Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
ABSTRACT
As known from very upsetting experiences, elevated water tanks were heavily damages or collapsed during
earthquake. This was might be due to the lack of knowledge regarding the proper behaviour of supporting system of
the tank again dynamic effect and also due to improper geometrical selection of staging patterns. Due to the fluidstructure interactions, the seismic behaviour of elevated tanks has the characteristics of complex phenomena. The
main aim of this study is to understand the behaviour of supporting system which is more effective under different
response spectrum method with SAP 2000 software. In this Paper different supporting systems such as radial
bracing and cross bracing.
with respect to alternate supporting system which are
safe during earthquake and also take more design
Introduction
forces.
Water is human basic needs for daily life. Sufficient
water distribution depends on design of a water tank
in certain area. An elevated water tank is a large
water storage container constructed for the purpose of
holding water supply at certain height to
pressurization the water distribution system. Many
new ideas and innovation has been made for the
storage of water and other liquid materials in
different forms and fashions. There are many
different ways for the storage of liquid such as
underground, ground supported, elevated etc. Liquid
storage tanks are used extensively by municipalities
and industries for storing water, inflammable liquids
and other chemicals. Thus Water tanks are very
important for public utility and for industrial
structure.
Elevated water tanks consist of huge water mass at
the top of a slender staging which are most critical
consideration for the failure of the tank during
earthquakes. Elevated water tanks are critical and
strategic structures and damage of these structures
during earthquakes may endanger drinking water
supply, cause to fail in preventing large fires and
substantial economical loss. Since, the elevated tanks
are frequently used in seismic active regions also
hence, seismic behaviour of them has to be
investigated in detail. Due to the lack of Knowledge
of supporting system some of the water tank were
collapsed or heavily damages. So there is need to
focus on seismic safety of lifeline structure using
www.borjournals.com
Model Provisions
Two mass model for elevated tank was proposed by
Housner (1963) which is more appropriate and is
being commonly used in most of the international
codes including Draft code for IS 1893 (Part-II). The
pressure generated within the fluid due to the
dynamic motion of the tank can be separated into
impulsive and convective parts. When a tank
containing liquid with a free surface is subjected to
horizontal earthquake ground motion, tank wall and
liquid are subjected to horizontal acceleration. The
liquid in the lower region of tank behaves like a mass
that is rigidly connected to tank wall. This mass is
termed as impulsive liquid mass which accelerates
along with the wall and induces impulsive
hydrodynamic pressure on tank wall and similarly on
base Liquid mass in the upper region of tank
undergoes sloshing motion. This mass is termed as
convective liquid mass and it exerts convective
hydrodynamic pressure on tank wall and base. For
representing these two masses and in order to include
the effect of their hydrodynamic pressure in analysis,
spring mass model is adopted for ground-supported
tanks and two-mass model for elevated tanks.
23
Fluid-Structure Interaction
www.borjournals.com
g 1.2
24
Fig 1.3: (a) Westergaard added mass concept (b) Normal and
Cartesian directions.
mai =[
]Ai 1.3
250 m3
Diameter of tank
8.6 m
Height of staging
16 m
4.6 m
1.75 m
1.5 m
3, 4, 5
Braces
Columns
Problem Description
120 mm
Top Dome
Conical Dome
1.4
Number of columns
250 x 300
mm
200 mm
500 x 300
mm
500 x 600
mm
200 mm
250 mm
300 x 600
mm
650 mm
www.borjournals.com
25
Results
TABLE 2- BASE SHEAR FOR 3 LEVEL BRACING
BASE SHEAR (kN)
Fluid
Level
Condition
Bracing types
Hexagonal
Bracing
Hexagonal &
Cross Bracing
Hexagonal &
Radical
Bracing
Empty
227.29
255.34
260.81
257.41
258.49
Half Full
276.14
306.38
315.78
311.98
313.13
Full
316.14
352.44
360.43
355.06
356.94
www.borjournals.com
26
Bracing types
Hexagonal
Bracing
Hexagonal &
Cross Bracing
Hexagonal &
Radical
Bracing
Empty
3933.84
4320.02
4405.85
4351.24
4370.28
Half Full
4841.06
5231.85
5387.12
5325.28
5347.15
Full
5635.11
6136.79
6269.54
6179.97
6210.43
TABLE 4- MAXIMUM BENDING MOMENT AT THE BOTTOM OF COLUMN FOR 3 LEVEL BRACING
MAX BENDING MOMENT (kN-m)
Fluid
Level
Condition
Bracing types
Hexagonal
Bracing
Hexagonal &
Cross Bracing
Hexagonal &
Radical
Bracing
Empty
115.69
122.84
119
123.65
118.23
Half Full
140.63
148.44
143.97
149.47
142.98
Full
160.91
169.80
164.22
170.74
163.26
Bracing types
Hexagonal
Bracing
Hexagonal &
Cross Bracing
Hexagonal &
Radical
Bracing
Empty
15.693
15.419
15.251
15.336
15.318
Half Full
19.127
18.913
18.479
18.634
18.571
Full
21.942
21.366
21.175
21.287
21.238
www.borjournals.com
27
Hexagonal
Bracing
300
250
Hexagonal &
Cross Bracing
200
150
Hexagonal &
Radical Bracing
100
50
7000
350
6000
Hexagonal
Bracing
5000
Hexagonal &
Cross Bracing
4000
3000
Hexagonal &
Radical Bracing
2000
1000
www.borjournals.com
28
Conclusion
a)
References
[1] George W. Housner (1963) The dynamic
behavior of water tanks Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America. Vol.53, No.
2, pp. 381-387.
[2] IS: 11682-1985 Criteria for design of RCC
staging for over head water tanks, Bureau of
Indian Standards, New Delhi.
[3] IS:1893-2002(PartII) Criteria for Earthquake
Resistant Design of Structure (Liquid Retaining
Tanks), Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
[4] Sudhir K. Jain, O R Jaiswal (2007) IITKGSDMA Guidelines for Seismic Design of
Liquid Storage Tanks.
[5] Stuctural Analysis Program SAP2000. Users
manual, Computers and Structures, Inc., Berkley,
Calif.
[6] H. Shakib, F.Omidinasab and M.T. Ahmadi
(2010) Seismic Demand Evaluation of Elevated
Reinforced Concrete Water Tanks International
Journal of Civil Engineerng. Vol. 8, No. 3.
[7] Soheil Soroushnia, Sh. Tavousi Tafreshi, F.
Omidinasab, N. Beheshtian, Sajad Soroushnia
(2011) Seismic Performance of RC Elevated
Water Tanks with Frame Staging and Exhibition
Damage Pattern Procedia Engineering 14
,pp.30763087.
[8] Dr. Suchita Hirde, Ms. Asmita Bajare, Dr. Manoj
Hedaoo (2011) Seismic Performance of
Elevated Water Tanks International Journal of
Advanced Engineering Research and Studies,
IJAERS/Vol. I/ Issue I/October-December, pp.
78-87.
www.borjournals.com
29