AGENDA ITEM: 650-472 Load Combinations 8th Ballot

HANDLED BY: Randy Kissell (SG Design)

PH: 919-644-8250 FX: 919-644-8252 tgbjrk@mindspring.com

SOURCE: API Fall Meeting 1998 SGD discussions.

PURPOSE: Using API 650's current level of risk of tank failure, provide a method for combining new
loads, such as external pressure, with current loads, such as wind, and provide rules for combining
currently considered loads (for example, snow and seismic).

IMPACT: Some designs would be more costly and some would be less costly than current designs. By
making the risk of tank failure more uniform, however, the overall cost of owning and operating tanks
will decrease.

PROPOSED CHANGE: This item was moved to publication at the Spring 2002 meeting with the
editorial changes approved at the meeting. Publication of this item was withheld pending a reballot of the
single issue contained in this ballot, which is the application of wind loads for the tank overturning
stability check. The scope of this ballot is limited to this issue only. Changes from the last ballot are
shown in red. The changes are those Larry Hiner requested to address his negative ballot and
several other affirmative comments requesting clarifications. Briefly summarized, the changes are:

1) Provide a default wind speed of 120 mph.

2) Set the horizontal wind pressure as 18 psf rather than 16 psf.
3) Limit design uplift to the strength of the shell-to-top joint.
4) Make the load coefficient for internal pressure consistent with the rest of the load combination
ballot when wind and pressure both act.
5) Do not include the weight of the bottom in uplift resistance to be consistent with Appendix E.
6) Set the specific gravity for the half full overturning check to 0.7.

3.2.1 (f) Wind (W): The design wind speed shall be 190 km/hr (120 mph), the 3 sec gust design wind
speed shall be determined from ASCE 7 Figure 6-1, or unless the 3 sec gust design wind speed (that
equals or exceeds the value based on a 2% annual probability of being exceeded (50 yr mean recurrence
interval)) is specified by the purchaser (this specified wind speed shall be for a 3 second gust based on a
2% annual probability of being exceeded (50 yr mean recurrence interval). The design wind pressure
shall be 0.77 0.86 kPa(V/190)2 , ((16 18 lbf/ft2)(V/120)2) on vertical projected areas of cylindrical surfaces
and 1.44 kPa(V/190)2 , ((30 lbf/ft2)(V/120)2) uplift (2) on horizontal projected areas of conical or doubly
curved surfaces, where V is the 3 sec gust wind speed. The 3 sec gust wind speed used shall be reported to
the purchaser.

1) These design wind pressures are in accordance with ASCE 7 for wind exposure category C. As a
alternative, pressures may be determined in accordance with ASCE 7 (exposure category and importance
factor provided by Purchaser) or a national standard for the specific conditions for the tank being
designed.
2) The design uplift pressure on the roof (wind plus internal pressure) need not exceed the design pressure
P determined in F.4.1.
3) Windward and leeward horizontal wind loads on the roof are conservatively equal and opposite and
therefore they are not included in the above pressures.

650-472 4/24/03 1
3.11.1 Wind Pressure Overturning stability shall be calculated using the wind pressures given in
3.2.1(f).
3.11.2 Unanchored Tanks
Unanchored tanks shall satisfy both of the following uplift criteria:

1) 0.6Mw + MPi < MDL /1.5

2) Mw + 0.4MPi < (MDL + MF)/2

where
MPi = moment about the shell-to-bottom joint from design internal pressure
Mw = overturning moment about the shell-to-bottom joint from horizontal plus vertical
wind pressure
MDL = moment about the shell-to-bottom joint from the weight of the shell and roof
supported by the shell and portion of the bottom that acts with the shell against uplift, roof, and
shell
MF = moment about the shell-to-bottom joint from liquid; where weight of liquid is wL
defined in E.4 using with the design a specific gravity G of 0.7 and a height of one half the
wL  4.67 t b Fb y H
design liquid height H, so
Wind Uplift Load

Internal Pressure Load

D/2

Wind Load on Shell

H

H/2 for uniform Moments About

pressure on shell Shell to Bottom Jt
Dead Load (DL)

Liquid Hold Down Weight (w L)

Figure 3-23

3.11.3 Anchored Tanks

When anchors are required, the design tension load per anchor shall be calculated as follows:
tB = 4Mw/dN – W/N

where
tB = design tension load per anchor (N) (lbf)
d = diameter of the anchor circle (m) (ft)
N = number of anchors
W = weight of the shell plus roof supported by the shell less 0.4 times the uplift from
internal pressure

650-472 4/24/03 2
JUSTIFICATION:

Summary: API tanks have a successful history against tank overturning due to wind, but this is achieved
by API 650 understating both wind loads and tank resistance to overturning. This ballot revises 650’s
wind loads and resistance to overturning to make them consistent good practice while resulting in
approximately the same anchorage requirements as the current edition of 650.

API 650 users have historically applied horizontal wind loads but ignored vertical wind loads, unlike
building codes. ASCE 7 and other codes apply wind pressures normal to surfaces. For tank roofs with
the ASCE 7 approach, the horizontal components largely offset one another, leaving the vertical
component as the primary design consideration. Applying ASCE 7 has the effect of requiring about 30
psf uplift rather than 15 psf horizontal pressure as API 650 users have done.

Applying 30 psf uplift in combination with the most severe fluid load condition (i.e., an empty tank)
results in most tanks not achieving the traditional 1.5 safety factor against overturning. This application is
unduly conservative, though, because it combines the most severe effects of two different loads – the 50
year wind storm and an empty tank.

To address this situation in a manner consistent with the other proposed API load combinations, a load
factor is applied to the wind when combined with the most severe fluid load (i.e., an empty tank). The
proposed change is illustrated below:

CURRENT APPROACH NEW APPROACH

(0.6)30 psf

15 psf
(0.6)16 psf
SF = 1.5
empty
18 psf
empty

30 psf

16 psf
SF = 2.0
half full

Details: This discussion is divided into two parts:

1) Wind overturning stability checks

2) Wind loads for API tanks

650-472 4/24/03 3
Wind Overturning Stability Checks

Load Factors: Load combination theory requires that the design value of a given load be combined with
the arbitrary-point-in-time (APT) value of other loads. For fluid loads and wind loads, there are two
cases:

a) design fluid load (for overturning, this is an empty tank) and APT wind load
b) design wind load and APT fluid load

For case (a), the APT wind load is determined in the same manner as the other load combinations were
determined in previous ballots by dividing the appropriate ASCE 7 load combination involving wind by
1.4:

[1.2D + 0.8W]/1.4 = 0.9D + 0.6W

The ratio of wind load to dead load is 0.6, so 60% of the wind load is combined with the dead load for an
empty tank.

For case (b), the APT fluid load is reasonably estimated as ½ the full fluid load since the fluid load ranges
from empty to full.

Safety factors: In addition to determining load factors for the load combinations, we must also establish
safety factors. API 650 3.6.2.1 uses a safety factor of 2.5 against rupturing the shell due to the hydrostatic
pressure of a full tank’s liquid contents. The safety factor used in API 650 3.11 for overturning of an
empty tank subject to wind is 1.5. For tanks with liquid levels between empty and full, a sliding scale
safety factor is proposed. For example, the safety factor required for a half-full tank would be the average
of the safety factors for empty and full tanks, or (1.5 + 2.5)/2 = 2.0. (See table below.)

Safety Factor As a Function of Liquid Height

Liquid Height Safety Factor
Full 2.50
Half Full 2.00
Empty 1.50

Dead Load: API 650 currently requires there to be no stress at the shell-to-bottom joint when wind loads
act on the tank. This is inconsistent with API 650’s approach for seismic loads, and too conservative
when wind loads are applied in accordance with accepted codes. The dead load of a tank includes the
portion of the tank bottom and liquid contents (if any) that is able to act with the shell against overturning
before the bottom yields. API 650 E.4.1 recognizes this and gives the width of this portion. Therefore,
this weight is included in the wind overturning check. This approach is also consistent with the new
approach to frangibility that the frangibility task force is proposing.

The weight of the tank contents that can be used to resist uplift is based on E.4.1 with G = 0.7 and height
as 0.5H, which is: w L  7.9t b Fby GH  7.9t b Fby (0.7)(0.5H )  4.67t b Fby H

Wind Loads for Tanks

API 650’s 10th edition, section 3.11.1 specifies overall wind loads of 18 psf on projected areas of
cylindrical surfaces and 15 psf on projected areas of conical and double-curved surfaces, and footnote a of
3.9.7.1 indicates that the local load considered for wind girder design is 31 psf. These are based on a

650-472 4/24/03 4
design wind speed of 100 mph (fastest mile speed). These wind loads are compared to ASCE 7,
Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, below.

The design wind speed is determined from ASCE 7 Figure 6-1, which is based on 3-second gust speeds
(discussed further below). The ASCE 7 design wind pressure is:

p = qz G = 0.00256Kz Kzt Kd V 2 I G

Assume the exposure category for all tanks is conservatively taken as category C, open terrain with
scattered obstructions with heights generally less than 30 ft. This includes flat open country and
grasslands. Virtually all locations are exposure category B (urban or suburban areas, wooded areas, or
other terrain with numerous closely spaced obstructions having the size of single-family dwellings or
larger) or exposure C. The wind load in exposure B is about 70% of that in C, so using exposure C for all
cases doesn’t introduce a large conservatism, and as will be seen below, gives design wind pressures
consistent with those currently used in 650.

The velocity pressure exposure coefficient Kz for exposure C at a height of 40 ft is 1.04, and less at lower
heights (Table 6-3). A height of 40 ft is proposed since the mid-height of most tanks is less than 40 ft.
The topographic factor Kzt is 1.0 for all structures except those on isolated hills or escarpments (6.5.7.1).
The directionality factor Kd is 0.95 for round tanks (Table 6-4). The importance factor I is taken as 1.0 for
ASCE 7 Category II structures (Table 6-1). The gust factor G is 0.85 for exposure C (6.5.8.1).

Since the adoption of API 650's existing provisions regarding wind load, the US National Weather Service
has changed the way wind speeds are measured and recorded from fastest mile (the maximum speed of a
one mile long column of air passing a reference point) to 3-second gust (the maximum speed associated
with an averaging time of 3 seconds). The speed V given in ASCE 7 Figure 6-1 is the 3-second gust
speed, which ranges from 85 to 150 mph in the US, depending on location. Converting a 100 mph fastest
mile wind speed to a 3 second gust wind speed per ASCE 7-98 Figure C6-1 gives a 117 mph non-
hurricane wind speed and a 121 mph hurricane wind speed, so a 3-second gust wind speed of 120 mph is
used here in order to compare to existing practice in API 650. The conversion factor of 1.2 given to
adjust fastest mile wind speed to 3 sec gust wind speed has an error typically less than 2% for the range of
wind speeds likely to be considered.

The design wind pressure is then:

p = qzG = 0.00256Kz Kzt KdV 2 I G = 0.00256(1.04)(1.0)(0.95)(120)2 (1.0)(G) = 36.4 G

p = (36.4)(0.85) = 31.0 psf

This wind pressure matches the 31 psf in API 650 section 3.9.7.1 footnote (a) before a 5 psf internal
vacuum is applied. As explained in footnote (b) of 3.9.7.1, the 36 psf pressure is assumed to apply
uniformly over a local area of the tank shell (equal to the theoretical buckling mode), and a shape factor is
not applied. This is consistent with the distribution of wind pressure shown in the diagram below, where
the maximum inward pressure is shown to occur on the windward side of the tank, at a pressure equal to
1p. The assumption of a 120 mph 3-second gust design wind speed is thus shown to provide an
equivalent wind pressure (i.e., 31 psf) to that presently assumed for the design of wind girders.

650-472 4/24/03 5
The average wind pressure on a cylindrical tank given in ASCE 7 is the design wind force (F) averaged
over the projected area normal to the wind (Af ):

F/Af = p Cf = pavg

ASCE 7 Figure 6-19 gives a force coefficient (Cf ) of 0.5 for API tanks (round cross section tanks with
moderately smooth surfaces, a height-to-diameter (h/D) ratio of 1, and for which D q z > 2.5). Applied
to the previously determined design wind pressure of 31 psf, this yields an average pressure on the tank
shell of 15.5 psf. For h/D equal to 2 (rare for API tanks), Cf is 0.52 and the average wind pressure is 16.1
psf. This ballot proposes to change leaves the current API 650 requirement of 18 psf (section 3.11.1) to
16 psf.

For cone roofs, ASCE 7-98 Figure 6-3 gives external pressure coefficients (Cp), and Table 6-7 gives
internal pressure coefficients (GCpi) to be used to determine the design wind pressure p in the equation:

p = qGCp – qi (GCpi)

ASCE 7 qualifies a tank as an enclosed structure since the area of openings in the windward shell doesn’t
exceed the sum of the area of openings in the leeward shell and roof. For roofs of enclosed structures, the
design wind pressure p is:

p = qhGCp – qh (GCpi) = qh (GCp - GCpi)

ASCE 7 Figure 6-5 gives the internal pressure coefficient (GCpi) for an enclosed structure as +/-0.18.

Supported cone roofs typically have a roof slope of ¾ on 12, or 3.6 o (see API 650 3.10.4.1). This is a
roof-height-to-tank-diameter ratio of (¾)/12/2 = 0.031. ASCE 7 does not specifically address cone roof
wind loads, but they could be determined by approximating the cone roof as a dome roof or as a hip roof.
ASCE 7 Figure 6-7 for dome roofs, however, indicates that hip roof pressures should be used for dome
roofs if the roof-height-to-tank-diameter ratio is less than 0.05. Therefore, wind loads for cone roofs must
be determined as for hip roofs by Figure 6-6. For both domes and cones, however, the ASCE 7 wind

650-472 4/24/03 6
pressure coefficients are a function not only of the roof-height-to-tank-diameter ratio (f/D), but also the
tank-height-to-tank-diameter ratio (h/D). API tank-height-to-tank-diameter ratios vary from about 0.2
(for a 40 ft tall tank 200 ft in diameter) to about 1.33 (for a 40 ft tall tank 30 ft in diameter) and average
about 0.6.

Considering a cone as a hip roof and using ASCE 7 Figure 6-6 for a roof slope of 3.6 o (< 10 o) and a tank-
height-to-tank-diameter ratio of 0.5 gives the following values for Cp and pressure.

location Cp pressure
windward half - 0.9 34.4
leeward half - 0.5 22.0

For example:
p = qh (GCp - GCpi)
p = 36.4 (-0.9(0.85) – 0.18) = 36.4 (-0.945) = 34.4 psf (uplift)

ASCE 7-02 provides wind pressures for dome roofs in Figure 6-10. Like cone roofs, dome pressures are
a function of the tank-height-to-diameter ratio, distance from the windward edge, and roof profile. For
typical profiles permitted by API 650 (for steel domes, see 3.10.6.1 and for aluminum domes, see G.6.2)
on an 80’ diameter, 48’ tall tank, ASCE 7 Figure 6-10 gives an approximate average Cp = -0.97, so the
design wind pressure is

p = qh (GCp - GCpi)
p = 36.4 (-0.97(0.85) – 0.18) = 36.4 (-0.94) = 36.6 psf (uplift)

A computation of ASCE 7-02 wind pressure on domes is shown for 3 tanks below, using a dome radius
equal to the tank diameter (D), a typical radius for API 650 tanks (see section 3.10.6 for steel domes and
G.6.2 for aluminum domes), resulting in a dome-height-to-tank-diameter ratio of 0.13:

Dome Roof Wind Pressure Coefficients Cp for 3 Tank Sizes

30’ x 40’h 80’ x 48’h 150’ x 48’h
5,000 bbl 43,000 bbl 151,000 bbl
h/D 1.3 0.6 0.32
Pt. A (windward edge) -1.6 -1.4 -1.0
Pt. B (center) -1.0 -1.0 -0.8
Pt. C (leeward edge) -0.5 -0.5 -0.3
average coefficient -1.02 -0.97 -0.72
average uplift (psf) 38.1 36.6 28.8

In each case, the uplift on the windward side is about 3 times the uplift on the leeward side, producing a
net horizontal force in a direction opposite to the wind direction. API 650 G.4.2.3.1 similarly specifies a
higher outward pressure on the windward side than the leeward side. Therefore, the horizontal effect of
the wind counteracts overturning and can be conservatively neglected.

A 30 psf roof uplift pressure is selected as a reasonable average for all roofs based on the above.

Cone roof tanks that have a frangible connection to the tank shell are exempted from the uplift pressure
since the connection of these roofs to the shell is designed to fail in the event of significant uplift pressure
acting on the roof. Also, these roofs are not connected to the rafters, so the light roof plates transfer part
of the imparted energy from the wind into kinetic energy, moving in wavelike action and dissipating part
of the wind force. Experience shows that the proposed roof uplift loading may be too conservative for

650-472 4/24/03 7
overturning calculations. The proposed loading would cause significant damage to the roof to shell
junction in many tank configurations, however, this damage is not realized in existing tanks. It therefore
is reasonable to limit the uplift pressure to maximum allowed by roof to shell junction.

650-472 4/24/03 8