Sei sulla pagina 1di 25
ANALYSIS OF A CYLINDRICAL WATER TANK BY: W.P.R Indrajith (168913V) DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY

ANALYSIS OF A CYLINDRICAL WATER TANK

BY:

W.P.R Indrajith (168913V)

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF MORATUWA SRI LANKA JANUARY 2017

Contents

1.0

Introduction

1

2.0

Hoope stress resultant and vertical stress resultant

2

3.0

Choosing of variables R, H, t

3

4.0

Mesh sensitivity study

3

5.0

Results compression

10

6.0

Observations and discussion

19

7.0

Conclusions

22

1

Introduction

Image below shows a vertical cross section of a cylindrical water tank.

Variables:

Radius of the tank Height of the tank Thickness of the cylinder wall

Results to be discussed Hoop stress-resultant

Vertical stress-resultant

R

H

t

N

N

θ

x

stress-resultant Vertical stress-resultant R H t N N θ x Fig. 1 : Vertical cross section

Fig. 1 : Vertical cross section of the water tank with variables

2 Hoop stress-resultant

( N θ )

and Vertical stress-resultant

( N x )

Let's use membrane hypothesis. Considering the pressure by liquid at which the point which we consider is P, then the equilibrium of the half of the cylinder is considered and shown below.

of the half of the cylinder is considered and shown below. Fig. 2: Forces at equilibrium

Fig. 2: Forces at equilibrium

Considering a unit height along the cylinder, force equilibrium can be written as follows.

the cylinder, force equilibrium can be written as follows. ; where are water pressure (P), By
the cylinder, force equilibrium can be written as follows. ; where are water pressure (P), By
the cylinder, force equilibrium can be written as follows. ; where are water pressure (P), By
the cylinder, force equilibrium can be written as follows. ; where are water pressure (P), By

; where are water pressure (P),

can be written as follows. ; where are water pressure (P), By substituting pressure P by,

By substituting pressure P by, Hoop stress-resultant can be written as

pressure P by, Hoop stress-resultant can be written as There are two forces acting in the

There are two forces acting in the system where water pressure and self weight of the wall. But since we consider only the water pressure loading case, there is no effective force acting along the vertical direction of the wall. Hence the vertical stress resultant should be zero.

N x

=

0

3

Choosing of variables R, H, t

 
   

Value (mm)

     

Value

 

Variable

Case 1

Case 2

Case 3

 

Variable

Case 1

Case 2

Case 3

R

1000

2000

4000

 

H/R

4

2.5

0.625

H

4000

5000

2500

 

t/H

0.025

0.03

0.05

t

100

150

 

125

 

t/R

0.1

0.075

0.03125

4

Selected values for variables for mesh sensitivity study

 

R

1000

   

H/R

 

4

 

H

4000

 

t/H

0.025

t

100

 

t/R

 

0.1

4.1

Properties & boundary conditions in SAP 2000 for initial analysis

 

Modulus of elasticity

34 x 10 6

kN/m 2

 

Member - shell - membrane - 100 mm in thickness Fixed at X=0 level

 

4.2

Modelling of water tank with SAP2000

 

Define material

- 100 mm in thickness Fixed at X=0 level   4.2 Modelling of water tank with

Define tank wall section - membrane

Define tank wall section - membrane Generate the geometry with specified mesh (~100mm both directions)

Generate the geometry with specified mesh (~100mm both directions)

Define tank wall section - membrane Generate the geometry with specified mesh (~100mm both directions)

Extruded view of the generated tank

Extruded view of the generated tank Assigning boundary conditions - Fixed base Define a joint pattern

Assigning boundary conditions - Fixed base

generated tank Assigning boundary conditions - Fixed base Define a joint pattern to simulate the triangular

Define a joint pattern to simulate the triangular pressure distribution

tank Assigning boundary conditions - Fixed base Define a joint pattern to simulate the triangular pressure

Application of water pressure using the joint pattern

Application of water pressure using the joint pattern Water pressure distribution along the vertical wall

Water pressure distribution along the vertical wall

Application of water pressure using the joint pattern Water pressure distribution along the vertical wall

Area local axis in the model

horizontal dir. local 2 dir. vertical dir. local 1 dir. local 3 dir.
horizontal
dir.
local 2 dir.
vertical dir.
local 1 dir.
local 3 dir.

Red colour arrow shows -

White colour arrow shows - Indigo colour arrow shows -

Local axis 1

-

Results out put F11

-

N

Local axis 2

-

Results out put F22

-

N

Local axis 3

-

Results out put F12

θ

x

Hoop stress resultant distribution of the tank wall

Hoop stress resultant distribution of the tank wall 4.3 Sensitivity study to find out a suitable

4.3 Sensitivity study to find out a suitable mesh arrangement

Water tank with the selected geometric parameters (H=4m, R=1m, t=100mm) is modelled with 4 types of mesh arrangement and Hoop stress resultant along the vertical wall is compared in different cases.

SAP2000 results along the wall for each mesh arrangement is shown below

 

Mesh 1

Mesh 2

Mesh 3

Mesh 4

Manual

 
         

Size of element after mesh

500mm

250mm

100mm

50mm

calculation

SAP- Hoop stress location

Mesh 1

Mesh 2

Mesh 3

Mesh 4

X

= 1000 mm

26.0

29.4

29.6

29.5

29.43

 

X

= 1500 mm

24.2

24.6

24.3

24.5

24.53

( kN/m )

X

= 2000 mm

19.0

19.6

19.6

19.6

19.60

X

= 3000 mm

9.6

9.8

9.8

19.8

9.80

All results start to converge well in 100mmx100mm mesh arrangement. Hence let's select 100mmx100mm mesh for the rest of the modelling works.

SAP 2000 Hoop stress-resultant contours with each meshing arrangements

Mesh size 500mmx500mm

with each meshing arrangements Mesh size 500mmx500mm Mesh size 50mmx50mm Mesh size 250mmx250mm Mesh size

Mesh size 50mmx50mm

with each meshing arrangements Mesh size 500mmx500mm Mesh size 50mmx50mm Mesh size 250mmx250mm Mesh size 100mmx100mm

Mesh size 250mmx250mm

with each meshing arrangements Mesh size 500mmx500mm Mesh size 50mmx50mm Mesh size 250mmx250mm Mesh size 100mmx100mm

Mesh size 100mmx100mm

with each meshing arrangements Mesh size 500mmx500mm Mesh size 50mmx50mm Mesh size 250mmx250mm Mesh size 100mmx100mm

5

Results comparison

 

Considering following geometric parameters of water tank, for each case, finite element models were developed with 3 member formulations as,

- Membrane sections

 

- Thin shell sections

 

- Thick shell sections

Geometric parameters

   

Value (mm)

     

Value

 

Variable

Case 1

Case 2

Case 3

 

Variable

Case 1

Case 2

Case 3

 

R

 

1000

 

2000

 

4000

H/R

4

2.5

0.625

 

H

 

4000

 

5000

 

2500

t/H

0.025

0.03

0.05

 

t

 

100

 

150

 

125

t/R

0.1

0.075

0.03125

5.1

SAP2000 Results summary

 

Case 1 - H=4000mm, R=1000mm, t=100mm

 

Location

 

N θ

(kN/m)

   

N x

(kN/m)

X(mm)

Membrane

Thin shell

Thick shell

Manual calc

Membrane

Thin shell

Thick shell

Manual calc

0

-1

-0.1

-0.1

39.24

-4.8

-0.5

-0.6

0

100

48.9

4.8

6.4

38.26

3.1

-0.2

-0.16

0

200

34.8

14

15.8

37.28

-0.77

0.016

0.06

0

300

36.5

22.8

24.1

36.30

0.13

0.12

0.13

0

400

35.6

29.2

30

35.32

0.04

0.14

0.14

0

500

33.9

32.8

33.1

34.34

-0.07

0.12

-0.12

0

1000

29.6

30.2

30.1

29.43

0.15

-0.004

-0.14

0

1500

24.3

24.4

24.4

24.53

0.08

0.1

0.1

0

2000

19.6

19.6

19.6

19.62

0.11

0.1

0.1

0

2500

14.6

14.7

14.7

14.72

0.01

0.1

0.1

0

3000

9.8

9.8

9.8

9.81

0.1

0.1

0.1

0

3500

4.9

4.9

4.9

4.91

0.1

0.1

0.1

0

4000

0

0

0

0.00

0.1

0.1

0.1

0

Location

B.M x direction (kNm/m)

X(mm)

Thin shell

Thick shell

0

1.05

0.97

100

0.33

0.29

200

-0.07

-0.07

300

-0.23

-0.21

400

-0.25

-0.22

500

-0.2

-0.18

1000

0.006

0.005

1500

0.002

0.002

2000

-0.0004

-0.0003

2500

0.00004

0.00003

3000

0.00003

0.00003

3500

0.000026

0.00003

4000

0.000025

0.000025

Case 2 - H=5000mm, R=2000mm, t=150mm

Location

 

N θ

(kN/m)

 

N x

(kN/m)

X(mm)

Membrane

Thin shell

Thick shell

Manual calc

Membrane

Thin shell

Thick shell

Manual calc

0

-2.5

-0.09

-0.13

98.10

-12.6

-0.44

-0.7

0

100

122.9

4.23

6.5

96.14

3.43

-1.06

-1.17

0

200

87.9

14.4

17.8

94.18

-0.47

-1.32

-1.35

0

300

92.9

27.1

30.8

92.21

0.2

-1.35

-1.32

0

400

90.7

40.1

43.1

90.25

0.35

-1.23

-1.18

0

500

87.4

51.9

54.9

88.29

0.03

-1.03

-0.96

0

1000

79.02

79.5

79.5

78.48

0.3

-1.01

0.01

0

1500

68.4

72.3

72

68.67

0.15

0.27

0.27

0

2000

59

59.6

59.5

58.86

0.23

0.24

0.24

0

2500

49

48.9

48.9

49.05

0.19

0.2

0.2

0

3000

39.3

39.2

39.2

39.24

0.19

0.2

0.2

0

3500

29.4

29.5

29.5

29.43

0.19

0.2

0.2

0

4000

19.6

19.7

19.7

19.62

0.19

0.2

0.2

0

4500

9.8

9.9

9.9

9.81

0.19

0.2

0.2

0

5000

0.04

0.04

0.04

0.00

0.19

0.2

0.2

0

Location

B.M x direction (kNm/m)

X(mm)

Thin shell

Thick shell

0

3.93

3.7

100

2.2

2.05

200

0.93

0.85

300

0.057

0.04

400

-0.49

-0.47

500

-0.79

-0.74

1000

-0.55

-0.5

1500

-0.05

-0.05

2000

0.04

0.03

2500

0.01

0.01

3000

-0.0007

-0.0002

3500

-0.0015

-0.0012

4000

-0.0001

-0.0003

4500

0.00008

0.00001

5000

0.00002

0.00002

Case 3 - H=2500mm, R=4000mm, t=125mm

Location

 

N θ

(kN/m)

 

N x

(kN/m)

X(mm)

Membrane

Thin shell

Thick shell

Manual calc

Membrane

Thin shell

Thick shell

Manual calc

0

-2.41

-0.047

-0.06

98.10

-12.05

-0.24

-0.31

0

100

117.13

2.23

2.92

94.18

7.43

-0.17

-0.16

0

200

88.47

7.8

8.9

90.25

-1.11

-0.1

-0.08

0

300

82.97

15.1

16.4

86.33

-0.47

-0.03

-0.02

0

400

86.52

23

24.35

82.40

0.78

0.01

0.02

0

500

74.6

30.6

31.9

78.48

-0.77

0.04

0.05

0

1000

60.65

51.5

51.9

58.86

0.74

-0.021

-0.009

0

1500

38.44

43.5

43.3

39.24

0.26

0.36

0.38

0

2000

19.91

22.9

22.7

19.62

0.46

0.35

0.47

0

2500

0.13

0.2

0.28

0.00

0.42

-0.45

-0.39

0

Location

B.M x direction (kNm/m)

X(mm)

Thin shell

Thick shell

0

2.77

2.7

100

1.76

1.69

200

0.96

0.88

300

0.31

0.26

400

-0.15

-0.18

500

-0.47

-0.47

1000

-0.67

-0.65

1500

-0.25

-0.25

2000

-0.03

-0.03

2500

0.000016

0.000036

5.2

Results comparison - General

5.2.1

Variation of N θ and N x vs X

, case 1 ( H = 4000mm, R = 1000mm, t =100mm )

H/ R =

4.0

t/ H =

0.0250

t/ R =

0.10

N θ vs X , Case 1 - H=4000mm

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 -10 N
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
-10
N θ (kN/m)

X (mm)

SAP Membrane40 30 20 10 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 -10 N θ (kN/m) X

SAP Thin shelll50 40 30 20 10 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 -10 N θ (kN/m)

SAP Thick shelll50 40 30 20 10 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 -10 N θ (kN/m)

Manual calc40 30 20 10 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 -10 N θ (kN/m) X

N x vs X , Case 1 - H=4000mm

4 3 2 1 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 -1 -2 -3 -4
4
3
2
1
0
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
-1
-2
-3
-4
-5
-6
N x (kN/m)

X (mm)

SAP Membrane0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6 N x (kN/m)

SAP Thin shelll1 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6 N x

SAP Thick shelll1 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6 N x

Manual calc0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6 N x (kN/m) X

5.2.2 Variation of N θ and N x vs X

H/ R =

2.50

t/ H =

, case 2 ( H = 5000mm, R = 2000mm, t =150mm )

0.030

t/ R =

0.0750

 

N θ vs X , Case 2 - H=5000mm

 
 

140

120

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000

6000

 

100

N θ (kN/m)

80

SAP MembraneN θ (kN/m) 80

60

SAP Thin shell60

SAP Thick shellN θ (kN/m) 80 SAP Membrane 60 SAP Thin shell 40   Manual calc   20

40

 

Manual calc 

 

20

0

 
 

-20

 

X

(mm)

 

N x vs X , Case 2 - H=5000mm

 
 

6

4

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000

6000

 

2

0

N x (kN/m)

-2

SAP MembraneN x (kN/m) -2

-4

SAP Thin shell-4

-6

SAP Thick shell-6

 

-8

Manual calc  -8

-10

-12

-14

 

X

(mm)

5.2.3 Variation of N θ and N x vs X

H/ R =

0.6250

, case 3 ( H = 2500mm, R = 4000mm, t =125mm )

t/ H =

0.050

t/ R =

0.03125

 

N θ vs X , Case 3 - H=2500mm

 
 

140

120

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500

3000

 

100

N θ (kN/m)

80

SAP MembraneN θ (kN/m) 80

60

SAP Thin wall60

SAP Thick wallN θ (kN/m) 80 SAP Membrane 60 SAP Thin wall 40   Manual calc   20

40

 

Manual calc 

 

20

0

 
 

-20

 

X

(mm)

 

N x vs X , Case 3 - H=2500mm

 
 

10

5

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500

3000

 

N x (kN/m)

0

SAP MembraneN x (kN/m) 0

SAP Thin wall2500 3000   N x (kN/m) 0 SAP Membrane -5 SAP Thick wall   Manual calc

-5

SAP Thick wall-5

 

Manual calc 

 

-10

-15

 

X

(mm)

5.2.4 Bending moment in X direction vs X

H/ R =

4.0

t/ H =

, case 1 ( H = 4000mm, R = 1000mm, t =100mm )

0.0250

t/ R =

0.10

M x vs X , Case 1 - H=4000mm

1.5 1 0.5 0 -0.5 M x (kNm/m)
1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.5
M x (kNm/m)

X (mm)

SAP Thin shelllM x vs X , Case 1 - H=4000mm 1.5 1 0.5 0 -0.5 M x

SAP Thick shelllM x vs X , Case 1 - H=4000mm 1.5 1 0.5 0 -0.5 M x

5.2.5 Bending moment in X direction vs X

H/ R =

2.50

t/ H =

0.030

, case 2 ( H = 5000mm, R = 2000mm, t =150mm )

t/ R =

0.0750

M x vs X , Case 2 - H=5000mm

5 4 3 2 1 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 -1 -2
5
4
3
2
1
0
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
-1
-2
M x (kNm/m)

X (mm)

SAP Thin shellX , Case 2 - H=5000mm 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 1000 2000 3000

SAP Thick shellX , Case 2 - H=5000mm 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 1000 2000 3000

5.2.6 Bending moment in X direction vs X

H/ R =

0.6250

t/ H =

, case 3 ( H = 2500mm, R = 4000mm, t =125mm )

0.050

t/ R =

0.03125

M x vs X , Case 3 - H=2500mm

3 2 1 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 -1 M x (kNm/m)
3
2
1
0
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
-1
M x (kNm/m)

X (mm)

SAP Thin wallM x vs X , Case 3 - H=2500mm 3 2 1 0 0 500 1000

SAP Thick wallM x vs X , Case 3 - H=2500mm 3 2 1 0 0 500 1000

5.3 Results comparison - Varying parameters

Based on the results comparison done in section 5.2, It seems that H/R ratio and thickness of the element may have an influence to stress resultants. In order to further investigate the behaviour, 9 more SAP models were developed using membrane elements as described below.

 

H = 2500 mm

 
 

t = 125 mm

 

R = 4000 mm

 

R = 4000 mm

R = 2000 mm

R = 1000 mm

t = 100 mm

t = 125 mm

t= 150 mm

Model 1

Model 2

Model 3

Thin shell

Thick shell

Thin shell

Thick shell

Thin shell

Thick shell

 

Model 4

Model 5

Model 6

Model 7

Model 8

Model 9

5.3.1 Variation of N θ , Keeping H and t constant and vary R

   

N θ ( kN/m)

 

R = 4000 mm ( H/R = 0.625)

R = 2000 mm ( H/R = 1.25)

R = 1000 mm ( H/R = 2.5)

X(mm)

Manual

SAP membrane

Manual

SAP membrane

Manual

SAP membrane

0

98.10

-2.41

49.05

-1.24

24.53

-0.62

100

94.18

117.13

47.09

60.5

23.54

30.2

200

90.25

88.47

45.13

42

22.56

21

300

86.33

82.97

43.16

43.5

21.58

21.7

400

82.40

86.52

41.20

41.5

20.60

20.8

500

78.48

74.6

39.24

38.8

19.62

19.4

1000

58.86

60.65

29.43

29.7

14.72

14.9

1500

39.24

38.44

19.62

19.5

9.81

9.7

2000

19.62

19.91

9.81

9.9

4.91

4.95

2500

0.00

0.13

0.00

0.05

0.00

0.03

N θ vs X , H=2500mm 140.00 H/R 0.625 Manual 120.00 H/R 0.625 100.00 SAP
N θ vs X , H=2500mm
140.00
H/R 0.625
Manual
120.00
H/R 0.625
100.00
SAP
H/R 1.25
80.00
Manual
60.00
H/R 1.25
SAP
40.00
H/R 2.5
20.00
Manual
0.00
H/R 2.5
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
SAP
-20.00
X (mm)
N θ (kN/m)

5.3.2 Effect of Thin shell and Thick shell in Variation of N θ , Keeping H and R constant and vary t

   

N θ ( kN/m)

 

t=100 mm ( t/H= 0.04, t/R= 0.025)

t=125 mm ( t/H= 0.05, t/R= 0.03)

t=150 mm ( t/H= 0.06, t/R= 0.038)

X(mm)

SAP Thin shell

SAP Thick shell

SAP Thin shell

SAP Thick shell

SAP Thin shell

SAP Thick shell

0

-0.06

-0.07

-0.05

-0.06

-0.04

-0.05

100

2.83

3.4

2.23

2.9

1.83

2.6

200

9.70

10.7

7.80

8.9

6.50

7.7

300

18.60

19.7

15.10

16.4

12.70

14.2

400

27.80

28.9

23.00

24.3

19.50

21.1

500

36.50

37.5

30.70

32

26.40

27.1

1000

56.10

56.2

51.50

51.9

47.20

47.8

1500

43.80

43.7

43.50

43.4

42.50

41.8

2000

21.70

21.6

22.90

22.8

23.90

23.7

2500

1.20

1.1

0.20

0.2

1.80

6.3

N θ vs X , H=2500mm, R=4000mm

120.00 100.00 80.00 60.00 40.00 20.00 0.00 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 -20.00
120.00
100.00
80.00
60.00
40.00
20.00
0.00
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
-20.00
N θ (kN/m)

X (mm)

t/H 0.04, t/R 0.025 Thin shell1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 -20.00 N θ (kN/m) X (mm) t/H 0.04, t/R 0.025 Thick

t/H 0.04, t/R 0.025 Thick shell-20.00 N θ (kN/m) X (mm) t/H 0.04, t/R 0.025 Thin shell t/H 0.05, t/R 0.031

t/H 0.05, t/R 0.031 Thin shell0.04, t/R 0.025 Thin shell t/H 0.04, t/R 0.025 Thick shell t/H 0.05, t/R 0.031 Thick

t/H 0.05, t/R 0.031 Thick shell0.04, t/R 0.025 Thick shell t/H 0.05, t/R 0.031 Thin shell t/H 0.06, t/R 0.038 Thin

t/H 0.06, t/R 0.038 Thin shell0.025 Thick shell t/H 0.05, t/R 0.031 Thin shell t/H 0.05, t/R 0.031 Thick shell t/H

t/H 0.06, t/R 0.038 Thick shellt/R 0.025 Thick shell t/H 0.05, t/R 0.031 Thin shell t/H 0.05, t/R 0.031 Thick shell

Manual0.05, t/R 0.031 Thin shell t/H 0.05, t/R 0.031 Thick shell t/H 0.06, t/R 0.038 Thin

6.0 Observations and discussion

- Values obtained for N θ and N x with manual calculations with membrane theory, SAP2000 using membrane elements, SAP2000 using Thin shell and SAP2000 using Thick shells are not exactly the same.

- Basically the variation shows near to the base ( X = 0) as shown in the following graph.

- As we goes along the vertical axis ( increasing X), all the results start to converge well with membrane theory regardless of the element formulation.

N θ vs X , Case 1 - H=4000mm

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 -10 N
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
-10
N θ (kN/m)

X (mm)

SAP Membrane40 30 20 10 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 -10 N θ (kN/m) X

SAP Thin shelll50 40 30 20 10 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 -10 N θ (kN/m)

SAP Thick shelll50 40 30 20 10 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 -10 N θ (kN/m)

Manual calc40 30 20 10 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 -10 N θ (kN/m) X

- Situation is quite same in the case of N x as well as shown below. Although N x is zero for entire tank in accordance to the membrane theory, SAP2000 results give a numerical value in all cases, yet they converges to zero after a certain height of the tank.

N x vs X , Case 1 - H=4000mm

4 3 2 1 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 -1 -2 -3 -4
4
3
2
1
0
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
-1
-2
-3
-4
-5
-6
N x (kN/m)

X (mm)

SAP Membrane0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6 N x (kN/m)

SAP Thin shelll1 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6 N x

SAP Thick shelll1 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6 N x

Manual calc0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6 N x (kN/m) X

-

The variation of N θ between Membrane theory and SAP2000 (using membrane elements) shows a little variation with changing H/R ratios as shown in the graph below. Although the variation is not that significant, it can be seen that with higher H/R ratios, values converges better than in the case of lower H/R rations.

N θ vs X , H=2500mm 140.00 H/R 0.625 Manual 120.00 H/R 0.625 100.00 SAP
N θ vs X , H=2500mm
140.00
H/R 0.625
Manual
120.00
H/R 0.625
100.00
SAP
H/R 1.25
80.00
Manual
60.00
H/R 1.25
SAP
40.00
H/R 2.5
20.00
Manual
0.00
H/R 2.5
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
SAP
-20.00
X (mm)
N θ (kN/m)

-

The effect of using thin shell and thick shells did not make a significant impact even with varied wall thickness with respect to the height and radius of the tank as shown below.

N θ vs X , H=2500mm, R=4000mm

120.00 100.00 80.00 60.00 40.00 20.00 0.00 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 -20.00
120.00
100.00
80.00
60.00
40.00
20.00
0.00
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
-20.00
N θ (kN/m)

X (mm)

t/H 0.04, t/R 0.025 Thin shell1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 -20.00 N θ (kN/m) X (mm) t/H 0.04, t/R 0.025 Thick

t/H 0.04, t/R 0.025 Thick shell-20.00 N θ (kN/m) X (mm) t/H 0.04, t/R 0.025 Thin shell t/H 0.05, t/R 0.031

t/H 0.05, t/R 0.031 Thin shell0.04, t/R 0.025 Thin shell t/H 0.04, t/R 0.025 Thick shell t/H 0.05, t/R 0.031 Thick

t/H 0.05, t/R 0.031 Thick shell0.04, t/R 0.025 Thick shell t/H 0.05, t/R 0.031 Thin shell t/H 0.06, t/R 0.038 Thin

t/H 0.06, t/R 0.038 Thin shell0.025 Thick shell t/H 0.05, t/R 0.031 Thin shell t/H 0.05, t/R 0.031 Thick shell t/H

t/H 0.06, t/R 0.038 Thick shellt/R 0.025 Thick shell t/H 0.05, t/R 0.031 Thin shell t/H 0.05, t/R 0.031 Thick shell

Manual0.05, t/R 0.031 Thin shell t/H 0.05, t/R 0.031 Thick shell t/H 0.06, t/R 0.038 Thin

- The effect of using thin shell and thick shells did not make a significant impact for bending moment Mxx as shown below. Values are almost the same although there is a absolute difference between values.

 

M x vs X , Case 2 - H/R=2.5

 
 

5

4

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000

6000

 

M x (kNm/m)

3

2

SAP Thin shell2

1

0

SAP Thick shell0

 

-1

-2

 

X

(mm)

 

M x vs X , Case 3 - H/R=0.625

 
 

3

M x (kNm/m)

2

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500

3000

 

1

SAP Thin wall1

SAP Thick wall(kNm/m) 2 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000   1 SAP Thin wall 0  

0

 
 

-1

 

X

(mm)

7.0 Conclusions

- Membrane theory is not valid near the base of the tank.

- As the top region is considered, membrane theory is valid.

- As the top region is considered, membrane theory is valid.

- Different H/R ratios show the same variation, in general, but it can be observed that there is an improvement for higher H/R ratios.

- As far as hoop stress resultant concern, use of Thin and Thick shells did not show a remarkable variation of the results, although numerical values show a difference.

- With all the observations, it can be seen that there is a significant effect of the Boundary conditions also. Specially the much higher value of hoop stress and Vertical stress resultant not being zero as expected can lead to that conclusion. Hence a separate model was developed with a different joint restrain to the this effect.

A model was developed with restraining the base only along vertical axis (Z) and the results of Nθ and Nx follow exactly as per Membrane theory. The results are shown below.

vertical axis (Z) and the results of N θ and Nx follow exactly as per Membrane
vertical axis (Z) and the results of N θ and Nx follow exactly as per Membrane

- Another important observation was made during the study. During the mesh sensitivity study, several models were required to develop from a coarse mesh to a fine mesh. In general cases which we encounter during daily works, meshing of slabs is a common activity which we do with SAP2000. In this meshing process, the selected area or areas can be meshed as per the required mesh density. But in this assignment, this general meshing process with SAP2000 for membrane sections was not worked as expected.

Following figures show the way of unsuccessful work of general meshing lead to incorrect results

work of general meshing lead to incorrect results F11- Initial 500mmx500mm mesh F11- Incorrect results for

F11- Initial 500mmx500mm mesh

lead to incorrect results F11- Initial 500mmx500mm mesh F11- Incorrect results for 250mmx250mm mesh which was

F11- Incorrect results for 250mmx250mm mesh which was obtained from 500mmx500mm model

General meshing produced results which are incorrect. Hence reproducing of the model by specifying meshing intervals at the very beginning produced a correct model. Results out put with the correct model is shown below for comparrison.

put with the correct model is shown below for comparrison. F11- correct results for 250mmx250mm mesh

F11- correct results for 250mmx250mm mesh which was generated from the beginning.

The reason could not be investigated yet, but further study and reading is required.