54 Journal of Marine Engineering and Technology No.

A2
The suppression of sloshing in a liquid tank by means of a reversed U-tube
The suppression of sloshing in a
liquid tank by means of a
reversed U-tube
S Hayama, Professor Emeritus, The University of Tokyo, Chiba, Japan, and
Y Inoue, Senior Technical Advisor, Asahi Glass Company Ltd, Yokohama,
Japan
As an effective antisloshing device, a reversed U-tube was employed as a dynamic damper
and its suppression characteristics were studied for a cylindrical tank, theoretically and
experimentally. As a result, it is confirmed that the reversed U-tube works as a dynamic
damper and suppresses the resonant amplitude of sloshing to less than 1/10 of the
undamped amplitudes, when the ratio of the natural frequency of sloshing to that of liquid
columns in the U-tube is set nearly equal to unity. When two U-tubes are set symmetrically
in a cylindrical tank in a cross formation, they can suppress resonant sloshing against the
excitations in any direction. The frequency response of the surface elevation calculated by
the Boundary Element Method (BEM) shows a good agreement with those obtained by
the experiments.
INTRODUCTION
I
t is very important, in terms of hazard prevention, to
suppress sloshing of liquid in oil storage tanks, caused by
large earthquakes, or to reduce sloshing loads on liquid
carriers due to their movements. Many studies have been
performed on sloshing phenomena in liquid tanks. Natural
frequencies of sloshing are already known for various types of
tanks
1,2
, and resonant responses of free surface elevation have
been calculated using linear and non-linear theories.
3~10
As for antisloshing devices, the damping characteristics of
various types of baffles were analysed.
11,12
The different types of
linear and non-linear sloshing dampers were studied.
13
An experi-
mental study was carried out on an active control of sloshing by
intermittent injection of gas bubbles into liquid in a tank.
14
Membrane rubber was used as an antisloshing system covering
free surface and its effectiveness was studied analytically and
experimentally.
15
Sloshing loads on road containers were reduced
by partitioning the tank and the optimum partitioning length was
obtained by numerical calculations.
16
Recently, thorough reviews
have been carried out on liquid sloshing dynamics in different
fields of application by Ibrahim et al.
17
In the authors study, a reversed U-tube was employed as an
antisloshing device. It was shown in the previous paper
18
that the
reversed U-tube worked as a dynamic damper and its effectiveness
This paper was rearranged from the papers (24) and (25) listed
in REFERENCES and presented at IMarEST, London, on 19
February 2002.
AUTHORS BIOGRAPHIES
Shinji Hayama graduated from the University of Tokyo in
1960. Immediately on completion of the doctor course in
mechanical engineering at that University in 1965, Dr Hayama
was appointed to the position of lecturer. A year later he
became an associate professor and in 1987 was promoted to
the post of Professor of the University of Tokyo. From 1997
to early in 2002 Dr Hayama was Professor of Toyama
Prefectural University, also becoming Professor Emeritus of
the University of Tokyo in 1997.
In May 2001 Professor Hayama, whose research activities
include marine shafting and flow-induced vibration, was
appointed President of the Japan Institution of Marine
Engineering for two years until April 2003.
Yoshiki Inoue who graduated from the University of Tokyo in
1985, completed the master course of mechanical engineering
at that Universitys Graduate School in 1987. He then joined
Asahi Glass Company Ltd as a flat glass production engineer.
Some eight years later he was appointed to assistant manager,
corporate pl anni ng of manuf acturi ng and techni cal
development.
A further promotion to his present position of Senior
Technical Advisor, Corporate Technical Development at
AFG Industries Inc., the Asahis North American operation,
came in March 1998
haynewlast copy 1 15/4/03, 4:39 pm 54
55 No. A2 Journal of Marine Engineering and Technology
The suppression of sloshing in a liquid tank by means of a reversed U-tube
and suppression characteristics were clarified for the case of a
rectangular tank. The idea is the same as that of Frahms anti-
rolling tank.
19,20
It is, however, noted that in the antisloshing
device, the body to be damped is not the vessel containing the
liquid, but the liquid itself in the vessel.
In this paper, the reversed U-tube was applied to a cylindrical
tank, and its suppression characteristics were studied. The basic
equations to represent the sloshing coupled with the liquid
columns in a U-tube were first derived by the Galerkin method
using the variational principle
21
, which resulted in the inertia-
coupled, two-degree-of-freedom, linear forced vibration equa-
tions, and their response characteristics were studied using the
dynamic damper theory.
.22
The basic equations obtained by the Galerkin method are
very useful in understanding the physical characteristics of the
coupled system. There remains, however, some discrepancies
between the calculations and experiments. To diminish the
discrepancies, the Boundary Element Method
23
was used to
calculate the frequency responses of the surface elevation of the
coupled system, the results of which have shown very good
agreement with experiments.
24,25
It is also confirmed that, when
two U-tubes are set in a cross formation in a cylindrical tank,
they can suppress resonant sloshing against excitations in any
horizontal direction.
Nomenclature
A : cross-sectional area of liquid column in the U-tube legs
d : damping coefficient in the U-tube
g : acceleration due to gravity
H : depth of liquid in a cylindrical tank at rest
h, h
1
: length of liquid column in a leg of the U-tube and
submerged length of the leg
2l : distance between the legs of the U-tube
N, N
f
: numbers of total nodal points and the nodal points on
free surface
P
0
: pressure of gas in the U-tube
P
1
, P
2
: pressures at the ends of the U-tube legs
q : outside normal derivative of on boundary
R : radius of cylindrical tank
R
1
: non-dimensional parameter defined in equation (23)
r : radial coordinate in a cylindrical tank, or distance be-
tween two points in the BEM
T
H
=tanh(

1
H/R),

1
=1.8412
t : time
X, Y : horizontal coordinates fixed at the tank (Fig 1)
X
G
: horizontal forcing displacement of tank
Y
1
, Y
2
: non-dimensional parameters defined in equation (23)
Z : vertical coordinate fixed at the tank (Fig 1)
Z
1
, Z
2
: displacements of liquid columns in the U-tube legs
: non-dimensional damping factor
: surface elevation of liquid in a tank
: circumferential coordinate measured from the direction
parallel to the U-tube (Fig 7)

1
: the first root of the Bessel function J
1 1
0
'
( )
: frequency ratio (
1
/
0
)
: nondimensional forcing frequency of tank displacement

0
: nondimensional natural frequency of sloshing in the tank
equipped with U-tube

1
: nondimensional natural frequency of liquid columns in
the U-tube
: effective coupling factor defined in equation (23)
: density of liquid
: velocity potential
: forcing angular frequency of tank displacement

0
: natural angular frequency of sloshing in the tank without
U-tube

1
: natural angular frequency of liquid columns in the U-
tube.
ANALYSIS OF SLOSHING IN A
CYLINDRICAL TANK COUPLED WITH A
REVERSED U-TUBE
Formulation of the problem
A reversed U-tube is employed as a sloshing damper and it is
symmetrically set up with the tank as shown in Fig 1, with the
liquid column length h in each leg of the U-tube and the
submerged leg length h
l
at rest. Then, sloshing in the tank
containing a reversed U-tube is considered. The entire liquid in
the tank is referred to as the main system V, and the liquid
columns in the U-tube are referred to as the subsystem. The
boundary S
f
is the free surface of liquid in the tank, and S
f0
is the
free surface at rest. S
w
denotes solid walls, and S
1
and S
2
are the
interfaces between the main system and the subsystem. The
surface elevation of the main system and the displacements
Z
1
, Z
2
of liquid columns in the U-tube are measured from their
rest levels, and their positive directions are defined by arrows in
Fig 1.
The following assumptions are made for the simplicity of the
analysis:
(1) The liquid in the tank is incompressible, inviscid and
irrotational.
(2) The free surface elevation is sufficiently small compared
with the liquid depth H at rest.
(3) The sloshing mode in the tank is almost similar to the
fundamental antisymmetric mode without the U-tube.
(4) The flow in the U-tube is one-dimensional, solid flow.
(5) The tank wall and the U-tube are so rigid that no coupled
motions with liquid occur.
Equations of sloshing in the main system
It is already known that the equations of sloshing in a liquid tank
are derived from the Lagrangian L given by JC Luke.
21
In the
present study it is modified to include the forcing acceleration

X
G
due to the tank displacement and the boundary conditions at
the interfaces S
1
and S
2
, as shown in equation (1),

L
Z XX dV Z dS Z ds
G
V s s

+ + +
( )

/

, u
2
1 2
2
2
1
g
(1)
where a dot denotes the derivative with respect to time t; dV the
volume element in the main system; dS the surface element on the
boundaries; and u
2 2 2 2
+ +
( )
u v w , where u, v, w
are the velocity components in X, Y, and Z directions. It is shown
by the variational principle that the Lagrangian given in equation
(1) represents the fluid motion in the main system coupled with
a reversed U-tube.
Let and be small variations of the surface elevation
and the velocity potential in the main system. As shown
in the APPENDIX, the variational principle in this case is
expressed
haynewlast copy 1 15/4/03, 4:39 pm 55
56 Journal of Marine Engineering and Technology No. A2
The suppression of sloshing in a liquid tank by means of a reversed U-tube

+ + +
( )

+ ( )
+
j
(
,
\
,
(
+
j
(
,
\
,
( +

u
2
0
0 1
1
2
2
2
0 0
1
gZ XX dS
w u dS
n
Z dS
n
Z dS
n
dS
G
Z S
X Y
Z S S
S S
f
fo
w
t
t
]

2
0 dV dt
V
,
(2)
where

2
denotes the Laplacian operator, / n the outside
normal derivative; dS
0
is the area element on S
fo
;
X Y
, are the
partial derivatives of with respect to X and Y ; and the variations
at time t
0
and t
1
are assumed to be zero.
From the conditions that equation (2) should be satisfied
identically for arbitrary, admissible variations and , the
following equations are obtained:
In the main system V,


2
0 ; (3)
On the free surface Z ,
u v w
Y
+ +
X
; (4)

/

+ + + u
2
2 0 g XX
G
; (5)
On the interfaces S
i
( i=1,2),

n
Z
S
i
i

j
(
,
\
,
(

; (6)
On the solid surfaces S
w
,

j
(
,
\
,
(

n

S
w
0. (7)
In the following analysis, only the linear terms are considered.
Equations of motion in the subsystem
The equations of motion of the liquid columns in the U-tube are
expressed as
h Z Z dZ
P P i
i i i
i
+ ( ) + + ( )
( )

, , ,
g + h Z
i
0
1 2
(8)
where
dZ
i

are damping forces in the U-tube, caused mainly by

tube friction and inlet/outlet losses at each end of the legs, which are
assumed to be proportional to

Z
i
. In this paper, only the damping
forces acting on the subsystem are taken into consideration.
The pressures P
i
at the interfaces S
i
are expressed by the
velocity potential in the main system as
P h X X i
i i i i G
+ +
( )
( )

, , , u
2
1
2 1 2 g (9)
where the subscript i denotes the values of the variables at the
center of the interfaces S
i
.
Now, from the assumptions (3) and (4), the following rela-
tions are derived
Z Z
1 2 1 2
0 + , . (10)
Thus, substituting equations (9) and (10) into equation (8),
and eliminating Z
2
,
2
, and X
2
from equation (8), the equation of
motion of liquid columns in the U-tube is expressed by the
variable Z
1
as
hZ dZ Z X
G

.
1 1 1 1
0 + + + + g l (11)
Equations of motion of the coupled system in a
cylindrical tank
As it is very difficult to obtain analytically the velocity potential in
the main system coupled with a U-tube, the basic equations to
represent the sloshing in the main system are first derived by the
Galerkin method using the variational principle expressed in
equation (2).
According to the assumption (3), the surface elevation and
the velocity potential in the main system are approximated by
the fundamental, antisymmetric sloshing mode in a cylindrical
tank without a U-tube and are expressed as



( ) ( )
RJ r / R y t
1 1
cos , (12)

( )
( )
( )
( )
R
J r / R
H Z / R
H / R
p t
2
1
1 1
1
1
cos
cosh
sinh
,
(13)
where y(t) and p(t) are functions of time t to be determined.
The spatial function

J r / R
1 1
cos cosh
( ) ( )
+
1
H Z R / in
equation (13) satisfies the Laplace equation (3) and the
boundary conditions at the bottom Z H and the cylinder
wall r R , and other coefficients are chosen so that the
linearised free surface boundary conditions in equations (4)
and (5),

w
Z 0
and

Z
+
0
g 0
are satisfied in case of
free sloshing.
Now, letting , and

X
G
be


( )
R J r / R y,
1 1
cos (14)

( )
( )
( )
R
J r / R
H Z / R
H / R
2
1
1 1
1
1
cos
cosh
sinh
p,
(15)

X X t
G

0
2
sin
, (16)
substituting equations (12) through (16) into equation (2), and
making the coefficients of and equal to zero after carrying
out the integrations over the given boundaries, the following
equations are obtained,
1 1 0
1 3 2
+
( ) ( )
C y C z C p , (17)
1 1
2 1
1
1
1
1
1 4
1
2
1 1
0
2
( ) + ( )
( )
( ) ( )
j
(
,
\
,
(
C p
T
R
C y
T C
J
X
R
t
H H
sin ,
g

(18)
where only linear terms are retained and
z Z R
1
/
. The con-
stants C
1
through C
4
, representing the decreases of volume
integrations in the main system caused by the addition of U-tube,
are given by
C
A
R
J R
J
C C
H h R
H R
C
A
R
J R
J
1 2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
2 1
1 1
1
3 2
1
2
1
2
1 1
2
4
1
1
2
2
4
1

j
(
,
\
,
(
( )
( )

( )
( )
,

,
,
]
]
]
]

j
(
,
\
,
(
( )

l
l
/
,
sinh /
sinh /
,
/
11
2
1
1 1
1
4
1
2
1 1 1
1 1
2

( )
( )
( )

j
(
\
,
( )

cosh /
cosh /
,
/
( )
.
H h R
H R
C
A
R R
J R
J
l l
(19)
Elimination of p and p from equations (17) and (18) yields the
equations of surface elevation in the coupled system as follows
haynewlast copy 1 15/4/03, 4:41 pm 56
57 No. A2 Journal of Marine Engineering and Technology
The suppression of sloshing in a liquid tank by means of a reversed U-tube

sin .
y
T
R
C
C
y
C
C
z
T
J
C C
C
X
R
t
H
H
+

j
(
,
\
,
(
+

( ) ( )
( ) ( )
( )
j
(
,
\
,
(
g

1 2
1
3
1
1
1
2
1 1
2 4
1
2
0
2
1
1 1
2
1
1 1
1
(20)
As the velocity potential
1
in equation (11) is expressed as

1
2
1
1 1
1 1
1
( )
( )
( )
( )
R
T
J R
H h R
H R
p t
H
l /
cosh /
cosh /
. ,
(21)
substitution of equation (21) into equation (11) and elimination
of p using equation (17) yields the equation of motion of the
subsystem as
(22)

h C z dz z
R
T
C
C
y
X
R
t
H
1
1
1
5
1
1
2
0
2
+ ( ) + + +

j
(
,
\
,
(

j
(
,
\
,
(
sin , g

l
where and C
5
are defined in equations (23). means an
effective coupling factor between the main and the subsystem.
C
5
is considered to be a virtual mass factor to elongate the liquid
column length h by hC
5
.
Now, let us introduce the following quantities,

0
1
0
2
1
1
5
1 1 0 0 0 1 0
5 1
1 1
1 1
1
1
1 1
2 1

+ ( )

+ ( )
( )
( )
(
g g T
R
C
C h C
t
d
h C
J R
H h R
H R
H
, , ,
/ , / , , / ,
, /
cosh /
cosh /
l
))

( )

j
(
,
\
,
(

( ) ( )
( ) ( )
( )

+ ( )

,
, ,
, .
R
C
C
C
R
hT
C
C
Y
T
J
C C
C
Y
h C
H
H
1
3
1
5
1
3
2
1
1
2
1 1 1
2 2
5
1 1
2
1
1 1
1 1
1 2 4

l
(23)
Then, equations (20) and (22) are rewritten, as in the case of
a rectangular tank
18
, as
/ sin ,
/ sin ,
y y R z Y X R
z z z y Y X R
+ +
+ + +
( )
( )

0
2
1 1 0
2
1 1
2 2
2
2
2
0
(24)
where the dot represents a derivative with respect to non-
dimensional time

. It is seen from the above analyses that

the sloshing in a tank coupled with a U-tube is, in the
vicinity of the fundamental resonant frequency, described
by an inertia-coupled, two degree-of-freedom vibration
system.
Responses of the surface elevation in a cylindrical
tank
Rewriting the forcing function sin , by the complex
function e
i
, the response functions y ( ) and z ( ) are
expressed in a complex form as
y Ye z Ze
i i


, ,
(25)
where Y and
Z
are complex amplitudes to be deter-
mined. Substituting equations (25) into equations (24)
and solving for Y , the response amplitude, RY X /
0
, is
expressed as a function of non-dimensional frequency

as equation (26) below

RY
X
Y
R Y Y
R
0
1
2
1
2
1 2 1
2
2
1
2
0
2 2
1
2 2
1
2 2 4
2
1 0
2 2
2
1 2
2

( )
+
( )

( )

( )

+
( )

/
(26)
Now, the response amplitude RY X
0
0
/ , when 0, is
expressed as
RY
X
Y
R Y Y
R
0
0
1
2 1
2
1 2 1
2
0
2 2
1
2 2
1
2 2 4
1

( )
( )( )

/
.
(27)
The response amplitude, RY X

/
0
, when , is expressed as
RY
X
Y

o
1
2
0
2 2

.
(28)
These two limiting curves are scaled down by J
1
(
1
) and are
illustrated in Figs 3 and 4 by broken lines. As shown in the figures,
these curves intersect each other at two fixed points P and Q,
which are independent of the damping factor . As known from
the theory of dynamic dampers
18,22
, the response curves of
equation (26) also pass the fixed points P and Q for any value of
and are bounded by the two limiting curves.
It is concluded that the guide for the design of a sloshing
damper using a reversed U-tube is to choose the liquid column
length h such that the frequency ratio
( )
1 0
/ is nearly
equal to unity under given conditions.
CALCULATION BY THE BOUNDARY
ELEMENT METHOD
As seen from Figs 3 and 4, which are explained later, there are
some discrepancies between the calculations by the Galerkin
method mentioned above and the experimental data shown by
the symbol O. In order to diminish these, calculations by the
Boundary Element Method (BEM) were carried out.
23,24
Boundary Integral Equations
The weighted residual integration of the Laplace equation (3)
in the main system V, is expressed as

( )
2
0
V
dV , (29)
where

is a weighting function. Applying Greens theorem to

the integration in equation (29) yields the following expression,
+

( )
j
(
,
\
,
(
2
0

V S
dV
n n
dS ,
(30)
where S denotes the boundary surrounding the main system V.
When the fundamental solution of the three-dimensional Laplace
equation is employed as the weighting function,

is expressed as

1 4 / r
. (31)
In this case, the following boundary integral equation is
obtained
(23)
,
(32)

c
n n
dS
i i
S

j
(
,
\
,
(
,
where
i
denotes the velocity potential at the point i, and c
i
is a
coefficient which is equal to 1/2, when the point i is on a smooth
haynewlast copy 1 15/4/03, 4:42 pm 57
58 Journal of Marine Engineering and Technology No. A2
The suppression of sloshing in a liquid tank by means of a reversed U-tube
boundary. In the following analysis, the velocity potential and
its normal derivative q n ( ) / on the boundary are considered
as the unknown variables.
Discretisation of basic equations and matrix formulation
As shown in Fig. 2, the boundaries of the region to be analysed are
divided into rectangular or triangular elements, and nodal points are
placed at the centre of each element. Conducting the numerical
integration of Equation (32) for all elements, assuming that the
unknown variables

i
and q
i
are constant over each element, yields

H G q
[ ]( ) [ ]
,
(33)
where [G] and [H] are the coefficient matrices which are given by
the numerical integrations of

S
dS
and

( )
/ n dS
S
for
all elements, respectively.
and q

denote the N-dimensional
vectors which consist of the unknown variables

i
and
q
i
at the
nodal points. The matrices [G] and [H] are then the NxN matrices.
The boundary conditions on the free surface, equations (4) and
(5), where only linear terms are considered, and the continuity
equations at the interfaces, equation (6), are discretised as follows
C X X
G f 1
0
[ ]
+ +

, g (34)

,
[ ] C q
1
(35)
q Z C

1
1 2

(36)
where



( )
( )

( ) ( )
[ ]
,

,
,
,
,
]
]
]
]
]
]
( )

1 2
1 2
1
2
1
1
1 0 0 0 0
0
0
0 0 1 0 0
, , ... , ,
, , ... , ,
,
N
f
T
f
f N
f
f
f
N
X
T
N
C N N
C
x x x
L L
O O M M M M
M O O M M M
L L
( ) ( )

0 0 1 0 0 1 , , , , . L L
T
N
(37)
The superscript T denotes the transpose of the matrix or vector.
N
f
represents the number of the nodal points on the free surface
whose X-coordinates are x
1
,
L
, x
Nf
. The number of the first zeros
in C
2

is N
f
. Combining equations (35) and (36) and taking the
condition q=0 on the X-Z plane into consideration, the normal
derivative vector is expressed as
q C C Z
T
[ ]
+
1 2 1

. (38)
Elimination of
and
q
from equations (33), (34), (38),
and (11) yields the following equations of and Z
1
,
M Q Z X X
G f
[ ] + + +

, g
2 1
0 (39)
h c Z dZ Z Q X
T
G
1 0
1 1 1 1
+ ( ) + + + +

, g l (40)
where
M C H G C N N
Q C H G C N
Q C H G C N
c C H G C h
T
f f
T T T
f
f
T
[ ] [ ][ ] [ ][ ] ( )
[ ] [ ][ ] ( )
[ ][ ] [ ] ( )
[ ] [ ]

1
1
1
1 2
1
1
2 1
1
2
2
1
2
1
1
,
,
,
/ .

(41)
Now, introducing the following,
y R z Z R
h c d h c

+ ( ) +

/ , / ,
/ , / ( ) ,
1
1 1
1 2 1 g
(42)
and using the same notations for
0 1
, , , and

as those
defined in equation (23), then, the equations (39) and (40) are re
written as
/ sin ,
/ sin ,
y W y S z Y X R
z z z S y Y X R
T
+[ ] + ( )
+ + +
( )

2 1 0
2
1 1
2
1 2 0
2
2


(43)
where
W M N N
S Q h c N
S M Q N
Y M X N
Y h c
f f
T T
f
f
f f
[ ] [ ]
( )
+ ( )
( )
[ ]
( )
[ ]

( )
+ ( )

g
1
0
2
1 1
2
1
2
1
1
2
1 1
1
1
1
/ ,
/


/ .

l
(44)
The matrix [W] gives non-dimensional angular frequencies of the
coupled system; the vectors {S
1
} and {S
2
} represent the coupling
factors between the main system and the subsystem; the vector
{Y
1
} and the constant Y
2
are magnification factors of the forcing
acceleration. Equations (43) are equivalent to equations (24),
which represent the motion of surface elevation in the tank
coupled with a reversed U-tube, except that in the BEM, they are
expressed by vector-matrix formulation.
Responses of surface elevation
The steady responses of y
and z are expressed as
y Y e z Ze
i i



, , (45)
where Y and
Z
are complex amplitudes to be determined,
as in equations (25). Substituting these into equations (43) and
solving for Y
, the response amplitude,
R Y X

/
0
, is ex-
pressed as
R Y X W I S S
Y S Y
T

[ ] [ ]
[ ]
+

/ /
/ ,
0
2 2 4
2 1
1
2
2 2 1

(46)
where
+
( ) ( )

1
2 2
1
2 i .
The response amplitude, R Y X

0
0
/ , when 0, is
expressed as
R Y X W I S S
Y S Y
T


( ) [ ] [ ] ( )

[ ]
+
( )

0 0
2
1
2
2
4 4
2 1
1
2
2 2 1
2 2
1
/
,


(47)
and the response amplitude,
R Y X

/
0
, when , is
expressed as
R Y X W I Y
[ ] [ ] [ ]

/ .
0
2 2
1
1

(48)
These two limiting response curves are illustrated in Figs 5 and
6 by the solid and broken lines.
EXPERIMENTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Experimental apparatus and procedures
The model tank used in experiments was a cylindrical open tank
haynewlast copy 1 15/4/03, 4:44 pm 58
59 No. A2 Journal of Marine Engineering and Technology
The suppression of sloshing in a liquid tank by means of a reversed U-tube
made of PCB pipe, with an inner diameter of 600mm. The tank
was placed on a vibrator table and was forced to oscillate harmoni-
cally in the horizontal direction with the displacement amplitude
of X
0
=1mm throughout the experiments. The U-tubes consisted
of three rectangular pipes made of 1mm PCB sheets. Their outer
sides were 76 x 76mm, and the distance between the legs was
402mm. The length of air column in the U-tube was adjusted by
injecting or ejecting air through a cock placed on the pipe wall.
The liquid used was water. The surface elevation in the tank was
measured by a scale attached to the tank wall in the direction of
excitation. The measurements were conducted for each forcing
frequency immediately after the tank had been forced to oscillate
over 30 periods from rest.
Results and discussions
Figs 3 and 4 show the responses of surface elevation obtained in
the cylindrical tank installed with a reversed U-tube, where the
non-dimensional amplitudes
/ 2
0
X
are plotted by the symbol
O. The broken lines in the figures show the values of
RJ Y X
1 1
0
0

( )
/ and RJ Y X
1 1 0

( )

/ calculated from equa-
tions (27) and (28). The experimental data in Figs 3 and 4 show
clearly the response patterns which are expected from the dy-
namic damper theory
22
, and they also show that the U-tube
worked well as a dynamic damper when the frequency ratio was
chosen to be nearly equal to unity.
The data in Figs 3 and 4, however, did not pass the fixed
points, P and Q, calculated from the Galerkin method, and the
response peaks in the higher frequency range did not appear
under the two limiting response curves. These facts urged the
authors to calculate the natural frequency of sloshing in the tank
coupled with a U-tube more correctly by the BEM.
Figs 5 and 6 show the results of other experiments as well as
the two limiting response curves calculated by the BEM with
N=217 and N
f
=51. The experimental data show again typical
response patterns for two different frequency ratios, and they
almost exactly pass the fixed points P and Q, as expected from the
dynamic damper theory
22
. This shows that the calculations by the
BEM are in good agreement with the experimental data.
Considering the fact that the maximum amplitude of surface
elevation obtained in the tank without a U-tube reached / 2
0
X
~200, the maximum amplitudes are reduced to 1/20 in Figs 3
and 5. In Figs 4 and 6, the tuning of the frequency ratio was
insufficient, but the maximum response amplitudes are suppressed
to less than 1/10 of the undamped responses. It is confirmed from
these facts that a single U-tube has the capability to suppress
resonant sloshing in a cylindrical tank as a dynamic damper when
the frequency ratio nearly equal to unity is chosen.
A suppression device against oblique excitations
When a cylindrical tank with a single U-tube is forced to oscillate
horizontally in an oblique direction of an angle

as shown in Fig
7, the response of surface elevation in the tank is obtained by the
superposition of the response
X
to the forcing acceleration

cos X X
GX G
in the X-direction, parallel to the U-tube and
the response
Y
to

sin X X
GY G
in the Y-direction, perpen-
dicular to it. It is easily understood that a reversed U-tube can not
suppress the resonance of

Y
.
The responses of surface elevation obtained by the oblique
excitations are shown in Fig 8. The experimental conditions of H,
h, h
1
are the same as those in Fig 6. In the oblique excitations,
another resonance C of the fundamental anti-symmetric sloshing
mode whose nodal line is on the X-axis in Fig 7 occurs in addition
to the two resonance peaks A and B of the coupled systems, as
shown in Fig 8. This is because of the fact that a single U-tube is
not effective as a dynamic damper against the excitation perpen-
dicular to the U-tube, as expected above. The frequency re-
sponses calculated numerically by the BEM are in good agree-
ment with those obtained by the experiments, which shows that
the modelling for the calculations in the cases of the oblique
excitations is appropriate.
To suppress the resonance of
Y
, two U-tubes with the same
cross section and the same submerged length are symmetrically
installed in a cylindrical tank in the cross formation, as shown in
Fig 9. The X-axis is chosen along the parallel direction of one of
the two U-tubes and the Y-axis perpendicular to it. Let be the
angle between the direction of excitation and the X-axis, as shown
in Fig 9.
As in the previous section, the forcing acceleration

X
G
is
dissolved into the X- and Y-components,

X
GX
and

Y
GY
, respec-
tively, and the responses of the main system containing two U-
tubes are obtained by the superposition of the responses to

X
GX
and

Y
GY
. When the two U-tubes are symmetrically set in the
cylindrical tank with respect to the Z-axis, the response function
due to a unit excitation in X-direction is equal to that in the Y-
direction. Let
0
be the maximum response amplitude of the
surface elevation due to a forcing displacement X
0
at a forcing
frequency

in the X- or Y-direction. Then, the maximum

response amplitudes
X
and
Y
due to the oblique excitation
with an angle and the same forcing displacement X
0
are
expressed as

X Y

0 0
cos , sin . (49)
As the surface elevation can be considered to vary sinusoidally
in the circumferential direction, the maximum amplitude of the
surface elevation in the direction of excitation is expressed as

+ +
X Y
cos sin cos sin ,
0
2
0
2
0
(50)
which shows that the maximum response amplitude is independ-
ent of the direction of excitation.
Figure 10 shows the responses of the main system to three
different directions of excitation, which were measured on the
tank wall in the direction of excitation. The experimental condi-
tions of H, h, h
1
are the same as those in Figs 6 and 7. The two
limiting response curves in Fig10 are calculated by the BEM with
N=295 and N
f
=70. As the two U-tubes are set in the tank
symmetrically with respect to the Z-axis, the responses of surface
elevation measured in the directions of excitation, are independ-
ent of the excitation direction and are the same as those when

=0, as expected from equation (50). Thus, it is concluded that

a set of two U-tubes in cross formation can suppress resonant
sloshing to sufficiently low levels against the excitations of any
direction.
CONCLUSIONS
As an effective method to suppress resonant sloshing in a
cylindrical tank, a reversed U-tube was employed as a dynamic
damper, and its suppression characteristics were studied theo-
retically by the Galerkin Method and the Boundary Element
Method as well as experimentally.
The results showed that a single U-tube has the capability to
suppress resonant sloshing when the tank is oscillating in the
direction parallel to the U-tube. When the ratio of the natural
haynewlast copy 1 15/4/03, 4:45 pm 59
60 Journal of Marine Engineering and Technology No. A2
The suppression of sloshing in a liquid tank by means of a reversed U-tube
frequency of sloshing to be damped to that of the liquid columns
in the U-tube is set nearly equal to unity, the maximum response
amplitudes can be suppressed to less than 1/10 of the undamped
amplitudes. The results calculated by the BEM are in good
agreement with the experimental data.
When a set of two reversed U-tubes are installed in a
cylindrical tank in cross formation, the response characteristics
of the surface elevation are independent of the direction of
excitation when they are measured on the tank wall in that
direction, and the maximum response amplitudes can be sup-
pressed to less than 1/10 of the undamped ones against the
excitations of any direction.
REFERENCES
(1) Moiseev, N, and Petrov, AA, The Calculation of Free
Surface Oscillations of a Liquid in a Motionless Container, Ad-
vances in Applied Mechanics, Academic Press, 9, (1966), 91-
154.
(2) Sogabe, K, On a Method of Evaluating the Period of
Sloshing Liquid in a Storage of Revolution, Journal of Institute of
Industrial Science, University of Tokyo, 26-7, (1974), 271-
274.
(3) Fultz, D, An Experimental Note on Finite-Amplitude Stand-
ing Gravity Waves, Journal Fluid Mechanics, 13-2 (1962), 193-
212.
(4) Abramson, HN, Chu, WH, and Kana, DD, Some Studies
of Nonlinear Lateral Sloshing in Rigid Containers, Transactions of
the ASME, Ser. E, 33-4, (1966), 777-784.
(5) Faltinsen, OM, A Non-linear Theory in Rectangular Tanks,
Journal of Ship Research, 18-4, (1974), 224-241.
(6) Hutton, RE, An Investigation of Resonant, Non-planar
Free Surface Oscillations of a Fluid, NASA Technical Note, D-
1870, 1963-5.
(7) Miles, JW, Non-linear Surface Waves in Closed Basins,
Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 75, Part 3, (1976), 419-448.
(8) Kimura, N, and Ouhashi, H, Non-linear Sloshing in
Containers with Arbitrary Axisymmetric Containers, Transactions
of the JSME, 44-385 (1978), 3024-3033: 44-386, (1978),
3446-3454: Ser. C, 46-401, (1980), 42-50.
(9) Hayama, S, Aruga, K, and Watanabe, T, Non-linear
Responses of Sloshing in Rectangular Tanks, Bulletin of the JSME,
26-219, (1983), 1641-1648.
(10) Shimizu, T, and Hayama, S, Non-linear Responses of
Sloshing Based on the Shallow Water Wave Theory, JSME Interna-
tional Journal, 30-263, (1987), 354-363.
(11) Langner, CG, A Preliminary Analysis for Optimum
Design of Ring and Vertical Wall Antislosh Baffles, SWRI, TR 7,
(1963).
(12) Schwind, RG, Scotti, RS, and Skogh, J, Analysis of
Flexible baffles for damping tank sloshing, Journal of Aircrafts and
Rokets, 4-1, (1967), 47-53.
(13) Sayar, BA, and Baumgarten, JR, Linear and nonlinear
analysis of fluid slosh dampers, AIAA J, 20-11, (1982), 1534-
1538.
(14) Hara, H, and Shibata, H, Experimental study on active
suppression by gas bubble injection for earthquake induced sloshing
in tanks, JSME International Journal, 30-260, (1987), 318-
323.
(15) Nishino, H, and Mochio, T, Sloshing analysis of cylin-
drical shell with rubber-covered surface, Fluid-Sloshing and Fluid-
Structure Interaction, ASME Pressure Vessel and Piping Confer-
ence, PVP-314, (1995), 43-55.
(16) Popov, G, Sankar, S, and Sankar, TS, Dynamics of liquid
sloshing in baffled and compartmented road containers, Journal of
Fluids and Structures, 7-7, (1993), 803-821.
(17) Ibrahim, RA, Pilipchuk, VN and Ikeda, T, Recent
advances in liquid sloshing dynamics, Applied Mechanics Re-
view, 54-2, (2001), 133-199.
(18) Hayama. S, and Iwabuchi, M, A Study on the Suppres-
sion of Sloshing in a Liquid Tank, Bulletin of the JSME, 29-252,
(1986), 1834-1841.
(19) Frahm, H, Neuartige Schlingertanks zur Abdaempfung
von Schiffsrollbewegungen und ihre erfolgreiche Anwendung in der
Praxis, Jahrbuch der Schiffbautechinschen Gesellschaft, 12,
(1911), 283-358.
(20) Frahm, H, Resul ts of Trial s of the Anti-rol l ing
Tanks at Sea, Transactions of the INA, 53, Part.1, (1911),
183-201.
(21) Luke,JC, A Variational Principle for a Fluid with a
Free Surface, Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 27, Part 2, (1967),
395-397.
(22) Den Hartog, JP, Mechanical Vibrations, 4 th ed.,
Chapter, 3, (1956), McGraw-Hill, New York.
(23) Brebbia, CA, Boundary Element Techniques, Chapters 2
and 3, Springer-Verlag, 1984.
(24) Inoue, Y, and Hayama, S, A Study on Antisloshing Device
in Liquid Tank, JSME International Journal, Ser. III, 31-3,
(1988), 545-553.
(25) Hayama, S, Inoue, Y, and Watanabe, T, The Suppres-
sion of Sloshing in a Liquid Tank by Means of a Reversed U-Tube,
JSME International Journal, Ser. III, 33-3, (1990), 339-345.
APPENDIX
For a small change in , the variational principle of
equation (1) is expressed as,

+ + +

+
j
(
\
,
+ ( )
+
j
(
\
,




u
2
1 2
2
1 2
2
0
1
1 0
1
0
1
0
1
2 1 0
1
gZ XX dVdt
Z dS Z dS dt
dVdt dVdt
Z dS Z dS
G
V V
v t
t
s s t
t
t
t
t
t
s s t
t
dt dt 0,
(A.1)
where u
2
+ +
( )
u v w
2 2 2
.
The first integration in the right side of equation (A.1) is rewritten
21

,
dVdt dZdS dt
t
t
t
t
t
dZdS dS
t
t
dt
dS dt
t
t
H S
f
V
S
f
H S
f
S
f

0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0 0
0
1
0
0
1
0

(A.2)
where S
f 0
is the free surface at rest; dS
0
is the surface element on
S
f 0
, and it is assumed that
0
at t t
0
and t
1
.
The second integration in the right side of equation (A.1) is
integrated by using the Greens theorem as follows,
+
+ +
( )

V S
f
S
S S
w
V
dV
n
dS
n
dS
n
dS
n
dS dV
1
2
2
,
(A.3)
haynewlast copy 1 15/4/03, 4:46 pm 60
61 No. A2 Journal of Marine Engineering and Technology
The suppression of sloshing in a liquid tank by means of a reversed U-tube
where
/ n
denotes the normal outside derivative. Let the angle
between the outside normal vector on the free surface and the Z
axis be , the following relations are obtained,

j
(
,
\
,
( ( )

n
w u dS dS
S
f
X Y
Z
cos , cos .
0
(A.4)
where suffix X and Y denote the partial derivative with respect to
X and Y. Then, the first integration in the right side of equation
(A.3) is rewritten as,

n
dS w u v dS
S
f X Y
Z
S
f

( )

0 0
. (A.5)
The variational principle for the small variation is expressed as

w u v dS
t
t
n
Z dS
n
Z dS
n
dS dV dt
X Y
Z
Sf
S S
S
w
V

+ +
+
( )
[
j
(
,
\
,
(
j
(
,
\
,
(
]

.
0 0
0
1
1 1 2 2
2
0
(A.6)
Referring to the equation (A.2), for a small change in , the
variational principle of equation (1) is simply expressed as,

.
+ + +

+ + +
( )

u
u
2
0
0
2
0
2
2 0
0
1
0 0
1
g
g
Z XX dZdS dt
Z XX dS dt
G
H
S
f
G
Z S
t
t
t
t
f
(A.7)
Then, for small changes and ,the variational principle is
expressed in equation (2).
FIGURES
Fig 1: A liquid tank coupled with a reversed U-tube used as a
sloshing damper
Fig 2: Boundary elements of the main system to be analysed
haynewlast copy 1 15/4/03, 4:46 pm 61
62 Journal of Marine Engineering and Technology No. A2
The suppression of sloshing in a liquid tank by means of a reversed U-tube
Fig 3: Responses of surface elevation in a cy1indrica1 tank containing a reversed U-tube.
=1.02, H=150, h=180, h
1
=60, and X
0
=1 mm
Fig 4: Responses of surface elevation in a cylindrical tank containing a reversed U-tube.
=0.93, H=150, h=220, h
1
=60, and X
0
=1 mm
Fig 5: Responses of surface elevation in a cylindrical tank containing a reversed U-tube to parallel excitations.
= 0.97, H = 150, h = 175, h
1
= 113 and X
0
= 1 mm
30
20
10
0
0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3
= 0.93
= 0.40
= 0.35
= 1.85
= 1.04

R
Y
Y
0

0

/
2
X
0
v
1
1
2
P Q
30
20
10
0
0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5
= 0.97
0
0

/
2
X
0
v
P
Q
haynewlast copy 1 15/4/03, 4:46 pm 62
63
No. A2 Journal of Marine Engineering and Technology
The suppression of sloshing in a liquid tank by means of a reversed U-tube
Fig 6: Responses of surface elevation in a cylindrical tank containing a reversed U-tube to parallel excitations.
= 0.88, H = 150, h = 225, h
1
= 113 and X
0
= 1 mm
Fig 7: Oblique excitation of a cylindrical tank with a single U-tube
Fig 8: Responses of surface elevation in a cylindrical tank containing a reversed U-tube
= 0.88, H = 150, h = 225, h
1
= 113 and X
0
= 1 mm
30
20
10
0
0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5
= 0.88
0 0

/
2
X
0
v
P
Q
Reversed
U-tube
Y
0
X
X
G

30
20
10
0
0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3
A C B
= 45
o
= 0.88

/
2
X
0
v
haynewlast copy 1 15/4/03, 4:46 pm 63
64 Journal of Marine Engineering and Technology No. A2
The suppression of sloshing in a liquid tank by means of a reversed U-tube
Fig 9: A cylindrical tank containing two reversed U-tubes in the
cross configuration
Fig10: Responses of surface elevation in a cylindrical tank containing two reversed U-tubes in the
cross formation to excitations of arbitrary directions.
= 0.88, H = 150, h = 225, h
1
= 113 and X
0
= 1 mm
X
G
Z
Y
X
0
30
20
10
0
0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3

/
2
X
0
v
0
0
P
Q
= 0
o
= 25
o
= 45
o
= 0.88

haynewlast copy 1 15/4/03, 4:46 pm 64