Seminar Sem 2

Seismic Behavior of RC Elevated Water Tank under Different Types of Staging Pattern
G.C.E.Karad Page 1

ABSTRACT
Elevated water tanks are one of the most important lifeline structures in earthquake prone
regions. In major cities and also in rural areas elevated water tanks forms an integral part of
water supply scheme. These structures has large mass concentrated at the top of slender
supporting structure hence these structures are especially vulnerable to horizontal forces due to
earthquake. Elevated water tanks that are inadequately analyzed and designed have suffered
extensive damage during past earthquakes. The elevated water tanks must remain functional
even after the earthquakes as water tanks are required to provide water for drinking and
firefighting purpose. Hence it is important to check the severity of these forces for particular
region. This study describes seismic performance of the elevated water tanks for various seismic
zones of India and seismic behavior for various staging patterns of elevated water tanks. 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
behavior of supporting system of the tank again dynamic effect and also due to improper
geometrical selection of staging patterns. Due to the fluid-structure interactions, the seismic
behavior of elevated tanks has the characteristics of complex phenomena. The main aim of this
study is to understand the behavior of supporting system which is more effective under different
earthquake time history records. Here two different supporting systems such as radial bracing
and cross bracing are compared with basic supporting system for various fluid level conditions.

KEY WORDS: Earthquake effects, elevated water tank, seismic analysis, staging patterns.


G.C.E.Karad Page 2

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

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
effects on 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 behavior 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 with respect to alternate supporting system
which are safe during earthquake and also take more design forces.
The present study is an effort to identify the behavior of elevated water tank under
Response Spectrum Method with consideration and modeling of impulsive and convective water
masses inside the container for different fluid conditions, types of bracings and bracing levels
using structural software SAP2000.


G.C.E.Karad Page 3

CHAPTER 2

THEROTICAL DATA

Elevated water tanks are a type of elevated liquid tanks considering as important town
services in many cities. Their safety performance is a critical concern during strong earthquakes.
They should not collapse after earthquake, so that they can be used in essential requirements like
preparing drinking water and quenching fires. Due to the shortage of water for drinking or
disturbing in quenching fire during critical conditions, by collapsing of these structures and
falling down of water perils occurred for people and their health in the city. Many studies
focused on the seismic behavior, analysis and design on tanks, particularly in ground tanks.
In the last decade most of these studies have concentrated upon the elevated tanks. Due
to the failure of lifeline structures, such as elevated tanks with insufficient seismic resistance,
past earthquakes have shown which it can be prevented the fire fighting process and other
emergency response efforts (such as experiences from Chile 1960, 1978 Izu-Oshima and
Miyagi, 1971 San Fernando, and 1987 Whittier earthquakes (Steinbrugge and Rodrigo 1963;
Minowa 1980; Knoy 1995). There have been several studies which analyzed and investigated the
dynamic behavior of liquid storage tanks (Minowa 1980; Wilson and John 1983; Olson and
Bathe 1983; Dogangun et al. 1996; Dogangun and Livaoglu 2004; Livaoglu and Dogangun
2005; Livaoglu 2005; Livaoglu and Dogangun 2006; Livaoglu and Dogangun 2007; Sezen et al
2008); however, the major of these studies have focused on the ground level cylindrical tanks
(Wilson and John 1983; Olson and Bathe 1983). Very few studies have concentrated upon the
behavior of elevated tanks (Dogangun et al 1996; Dogangun and Livaoglu 2004; Livaoglu and
Dogangun 2005; Livaoglu 2005; Livaoglu and Dogangun 2006; Livaoglu and Dogangun 2007;
Sezen et al 2008). In comparison with reinforced concrete elevated water tanks with shaft
staging, the reinforced concrete elevated water tanks with frame staging have shown better
seismic behavior to resistant against lateral loads, because of having more indeterminacy and
seismic energy absorption capacity through the nonlinear behavior. The members of reinforced
concrete elevated water tanks with staging moment resisting frame including some beams and
columns have more resistance against lateral loads and suffering a little damage, therefore
unexpected collapsing never occurred for these tanks because of suffering the inelastic

G.C.E.Karad Page 4

deformations and damage distribution on several members. In this way, concrete frame can be
designed so that the appropriate ductility under lateral loads happened with assurance in contrary
by thin-walled sections in shaft staging type. Sections near the end of the beams can be designed
so that had the best appropriate details in order to suffer the inelastic deformation so that could
dissipate earthquake energy. In reinforced concrete frame column because of greater degrees of
indeterminacy and feasibility of redistribution of forces in structure, it is possible if the other
points yielded. The different paths of load transferring and beam to column connections
integrating cause which this sort of column has a good seismic behavior. In designing such
columns, it must prevent creating plastic hinges and by conducting the location of hinges on
beam the number of them increased and nonlinear deformations and destructions in structure are
more distributed. In addition, hinges creation in columns caused mechanism in frame, which
followed ruins. By increasing the number of stories in frame, frame-shape behavior and also
stiffness grew up which result in decrease of the displacements and more integrating in frame
against lateral loads. In examining the reports of the earthquakes and investigation on existent
elevated water tanks in the regions, the failure modes of these types of tanks classified as
following:

2.1 Failure Modes in Elevated water tank.

2.1.1 Failure mode in Shaft type stagings
The current designs of supporting structures of elevated water tanks are extremely
vulnerable under lateral forces due to an earthquake. The shaft type stagings suffer from poor
ductility of thin shell sections besides low redundancy and toughness whereas framed stagings
consist of weak members and poor brace columns joints. A strength analysis of a few damaged
shaft type stagings clearly shows that all of them either met or exceeded the strength
requirements of IS: 1893-1984, however they were all found deficient when compared with
requirements of the International Building Code IS: 1893-1984 is unjustifiably low for these
systems


G.C.E.Karad Page 5

Figure 1-Collapsed 265 KL water tank in Chobari village about 20km from the epicenter of
Bhuj earthquake. The tank was approximately half full during the earthquake.
2.1.2 Shear failure modes in beams
This type of failure due to high shear force in the end of beams, 45 degree angle shear cracks
appears in the plastic joints and creating the end of beams is their failure. Samples this type of
failure, Chile earthquake in South America in 1960 with a magnitude M=8.5, for aerial water
reservoir Hotel Puerto 3078 Soheil Soroushnia et al. / Procedia Engineering 14 (2011) 3076
3087 Varas, occurred that causes cracks and subsequent fracture shear beams and plastic joint
was created. The tank so that instability and in some columns due to the high performance large

Figure 2 - Elevated water tank of Puetro Varas Hotel, May 22nd, 1960, Chile earthquake
(PEER).

G.C.E.Karad Page 6

columns create moment is low (PEER). Damaged tank struts. Some columns worked slightly at
tops due to high
The earthquake in Chile (South America) in May 22, 1960 with a magnitude M= 8.5, for
the elevated water tank with a volume of 50 cubic meters, bracket has the form of eight square
column dimensions of 40 cm and 180 cm distance each other columns, beams loss creating a
joint plastic strut has been reported and No damage has been reported in Columns (PEER). This
tank apparently rocked on its foundation. Some reinforcing steel was exposed to weather before
the shock (this was noted at undamaged column locations) as shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3- Elevated water tank with 50 m3 capacity in May 22nd, 1960, Chile earthquake
(PEER)
Bhuj earthquake in India in 2001 with a magnitude M=7.7, for the elevated water tank
with 100 cubic meters of volume collapsed, due to the inappropriate design connections and
poor detailing of column-beam joints. If connections are not designed for seismic forces, they
lead to failure in elevated water tanks. Columns from one side, where the beams connecting the
columns had shear cracks suffered and caused unstable side frame of the outcome, then so the

G.C.E.Karad Page 7

elevated water tanks collapsed. Elevated water tanks in the 2001 Bhuj (India) earthquake have
experienced failure having shown that if the connections are not designed for seismic forces,
they lead to failure (C Rai 2003). Side frame and subsequent instability failure has occurred is
the tank due to the incidence of some shear cracks in the Beam-Column frame connections
preservative and vertical cracks in some columns, , as shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4 Collapsed slender and weak framed staging of water tanks in Manfera village;
Severe damage occurred to elevated water tanks with frame staging which caused water
tank pulled down in Bhachau (C Rai 2003)
However, if the frame members and the brace-column joints are not designed and detailed for
inelastic deformations, in the epicentral, tract collapsed whereas severe damage to a water tank in
Bhachau (January 26th, 2001, Bhuj, India, M=7.7) warranted it to be torn down. Clearly, brace
and column members of tanks in Manfera and Bhachau do not meet the ductility and toughness
requirements for earthquake resistance (C Rai 2003).


G.C.E.Karad Page 8

2.1.3 Bending-shear failure in beams
This type of failure in the bending-shear cracks beams occurs in the middle section beams with a
gradual increase toward the middle of support prevent occurrence of shear failure and conduct
joint with plastic end of beams to the middle of beams to create this kind provide failure. An
illustration of this type of earthquake failure is Chile (South America) in 1960 with a magnitude
M=8.5, for the elevated water tank volume of 700 cubic meters; it has been shown that joint
damage in plastic beams creating a strut has been reported. Stirrups the W shape and size during
the earthquake within the water tank near 600 cubic meters has been reported. Also reported that
pipe broke underneath the tank, and separated one meter as the water discharged from the tank
(PEER). The design seismic shear forces frame members should be closed tight took advantage.
Figure 5 using open stirrups W shape show that the shear failure beams are in the middle.

Figure 5- Elevated water tank with 700 m3 capacity in earthquake 1960 Chile (PEER).
2.1.4. Axial failure in columns
Another type of the failure to vertical cracks occurs due to forces column compressive is on
them. An example of this type of failure is Bhuj earthquake in India in 2001 with a magnitude
M=7.7, for the elevated water tank with 20 cubic meters capacity located in Gujarat near Anjar,

G.C.E.Karad Page 9

built in 1958 that has occurred so relatively severe damages column was created (Eidinger
2001). Deep cracks in the columns were observed. The cracks occurred along of longitudinal
reinforced of column. Also, in the column connection to the container holder system were
developed cracks vertically that low the performance of columns. It has suffered in elevated
tank; however it has been not collapse.

Figure 6- Elevated water tank of Gujarat, located in India (Eidinger 2001).
The other elevated reinforced concrete water tank with approximately 20 meters in height and
350 cubic meters in capacity which can be seen in Figure 7. The tower has eight legs. The tank
was apparently full of water during the Bam earthquake (Iran, Dec 26, 2003, M=6.3). According
to Figure 7, In spite of the appropriate general performance of this structure as shown in Figure
7, some joints cracked so that the steel bars can be seen. As a matter of fact the only observed
defect in this structure was improper reinforcement detailing. Investigations showed that the used
steel rebar in the structure were round ones to which the cracks to some extent can be related. In
addition, one will be surprised, which the columns are not reinforced with ties (at least in the
joints). It believed that the cracks in the joints to a great extent are related to the lack of ties in
the joints. Also, Figure 6 is shown, an elevated water tank with frame staging, which created 20
years before the 2001 Bhuj earthquake in Gujarat (India), the concrete base had been sprayed.

G.C.E.Karad Page 10

After the earthquake affected tank base, small cracks occurred in beam and column connections.
The number of vertical cracks in some concrete columns between the old and sprayed concrete
was due to appear compressive forces in the columns (Eshghi et al. 2004; Zahrai and
Heidarzadeh 2007).

Figure 7 The Elevated water tank of Bam, Iran, Dec 26, 2003 (Eshghi et al 2004, Zahrai
and Heidarzadeh 2007)
2.1.5 Cracks in connections
After Bhuj earthquake the elevated water tank, which its legs sprayed with concrete many years
ago, after earthquake they had some fine cracks in Beam-Column connections, vertical cracks in
Columns and also shear cracks in beams. . Due to the high compressive forces on columns some
columns had numbers of vertical cracks which they occurred between the borders of old
concrete and sprayed concrete (C Rai 2003).


G.C.E.Karad Page 11

Figure 8 Elevated water tank with a capacity of 680 m3 in 2001 Bhuj earthquake in India
suffered small cracks in the joints and vertical cracks in the some columns (C Rai 2003).
2.1.6 Torsion failure
The other type of failure is more common in concrete elevated tanks with frame staging, which
called the torsion failure 9. In general, the elevated tanks geometry needs to design so that it has
symmetry axis at geometric center and also centroid and center of rigidity lie at the same point.
However, using ladder, stairs, installation pipes and executive errors cause incidental eccentricity
between centroid and center of rigidity. Many elevated water tanks collapsed on vertical
direction without any lateral sway in past earthquakes, however by perceiving collapsed tanks it
understands which a large number of them had extra torsion deflection. An example is shown in
figure 9. This type of failure in the main action is due to twist moment bending, shear and axial
forces in frame members arises and causes of damage and failure types mentioned above are in
the frame members. Elevated water tank in 1980 El-Asnam earthquake with a magnitude Algeria
M=7.2, the effect of incorrect connections and enlarge treatment plan fell twist. Arrangement of
frame members standing in the elevated tank in such a way that enlarge the deflection behavior
does not occur. Failure was due to poor detailing of the reinforcement at the beam-column
connections (PEER)

G.C.E.Karad Page 12

Figure 9 -Failure of the reinforced concrete supporting tower of an elevated reinforced
concrete water tank during the 1980 El-Asnam Earthquake, Algeria (PEER).


G.C.E.Karad Page 13

2.2 PROVISIONS OF INDIAN CODE:

Indian Standard IS: 1893-1984 provides guidelines for earthquake resistant design of several
types of structures including liquid storage tanks. This standard is under revision and in the
revised form it has been divided into five parts. First part, IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002; which deals
with general guidelines and provisions for buildings has already been published. Second part, yet
to be published, will deal with the provisions for liquid storage tanks. In this section, provisions
of IS: 1893-1984 for buildings and tanks are reviewed briefly followed by an outline of the
changes made in IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002.
In IS: 1893-1984, Base Shear for building is given by V = Cs W, where, Cs is the Base Shear
Coefficient given by

Cs = K C I o.

Here,
K = Performance factor depending on the structural framing system and brittleness
or ductility of construction;
C = Coefficient defining flexibility of structure depending on natural period T;
= Coefficient depending upon the soil-foundation system;
I = Importance factor;
o = Basic Seismic Coefficient depending on Zone.

For buildings with moment resisting frames, K = 1.0. Importance factor, for buildings is usually I
= 1.0.

IS:1893-1984; does not have any provision for ground-supported tanks. It has provisions for
elevated tanks, for which it does not consider Convective Mode. Base Shear for elevated tank is
given by V = Cs W, where, Base Shear Coefficient, Cs is given by:

Cs = I F o (Sa/g)


G.C.E.Karad Page 14

Here,
Sa/g = Average Acceleration Coefficient corresponding to the time period of the tank, obtained
from acceleration spectra given in the code;
F o = Seismic Zone Factor;
W = Weight of container along with its content and one-third weight of supporting structure.
For elevated tanks, Importance factor I = 1.5. It may be noted that in the expression for Base
Shear Coefficient of tank, the Performance Factor K does not appear, i.e. K = 1 is considered,
which is same as that for a building with ductile frame. This implies that in IS: 1893-1984, there
is no provision to account for lower ductility and energy absorbing capacity of elevated tanks.
Thus, as per IS: 1893-1984, Base Shear Coefficient for tank will be only 1.5 times higher than
that for a building, which is due to higher value of Importance Factor. This is in contrast to other
codes, reviewed in earlier sections, wherein tank Base Shear Coefficient is seen to be 3 to 7
times higher than buildings. This lacunae needs to be corrected in the next revision of the code.
As mentioned earlier, IS 1893 is under revision and first part, of the revised code, IS 1893 (Part
1): 2002, has already been published. In this revised code, Base Shear for building is given by
V = Cs W,
and base shear coefficient Cs is given by
Cs = ZI (Sa/g)/2R
Where,
Z = Zone Factor,
I = Importance Factor,
R = Response Reduction Factor and
Sa/g = Average Response Acceleration Coefficient, obtained from acceleration spectra given in
the code.
For buildings with ductile frames value of R is 5.

G.C.E.Karad Page 15

In Figure 10, a comparison of Base Shear Coefficients for building obtained from IS: 1893-1984
and IS 1893 (Part I): 2002 is shown, along with the Base Shear Coefficient from IBC 2000.

Figure 10-Comparison of BSC of Building obtained from IS Codes & IBC 2000

Since IS: 1893-1984, does not specify specific value of load factors for strength design, the
results in Figure above are presented for working stress level. It is seen that Base Shear
Coefficient from IS: 1893-1984 is lower than one from IS 1893 (Part I): 2002. Further, unlike
IBC 2000, there is no lower bound in IS 1893 (Part I): 2002 and IS: 1893-1984. Subsequent parts
of IS 1893:2002, will be using Acceleration Spectra given in Part I, and will be based on same
design philosophy. Thus, for liquid storage tanks, Base Shear Coefficient will be given by Cs =
ZI (Sa/g)/2R in which suitable values of R will have to be used for different types of tanks. From
the review presented in earlier sections, it is seen that low and high ductility tanks have design
Base Shear 3 to 7 times higher than ductile buildings. In Figure11, base shear coefficients for
low and high ductility tanks, from IBC 2000 (i.e., tanks with R=1.5 and R=3.0) are shown. To
achieve this level of base shear coefficients the value of R in IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002 should be

G.C.E.Karad Page 16

1.1 and 2.25 as can be seen from Figure below. Also shown in this figure is the base shear
coefficient for tank obtained from IS: 1893-1984, which is on much lower side. Based on the
comparison shown in the Figure 11, proposed values of R, which can be used in, IS 1893 (Part
2): 2002 for different types of tanks are given in Table 1.

Figure 11-Base Shear Coefficients for tanks from IBC 2000, IS 1893:1984 and IS 1893(Part
1): 2002. IBC values are divided by 1.4 to bring them to working stress level.

Table 1-Proposed values of Response Reduction Factor, R for IS
1893:2002

G.C.E.Karad Page 17

2.3. IITK-GSDMA GUIDELINES & PROVISIONS FOR SEISMIC DESIGN OF
ELEVATED LIQUID STORAGE TANKS
2.3.1. Damping
Damping in the convective mode for all types of liquids and for all types of tanks shall be
taken as 0.5% of the critical. Damping in the impulsive mode shall be taken as 2% of the critical
for steel tanks and 5% of the critical for concrete or masonry tanks.

2.3.2. Design Horizontal Seismic Coefficient
Design horizontal seismic coefficient, Ah shall be obtained by the following expression,
subject to Clauses 4.5.1 to 4.5.4

where
Z = Zone factor given in Table 2 of IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002,
I = Importance factor given in Table 1 of this guideline,
R = Response reduction factor given in Table 2 of this guideline, and
Sa/g = Average response acceleration coefficient as given by Figure 2 and Table 3 of IS
1893(Part 1): 2002 and subject to Clauses 4.5.1 to 4.5.4 of IITK-GSDMA Guidelines.

Table 2 Importance factor, I

G.C.E.Karad Page 18

Note- Values of importance factor, I given in IS 1893 (Part 4) may be used where
appropriate.

Table 3-Response reduction factor, R

These R values are meant for liquid retaining tanks on frame type staging which are
inverted pendulum type structures. These R values shall not be misunderstood for those
given in other parts of IS 1893 for building and industrial frames.
These tanks are not allowed in seismic zones IV and V.
For partially buried tanks, values of R can be interpolated between ground supported and
underground tanks based on depth of embedment.

Acceleration coefficient (Sa /g) as
For hard soil sites
Sa /g = 2.5 for T < 0.4
Sa /g = 1.0/T for T 0.4
For medium soil sites
Sa /g = 2.5 for T < 0.55
Sa /g = 1.36/T for T 0.55


G.C.E.Karad Page 19

For soft soil sites
Sa /g = 2.5 for T < 0.67
Sa /g = 1.67/T for T 0.67
2.3.3. Base Shear
Base shear in impulsive mode, just above the base of staging (i.e. at the top of footing of staging)
is given by[1],
Vi = (Ah) i (mi + ms)g

and base shear in convective mode is given by,
Vc= (Ah )c mc g
Where,
ms = Mass of container and one-third mass of staging.
(Ah)i = Design horizontal seismic coefficient for impulsive mode,
(Ah)c = Design horizontal seismic coefficient for convective mode,
mi = Impulsive mass of water
mt = Mass of roof slab, and
g = Acceleration due to gravity.

Total base shear V, can be obtained by combining the base shear in impulsive and convective
mode through Square root of Sum of Squares (SRSS) rule and is given as follows,

2.3.4. Base Moment
Overturning moment in impulsive mode, at the base of the staging is given by,
Mi= (Ah) i [mi (hi+ hs ) +ms hcg ] g
and overturning moment in convective mode is given by,
Mc= (Ah )c mc (hc +hs )g
Where,
hs = Structural height of staging, measured from top of footing of staging to the bottom of tank
wall, and

G.C.E.Karad Page 20

hcg = Height of center of gravity of empty container, measured from top of footing.

2.3.5. Direction of Seismic Force
For elevated tanks supported on frame type staging, the design of staging members
should be for the most critical direction of horizontal base acceleration. For a staging consisting
of four columns, horizontal acceleration in diagonal direction (i.e. 45 to X-direction) turns out
to be most critical for axial force in columns. For brace beam, most critical direction of loading
is along the length of the brace beam. Sameer and Jain (1994) have discussed in detail the critical
direction of horizontal base acceleration for frame type staging. For some typical frame type
staging configurations, critical direction of seismic force is described in Figure 12.

Figure 12-Critical direction of seismic force for typical frame type staging profiles[1]


G.C.E.Karad Page 21

2.4. MODEL PROVISIONS
Two mass model for elevated tank was proposed by Housner (1963)[3] 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.

Figure 13-Two mass model for elevated tank
In spring mass model convective mass (mc) is attached to the tank wall by the spring
having stiffness (Kc), where For elevated tanks two-mass model is considered, which consists of
two degrees of freedom system. Spring mass model can also be applied on elevated tanks, but
two-mass model idealization is closer to reality. The two- mass model is shown in Fig 13(a).
where, mi, mc, Kc, hi, hc, hs, etc. are the parameters of spring mass model and charts as well as
empirical formulae are given for finding their values. The parameters of this model depend on
geometry of the tank and its flexibility. For elevated tanks, if the shape is other than circular or

G.C.E.Karad Page 22

rectangular, then the values of spring mass parameters can be obtained by considering an
equivalent circular tank having same capacity with diameter equal to that of diameter at top level
of liquid in original tank. The two-mass model was first proposed by G. M. Housner (1963) and
is being commonly used in most of the international codes. The response of the two degree of
freedom system can be obtained by elementary structural dynamics. However, for most of
elevated tanks it is observed that both the time periods are well separated. Hence, the two mass
idealizations can be treated as two uncoupled single degree of freedom system as shown in
Fig.13 (b). The stiffness (Ks) is lateral stiffness of staging. The mass (ms) is the structural mass
and shall comprise of mass of tank container and one-third mass of staging as staging will acts
like a lateral spring. Mass of container comprises of roof slab, container wall, gallery if any, floor
slab, floor beams, ring beam, circular girder, and domes if provided.
2.5. FLUID-STRUCTURE INTERACTION

The analysis of elevated tank under seismic load of Fluid- structure-interaction problems
can be investigated by using different approaches such as added mass Westergaard or velocity
potential, Lagrangian (Wilson and Khalvati), Eulerian (Zienkiewicz and Bettes), and Lagrangian
Euclidian approach (Donea). These analyses can be carried out using FEM or by the analytical
methods. The added mass approach as shown in Fig.14 can be investigated by using some of
conventional FEM software such as SAP2000, STAAD Pro and LUSAS. Whilst in the other
approaches, the analysis needs special programs that include fluid elements in the elements
library, such as ANSYS, ABAQUS ADINA, ALGOR and etc.
The general equation of motion for a system subjected to an earthquake excitation can be written
as,
M+ C + Ku= -M g .. 1.1
In which M, C and K are mass, damping and stiffness matrices with , and u are the acceleration,
velocity and displacement respectively, and is the ground acceleration. In the case of added mass
approach the form of equation 1.1 become as below.
M* + C + Ku= -M* g 1.2
In which M* is the new mass matrix after adding hydrodynamic mass to the structural mass,
while the damping and stiffness matrices are same as in equation 1.1

G.C.E.Karad Page 23

Figure 14-FEM Fluid-Structure-Interaction Model
Westergaard Models method was originally developed for the dams but it can be applied to
other hydraulic structure, under earthquake loads i.e. tank. In this paper the impulsive mass has
been obtained according to GSDMA guideline equations and is added to the tanks walls
according to Westergaard Approach as shown in Figure 15 using equation 1.3.
Where, is the mass density, h is the depth of water and Ai is the area of curvilinear surface.

Figure 15-a) Westergaard added mass concept (b) Normal and Cartesian directions.

In the case of Intze tank where the walls having sloped and curved contact surface, the equation
1.3 should be compatible with the tank shape by assuming the pressure is still expressed by
Westergaard's original parabolic shape. But the fact that the orientation of the pressure is normal

G.C.E.Karad Page 24

to the face of the structure and its magnitude is proportional to the total normal acceleration at
the recognized point. In general, the orientation of pressures in a 3-D surface varies from point to
point; and if it is expressed in Cartesian coordinate components, it would produce added-mass
terms associated with all three orthogonal axes. Following this description the generalized
Westergaard added mass at any point i on the face of a 3-D structure is expressed by the equation
1.4

-------1.4

Ai is the tributary area associated with node i, i is the normal direction cosine(2y , 2x , 2z )
and ai is Westergaard pressure coefficient.


G.C.E.Karad Page 25

CHAPTER 3

ILLUSTRATIVE SEISMIC DESIGN EXAMPLE

Example Elevated Intze Tank Supported on 6 Column RC Staging.
Problem Statement:
An intze shape water container of 250 m3 capacity is supported on RC staging of 6 columns with
horizontal bracings of 300 x 600 mm at three levels. Details of staging configuration are shown
in Figure 16. Staging conforms to ductile detailing as per IS 13920. Grade of concrete and steel
are M20 and Fe415, respectively. Tank is located on hard soil in seismic zone IV. Density of
concrete is 25 kN/m3. Analyze the tank for seismic loads. [1]
Solution:
Tank must be analyzed for tank full and empty conditions.
3.1.Preliminary Data
Details of sizes of various components and geometry are shown in Figure 16.
Sizes of various components
Top Dome =120 thick
Top Ring Beam= 250 x 300
Cylindrical Wall =200 thick
Bottom Ring Beam =500 x 300
Circular Ring Beam =500 x 600
Bottom Dome= 200 thick
Conical Dom=e 250 thick
Braces= 300 x 600
Columns =650 dia.


G.C.E.Karad Page 26

3.2.Weight calculations
Table 4-Weights of various components

Note: -
1. Wherever floor finish and plaster is provided, their weights should be included in the
weight calculations.
2. No live load is considered on roof slab and gallery for seismic load computations.
3. Water load is considered as dead load.
4. For seismic analysis, free board is not included in depth of water.
From Table 4,
Weight of empty container = 209.3 + 52.1+ 552.9 + 107.2 + 148 + 185.6 + 321.3 = 1,576 kN
Weight of staging = 782 + 254 = 1,036 kN
Hence, weight of empty container + one third weight of staging = 1,576 + 1,036 / 3 = 1,921 kN


G.C.E.Karad Page 27

Figure 16-Details of tank geometry


G.C.E.Karad Page 28

3.3.Center of Gravity of Empty Container
Components of empty container are: top dome, top ring beam, cylindrical wall, bottom ring
beam, bottom dome, conical dome and circular ring beam. With reference to Figure 17,
Height of CG of empty container above top of circular ring beam,
= [(209.3 x 7.22) + (52.1 x 5.9) + (552.9 x 3.8) + (107.2 x 1.65)
+ (321.3 x 1) + (185.6 x 0.92) (148 x 0.3)] / 1,576
= 2.88 m
Height of CG of empty container from top of footing, hcg = 16.3 + 2.88 = 19.18 m.

Figure 17-Details of tank container
3.4.Parameters of Spring Mass Model
Total weight of water = 2,508 kN = 25,08,000 N.
Volume of water = 2,508 / 9.81 = 255.65 m3
Mass of water, m = 2, 55,658 kg.
Inner diameter of tank, D = 8.6 m.
For obtaining parameters of spring mass model, an equivalent circular container of same volume
and diameter equal to diameter of tank at top level of liquid will be considered. ( Section 4.2.3)

Let h be the height of equivalent circular cylinder,
(D /2)2 h = 255.65
h = 255.65 / [ x (8.6 / 2)2] = 4.4 m
For h / D = 4.4 / 8.6 = 0.51,

G.C.E.Karad Page 29

m i / m = 0.55;
mi = 0.55 x 2,55,658 = 1,40,612 kg
mc /m = 0.43;

mc = 0.43 x 2,55,658 = 1,09,933 kg
hi / h = 0.375; hi = 0.375 x 4.4 = 1.65 m
hi* / h = 0.78; hi* = 0.78 x 4.4 = 3.43 m
hc / h = 0.61; hc = 0.61 x 4.4 = 2.68 m
hc*/ h = 0.78; hc* = 0.78 x 4.4 = 3.43 m.
( Section 4.2.1)

About 55% of liquid mass is excited in impulsive mode while 43% liquid mass participates in
convective mode. Sum of impulsive and convective mass is 2,50,545 kg which is about 2 % less
than the total mass of liquid. Mass of empty container + one third mass of staging,

ms = ( 1,576 + 1,036 / 3 ) x (1,000 / 9.81)= 1,95,821 kg.

3.5.. Lateral Stiffness of Staging
Lateral stiffness of staging is defined as the force required to be applied at the CG of tank so as
to get a corresponding unit deflection. As per Section 4.3.1.3, CG of tank is the combined CG of
empty container and impulsive mass. However, in this example, CG of tank is taken as CG of
empty container. Finite element software is used to model the staging (Refer Figure 18).
Modulus of elasticity for M20 concrete is obtained as 5,000 fck = 5,000 x 20 = 22,360 MPa or
22.36 x 106 kN/m2. Since container portion is quite rigid, a rigid link is assumed from top of
staging to the CG of tank. In FE model of staging, length of rigid link is = 2.88 + 0.3 = 3.18 m.
From the analysis deflection of CG of tank due to an arbitrary 10 kN force is obtained as 5.616E-
04 m. Thus, lateral stiffness of staging,
Ks = 10 / (5.616E-04) = 17,800 kN/m
Stiffness of this type of staging can also be obtained using method described by Sameer and Jain
(1992).

G.C.E.Karad Page 30

Here analysis of staging is being performed for earthquake loading in X-direction. However, for
some members of staging, earthquake loading in Y-direction will be critical, as described in
(Section 4.8.2.)

Figure 18-FE Model Of staging

3.6.Time Period

3.7.Design Horizontal Seismic Coefficient
Design horizontal seismic coefficient for impulsive mode,
(A
h)t
=
( Sections 4.5 and 4.5.1)

Where,
Z = 0.24 (IS 1893(Part 1): Table 2; Zone IV)

G.C.E.Karad Page 31

I = 1.5 ( Table 1)
Since staging has special moment resisting frames(SMRF), R is taken as 2.5( Table 2)
Here, Ti = 0.86 sec,
Site has hard soil,Damping = 5%, ( Section 4.4)
Hence, (Sa /g) i = 1.16 (IS 1893(Part 1): Figure 2)

Design horizontal seismic coefficient for convective mode,

(A
h)c
=

Where,
For convective mode, value of R is taken same as that for impulsive mode as per Section 4.5.1.
Here, Tc = 3.14 sec, Site has hard soil,
Damping = 0.5%, ( Section 4.4)
Hence, as per Section 4.5.3 and IS 1893(Part 1): 2002, Figure 2
(Sa /g)c = 1.75 x 0.318 = 0.56
Multiplying factor of 1.75 is used to obtain Sa /g values for 0.5% damping from that for 5%
damping.


G.C.E.Karad Page 32

3.8.Base Shear

It may be noted that total lateral base shear isabout 6 % of total seismic weight (4,429 kN) of
tank.

3.9.Base Moment
Overturning moment at the base of staging in impulsive mode,
Mi* = (Ah)i [ mi ( hi* + hs ) + ms hcg ] g
= 0.084 x [1,40,612 x (3.43 + 16.3)+ (1,95,821 x 19.18)] x 9.81
= 5,381 kN-m
Similarly, overturning moment in convectivemode,
Mc* = (Ah)
c
m
c
( hc* + hs ) g
= 0.040 x 1,09,933 x (3.43 + 16.3) x 9.81
= 852 kN-m
Total overturning moment,


G.C.E.Karad Page 33

3.10. Sloshing Wave Height
dmax = ( Ah)c R D / 2 ( Section 4.11)
= 0.040 x 2.5 x 8.6 / 2
= 0.43 m.
3.11. Analysis for Tank Empty Condition
For empty condition, tank will be considered as single degree of freedom system as described in
Section 4.7.4. Mass of empty container + one third mass of staging, ms = 1,95,821 kg. Stiffness
of staging, Ks = 17,800 kN/m.
3.11.1 Time Period
Time period of impulsive mode,

Empty tank will not convective mode of vibration

3.11.2 Design Horizontal Seismic Coefficient
Design horizontal seismic coefficient corresponding to impulsive time period Ti,
(A
h)c
=

Where,
I = 1.5 ( Table 1)
R = 2.5 ( Table 2)
Here, Ti = 0.66 sec,

Site has hard soil,
Hence, (Sa /g)i = 1.52


G.C.E.Karad Page 34

3.11.3 Base Shear
Total base shear,
V = Vi = (Ah)i ms g
= 0.12 x 1,95,821 x 9.81
= 211 kN.

3.11.4 Base Moment
Total base moment,
M* = (Ah)i ms hcg g
= 0.11 x 1,95,821 x 19.18 x 9.81
= 4,053 kN-m

Since total base shear (280kn) and base moment (5,448 kN-m) in tank full condition are more
than base shear (211 kN) and base moment (4,053 kN-m) in tank empty condition, design will be
governed by tank full condition.


G.C.E.Karad Page 35

CHAPTER 4

CASE STUDY

Problem Description
An Intze shape water container of 250 m3 capacity is supported on RC staging of 6 columns with
horizontal bracings of 300 x 600 mm at three levels. Details of staging configuration are shown
in Figure 5. Staging conforms to ductile detailing as per IS 13920. Grade of concrete and steel
are M20 and Fe415, respectively. Tank is located on hard soil in seismic zone IV. Density of
concrete is 25 kN/m3. A FEM structural software SAP 2000 is used to model the elevated intze
water tank as shown in Fig 22. Columns and beams in the frame type support system are
modelled as frame elements (with six degrees of freedom per node). Conical part, bottom and top
domes and container walls are modelled with thin shell elements (with four nodes and six
degrees of freedom per node). Other dimensions of the elevated tanks are illustrated in Table 5.

Capacity of the tank 250m3
Diameter of tank 8.6 m
Number of
columns
6
Height of staging 16 m
Height of
Cylindrical Wall
4.6 m
Rise of Top Dome 1.75 m
Rise of Bottom & Conical Dome 1.5 m
Number of
Bracing Level
3, 4, 5
Top Dome 120mm
Top Ring Beam 250 x 300 mm
Cylindrical Wall 200 mm
Bottom Ring Beam 500 x 300 mm
Circular Ring Beam 500 x 600 mm
Bottom Dome 200 mm
Conical Dome 250 mm
Braces 300 x 600 mm
Columns 650 mm

Table 5-STRUCTURAL DATA FOR FRAME TYPE

G.C.E.Karad Page 36

In the present study an alternate staging configurations are those which can be achieved
by simple modifications to the Hexagonal Bracing Fig 19; for instance by adding cross bracing
Fig 20 and radical bracing Fig 21 and levels of bracing as shown in Fig 23, Fig 24, Fig 25.[6]

Figure 19-Hexagoonal bracing

Figure 20-Hexagonal & cross bracing

Figure 21-Hexagonal & radical bracing


G.C.E.Karad Page 37

Figure 23-3 level bracing Figure 24-4 level bracing Figure 25-5 level bracing

Figure 22- 3 level bracing model with hexagonal bracing

G.C.E.Karad Page 38

Analysis Results:
This 3 level bracing model with diff type of staging pattern is tested in SAP2000. The results are
as follows,
Table 6-Base shear for 3 level bracing

Table 7-Over turning moment for 3 level bracing

Table 8-Maximum bending moment at the bottom of column for 3 level bracing


G.C.E.Karad Page 39

Table 9-Maximum story displacement for 3 level bracing


G.C.E.Karad Page 40

Figure 26-Base shear for 3 level bracing

Figure 27-Over turning Moment For 3 Level bracing

G.C.E.Karad Page 41

Figure 28-Maximum bending moment at the bottom of column for 3 level bracing

Figure 29-Maximum story displacement for 3 level bracing


G.C.E.Karad Page 42

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION

Base shear increases as bracing level increases for different types of bracings.
Base shear is more for hexagonal & radical bracings of full tank condition than half full
and empty condition.
Over-turning moment is more in hexagonal & radical bracings of full tank condition than
half full and empty condition.
Bending moment at bottom of column goes on decreasing as level of bracing increases
for different bracing types.
Story displacement goes on decreasing as level of bracing increases and hexagonal &
radical type bracing gives less story displacement as compared to other bracing types.
The performance of hexagonal and radical type bracing is better.


G.C.E.Karad Page 43

REFERENCES

1. IITK-GSDMA Guidelines for Seismic Design of Liquid Storage Tanks Provisions with
commentary and explanatory examples.

2. IS:1893-2002(PartII) Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structure (Liquid
Retaining Tanks), Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.

3. George W. Housner (1963) The dynamic behavior of water tanks Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America. Vol.53, No. 2, pp. 381-387.

4. Dr. Suchita Hirde, Ms. Asmita Bajare, Dr. Manoj Hedaoo Seismic Performance of
Elevated Water Tanks International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and
Studies, IJAERS/Vol. I/ Issue I/October-December 2011, pp. 78-87.

5. Ayazhussain M. Jabar, and H. S. Patel , Seismic behavior of RC elevated water tank
under different staging pattern and earthquake characteristics, International Journal of
Advanced Engineering Research and Studies E-ISSN22498974, Vol. I, Issue III,April-
June, 2012/293-296

6. Pavan .S. Ekbote, and Dr. Jagadish .G. Kori , Seismic Behavior of RC Elevated Water
Tank under Different Types of Staging Pattern, Journal of Engineering, Computers &
Applied Sciences (JEC&AS) ISSN No: 2319-5606 Volume 2, No.8, August 2013 P 293-
296

Seminar Sem 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Seminar Sem 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Seismic Behavior of RC Elevated Water Tank under Different Types of Staging Pattern

( Sections 4.5 and 4.5.1)

You might also like