Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263092752
READS
121
6 AUTHORS, INCLUDING:
lvaro Ramrez-Gmez
Eutiquio Gallego
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE
Francisco Ayuga
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 8 March 2014
Received in revised form 9 May 2014
Accepted 18 May 2014
Keywords:
Roof
Silo
Stress
Steel
Full-scale tests
Structural design
a b s t r a c t
The large-diameter, metallic, cylindrical silos used in agroindustry require in many cases some type of
structure in their uppermost section so that roof panels can be secured in place. These structures often
take the form of a lattice of radial and circular beams. The calculation models used in the design of these
lattices assume the existence of certain behaviours that are not usually veried experimentally. In the
present work, a 3-D beam model was used to predict the stresses and vertical displacements of a metal
silo roof structure measuring 18.34 m in diameter. To check the validity of the model, these stress and
vertical displacement values were experimentally veried at full scale. The instrumentation required
to obtain these values in such a large structure is complex and costly. In this study, slings were used
to apply load at 54 points in the roof structure, monitored by the use of dynamometers. The vertical displacements and strains suffered by the structure were recorded using eximeters and strain gauges
respectively. The experimental assays showed that the 3-D beam model did not contemplate the true
rigidity of the joints between the tension plates and the radial beams at their point of contact with the
vertical silo wall. The model therefore required adjustment in order to predict the measured results.
The results show the need to use conservative models in the design of these structures.
2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Silos have been used as storage facilities in the agroindustrial,
mining, chemical and pharmaceutical industries since the end of
the 19th century. Cylindrical silos made of steel are probably the
most commonly used in the agroindustrial sector.
The enormous increase in computing power achieved since the
last third of the 20th century has greatly facilitated the use of
numerical methods for analysing the mechanical behaviour of
these structures (Jofriet et al., 1977; Eibl and Hassler, 1984; Ooi
and Rotter, 1990; Meng et al., 1997; Briassoulis, 2000; Guaita
et al., 2003; Vidal et al., 2006; Gallego et al., 2010; GonzlezMontellano et al., 2012). Such studies have signicantly improved
our knowledge regarding the behaviour of silos and their different
components (Ayuga, 2008).
Numerical models allow the stresses and displacements in any
structure to be predicted. All that needs to be known are the
dimensions involved, the construction materials to be used, the
cross-sections of the beams used, the design of the joints, and
Corresponding author. Address: ETSID Industrial, Ronda de Valencia, 28012
Madrid, Spain. Tel.: +34 91 3366837; fax: +34 91 3365625.
E-mail address: alvaro.ramirez@upm.es (. Ramrez-Gmez).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2014.05.008
0168-1699/ 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
57
bolts placed only at the web of the radial beams were used to join
this element to the tension plates. So, the anges of the radial beams
can freely move with respect to the tension plate, and then the angle
formed by both elements can vary. This is the reason why the union
of tension plates to the radial beams was supposed to be articulated
in the 3-D beam model. Detailed views of the joints between the
different elements of the roof structure are shown in Fig. 3.
3. The 3D-beam model
A 3D-beam model (PowerFrame software [BuildSoft]) was used
to predict the behaviour of the silo roof under load. The model
was based on the displacement method, and contemplated the
following (Fig. 1):
4.2.1. Dynamometers
Eight dynamometers were installed on slings attached to
the radial beams to measure the loads applied (Fig. 6). These
58
Fig. 2. Detailed drawing of the joint between the tension plates and a radial beam at the lower part of the structure.
Fig. 3. Detailed views of the different joints: Radial beams to the ring stiffener (left), circular beams to the radial beams (center) and tension plates to the radial beams (right).
59
4.2.4. Dataloggers
The readings from the strain gauges were recorded using an
ESAM Traveller 1 24-channel datalogger. The readings from the
eximeters were recorded using a DATA- TAKER DT50 datalogger.
5. Results and discussion
Fig. 4. Loading points.
Fig. 5. System used to apply loads to the structure, and anchoring of the slings.
60
Fig. 8. Positioning of displacement gauges for measuring horizontal displacement at the bottom of the radial beams.
Fig. 10. Arrangement of the strain gauges on the radial beams. The blue points
show the location of the gauges on the upper and lower beam anges.
61
Fig. 11. Comparison of normal stress values measured experimentally and predicted by the model, for all the radial beams at position G1 in one of the assays repetitions.
Fig. 12. Comparison of vertical displacement values measured experimentally and predicted by the model.
These results show the tension plate/radial beam joints (Fig. 13)
were less rigid than the values contemplated by the model. The reason for this lies in making the joint via the folding of the tension plate
and the use of bolts of insufcient resistance. This led to the opening
of a radial aperture at the base of the radial beams that was larger
than envisaged. This reduction in rigidity also led to the radial beams
having to stand greater forces since the ratio of the rigidity of the
radial beam to the tension plate became greater than expected. Thus,
the normal stresses and vertical displacements measured experimentally were greater than those predicted by the model.
5.3. Modication of the numerical model and comparisons of the
stresses and displacements predicted by the modied model with those
experimentally obtained
The observations made on the behaviour of the tension plate/
radial beam joints led to the modication of the model. To prevent
confusion, the original model is hereinafter referred to as Model 1,
and the modied model as Model 2.
Table 1
Radial displacement measured experimentally (C1C4) and obtained using the model.
Experimental measurements (mm)
Model (mm)
C1
C2
C3
C4
Mean
12.98
10.60
11.22
11.49
11.57
The authors only used the results obtained for the rst test in
order to adjust the stiffness of the bar simulating the tension plate.
The stiffness of the bar simulating the tension plate was reduced
until the radial aperture of the silo matched with that experimentally measured. The numerical model that considered this reduced
value of the stiffness for the tension plate was Model 2. Then, the
different load patterns corresponding to each repetition were
applied in Model 2, and the new normal stresses and vertical
displacements provided by this modied numerical model were
then calculated for every assay and compared to those actually
measured. The results are shown below.
62
Fig. 13. Detailed view of the joint between a tension plate and radial beam seen
from above.
Fig. 14. Comparison between the normal stress measured experimentally and predicted by Model 2 for the radial beams at position G1 in one of the assay repetitions.
63
Fig. 15. Comparison or normal stresses measured experimentally and predicted by Model 2 for all the radial beams at position G2.
Table 2
Maximum normal stress obtained at position G1 in the experimental assays and those predicted by Model 2.
r (N/mm2)
Experimental
Model 2
Difference
Repetition. Position G1
Mean
E01
E02
E03
E04
E05
E06
E07
76.5
79.1
3.40%
83.1
84.8
2.05%
85.1
93
9.28%
85.1
92.3
8.46%
77
93.9
21.95%
87.6
86
1.83%
86
96.5
12.21%
82.91
89.37
7.79%
Fig. 16. Curve for the moments of a radial beam in one of the assay repetitions predicted by Model 2. [in kN m].
64
Fig. 17. Vertical displacements measured experimentally and obtained by Model 2 in one of the assay repetitions.
Table 3
Maximum vertical displacement measured by eximeters FL1, FL2 and FL3, and
results predicted by Model 2.
dy (mm)
Experimental
Model 2
Difference
Repetition
Mean
E1
E2
E4
E5
E7
21.5
17
20.93%
25.3
20
20.95%
22.5
20
11.11%
22.1
21
4.98%
22.4
20.8
7.14%
22.76
19.76
13.18%
This might be explained in that FL2 was located on the ring stiffener at the top of the roof structure, while the other two were
located on the underside of two radial beams. Small differences
were also seen between the measurements made by FL1 and FL3.
These were due to the fact that the force applied at the 54 loading
points was not strictly the same. This would have led to some
heterogeneity in the loads applied in each area of the roof, and
therefore some variation in the vertical displacement registered.
Table 3 shows the maximum vertical displacement recorded
(for the eximeters as a whole) and the value predicted by Model
2 for all the assay repetitions. The results for repetitions E3 and E6
are not shown given that problems occurred with the instruments
during these assays. The measured vertical displacements are
slightly greater than those predicted by Model 2; the mean values
differed by 13%.
It should be remembered that the maximum eximeterprovided displacement value was contemplated; this would be
the value most similar to that predicted by the model. Further,
the values measured by the eximeters were always 12 mm
greater than the real value, due to the vertical compression of
the wall sheeting on which the roof rests.
The present experimental results did not agree with those predicted by the original model (Model 1). This was due to the joints
between the tension plates and the radial beams, in the area of
contact with the silo wall being less rigid than predicted. This
shows the need to use more conservative models in the design of
these structures that take into account possible difculties in their
actual mounting. This is especially important taking into account
that it is not common to try to validate the model used to design
the silo roofs before they are mounted.
The observations made on the behaviour of the tension plate/
radial beam joints led to the modication of the rigidity of the bars
simulating the tension plates in the original model. With respect to
the maximum stress affecting the radial beams and the roof
displacement values, Model 2 provided results much more in line
with those collected experimentally. The stress values for the
radial beams predicted by Model 2 were a mean 7.8% higher than
those recorded experimentally, while the vertical displacement
values were 13.2% smaller.
The present results highlight the importance of the tension
plates in the behaviour of a silo roof structure. On the other hand,
different silo designs may have different joints and stiffness may
vary signicantly. The accuracy of the results obtained with a
computational model greatly depends on a correct simulation of
the stiffness of the joints.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank SYMAGA for funding this work, Prof. Jrgen
Nielsen of the Danish Building Research Institute, Aalborg University, for assistance in the design of the experiment, and Prof. Jos
Miguel Gonzalo-Magro for his interesting discussion.
Appendix A. Supplementary material
6. Conclusions
Performing experiments on steel structures at full scale is
difcult and costly. During the design of the present experiment,
decisions had to be made regarding simplications of the experiment that would still allow the behaviour of the structure to be
determined and problems or anomalies not predicted by the
original model to be detected.
65
Meng, Q., Jofriet, J.C., Negi, S.C., 1997. Finite element analysis of bulk solids ow:
Part 1, Development of a model based on a secant constitutive relationship. J.
Agric. Eng. Res. 67 (2), 141150.
Nielsen, J., 1998. Pressures from owing granular solids in silos. Philos. T. Roy. Soc. A
356, 26672684.
Ooi, J.Y., Rotter, J.M., 1990. Wall pressures in squat steel silos from simple nite
element analysis. Comput. Struct. 37 (4), 361374.
Pingue, F., Petrazzuoli, S.M., Obrizzo, F., Tammaro, U., De Martino, P., Zuccaro, G.,
2011. Monitoring system of buildings with high vulnerability in presence of
slow ground deformations (The Campi Flegrei, Italy, case). Measurement 44,
16281644.
Portela, G., Godoy, L.A., 2005. Wind pressures and buckling of cylindrical steel tanks
with a conical roof. J. Constr. Steel Res. 61 (6), 786807.
Ramirez, A., Nielsen, J., Ayuga, F., 2010a. On the use of plate-type normal pressure
cells in silos. Part 1: Calibration and evaluation. Comput. Electron. Agr. 71, 7176.
Ramirez, A., Nielsen, J., Ayuga, F., 2010b. On the use of plate-type normal pressure
cells in silos. Part 2: Validation for pressure measurements. Comput. Electron.
Agr. 71, 6470.
Ramirez, A., Nielsen, J., Ayuga, F., 2010c. Pressure measurements in steel silos with
eccentric hoppers. Powder Technol. 201, 720.
Ruiz, A., Couto, A., Aguado, P.J., 2012. Design and instrumentation of a mid-size test
station for measuring static and dynamic pressures in silos under different
conditions Part II: Construction and validation. Comput. Electron. Agr. 85,
174187.
Teng, J.G., Lin, X., Rotter, J.M., Ding, X.L., 2005. Analysis of geometric imperfections
in full-scale welded steel silos. Eng. Struct. 27, 938950.
Vidal, P., Gallego, E., Guaita, M., Ayuga, F., 2006. Simulation of the lling pressures of
cylindrical steel silos with concentric and eccentric hoppers using 3dimensional nite element models. Trans. ASABE 49 (6), 18811895.
Xue, W., Liu, S., 2009. Design optimization and experimental study on beam string
structures. J. Constr. Steel Res. 65, 7080.
Yang, J., Liu, Q., 2012. An experimental study into exural behaviour of sigma
purlins attached with roof sheets. Eng. Struct. 45, 481495.