See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/293731397

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ELEVATED WATER

STORAGE STRUCTURE USING DIFFERENT TYPES
OF BRACING PATTERNS...

Technical Report May 2013

CITATIONS READS

0 126

2 authors, including:

Anand Gharad
Shri Ramdeobaba Kamla Nehru Engineering College
6 PUBLICATIONS 1 CITATION

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Resonance response of Continuous and Integral bridges subjected to high-speed moving loads for different
soil conditions View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Anand Gharad on 10 February 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 RESEARCH PAPERS

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ELEVATED WATER STORAGE

STRUCTURE USING DIFFERENT TYPES OF BRACING
PATTERNS IN STAGING
By
GAURAV S. ATALKAR * ANAND M.GHARAD **
* M.Tech Student, Civil Engineering Department, ShriRamdeobaba College of Engineering & Management, Nagpur, India.
** Assistant Professor, Civil Engineering Department,ShriRamdeobaba College of Engineering & Management, Nagpur, India.
ABSTRACT
From the very upsetting experiences of few earthquakes, like the Bhuj earthquake in India (DurgeshC. Rai 2003), R.C.C
elevated water tanks were heavily damaged or collapsed. This, might be, due to the lack of knowledge regarding the
proper behavior of supporting pattern of the tank due to dynamic effect and improper geometrical selection of
staging.
The main aim of this study is (i) to understand the behavior of different staging, under different loading conditions (ii) to
strengthen the conventional type of staging during earthquake. Seismic coefficient method, for five different types of
bracing patterns, is applied to the staging of elevated circular water tank in zone IV, is carried out using STAAD Pro. V8i.
Comparison of base / storey shear and nodal displacements of the container of circular water tank for empty, half filled
and full condition is done. Alternate diagonal bracing pattern for staging, yields the optimum value of base shear and
displacement, compared to other patterns that are studied.
Keywords: Elevated Water Tanks, Staging, Bracings, Base Shear, Displacement, Seismic Coefficient Method.

INTRODUCTION software. Eleven models of an elevated RCC water tank,

Currently Liquid storage tanks are used extensively by
municipalities and industries for storing water, inflammable
liquids and other chemicals. Thus water tanks are very
important for public utility and for industrial structure.
Elevated water tanks consist of huge water mass at the top
of a slender staging which are most critical consideration
for the failure of the tank during earthquakes.Due to the lack
of knowledge of supporting pattern some of the water tanks
were collapsed or heavily damaged. So, there is a need to
focus on seismic safety of such structures. (H. S. Patel and
Ayazhussain M. Jabar2012).
Many elevated water tanks suffered damage to their
staging (support structure) in the Bhuj earthquake of
January 26th, 2001(DurgeshC. Rai 2003); and, atleast three
of them collapsed. Themajority of these tanks was
supported on cylindrical shaft type staging which
developed circumferential flexural cracks near the base.
The present study explores the simplified approach of
seismic coefficient method,used in the STAAD Pro.V8i
consistingof different bracing patterns, are analysed using
the software. The base shears and the top nodal
displacements of each model are compared. The results
of the present study show that the use of alternate diagonal
bracing pattern provides the optimum value of base shear
and nodal displacement.
1. Seismic coefficient method (S)
It is a well known method for determining seismic forces on
structures. For the purpose of finding seismic forces,India
has been divided into four seismic zones. In the previous
code, there were five zones whereas in revised codeIS
1893:2002 (Part-I), zones I&II are merged and is considered
as zone II. The design horizontal seismic coefficient (Ah),for
the zones II, III, IV, and V, is evaluated using Equation 1.
Ah = Z/2 * I/R * Sa/g (1)
where, as per IS-1893-2000(Part-I),
Z - Zone factor
I - importance factor depending upon the functional use of
structure given by hazardous consequences of its failure

i-managers Journal on Structural Engineering, Vol. 3 l

No. 1 l
March - May 2014 1
 RESEARCH PAPERS

post earthquake functional needs, historical value or
economical importance.
R- response reduction factor depending on the perceived
seismic damage performance of the structure
characteristic by ductile or brittle deformation, however the
ratio (I/R) shall not be greater than 1
Sa/g average response acceleration coefficient
1.2 Analysis of 3D elevated water tank (S)
The methodology discussed in 2.1 is extended to validate
the following study problem (Table 1) with the analytically
solved problem of the IIT Kanpur guidelines for seismic
design of liquid storage tanks (IITK-GSDMA).Eight-noded
plate element is used to model the circular container of the
elevated water tank. Type of soil is assumed to be soft.

The total design lateral forces or design seismic base shear The base shear calculated, for tank full condition, by IIT
(VB)along any principal direction shall be determined by the Kanpur guidelines (IITK-GSDMA) is 60kN whereas, the base
following formula (Equation 2). shear calculated by STAAD.Pro V8i for same model is 61.88
kN .
V B = Ah * W (2)
2.Study problems (S)
where, VB = design seismic base shear
From the section 2.1 and 2.2, it is verified that the results
W = seismic weight of building
obtained by the simplified method of software, are in fair
1.1 Analysis of 3D frame structure (S)
agreement with the analytical results. Based on this
A 3D frame structure (Figure1) is analysed using the seismic validation, eleven models (Figures 3 to 13) are analysed to
coefficient method for the following parameters. Size of
beam: (230x450) mm; Size of column:(230x600) mm; Sr.No. Parameter Value
2 1 Thickness of roof slab 120 mm
Thickness of slab: 150 mm; Live load: 3kN/m ;Zone: II;
2 Thickness of wall 200 mm
Importance factor: 1; Type of soil: soft soil; Frame type:
3 Thickness bottom slab 200 mm
special moment resisting frame (SMRF); Concrete density: 4 Size of top ring beam 200x100 mm
25kN/m3. The simplified method adopted by STAAD. Pro V8i 5 Size of bottom ring beam 250x600 mm
6 Size of braces 300x450 mm
is followed to analyse the aforesaid 3D model. The
7 Diameter of column 450mm
calculated values of base shear are as follows
8 Zone II
Base shear (analytical)= 304.81 kN 9 Importance factor 1.5
10 Frame SMRF (R=5)Special moment
Base shear (software) = 305.30 kN resisting frame
11 Depth of foundation 1.775m
The STAAD.Pro result is in a fair agreement with the result of
12 Number of columns 4
an analytically solved problem. This verifies the use of the 13 Concrete density 25kN/m3
simplified method of the software.
Table 1. Input parameters for elevated water tank of Figure 2

Figure 1. 3D view of frame structure model Figure 2. 3-D view of elevated water tank

2 i-managers Journal on Structural Engineering, Vol. 3 l

No. 1 l
March - May 2014
 RESEARCH PAPERS

study the base shear and nodal displacement at the top of

the container's wall (H.S.Patel and Ayazhussain M. Jabar,
2012).
Following parameters are used (Table 2) for analyzing these
eleven models. Eight-noded plate element is used to

Sr.No. Parameters Values

1 Thickness of top slab 100 mm

2 Thickness of bottom slab 150 mm
3 Top ring beam 250x350 mm
4 Bottom ring beam 250x500 mm
5 Size of Column 500x250 mm
6 Size of Braces 500x250 mm Figure 5. Staging with diagonal bracing
7 Density of concrete 25 kN/m3
8 Diameter of tank 10 m
9 Height of tank 5m
10 Height of staging 15 m
11 Number of columns 10
12 Zone IV(0.24)
13 Response reduction factor (R) 5 (SMRF) Special moment
resisting frame
14 Importance factor 1.5 (for water tank )

Table 2. Input parameters for elevated water tank (Figures 3- 13)

Figure 6. Staging with chevraon bracing

Figure 3. Staging without inclined bracing

Figure 7. Staging with k-type bracing

model the container of the water tank. Type of soil is

assumed to be hard.
The presence of water in the container will induce
hydrostatic pressure on the vertical wall of the container
(Figure 14) and a uniform pressure on the bottom slab
Figure4. Staging with cross bracing
 RESEARCH PAPERS
Figure 8. Staging with v-type bracing
Figure 9. Alternate v-type bracing in staging
Figure 10. Alternate k-type bracing in staging
(Figure 15).
3.Results
3.1. Base shear
The seismic coefficient method is used to calculate the
base shear of the elevated water tank. Also, lateral load/force
at each storey level is evaluated by this method (Figure 16).
Figure 11.Alternate diagonal bracing in staging
Figure12. Alternate cross bracing in staging
Figure13.Alternate chevron bracing in staging
3.1.1. Base shear of different bracing pattern
Figure 17 shows the variation of base shear of different
bracing pattern(Figures 3-8) for tank empty,half-filled and
tank full condition.
3.1.2. Base shear of alternate bracing pattern
Figure 18 shows the variation of base shear of alternate
 RESEARCH PAPERS

250
200

Base shear (kN)

150
100
empty
50 half
0 full
without cross chevron diagonal k -type v-type
inclined bracing bracing bracing bracing bracing
bracing
Types of bracing pattern
Figure 17. Base shear of different bracing pattern for empty,
half-filled and full condition of tank.
Figure 14. Hydrostatic pressure on vertical plate
250

200

Base shear(kN)
150

100 empty

50 half
full
0
without chevron cross diagonal k -type v-type
inclined bracing bracing bracing bracing bracing
bracing
Types of bracing pattern

Figure 18. Base shear of alternate bracing pattern for empty,

half-filled and full condition of tank
Figure 15. Water pressure on bottom slab

Figure 19. Position of node no.35

3.2.1. Displacement for different bracing pattern

Figure16. Lateral forces due to earthquake
For all types of bracing patterns, the maximum
bracing pattern (Figures 3,9-13) for tank empty, half-filled displacement of top node no. 35, is observed for the
and tank full condition. 1.5(DL+EQX) loading combination. Figure 20. shows the

3.2. Displacement of top node variation of top node displacement of different bracing
pattern for empty, half-filled and full condition of the tank
The top node of the container (Figure19) is considered for
(Figures3-8).
the study purpose.
 RESEARCH PAPERS

25 calculated results (section 2.1 and section 2.2).Parametric

study is carried out for different patterns of bracings (same
Displacement(mm)

20

15 dimensions of bracing) in the staging of an elevated water

tank. From the Figures 17 and 18, it is clear that the base
10 empty
shear value, reduces for alternate bracing pattern in
5 half
full staging. This is apparent because of the reduction of
0 overall stiffness of the structure. The Figures 20 and 21
without cross chevron diagonal k -type v-type
inclined bracing bracing bracing bracing bracing reveals the top node displacement values. Though it is
bracing
evident that alternate cross bracing pattern gives the
Types of bracing pattern in staging
minimum value of displacement, but from the construction
Figure 20. Displacement of node 35. using different bracing point of view and economy of overall construction, the
pattern for empty,half-filled and full condition of tank
alternate diagonal bracing pattern can be suggested.
25
References
20
Displacement(mm)

[1]. Durgesh C. Rai (2003). Performance of Elevated Tanks

15 in Mw 7.7 Bhuj Earthquak of January 26th, 2001.Proc.
10 empty
Indian Acad. Sci. (Earth Planet. Sci.), 112, No. 3 pp. 421-429
half [2]. H. S. Patel and Ayazhussain M. Jabar(2012). Seismic
5
full
Behavior of RC Elevated Water Tank Under Different Staging
0
without chevron cross diagonal k -type v-type Pattern and Earthquake Characteristics.International
inclined bracing bracing bracing bracing bracing Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Studies, E-
bracing
Types of bracing pattern in staging
ISSN22498974

Figure 21. Displacement of node 35. using alternate bracing
pattern for empty, half-filled and full condition of tank
3.2.2. Displacement for alternate bracing pattern
Figure 21 shows the variation of top node displacement of
the alternate bracing pattern (Figures 3,9-13) for tank
empty, half-filled and tank full condition.
Conclusion and Remarks
In this paper, emphasis is given on the study of the inbuilt
feature of solving seismic coefficient method in STAAD.pro
V8i. This method provides the values of base shear, which
are much agreemented with the values of the manually
[3]. IITK-GSDMA (October 2007). Guidelines for Seismic
Design of Liquid Storage Tanks: Provisions with Commentary
and Explanatory Examples. Gujarat State Disaster
Management Authority, Indian Institute of Technology
Kanpur.
[4]. IS 11682:1985, Criteria for Design of RCC Staging for
Overhead Water Tanks. Bureau of Indian Standards, New
Delhi, India.
[5]. IS 1893:2000(Part 1), Criteria for Earthquake Resistant
Design Structures, General Provisions and Buildings. Bureau
of Indian Standards, NewDelhi, India.

View publication stats