑠𝑡
1 𝑓𝑖𝑚𝑝 1 𝑠𝑡 𝑓𝑐𝑜𝑛
ℎ/𝑟
0.5 1.24 2.8 15.35 48.75 64.21 67.57 161.69 1.21
1.0 1.40 1.85 2.76 15.54 50.97 64.21 98.39 1.39
1.5 1.44 1.86 2.80 15.63 33.51 49.99 68.83 1.42
2.0 1.44 1.86 2.80 15.65 31.63 50.45 50.38 1.42
2.5 1.45 1.85 2.78 17.17 30.31 50.82 38.15 1.42
3.0 1.45 1.85 2.80 16.57 30.83 47.59 29.67 1.42
751
752

View publication stats