European Journal of Scientific Research ISSN 1450-216X Vol.49 No.4 (2011), pp. 510-520 EuroJournals Publishing, Inc.

. 2011 http://www.eurojournals.com/ejsr.htm

Economical Design of Water Concrete Tanks

Hasan Jasim Mohammed Civil Engineering Department, Engineering collage-Tikrit University, Tikrit, Iraq E-mail: hasan_jasim2000@yahoo.com Tel: +9647701785250 Abstract This paper is an application of optimization method to the structural design of concrete rectangular and circular water tanks, considering the total cost of the tank as an objective function with the properties of the tank that are tank capacity, width and length of tank in rectangular, water depth in circular, unit weight of water and tank floor slab thickness, as design variables.A computer program has been developed to solve numerical examples using the Indian IS: 456-2000 Code equations .The results shown that the tank capacity taken up the minimum total cost of the rectangular tank and taken down for circular tank. The tank floor slab thickness taken up the minimum total cost for two types of tanks. The unit weight of water in tank taken up the minimum total cost of the circular tank and taken down for rectangular tank.

Keywords: Optimization, Water tanks, Minimum total cost, Tank capacity

1. Introduction
In general there are three kinds of water tankstanks resting on ground, underground tanks and elevated tanks. The tanks resting on ground like clear water reservoirs, settling tanks, aeration tanks etc. are supported on the ground directly. The walls of these tanks are subjected to pressure and the base is subjected to weight of water and pressure of soil. The tanks may be covered on top. From design point of view the tanks may be classified as per their shape rectangular tanks, circular tanks, intze type tanks, spherical tanks conical bottom tanks and suspended bottom tanks.Rectangular tanks are provided when small capacity tanks are required. For small capacities circular tanks prove uneconomical as the formwork for circular tanks is very costly. The rectangular tanks should be preferably square in plan from point of view of economy. It is desirable that longer side should not be greater than twice the smaller side.

2. Object of Study
The object from this paper is to investigated from the appropriate of optimization method to dealt the minimum cost of structural design of a rectangular and circular sanitary concrete tanks. Giving a safe design with minimum cost of the tank and giving the designer the relationships and curves between design variables, the design of a tank can be more economical, reliable and simple.

Economical Design of Water Concrete Tanks

511

3. Previous Research
Torres et al., (1966),as reported by Al-Jubori (2001) presented the minimum cost design of prestressed concrete highway bridges subjected to AASHTO loading by using piecewise LP (load program) method .Thakkar and Sridhar Rao (1974), discussed cost optimization of non cylindrical composite type prestressed concrete pipes based on the Indian code .Namiq and Al-Ani (1985) minimized the cost of spread footings subjected to axial load and biaxial moments by using graphical method as well as Rosenbrock's method. The cost function included the cost of soil excavated, concrete, steel, and backfilling. The footing length, width, thickness and reinforcing steel in both directions were considered as design variables. Sexena et al. (1987) presented the minimum cost design of Intze reinforced concrete water tanks based on the Indian and ACI ("building" 1969) codes using the heuristic flexible tolerance method (Himmelblau 1972). The cost function included the material costs of concrete, steel, and the formwork. They concluded that a large percentage in cost savings can be achieved for water tanks with large capacities . Tan et al. (1993) presented the minimum cost design of reinforced concrete cylindrical water tanks based on the British Code for water tanks, using a direct search method and the (SUMT). The cost function included the material costs of concrete and steel only. The tank wall thickness was idealized with piecewise linear slopes with the maximum thickness at the base . Al-Jubair (1994) minimized the cost of ring foundations by using the simplex method of Nelder and Mead. The results obtained supported the efficiency of optimization techniques in selecting the most economical design of ring foundations for given conditions .Zielinski et al. (1995) presented cost optimization of reinforced concrete short, tied rectangular columns based on the Canadian Code ("Design "1984) using the internal penalty function method . Al-Douri (1999) minimized the cost of rectangular combined footings by using several methods .She concluded that the minimum cost of the footing decreases with increasing the distance between the columns for a constant length . Al-Jubori (2001) minimized the cost design of mat foundations. He proved that the minimum cost of the raft foundation decreases with increasing of the angle of internal friction of the soil and increases with increasing the column spacing's in both directions as well as with increasing the difference between the loads of adjacent columns . Al-Badri (2005) presented cost optimization of reinforced concrete circular grain silo based on the ACI Code (2002). He proved that the minimum cost of the silo increases with increasing of the angle of internal friction between stored materials, the coefficient of friction between stored materials and concrete, and the number of columns supporting hopper . Al-Badri (2006) presented the minimum cost design of reinforced concrete corbels based on ACI Code (2002). The cost function included the material costs of concrete ,formwork and steel reinforcement. He proved that the minimum total cost of the corbel increases with the increase of the shear span, and decreases with the increase of the friction factor for monolithic construction.

4. Objective Function
The total cost of a tank can be represented by: TC=TCRE+TCF+TCC where: TC= Total cost of tank (unit price). TCRE = Cost of tank steel reinforcement (unit price). TCF = Cost of tank formwork (unit price). TCC = Cost of tank concrete (unit price). For rectangular tank :TCRE ={(4L*H*No.)+2B*No.(H+ L+1.0)}*COR TCF = 2(L+B)(2H+TFS) *COFW TCC ={[ 2(L+B)(H*t)]+[(L+0.5)(B+0.5)*TFS]}*COCO For circular tank :TCRE ={(2Pi*D*No.*H)+(2Pi(D+0.5)*No.)}*COR

512 TCF ={(2Pi*D*H)+(Pi(D+0.5)*TFS)}*COFW TCC ={(Pi*D*t*H)+(Pi(D+0.5)*TFS)}*COCO and where: COR= Price of steel reinforcement (unit price/ton) COFW= Price of formwork (unit price/m2) COCO= Price of concrete (unit price/m3) L= length of tank (m). B= width of tank (m). H=height of tank walls(m). TFS=tank floor slab thickness (mm). t=tank walls thickness (m). No. = number of reinforcement bars per meter length . D=diameter of circular tank (m) . Pi=22/7

Hasan Jasim Mohammed

5. Computer Program
The programs (Rectangular Tank. For) and (Circular Tank.For) in FORTRAN-77 were written by using the design procedure of IS: 456-2000 Code. This program gave good results with code requirements . The main program, utilized to perform the necessary calculations for optimization, was drawn from Bundy (1984) and translated to FORTRAN-77.Hooke and Jeeves method was used to performed the minimization process utilizing this method of solution. Followings, are the required input parameters for this program. Ns- number of independent (design) variables. X(Iz)-initial estimate of the design variables [Iz=1,2,3,Ns] .Hz-step length. These programs (Rectangular Tank. For) and (Circular Tank.For) uses a subroutines with the program (H & J. For). Input data symbols and other parameters used in program are listed in Table (1).
Table 1:
CT L B W TFS H DW D

Some Input Data

Symbols
Capacity of tank (m3) Length of tank (m) Width of tank (m) Unit weight of water in tank (kN/m3) Tank floor slab thickness (mm) Height of tank (m) Water depth in circular tank=H-0.2 (m) Diameter of circular tank (m)

Function

6. Numerical Examples
The rectangular tank was solved by using six sets of initial trial values for design variables vector X=[CT, L, B, W,TFS] .The circular tank was solved by using four sets of initial trial values for design variables vector X=[CT, DW, W,TFS] , Hz=0.01. The results obtained are shown in Tables (2)&(3). Figs (1) to (10) show the convergence rate towards the minimum cost design of tanks.
Table 2: The (initial trial point) Rectangular tank
1st trial 30 6 2 10 150 2nd trial 40 7 3 10 150 3rd trial 20 5 2 10 150 4th trial 35 6 3 10 150 5th trial 25 5 2 10 150 6th trial 22 5 2 10 150

Variables capacity (m3) L(m) B(m) W (kN/m3) TFS(mm)

Economical Design of Water Concrete Tanks

Table 3: The (initial trial point) Circular tank
First trial 250 4 10 150 Second trial 300 4.5 10 150 Third trial 500 6 10 150 Fourth trial 600 7 10 150

513

Variables Capacity (m3) DW(m) W (kN/m3) TFS(mm)

7. Discussion of Results
A parametric study was done to the tank capacity, length of tank, width of tank, unit weight of water in tank, and tank floor slab thickness for the sixth initial trial point of rectangular tank. The results are listed in Tables (4)to(8) . It can be observed from Table (4) and Figs. (11) to (13) that as the tank capacity increases; the minimum total cost is increased ,as shown in Fig (11), the minimum total cost is at 15 m3.Also the optimum length and width of tank are increased with increment of tank capacity, Figs. (12) and (13) . But the tank floor slab thickness does not change with tank capacity change, Table(4).
Table 4: The Design Results for different capacity of rectangular tank
CT=18 397648 2.0 2.10 9.0 141 199 CT=20 446390 2.30 2.20 9.0 141 199 CT=22 495702 2.20 2.80 9.0 141 199 CT=25 565044 2.10 3.10 9.0 141 197 CT=28 615938 3.10 2.70 9.0 141 199

Variables (m3) CT=15 Cost (U.P.) 318960 L(m) 1.50 B(m) 2.00 W (kN/m3) 9.0 TFS(mm) 141 FE * 200 * Number of function evaluation.

Table 5:

The Design Results for different length of the rectangular tank

L=4.0 452244 10.90 2.70 9.0 141 199 L=4.5 448500 10.90 2.50 9.0 141 199 L=5.0 446390 10.90 2.20 9.0 141 199 L=5.5 452244 10.90 2.70 9.0 141 200 L=6.0 454380 10.90 2.80 9.0 141 200

Variables(m) L=3.5 Cost (U.P.) 447973 Capacity (m3) 10.90 B(m) 2.30 W (kN/m3) 9.0 TFS(mm) 141 FE * 199 * Number of function evaluation.

Table 6:

The Design Results for different width of the rectangular tank

B=1.75 453343 10.90 1.80 9.0 141 199 B=2.00 446390 10.90 2.30 9.0 141 199 B=2.25 447662 10.90 2.10 9.0 141 200 B=2.50 446390 10.90 2.30 9.0 141 200 B=3.00 446601 10.90 2.30 9.0 141 198

Variables(m) B=1.50 Cost (U.P.) 447082 Capacity (m3) 10.90 L(m) 2.10 W (kN/m3) 9.0 TFS(mm) 141 FE * 198 * Number of function evaluation.

514
Table 7: The Design Results for different unit weight of water in rectangular tank
W =9.00 497765 12.20 2.10 2.90 142.2 183 W =9.50 424328 10.90 1.90 2.60 140.90 199 W =10.0 446390 10.90 2.30 2.20 140.90 199

Hasan Jasim Mohammed

Variables (kN/m3) W =8.50 Cost (U.P.) 468749 Capacity (m3) 12.20 L(m) 2.20 B (m) 2.40 TFS(mm) 142.2 FE * 184 * Number of function evaluation.

W =10.5 375422 9.60 2.00 2.40 139.60 200

W =11.0 402567 9.50 2.10 2.70 138.90 199

Table 8:

The Design Results for different rectangular tank floor slab thickness
TFS =125 398167 10.90 2.00 2.80 9.0 199 TFS =150 446390 10.90 2.30 2.50 9.0 199 TFS =175 498917 10.90 2.00 2.40 9.0 199 TFS =200 546170 10.90 2.00 2.20 9.0 197 TFS =225 592747 10.90 2.10 2.00 9.0 199

Variables (mm) TFS =100 Cost (U.P.) 342017 Capacity (m3) 10.90 L(m) 2.10 B (m) 3.00 W (kN/m3) 9.0 FE * 198 * Number of function evaluation

Table 9:

The Design Results for different capacity of circular tank

245 188737 4.20 8.30 4.40 135 199 250 183971 4.20 8.40 4.40 135 199 255 178924 4.20 8.50 4.40 135 199 260 173894 4.20 8.60 4.40 135 197 265 168784 4.20 8.70 4.40 135 199

Variables (m3) 240 Cost (U.P.) 193515 Dw(m) 4.20 D(m) 8.30 H(m) 4.40 TFS(mm) 135 FE * 200 * Number of function evaluation.

Table 10: The Design Results for different water depth in circular tank
Variables(m) Dw=3.0 Cost (U.P.) 614500 Capacity (m3) 236 D(m) 5.90 TFS(mm) 135 H (m) 8.90 * Number of function evaluation. Dw=3.5 216625 236 6.80 135 6.60 Dw=4. 0 179919 235 9.20 135 3.70 Dw=4.5 341181 245 10.90 135 2.90 Dw=5. 0 522390 235 10.30 135 3.00 Dw=5.5 1283814 244 8.90 135 4.10

Table 11: The Design Results for different unit weight of water in circular tank
Variables (kN/m3) Cost (U.P.) Capacity (m3) Dw(m) TFS(mm) D(m) H (m) 9.0 1717330 249 2.70 149 10.9 2.90 9.5 1758264 249 2.70 149 10.9 2.90 10.0 1799199 249 2.70 149 10.9 2.90 10.5 1840133 249 2.70 149 10.9 2.90 11.0 1881068 249 2.70 149 10.9 2.90

Economical Design of Water Concrete Tanks

Table 12: The Design Results for different circular tank floor slab thickness
Variables (mm) Cost (U.P.) Capacity (m3) Dw(m) D(m) H (m) TFS =130 1665716 249 2.70 10.90 2.90 TFS =140 1727457 249 2.70 10.90 2.90 TFS =150 1838730 249 2.70 10.90 2.90 TFS =160 1870940 249 2.70 10.90 2.90

515

TFS =170 1942682 249 2.70 10.90 2.90

It can be observed from Table (5) and Figs (14) and (15) that as the length of tank increases; the minimum total cost decreases then increases, Fig. (14).The minimum total cost occurs at 5m length. The optimum width of tank is change between increased and decreased, Fig. (15) . But optimum tank capacity, and tank floor slab thickness does not change with length of tank change, Table(5). It can be realized from Table (6) and Figs. (16) and (17) that as the width of tank increases; the minimum total cost increases then decrease and then constant Fig.(16). The minimum total cost is at 2m width. The optimum length of tank is change between increased and decreased, Fig. (17). The optimum tank capacity, unit weight of water in tank, and tank floor slab thickness are also have a constant values. So, width and length of tank exchanged between increase and decrease to get the optimum values that gives minimum total cost . It can be noticed from Table(7) and Figs(18) to (22) that as the unit weight of water in tank increased ; the minimum total cost decreased Fig(18) . The optimum tank capacity and tank floor slab thickness are decreased Figs(19) and (22). The optimum width and length of tank are changed between increases and decreases Figs(20) and (21).Minimum values at 10.5 kN/m3. It can be noticed from Table(8) and Figs(23) to (25) that as the tank floor slab thickness increased ; the minimum total cost increased Fig(23) . The optimum width of tank decreased Fig.(25). The optimum length of tank is changed between increases and decreases Fig(24). The optimum tank capacity not change with increase tank floor slab thickness . A parametric study was done to the tank capacity, water depth, unit weight of water in tank, and tank floor slab thickness for the first initial trial point of circular tank. It can be realized from Table (9) and Figs. (26) and (27) that as the tank capacity increases; the minimum total cost decreases. The optimum diameter of tank is increased, Fig. (27). The water depth, and tank floor slab thickness are also have no change in values. It can be noticed from Table(10) and Figs(28) to (30) that as the water depth increased ; the minimum total cost increased Fig(28) . The optimum tank capacity and diameter are changed between decreases and increases. It can be noticed from Tables (11)&(12) and Figs(31) & (32) that as the unit weight of water and the tank floor slab thickness increased ; the minimum total cost increased. The another variables do not effected with increases two variables.

8. Conclusions and Recommendations

The minimum total cost is more sensitive to the changes in tank capacity and tank floor slab thickness of rectangular tank, but in circular type is more sensitive to the change in all variables. Increase in tank capacity leads to increase in minimum total cost in rectangular and decrease in circular . Increase in the width and length of tank are leads to small changed in minimum total cost. So in another variables . Increase in unit weight of water in tank leads to decreases in minimum total cost in rectangular tank, and increase in circular tank. Increase in tank floor slab thickness leads to increase in minimum total cost for two types of tank. Increase in water depth in circular tank leads to increase in minimum total cost. In future can take another type of concrete tanks and study the minimum total cost. The another dimensions and type of stored materials can optimization this give results to take more relationships between variables uses in design of sanitary concrete tanks.

516
Figure 1: Convergence towards the initial trial)rectangular tank

Hasan Jasim Mohammed

minimum(1st Figure 2: Convergence towards the minimum(2nd initial trial)rectangular tank
1500000 Co st(U.P.) 1000000 500000 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 FE

Figure 3: Convergence towards the initial trial)rectangular tank

minimum(3rd Figure 4: Convergence towards the minimum(4th initial trial) rectangular tank
1500000

1500000

C ost(U.P.)

1000000 500000 0

Co st(U.P.)

1000000 500000 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 FE

100

200

300 FE

Figure 5: Convergence towards initial trial)rectangular

the

minimum(5th Figure 6: Convergence towards the minimum(6th initial trial)rectangular tank

Figure 7: Convergence towards the initial trial) circular tank

minimum(7th Figure 8: Convergence towards the minimum(2nd initial trial) circular tank
3000000 Cost (U.P.) 2000000 1000000 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 FE

Economical Design of Water Concrete Tanks

Figure 9: Convergence towards the initial trial)circular tank
5000000 Cost(U.P.)
Cost(U.P.)

517

minimum(3rd Figure 10: Convergence towards the minimum(4th initial trial) circular tank
8000000 6000000 4000000 2000000 0

4000000 3000000 2000000 1000000 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 FE

50

100

150

200

250 FE

Figure 11: Minimum total cost vs. Rectangular tank Figure 12: Optimum length of tank vs. rectangular capacity tank capacity
602500 502500 Cost(U.P.) 402500 302500 202500 102500 2500 15 20 25 capacity of tank(m3) 30

Len g th of tan k (m)

702500

3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 15 20 25 30

capacity of tank(m3) Fig(12)Optimum length of tank vs.

Figure 13: Optimum width of tank vs. rectangular tank Figure 14: Minimum total cost of vs. length of capacity rectangular tank
460000 Co st(U.P.) 455000 450000 445000 440000 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6

len gth o f tank(m)

Figure 15: Optimum width of tank vs. length of Figure 16: Minimum total cost of vs. width of rectangular tank rectangular tank
3 2.8 widt h of tank (m)

460000 455000 C ost(U.P.)

3.5 4 4.5 5 leng th of tank(m) 5.5 6

2.6 2.4 2.2 2

450000 445000 440000 1.5 2 2.5 width of tan k(m) 3

518

Hasan Jasim Mohammed

Figure 17: Optimum length of tank vs. width of Figure 18: Minimum total cost of vs. unit weight rectangular tank of stored materials in rectangular tank
490000 470000 450000 Co st(U.P.) 430000 410000 390000 370000 350000 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 u nit weight o f water in tank (kN/m3) 11

Figure 19: Optimum length of tank vs. unit weight of Figure 20: Optimum length of tank vs. unit stored materials in rectangular tank weight of stored materials in rectangular tank
tank capaci ty (m3) 12 11 10 9 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 unit weight of water in tank (kN/m3)

Figure 21: Optimum width of tank vs. unit weight of Figure 22: Optimum tank floor slab thickness vs. stored materials in rectangular tank unit weight of stored materials in rectangular tank

Figure 23: Minimum total cost vs. tank floor slab Figure 24: Optimum length of tank vs. tank floor thickness in rectangular tank slab thickness in rectangular tank

len gt h of tank (m)

2.4 2.3 2.2 2.1 2 1.9 1.8 100 125 150 175 200 225 tank floor s lab thicknes s (mm)

Economical Design of Water Concrete Tanks

519

Figure 25: Optimum width of tank vs. tank floor slab Figure 26: Minimum total cost vs. Circular tank thickness in rectangular tank capacity

Figure 27: Optimum diameter of tank vs. Circular tank Figure 28: Minimum total cost vs. Water depth of capacity Circular tank
1350000 C ost(U.P.) 1150000 950000 750000 550000 350000 150000 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5

Water dep th of tan k (m)

Figure 29: Optimum circular tank capacity vs.Water Figure 30: Optimum diameter of circular tank vs. depth Water depth of tank
Diemet er o f circular t an k (m) 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Water d ept h of tank (m) 5.5 6

Fig(30)Op timum diameter of circular tank vs.

Figure 31: Minimum total cost vs. unit weight of Water Figure 32: Minimum total cost of Floor slab unit in circular tank thickness of tank
2000000 1900000 Cost(UP) 1800000 1700000 1600000 130 140 150 160 Flo or s lab thicknes s of t ank(m) 170

520

Hasan Jasim Mohammed Al-Badri, H.J.M.,2005. "Estimation of Minimum Cost Design of Circular Grain Silo", Tikrit J. of Eng. Sciences, Vol.12,No.4 . Al-Badri, H.J.M.,2006. " Economical Design of Corbels ", Tikrit J. of Eng. Sciences, Vol.13,No.3 . Al- Douri , E . M. ,1999. " Optimum Design of Rectangular Combined Footings" , M.Sc. Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, Tikrit University. Al-Jubair, H.S. ,1994. " Economical Design of Ring Foundations " Al-Mohandas ,Vol.120,No.4, pp.45-54. Al-Jubori , A. M. , 2001. " Optimum Design of Raft Foundations ", M.Sc. Thesis ,Tikrit University , College of Engineering, Civil Engineering Department. Bundy , B. D. , 1984. " Basic Optimization Methods ", Edward Arnold Publishers. Fintel, M., ,1974. " Handbook of Concrete Engineering", USA. Gray ,W.S. and Manning ,G.P., 1960. " Concrete Water Tower, Bunkers, Silos and Other Elevated Structures" , 3rd ed. , London. Manning, G.P., 1973. " Reinforced Concrete Reservoirs and Tanks" , 1st ed. London. Namiq, L.I. and Al-Ani, M.M., 1985. "Optimization Design of Spread Footings Subjected to Axial and Biaxial Moments ", ICE, Vol.1. Raju, N. K. , 2004. " Design of Reinforced Concrete Structures" , 3rd ed., New Delhi. Saxena, K.C. and Adeli, H.,1987. " Cost Optimization of Intze Tanks on Shafts Using Nonlinear Programming ", Eng. Optimization, Vol.10,No.4. Tan, G.H. et al., 1993. " Design of Reinforced Concrete Cylindrical Water Tanks for Minimum Materials Cost ", Computers and Structures , Vol.48,No.5. Thakkar, M.C. and Sridhar Rao, J.K., 1974. " Optimal Design of Prestressed Concrete Pipes Using Linear Programming ", Computers and Structures , Vol.4,No.2. V.N Vazirani, and M.M. Ratwani,1975. "Concrete Structures, Analysis, Design and Details of Structures " , 6th ed. , Khanna publishers, Delhi. Zielinski, Z.A. et al., 1995. " Designing Reinforced Concrete Short-Tied Columns Using the Optimization Technique ", ACI Structures J., Vol.92,No.5.

References
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16]