Static and Dynamic Analysis of A Steel Water Tower by Finite Element Method

PROJECT REPORT ON
Static and Dynamic analysis of a steel water tower by

Finite Element Method
Thesis submitted for the partial fulfillment of the requirement for degree of
Bachelor of Technology in Mechanical Engineering, Maulana Abul Kalam
Azad University of Technology
Submitted by
SAMARJEET KUMAR SINGH (ROLL NO.—10200713038)

SAPTARSHI PAL (ROLL NO.—10200713044)
SUJIT KUMAR DAS (ROLL NO.—10200713054)
Under the guidance

of
Mr. ARUP KUMAR BISWAS
Assistant Professor
Department of Mechanical Engineering

Kalyani Government Engineering College
Kalyani, Nadia, West Bengal-741235
Session: 2016-2017
CERTIFICATE OF RECOMMENDATION
I hereby recommend that the thesis entitled “Static and Dynamic analysis of a steel water tower by
Finite Element Method prepared under my supervision by Mr. Samarjeet Kumar Singh (Roll
No.10200713038), Mr. Saptarshi Pal(Roll No. 10200713044) and Mr. Sujit Kumar Das (Roll No.
10200713054), be accepted for the partial fulfillment, for the degree of Bachelor of Technology in
Mechanical Engineering, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad University of Technology.
----------------------------------- -------------------------------------
Mr. ARUP KUMAR BISWAS Dr. SANTANU DAS
Assistant Professor Professor and H.O.D
Department of Mechanical Engineering Department of Mechanical Engineering
Kalyani Government Engineering College Kalyani Government Engineering College
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Acknowledgement is not just a mere formality, but it is a genuine

opportunity to express the indebtedness to all those without whose active support
and encouragement this project report wouldn’t have been possible.
Foremost, we would like to express our sincere gratitude to Mr. Arup Kumar
Biswas (Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering Department) for his
continuous support, patience, motivation, enthusiasm, and immense knowledge.
His guidance helped us in all the time of understanding and completing of this
project.
Our special thanks to Dr. Santanu Das, Head of the Department, Mechanical
Engineering, Kalyani Government Engineering College.
Last but not the least, we are thankful to all of our parents & friends who have
been our strong support and source of inspiration for the successful completion of our
project work.
Samarjeet Kumar Singh

(Roll No. 10200713038)
Saptarshi Pal
(Roll No. 10200713044)
Sujit Kumar Das

(Roll No. 10200713054
ABSTRACT
Structural analysis of a water tower is a common task in manufacturing industry as it is
necessary to keep the design within standards, keep costs down and provide a robust &
reliable design. It is also an interesting finite element analysis problem. The purpose of this
analysis is to investigate the displacement and stress distributions which exist due to
 Tank’s own weight and fluid contained resulting in hydrodynamic pressure

within(static analysis)
 Flowing winds of high velocities(dynamic analysis)
 Vibrations emanating from the ground (modal analysis)
4|Page
INDEX
Chapter Particulars Page no
1. Introduction 7-8
1.1. Introduction 7
1.2. Lattice Tower 8
1.3. Water tower 8
2. Design of model 9-10
2.1. Design specification 9
2.2. 2D draft of the model 10
3. Material Selection 11
3.1. Structural Steel 11
4. CFD Analysis ( Fluent analysis ) 12-17
4.1. Wind Load 12
4.1.1. Uplift Load 12
4.1.2. Shear Load 12
4.1.3. Lateral Load 12
4.1.3.1. Skin friction drag 12
4.1.3.2. Pressure drag 12
4.1.3.3. Total Drag 12
4.1.3.4. Reason behind drag force 12
4.2. Calculation of drag force magnitude 13
4.2.1. Using empirical formula 13
4.2.2. Using Ansys fluent software 14
4.2.2.1. Boundary Condition 14
4.2.2.1.1. Zone 14
4.2.2.1.2. Step condition 14
4.2.2.2. Solution 16
5. Static Structural analysis 18-25
5.1. Connection of project 18
5.2. Different loads 18
5.3. Results 21
5.3.1. Total deformation 22
5.3.2. Equivalent (Von-Mises) Stress 23
5.3.3. Shear Stress 24
5.3.4. Maximum Principal Stress 25
6. Modal Analysis 26-58
6.1. Modal analysis 26
6.1.1. Single degree of freedom (SDOF) 26
6.1.2. Multiple degree of freedom (MDOF) 26
5|Page
Chapter Particulars Page no
6.2. Modal parameter 27
6.3. Loads 28
6.4. Solution 29
6.5. Results 31
6.5.1. Total deformation 31
6.5.2. Maximum principal stress 38
6.5.3. Maximum Shear Stress 45
6.5.4. Equivalent (Von-Mises) stress 52
7. Conclusion 59
8. References 60
6|Page
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Fig 1.1 Render image of Water Tower in a Rural Land

Latticed structures are used in a wide variety of engineering applications. A latticed
structure is a system of members (elements) and connections (nodes) which act together to resist an
applied load. Typical latticed structures include grids, roofing structures, domes, water towers and
electric transmission towers. Latticed structures are ideally suited for situations requiring a high load
carrying capacity, a low self-weight, an economic use of materials, and fast fabrication and
construction. Because one latticed tower design may be used for hundreds of towers on a
transmission Line, it is very important to find an economic and highly efficient design. The
arrangement of the tower members should keep the tower geometry simple by using as few
members as possible and they should be fully stressed under more than one loading condition. The
goal is to produce an economical structure that is well proportioned and attractive. The current
method for analysing water towers among practicing engineers is to assume linear-elastic behaviour
and to treat the angle members as pin-ended truss elements. This approach ignores the effects of
bolt slippage and local bolt deformation, geometric or material nonlinearity, joint flexibility, and the
bending stiffness of the angle members.
7|Page
1.2 Lattice Tower
A lattice tower or truss tower is a freestanding framework tower. They can be used as
electricity transmission towers especially for voltages above 100 kilovolts, as water tower, as a radio
tower (a self-radiating tower or as a carrier for aerials) or as an observation tower.
Before 1940, they were used as radio transmission towers especially for short and medium
wave, occasionally lattice towers consisting of wood were utilized. The tallest wooden lattice tower
was at Mühlacker, Germany. It had a height of 190 metres (620 ft) and was built in 1934 and
demolished in 1945. Most wood lattice towers were demolished before 1960. In Germany the last
big radio towers consisting of wood were the transmission towers of the Golm transmitter and the
transmitter Ismaning. They were demolished in 1979 and 1983 respectively.
The tallest lattice tower is the Tokyo Skytree, with a height of 634 metres (2,080 ft).
1.3 Water towers

Often operate in conjunction with underground or surface service reservoirs, which store
treated water close to where it will be used. Other types of water towers may only store raw (non-
potable) water for fire protection or industrial purposes, and may not necessarily be connected to a
public water supply.
Water towers are able to supply water even during power outages, because they rely on hydrostatic
pressure produced by elevation of water (due to gravity) to push the water into domestic and
industrial water distribution systems; however, they cannot supply the water for a long time without
power, because a pump is typically required to refill the tower. A water tower also serves as a
reservoir to help with water needs during peak usage times. The water level in the tower typically
falls during the peak usage hours of the day, and then a pump fills it back up during the night. This
process also keeps the water from freezing in cold weather, since the tower is constantly being
drained and refilled
8|Page
CHAPTER 2
DESIGN OF MODEL
The modelling was done by using advanced design software CATIA V5 (Computer
Aided Dimensional Interactive Application). The modelling will be done faster and accurate.
In modelling two stages involved,
to design the individual
components of water tank
stand. Second is to assemble
those components. For creating
the components the work will be
done in part module and to
assemble the components
assembly module is used.
2.1 Design Specifications

 Height of tower
(excluding tank): 30 meters
 Diameter of tank: 4
meters
 diameter of steel
columns: 0.4 meters
 Diameter of connecting
trusses: 0.2 meters
 Height of tank: 4 meters
 Thickness of tank
material: 40 mm
 Taper of tower: 0.95
degrees
Fig 2.1Screenshot image of the Water Tower in Catia V5
9|Page
2.2 2D Draft of the model
Fig 2.2 2D -draft of the Water Tower in Catia V5
10 | P a g e
CHAPTER 3
MATERIAL SELECTION
3.1 Structural Steel
TABLE 3.1.1
Material Data > Structural Steel > Constants
Density 7.85e-006 kg mm^-3
Coefficient of Thermal Expansion 1.2e-005 C^-1
Specific Heat 4.34e+005 mJ kg^-1 C^-1
Thermal Conductivity 6.05e-002 W mm^-1 C^-1
Resistivity 1.7e-004 ohm mm
TABLE 3.1.2
Structural Steel > Yield Strength
Compressive Yield Strength MPa Tensile Yield Strength MPa
250 250
11 | P a g e
CHAPTER 4
CFD ANALYSIS (FLUENT)
This section mainly deals with the action of wind pressure against the tower structure.
Wind load is the “load” placed by the wind speed and its air density onto a building.
4.1 Wind load has 3 components:

o 4.1.1 Uplift Load
o 4.1.2 Shear Load
o 4.1.3 Lateral Load
4.1.3 Lateral Load: The lateral load is most significant

in tower design as it gives rise to a drag force on the structure.
The drag force can be classified as:
4.1.3.1 Skin friction drag (Df): resultant viscous forces

acting on a body. Significant for fluid flow with a low Reynolds’s Fig 4.1 Uplift Load
no. (High viscosity, low velocity).
4.1.3.2 Pressure drag (Dp): due to unbalanced pressure

forces caused by flow separation. Suitable for high Reynolds’s no.
flows.
4.1.3.3 Total drag = skin friction drag + pressure drag

D = Df + D p
4.1.3.4 Reason behind drag force Fig 4.2 Shear Load

 Air has low viscosity and high velocity’ resulting in
higher Reynolds’s number.
 Due to this , the drag force that exists is primarily
due to an unsymmetrical pressure distribution
existing in the upstream and downstream side of
the cylinder
 On the upstream side, the flow remains attached
to the surface resulting in higher pressure , as its
velocity decreases due to contact with an obstacle
(cylinder)
 On the downstream side, flow separation occurs,
leaving a low pressure stagnant fluid in the wake Fig 4.3 Lateral Load
12 | P a g e
Fig 4.4 Different path and layer of air flow over the
4.2 Calculation of drag force magnitude
4.2.1 Using empirical formulas:
It is common practice to calculate wind loads with the help of empirical formulas available in
standard handbooks. Wind loading codes as per Indian standard IS 875 and IS 802 (part1/sec1):
1995 were used in calculation of wind load on lattice tower with similar condition of
topography, return period, basic wind speed.
Wind speed of 92 m/sec with open terrain with well scattered obstructions having height generally
1.5 m to 10 m (this category includes normal country lines with very few obstacles) and return
period of design loads of 50 years was considered.
Using Indian standard IS 875 and IS 802(part1/sec1):1995:
13 | P a g e
Design wind pressure Pd=0.6 (Vd)2
Pd=0.6 (92) 2 as, (Vd = 92 m/s)
=5.078 e03 Pa.
Design wind load F = Pd * Cdt*Ae*Gt
Cdt = drag coefficient for panel depends on solidity ratio
Ae = effective area of the object normal to wind
Gt = gust response factor depends on ground roughness and height above ground.
4.2.2 Using ANSYS fluent software

After the creation of the geometry the model was imported to analysis software ANSYS V16.0 as an
STP file. Different Stresses were found at different loading conditions and the results were compared
and tabulated. The necessary conclusions are also drawn.
4.2.2.1 Boundary Conditions
4.2.2.1.1 Zones
Name Id Type
---------------------------------
in 6 velocity-inlet
wall-solid 1 wall
out 7 pressure-outlet
wall 8 wall
4.2.2.1.2 Setup Conditions
4.2.2.1.2.1 in
Condition Value
--------------------------------------------------
Velocity Magnitude (m/s) 92
Supersonic/Initial Gauge Pressure (Pascal) 0
X-Component of Flow Direction 1
Y-Component of Flow Direction 0
Z-Component of Flow Direction 0
Angular velocity (rad/s) 0
4.2.2.1.2.2 wall-solid
Condition Value
----------------------------------------------------------
Wall Motion 0
14 | P a g e
Shear Boundary Condition 0
Define wall motion relative to adjacent cell zone? yes
Apply a rotational velocity to this wall? no
X-Component of Wall Translation 1
Y-Component of Wall Translation 0
Z-Component of Wall Translation 0
4.2.2.1.2.3 out
Condition Value
---------------------------------------------------------
Gauge Pressure (Pascal) 0
Backflow Direction Specification Method 1
Coordinate System 0
X-Component of Flow Direction 1
Y-Component of Flow Direction 0
Z-Component of Flow Direction 0
Targeted mass flow (kg/s) 1
Upper Limit of Absolute Pressure Value (Pascal) 5000000
Lower Limit of Absolute Pressure Value (Pascal) 1
4.2.2.1.2.4 wall
Condition Value
----------------------------------------------------------
Enable shell conduction? no
Wall Motion 0
Shear Boundary Condition 0
Define wall motion relative to adjacent cell zone? yes
Apply a rotational velocity to this wall? no
X-Component of Wall Translation 1
Y-Component of Wall Translation 0
Z-Component of Wall Translation 0
15 | P a g e
4.2.2.2 Solution:
FIGURE 4.2.2.2.1
Fluent > Solution > Contours of Total Pressure (Pascale)
TABLE 4.2.2.2.1
Fluent > Solution > Contours of Total Pressure (Pascale)
Time [s] Minimum [Pa] Maximum [Pa]
1. -2.93 e+03 5.93 e+03
16 | P a g e
FIGURE 4.2.2.2.2
Fluent > Solution > Velocity Vector Coloured by Velocity Magnitude (m/s)
TABLE 4.2.2.2.1
Fluent > Solution > Velocity Vector Coloured by Velocity Magnitude (m/s)
Time [s] Minimum [m/s] Maximum [m/s]
1. 2.17 1.56 +02
17 | P a g e
CHAPTER 5
Static Structural Analysis
In this case, loading occurs through the hydrostatic pressure of the elevation of water; for
every 10.20 centimetres (4.016 in) of elevation, it produces 1 kilopascal (0.145 psi) of pressure.
30 m (98.43 ft) of elevation produces roughly 300 kPa (43.511 psi), which is enough pressure to
operate and provide for most domestic water pressure and distribution system requirements.
The height of the tower provides the pressure for the water supply system, and it may be
supplemented with a pump. The volume of the reservoir and diameter of the piping provide
and sustain flow rate.
5.1 Connection of Project
5.2 Different Loads

TABLE 5.2.1
Static Structural > Loads
Object Name Fixed Support Pressure
State Fully Defined
Scope
Scoping Method Geometry Selection
Geometry 1 Face
Definition
Type Fixed Support Pressure
Define By Normal To
Magnitude 3.924e-002 MPa (ramped)
18 | P a g e
TABLE 5.2.2
Static Structural (B5) > Imported Load (A5)
Object Name Imported Load (A5)
State Fully Defined
Definition
Type Imported Data
Interpolation Type CFD Results Interpolator
Source A5::Solution 1
TABLE 5.2.3
Static Structural > Imported Load > Imported Pressure
Object Name Imported Pressure
State Solved
Scope
Geometry 2 Faces
Definition
Type Imported Pressure
Tabular Loading Program Controlled
Graphics Controls
Component All
Transfer Definition
CFD Surface wall solid
Static Structural > Imported Load > Imported Pressure > Imported Load Transfer Summary
CFD Load Transfer Summary
All values correspond to the CFD results before the application of any Scale or Offset operations
set in Mechanical.
19 | P a g e
CFD Computed Forces from CFD Results File X-component = -1300.3 N
Y-component = -46887 N
Z-component = -2299.3 N
Mechanical Mapped Forces for Mechanical Surface File

X-component = 71135 N
Y-component = 8706.0 N
Z-component = 3716.6 N
Fig 5.1 Loads
20 | P a g e
5.3 Results
TABLE 5.3.1
Static Structural > Solution > Results
Total Maximum Principal

Object Name Equivalent Stress Shear Stress
Deformation Stress
State Solved
Scope
Geometry All Bodies
Definition
Total Equivalent (von-Mises) Maximum Principal

Type Shear Stress
Deformation Stress Stress
By Time
Display Time Last
Orientation XY Plane
Coordinate Global Coordinate
System System
Results
Minimum 0. mm 1.1419e-005 MPa -0.96476 MPa -1.0816 MPa
Maximum 0.45758 mm 3.7002 MPa 1.2381 MPa 4.2764 MPa
21 | P a g e
5.3.1 Total Deformation
FIGURE 5.2
Static Structural > Solution > Total Deformation
TABLE 5.3.1
Static Structural > Solution > Total Deformation
Time [s] Minimum [mm] Maximum [mm]
1. 0. 0.45758
22 | P a g e
5.3.2 Equivalent (Von-Mises) Stress
FIGURE 5.3
Static Structural > Solution > Equivalent Stress
TABLE 5.3.2
Static Structural Solution > Equivalent Stress
Time [s] Minimum [MPa] Maximum [MPa]
1. 1.1419e-005 3.7002
23 | P a g e
5.3.3 Shear Stress
FIGURE 5.4
Static Structural > Solution > Shear Stress
TABLE 5.3.3
Static Structural > Solution > Shear Stress
1. -0.96476 1.2381
24 | P a g e
5.3.4 Maximum Principal Stress
FIGURE 5.5
> Static Structural > Solution > Maximum Principal Stress
TABLE 5.3.4
Static Structural > Solution > Maximum Principal Stress
1. -1.0816 4.2764
25 | P a g e
CHAPTER 6
MODAL ANALYSIS
6.1 Modal analysis is the study of the dynamic properties of systems in the frequency
domain. A typical example would be testing structures under vibrational excitation.
Modal analysis is the field of measuring or calculating and analyzing the dynamic response
of structures and/or fluids or other systems during excitation. Examples would include
measuring the vibration of a car's body when it is attached to an electromagnetic shaker,
analysis of unforced vibration response of vehicle suspension, or the noise pattern in a room
when excited by a loudspeaker.
In structural engineering, modal analysis uses the overall mass and stiffness of a
structure to find the various periods at which it will naturally resonate. These periods of
vibration are very important to note in earthquake engineering, as it is imperative that a
building's natural frequency does not match the frequency of expected earthquakes in the
region in which the building is to be constructed. If a structure's natural frequency matches
an earthquake's frequency, the structure may continue to resonate and experience
structural damage.
6.1.1 A single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF):
system (see Figure 4 where the mass m can

only move along the vertical x-axis) is
described by the following equation
M x(t) + cx(t) + k x(t) = f (t)
with m the mass, c the damping coefficient,
Fig 6.1 SDOF

and k the stiffness
6.1.2 Multiple-degree-of-
freedom (MDOF):
Systems are described by the

following equation
M x(t) + C x(t) + K x(t) = f(t)
with M as mass matrix c as

damping matrix and k as stiffness
matrix as shown in figure Fig 6.2 MDOF
26 | P a g e
6.2 Modal Parameter
TABLE 6.2.1
Model > Analysis
Object Name Modal (C5)
State Solved
Definition
Physics Type Structural
Analysis Type Modal
Solver Target Mechanical APDL
Options
Environment Temperature 22. °C
Generate Input Only No
TABLE 6.2.2
Model > Modal > Initial Condition
Object Name Pre-Stress (None)
State Fully Defined
Definition
Pre-Stress Environment None
TABLE 6.2.3
Model > Modal > Analysis Settings
Object Name Analysis Settings
State Fully Defined
Options
Max Modes to Find 9
Solver Controls
Damped No
Solver Type Program Controlled
Rotor dynamics Controls
27 | P a g e
Coriolis Effect Off
Campbell Diagram Off
Output Controls
Stress Yes
Strain Yes
Nodal Forces No
Calculate Reactions No
Store Modal Results Program Controlled
General Miscellaneous No
Analysis Data Management
Future Analysis None
Save MAPDL db No
Delete Unneeded Files Yes
Solver Units Active System
Solver Unit System N,mm
6.3 Loads
TABLE 6.3
Model > Modal > Loads
Object Name Fixed Support 2
State Fully Defined
Scope
Geometry 1 Face
Definition
Type Fixed Support
Suppressed No
28 | P a g e
6.4 Solution
TABLE 6.4.1
Model > Modal > Solution
Object Name Solution (C6)
State Solved
Adaptive Mesh Refinement
Max Refinement Loops 1.
Refinement Depth 2.
Information
Status Done
The following bar chart indicates the frequency at each calculated mode.
FIGURE 6.3
Model > Modal > Solution (C6)
TABLE 6.4.2
Model > Modal > Solution
Frequency [Hz] 2.9532 2.9532 11.086 14.594 14.598 15.077 15.356 18.212 21.009
Mode 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
29 | P a g e
TABLE 6.4.3
Model > Modal > Solution > Solution Information
Object Name Solution Information
State Solved
Solution Information
Solution Output Solver Output
Newton-Raphson Residuals 0
Update Interval 2.5 s
Display Points All
FE Connection Visibility
Activate Visibility Yes
Display All FE Connectors
Draw Connections Attached To All Nodes
Line Color Connection Type
Visible on Results No
Line Thickness Single
Display Type Lines
30 | P a g e
6.5 Results
6.5.1 Total Deformation

TABLE 6.5.1
Model > Modal > Solution > Total Deformation > Results
Object Total Total Total Total Total Total
Name Deformation Deformation 2 Deformation 3 Deformation 4 Deformation 5 Deformation 6
State Solved
Scope
Scoping
Geometry Selection
Method
Geometry All Bodies
Definition
Type Total Deformation
Mode 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Results
Minimum 0. mm
Maximum 3.7415 mm 3.7414 mm 3.6152 mm 4.4435 mm 4.4387 mm 8.0869 mm
Information
Frequency 2.9512 Hz 2.9532 Hz 11.086 Hz 14.594 Hz 14.598 Hz 15.077 Hz
31 | P a g e
Fig 6.5.1.1 Mode 1 Total deformation
32 | P a g e
33 | P a g e
34 | P a g e
35 | P a g e
36 | P a g e
37 | P a g e
6.5.2 Maximum Principal Stress
TABLE 6.5.2
Model > Modal > Solution > Maximum Principal Stress > Results
Maximum Maximum Maximum Maximum Maximum Maximum

Object
Principal Principal Stress Principal Stress Principal Stress Principal Stress Principal Stress
Name
Stress 2 3 4 5 6
State Solved
Scope
Scoping
Geometry Selection
Method
Geometry All Bodies
Definition
Type Maximum Principal Stress
Mode 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Integration Point Results
Display
Averaged
Option
Results
Minimum -1.511 MPa -1.3511 MPa -2.6784 MPa -11.062 MPa -10.285 MPa -7.7264 MPa
Maximum 8.0102 MPa 7.8909 MPa 14.764 MPa 42.52 MPa 36.518 MPa 58.518 MPa
Information
Frequency 2. 9512 Hz 2.9532 Hz 11.086 Hz 14.594 Hz 14.598 Hz 15.077 Hz
38 | P a g e
Fig 6.5.2.1 Mode 1 Maximum Principal Stress
39 | P a g e
40 | P a g e
41 | P a g e
42 | P a g e
43 | P a g e
44 | P a g e
6.5.3 Maximum Shear Stress
TABLE 6.5.3
Model > Modal > Solution > Maximum Shear Stress > Results
Maximum Maximum Maximum Maximum Maximum Maximum
Object Name
Shear Stress 1 Shear Stress 2 Shear Stress 3 Shear Stress 4 Shear Stress 5 Shear Stress 6
State Solved
Scope
Scoping
Geometry Selection
Method
Geometry All Bodies
Definition
Type Maximum Shear Stress
Mode 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Display
Averaged
Option
Average
No
Across Bodies
Results
3.8772e-006 4.4766e-006 2.8196e-005 6.6609e-005 7.507e-005 2.2118e-005

Minimum
MPa MPa MPa MPa MPa MPa
Information
Frequency 2.9512 Hz 2.9532 Hz 11.086 Hz 14.594 Hz 14.598 Hz 15.077 Hz
45 | P a g e
Fig 6.5.3.1 Mode 1 Maximum Shear Stress
46 | P a g e
47 | P a g e
48 | P a g e
49 | P a g e
50 | P a g e
51 | P a g e
6.5.4 Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress
TABLE 6.5.4
Model > Modal > Solution > Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress > Results
Equivalent Equivalent Equivalent Equivalent Equivalent Equivalent

Object Name
Stress 2 Stress 3 Stress 4 Stress 5 Stress 6 Stress
State Solved
Scope
Geometry All Bodies
Definition
Type Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress
Mode 2. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Display Option Averaged
Average Across
No
Bodies
Results
7.6095e-006 7.8175e-006 4.9974e-005 1.1974e-004 1.3233e-004 3.9972e-005

Minimum
MPa MPa MPa MPa MPa MPa
Information
Frequency 2. 9512 Hz 2.9532 Hz 11.086 Hz 14.594 Hz 14.598 Hz 15.077 Hz
52 | P a g e
Fig 6.5.4.1 Mode 1 Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress
53 | P a g e
54 | P a g e
55 | P a g e
56 | P a g e
57 | P a g e
58 | P a g e
CHAPTER 7
CONCLUSION
Considering a conservative f.o.s value 4, we calculate,
Maximum permissible stress in steel = Syt /4= 250/4 = 63.33 MPa or 64 MPa approx.
 CFD & Static Structural Analysis shows that

o Total pressure varies between -2.93kpa to 5.93 kpa and velocity magnitude is
maximum on the side faces (for the tank). These values are imported for
analysis to the static domain.
o For the given tower maximum deflection is 0.45758 mm and maximum stress
of 4.2764 Mpa is in the case of maximum principal stress. So design is safe.
 Modal Analysis up to 6 Modes of vibration shows that

o Maximum stress of 61.522 Mpa up to 6th mode of vibration (Safe).
o Maximum deflection about 8.0658 mm around the middle of the structure
which may me neglected.
59 | P a g e
REFERENCES
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_tower
 http://www.iitk.ac.in/nicee/IITK-GSDMA/W06.pdf
 http://www.wind.arch.tkougei.ac.jp/APECWW/Report/2012/N
EPALb.pdf
 http://www.iitk.ac.in/nicee/wcee/article/14_S11-028.PDF
 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014102969
7001582
 Basic structural analysis by C.S.Reddy, TMH, 2010
60 | P a g e

Static and Dynamic Analysis of A Steel Water Tower by Finite Element Method

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Static and Dynamic Analysis of A Steel Water Tower by Finite Element Method

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PROJECT REPORT ON

Static and Dynamic analysis of a steel water tower by

SAMARJEET KUMAR SINGH (ROLL NO.—10200713038)

Under the guidance

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Acknowledgement is not just a mere formality, but it is a genuine

Samarjeet Kumar Singh

Sujit Kumar Das

 Tank’s own weight and fluid contained resulting in hydrodynamic pressure

Fig 1.1 Render image of Water Tower in a Rural Land

1.3 Water towers

2.1 Design Specifications

Fig 2.2 2D -draft of the Water Tower in Catia V5

Density 7.85e-006 kg mm^-3

Coefficient of Thermal Expansion 1.2e-005 C^-1

Specific Heat 4.34e+005 mJ kg^-1 C^-1

Thermal Conductivity 6.05e-002 W mm^-1 C^-1

Resistivity 1.7e-004 ohm mm

Compressive Yield Strength MPa Tensile Yield Strength MPa

4.1 Wind load has 3 components:

4.1.3 Lateral Load: The lateral load is most significant

4.1.3.1 Skin friction drag (Df): resultant viscous forces

4.1.3.2 Pressure drag (Dp): due to unbalanced pressure

4.1.3.3 Total drag = skin friction drag + pressure drag

4.1.3.4 Reason behind drag force Fig 4.2 Shear Load

4.2 Calculation of drag force magnitude

4.2.1 Using empirical formulas:

Using Indian standard IS 875 and IS 802(part1/sec1):1995:

Design wind load F = Pd * Cdt*Ae*Gt

Cdt = drag coefficient for panel depends on solidity ratio

Ae = effective area of the object normal to wind

4.2.2 Using ANSYS fluent software

4.2.2.1 Boundary Conditions

4.2.2.1.2 Setup Conditions

Time [s] Minimum [Pa] Maximum [Pa]

1. -2.93 e+03 5.93 e+03

Time [s] Minimum [m/s] Maximum [m/s]

1. 2.17 1.56 +02

5.1 Connection of Project

5.2 Different Loads

State Fully Defined

Scoping Method Geometry Selection

Type Fixed Support Pressure

Magnitude 3.924e-002 MPa (ramped)

Object Name Imported Load (A5)

State Fully Defined

Type Imported Data

Interpolation Type CFD Results Interpolator

Object Name Imported Pressure

Scoping Method Geometry Selection

Type Imported Pressure

Tabular Loading Program Controlled

CFD Surface wall solid

Mechanical Mapped Forces for Mechanical Surface File

Fig 5.1 Loads

Total Maximum Principal

Scoping Method Geometry Selection

Geometry All Bodies

Total Equivalent (von-Mises) Maximum Principal

Display Time Last

Coordinate Global Coordinate

Minimum 0. mm 1.1419e-005 MPa -0.96476 MPa -1.0816 MPa

Maximum 0.45758 mm 3.7002 MPa 1.2381 MPa 4.2764 MPa

Design wind load F = Pd * CdtAeGt