7th EUROMECH Solid Mechanics Conference J. Ambrsio et.al. (eds.

) Lisbon, Portugal, September 7-11, 2009

MECHANICAL BEHAVIOR OF THE STORAGE TANKS

Vctor Flores C.1, Hctor A. Snchez S.1, Mara J. Prez de la C.1 and Carlos Corts S.2
SEPI - ESIA, Instituto Politcnico Nacional U. P. Adolfo Lpez Mateos Gustavo A. Madero, 07738, Mxico, D. F e-mail: brhec@yahoo.com.mx, hsanchezs@ipn.mx, viflores@ipn.com, mjpc.mar@gmail.com Instituto Mexicano del Petrleo Eje Lzaro Crdenas No. 152, Apto. Postal 14-805, 07730 Mxico, D. F. e-mail: ccsalas@imp.mx
2 1

Keywords: Computational Mechanics, behavior of tanks, mechanical behavior, liquid containers, distribution of the hydrodynamics pressures. Abstract. This work studies the mechanical behavior of two geometries of the storage tanks under horizontal action at the base, by numerical procedure, based in the finite element method (FEM) through of the discretization dominion with triangular elements, satisfying the Laplace equation, also are reviewed others analytical and numerical solution that they are in Literature. The objective is to calculate and evaluate the distribution of the hydrodynamics pressures on the walls of containers under seismic acceleration, for which numerical models are made, that consider the properties of the material, the fluid characteristics and the real geometry of the steel storage tanks. It is observed that the impulsive hydrodynamic pressures obtained with this numerical procedure compared with the others are a good agree. Finally the dynamic response of the tanks is analyzed, involving the numerical modeling by FEM and simplified procedures of the two relevant codes [2, 4].

Vctor Flores C., Hctor A. Snchez S., Mara J. Prez de la C. and Carlos Corts S.

INTRODUCTION

The experience obtained in the natural disasters such as the earthquakes on deposits or storage tanks, reveals that to diminish the structural vulnerability at acceptable levels they are needed preventive actions and suitable designs. Storage tanks are structures that due to its nature and behavior require criteria of analyses that consider the hydrodynamic effects on the walls and the bottom of the container. Therefore with the purpose to respond to these necessities as well as to study the mechanical behavior and hydrodynamic pressure distribution on the walls of the tanks has been necessary to carry out the revision and evaluation of the analytical developments used in the analysis and design of this type of structures. Consequently, the objective of this work is to show by means of a numerical procedure, based on the method of the finite element (FEM), the distribution of hydrodynamic pressures in containers generated by a horizontal acceleration. Then in these analysis are ignored the viscosity of the fluid and the turbulence, satisfying the Laplace equation. On the other hand, the recommendations of the standards are evaluated such as, API-650 [2]and CFE-93[4], and the numerical models to represent the interaction fluid-structure effect has been developed with the aid of code ANSYS[1], with the purpose to study the influence of walls flexibility in the distribution of pressures hydrodynamics. For the analysis were considered two geometries, rectangular and cylindrical sections of the tanks, in order to evaluate both numerical models and its results such as due to hydrostatic and hydrodynamics loads by analytical procedure of the plate and shell theories, obtaining a very good agreement between analytical and numerical results. 1.1 Background

The early advances of the seismic analysis in the behavior and response of the liquid storage tanks considered the rigid walls and focused their attention on the dynamic behavior of the contained liquid of the tanks against lateral excitation from earthquake loading as a phenomenon of strong vibration. Housner formulated an idealization to consider the response of the fluid in rectangular and cylindrical rigid tanks under a seismic excitation. The study displayed values for equivalent masses and their locations that represent the hydrodynamic effects due to the movement of rigid body of the container and the hydrodynamic effects due to the fundamental vibration way of the liquid. The solution for the design of containers suggest by Housner, considers that the seismic response for typical problems of containers can be separated in a system of equations which govern sloshing effect of the free surface of the liquid, and a connected system which governs the structural ways that are influenced by the mass and the force generated by the pressure of the liquid, had to the separation of the frequency of the typical surface of slosh, the liquid and the response of the wall of the container, the approach is given in terms of two separated problems. Slosh of the surface of the liquid it happens with the lowest frequency in relation to the response of the walls. The dynamic behavior and response of the tanks under lateral excitation is generally nonlinear in nature and has been the subject of extensive research. The problem was first addressed by Housner for the case of a fixed base rigid upright cylindrical tank under seismic excitation. The motion of the liquid inside the tank results in hydrodynamic pressure loading on the tank walls and Housner assumed that the response of the rigid tank could be split into two hydrodynamic components namely:

Vctor Flores C., Hctor A. Snchez S., Mara J. Prez de la C. and Carlos Cortes S.

Impulsive component due to rigid-body motion of the liquid. Under dynamic loading, part of the liquid moves synchronously with the tank as an added mass and is subject to the same acceleration levels as the tank. This is hereafter called the rigid-impulsive component. Convective component due to sloshing of the liquid at the free surface. Under lateral excitation, oscillations of the fluid occur and this results in the generation of pressures on the walls, base and roof of the tank. Based on the assumptions that: The liquid is incompressible and inviscid, Motion of liquid is irrotational and satisfies Laplaces equation, Structural and liquid motions remain linearly elastic in conjunction with the boundary conditions and Radial velocities of liquid and tank wall must be the same for rigid tank. Moreover, the earthquake of Alaska in 1964 caused great damages in tanks of modern design reason why new investigations began considering the dynamic characteristics of flexible containers. Additionally, the development of hardware and numerical techniques associates, have capacity of the solution well-known. Several studies have been carried out to investigate the dynamic interaction between the deformable wall of the tank and the liquid by means of the finite element method. A different consideration from the solution of the problem was made by Veletsos, the tank was considered like a system with a single degree of freedom and that vibrates in a prescribed way. Veletsos and Yang obtained the natural frequency of the container with liquid by the Rayleigh-Ritz method, late on Veletsos and Yang obtained supplementary results testing models on reduced scale; nevertheless, most of these studies were referred to the associated dynamic problems the aerospace uses [8]. 2 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STRUCTURES ANALYZED

The structures selected are typical structures employed in the oil national industry; consequently it has been used real values of the geometric and mechanical properties that constitute it. The research is developed in the following way, the storage tanks are modeled through a fine mesh composed by finite shells and fluid elements, and they are analyzed applying the finite element method (FEM), considering constant thickness t of wall that contribute to modify the dynamic behavior. It is studied the flexibility of the shell walls and the sloshing effect generated by the seismic action of the fluid on the steel walls. 2.1 General considerations

The walls of the rectangular and cylindrical reservoirs are considered as thin plates with an elastic behavior. The vessels are submitted to vibrations due to dynamic excitations. The seismic behavior of these structures is studied by fluid structure interaction system. The general hypotheses employed in the analysis are: the vessels are constituted by constant thickness t along wall height H, the material is isotropic homogenous and elastic, exist loads applied on the plates and it is considered also the own weight (mass). 2.2 Geometrical and mechanical characteristics of the tanks studied

To known the seismic behavior of the storage tanks, it were studied two geometries, the metallic rectangular and cylindrical tank of 55 thousands barrels (Tbls) of capacity, constituted by steel plates welded mutually, with constant thickness t along of the height H, see figures 1.a, 1.b and tables 1 and 2.

Vctor Flores C., Hctor A. Snchez S., Mara J. Prez de la C. and Carlos Corts S.

a) Rectangular geometry

b) Circular geometry

Figure 1: Reservoirs studied (55 Tbls).

Geometrical characteristics HT total (m) HL liquid (m) R(m) A(m) L(m)

Rectangular 55 Tbls 12.19 10.99 ---23.93 30.48

Circular 55 Tbls 12.192 10.99 15.24 -------

Table 1: Geometrical characteristic of the tanks

Es s s l l

Mechanical characteristics of the materials 206,000 Young modulus of steel Mpa 0.3 Poissons ratio of material 76,910.4 Weight per unit of volume of the steel N/m3 7,840 Mass per unit of volume of the steel (N/m3)/g 9,810 Weight per unit of volume of the liquid N/m3 1,000 Mass per unit of volume of the liquid (N/m3)/g 2,206 Bulk of compressibility of the fluid Mpa

Table 2: Mechanical characteristics of materials of steel storage tanks

3 3.1

THEORETICAL AND MATHEMATICAL ARRANGEMENT Finite elements method

For the study of the hydrodynamics pressures on the rectangular geometry using the Finite Element Method (FEM), in this research, it is considered a bi-dimensional dominion like which it is in figure 2. Then, for a system of accelerations given and a movement of small amplitude, it is possible to be demonstrated that for an incompressible, inviscid and irrotational liquid the pressures satisfy the Laplace equation. Furthermore, structural and liquid motions remain linearly elastic in conjunction with the boundary conditions. Radial velocities of liquid and tank wall must be the same for rigid tank. 2 p = 0
2 p 2 p + =0 x 2 y 2

(1)

Vctor Flores C., Hctor A. Snchez S., Mara J. Prez de la C. and Carlos Cortes S.

Reason why, in the contours, fixed or movable, the conditions of border are given by:

p = an n

(2)

Where, is the density of the fluid and an is the normal component of the acceleration on the points of the wall. The boundary condition settles down ignoring the surface waves, for lowers Reynolds numbers (to see figures 2, 3.a and b), that is to say;

p=0 p=0
p = an n p = an n

(3)

Figure 2: Bi-dimensional dominion of study.

ax

L
a) Geometrical model b) Finite element model

Figure 3: Fluid element model.

By means of application the finite element method, the solution of equation 1, can be obtained through of the discretization dominion with triangular elements (see figure 4).

Figure 4: Types of elements 1 and 2.

The solution of the system has the following form:

K
a =1

ra

p a + br = 0

r = 1,2,..., n s

(4)

Vctor Flores C., Hctor A. Snchez S., Mara J. Prez de la C. and Carlos Corts S.

where, s it is the number of nodes that maintain the approach to the conditions limits of Die richlet and K ra (equivalent rigid matrix) it is formed by the contribution of the elements K re with:
e K ra =

N b
i

N a d xi

and

bre = N b qn
eq

r = 1,2,..., n s

(5)

The functions of form used for the element 1 and 2 are, respectively:

N1 = 1 N1 = 1

x x x x2 ; N 2 = 2 ; N3 = 2 1 l l l x x x x2 ; N 2 = 1 2 ; N3 = 2 l l l

(6)
(7)

The solution of the system of equations 4 provide the pressures that act in each node of the discretized dominion. Firstly is made the discretization of the dominion in triangular elements fluids with three nodes, these elements are versatile and simples for the dynamic analysis, the dimension of the mesh generated has 300 nodes and 528 elements (see figure 5).

Figure 5: Finite element model for the rectangular reservoir.

3.2

Others analytical and numerical solution

In order to compare these results with others are showing different developments appeared in the Literature, referring to the determination of the hydrodynamics pressures in reservoirs.
a. Outline of the fluid-structure interaction [13]

Zienkiewicz present an outline about of the fluid-structure interaction for a distribution of arbitrary accelerations, the pressures {p} that they take place in the nodes of the contour are possible to be grouped in form of a matrix, function of the acceleration, of the points in the wall, like:

{p} = M {an }

(8)

where, M it is an influence matrix (equation 9) that relates the pressures in the nodes to its accelerations. Of this form, the pressures corresponding to a distribution of accelerations can be calculated anyone [13], where an represent an associate acceleration for each node of the fluid on the wall of the tank.

Vctor Flores C., Hctor A. Snchez S., Mara J. Prez de la C. and Carlos Cortes S.

h M = 6

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0.7249 0.3685 0.2466 0.1996 0.1744 0.1680

0 0.3685 0.9715 0.5648 0.4210 0.3644 0.3488

0 0.2466 0.5648 1.1459 0.7329 0.5954 0.5607

0 0.1963 0.4210 0.7329 1.3203 0.9292 0.8420

0 0.1743 0.3644 0.5954 0.9292 1.5669 1.2977

0 0.0840 0.1744 0.2804 0.4210 0.6483 1.1459

(9)

The follows analytical solution were developed by Rosenblueth et al. [12] and Westergaard, they resolved the Laplace equation assuming the same condition for the fluid and considering seismic and dynamic action.
b. Rosenblueth approach [12]

2 p 2 p + =0 x 2 z 2

(10)

p = 2an h
n =1

( 1)n+1 exp n x cos n z

2 n

(11)

n =
c. Westergaard approach

(2n 1)
2

p = 0.692 pan [z (2h z )]

1/ 2

(12)

3.3

Regulations and criteria of the Standards codes

The following sub-sections address the current practice for determining response of the tanks based on simplified procedures from relevant codes of practice and technical papers. In our country these type of structures are designed in their great majority with the criteria and recommendations specified by the CFE-93-Manual [4], which used the expressions derived from the model of Housner and the American Petroleum Institute code (API-650) [2] for is the oil industry.
a. API Standard 650 Code [2]

Circumferential stresses for earthquake condition.

p = p1 + p2

(13)

where:
p1 , impulsive component p2 , convective component for D/H 1.333 ratio;

Vctor Flores C., Hctor A. Snchez S., Mara J. Prez de la C. and Carlos Corts S.

y 1 y 2 D p1 = 4.5ZI a nGDh tanh 0.866 h 2 h h H Y cosh 3.68 D 2 p2 = 0.975ZI a nGD H cosh 3.68 D
b. CFE 93 Manual [4]

(14)

(15)

Equivalent lineal hydrodynamic pressure model = vs 2 2 ( p0 + 2 pH ) H = ms 6 hydrodynamic pressure z p = pH + ( p0 pH ) cos H

4 4.1 RESULTS OF THE RECTANGULAR TANK Numerical results by FEM

( p0 + pH ) H

(16)

The dynamic analysis were carried out, in this work, applying different level of acceleration recommended by Mexican seismic code (2004), see table 3. Excitation Acc 1 Acc 2 Acc 3 Acc 4 Acceleration (an) 0.16g 0.32g 0.40g 0.45g Acceleration coefficient ( an ) 0.16 0.32 0.40 0.45

Table 3: Design response spectrum accelerations

a. Impulsive pressure distributions

Figure 6 shows the distribution of the impulsive hydrodynamic pressures ( pHDYI ) obtained by means of the approach developed in this research, solving the equation systems (4) for Acc1=0.16g. The numerical solution is represented for an elliptic curve, at free surface, pHDYI (h=10.99m) =0 and pHDYI (0) = 0.0126Mpa (see figures 6 and 7).

Vctor Flores C., Hctor A. Snchez S., Mara J. Prez de la C. and Carlos Cortes S.

Figure 6: Distribution along of the height H for impulsive hydrodynamic pressures p HDYI .

Figure 7: Variation of the impulsive hydrodynamic pressure p HDYI in horizontal direction.

b. Comparison of the impulsive pressure distributions

Figure 8 illustrate the comparison of the different distributions of the impulsive hydrodynamic pressure ( pHDYI ) obtained with the approach developed in this research and others approaches, for Acc1=0.16g. In all cases the curves are elliptic observing a good agree between them, the red line corresponds to the numerical solution of this research which is placed among the [12, 13] approaches.

Figure 8: Comparison of the different methods and approaches.

Vctor Flores C., Hctor A. Snchez S., Mara J. Prez de la C. and Carlos Corts S.

4.2 [1]

Numerical results of the hydrostatic pressure of the rectangular tanks by (ANSYS)

Is studied a rectangular tank geometry (see tables 1 and 2), the vessel is represent as a fluid structure interaction system modeled through a fine mesh composed by finite shells and fluid elements composed by quadrilateral shell elements shells63 and fluid80 coupled [1], and they are analyzed applying the finite element method (FEM), considering invariable thickness t of wall, considering 4 different thickness t and accelerations an that contribute to modify the dynamic behavior. It is analyzed the flexibility of the shell walls and the sloshing effect generated by the seismic action of the fluid on the steel walls see figure 9.

Lateral excitation

Figure 9: Fluid structure interaction system.

Figures 10.a and b, shown the linear variation and effect to the hydrostatic pressure along of the height of tank due to gravitational force of the liquid.

a) Variation of the hydrostatic pressure in the fluid Figure 10: Hydrostatic pressures

b) Variation of the hydrostatic pressure in the fluid-structure

pHST of the rectangular tanks.

4.3

Total pressures of the rectangular tanks

In this section it is obtained the total pressures ( pT = hydrostatic and hydrodynamic pressure) of the vessel due to the sloshing effect generated by the seismic action of the fluid on the steel walls, gravitational force of the liquid and horizontal acceleration are applied at the base to get the dynamic behavior. Figures 11.a and b show the variation and sloshing effect along wall height of the tank for hydrodynamic pressure.

10

Vctor Flores C., Hctor A. Snchez S., Mara J. Prez de la C. and Carlos Cortes S.

Lateral excitation

a) Variation of the total pressures in the fluid

b) Variation of the total pressures in the fluid-structure

Figure 11: Total pressures pT of the rectangular tanks.

Numerical results of the total pressures ( pT ), for the rectangular tank considering four cases (t=32.16, 38.10, 50.80mm and rigid wall) and lateral excitation (Acc1=0.16g) are shown in figure 12, in this picture is observed that for all cases the variation of the pressure are the same pattern with a fall linear variation, the rigid wall case is the most significant than then others (0.14382Mpa).

Figure 12: Comparison of the variation of the total pressures pT for all cases calculated (Acc1=0.16g).

4.4

Convective hydrodynamic pressure

The convective hydrodynamic component ( pHDYC ) is determined to the total pressures ( pT ) obtained by numerical results (see figure 12) and the impulse component ( pHDYI ) given by the equation systems 4, (figure 5), such as it is illustrated in the figure 13 and calculated with equation 17. pHDYC = pT ( pHST + pHDYI ) where: pT = pHST + ( pHDYI + pHDYC ) , total pressures pHST , hydrostatic pressure pHDYI , impulse hydrodynamic component pHDYC , convective hydrodynamic component 11 (17)

Vctor Flores C., Hctor A. Snchez S., Mara J. Prez de la C. and Carlos Corts S.

Hydrodynamic pressures
Impulsive pressures Convective pressures Hydrostatic pressures

Height of the liquid

Pressures

Figure 13: Total pressures

pT = pHST + ( pHDYI + pHDYC ) .

Figures 14.a and b showing the impulsive ( pHDYI ) and convective ( pHDYC ) hydrodynamic components hydrostatic pressures, for all cases analyzed and Acc1=0.16g.

a) Impulsive hydrodynamic component p HDYI (Acc1=0.16g)

b) Convective hydrodynamic component cases calculated

pHDYC for all

Figure14: Impulsive and convective hydrodynamic components.

The aim of this part is study the behavior of the vessel for different acceleration levels considered (Acc1=0.16g, Acc2=0.32g, Acc3=0.40g and Acc4=0.45g) and t=32.16mm. The numerical results of the total pressures distribution observe that this distribution has a linear variation and increase gradually with the acceleration level, reaching at maximum value of pressure of 0.168Mpa (see figure 15).

12

Vctor Flores C., Hctor A. Snchez S., Mara J. Prez de la C. and Carlos Cortes S.

Figure 15: Comparison of the variation of the total pressures pT for 4 acceleration levels (Acc1, Acc2, Acc3, and Acc4).

Figures 16.a and b illustrate the distribution of the impulsive and convective hydrodynamic pressures obtained, solving the equation systems (4) and applying the equation (17) respectively, for different levels of accelerations (Acc1=0.16g, Acc1=0.32g, Acc1=0.40g and Acc1=0.45g).

a) Impulsive hydrodynamic component p HDYI

b) Convective hydrodynamic component

pHDYC

Figure 16: Impulsive and convective hydrodynamic components.

5 5.1

RESULTS OF THE CILINDRICAL TANK Numerical model

The structure selected is a typical structure employed in the oil national industry (cylindrical tank with 55 Tbls); consequently it has been used real values of the geometric and mechanical properties that constitute it (see tables 1 and 2). The storage tank is modeled as a fluid-structure model through a fine mesh composed by quadrilateral shell elements shells63 and fluid80 coupled [1], with ANSYS code, considering constant thickness t=32.19mm of wall that contribute to modify the dynamic behavior. It is studied the flexibility of the shell walls and the sloshing effect generated by the seismic action of the fluid on the steel walls.

13

Vctor Flores C., Hctor A. Snchez S., Mara J. Prez de la C. and Carlos Corts S.

Gravitational force and horizontal acceleration are applied to obtain the dynamic solution (see figures 17.a, b and 18).

a) Empty-tank

b) Fluid structure interaction system Figure 17: Fluid-structure models.

Acceleration

Figure 18: Details of the fluid-structure model.

5.2

Numerical results of the hydrostatic pressure of the circular tanks

The numerical hydrostatic analysis obtained by FEM (fluid structure system) of the tank was compared with the analytical solution (equation 18) when the vessels are submitted to the action of a liquid hydrostatic pressure. For a vertical, cylindrical shell completely full of liquid, with uniform thickness t, radius R, heights h, and weight per unit volume of the liquid , the radial displacement w(x) is given by Timoshenko [17];
w( x) =

h 4 D 4

x 1 x x sen x 1 e cos x e 1 h h

(18)

3 2 where: 4 = Et = 3(1 ) and D = Et 2 (flexural rigidity of the shell). 4 DR 2 R 2 t 2 12(1 )

The radial deformations w(x) is compared in figure 19 observing a good agree between two analyses.

14

Vctor Flores C., Hctor A. Snchez S., Mara J. Prez de la C. and Carlos Cortes S.

Figure 19: Radial deformation of the cylindrical tank (55 Tbls).

5.3

Hydrodynamic pressure of the cylindrical tanks with API-650[2]

Applying the equations 14 and 15 it is obtained the impulsive p1 and convective p2 components. The solution of the variation of these hydrodynamic pressure for Acc1=0.16g is represented in figures 20.a and b.

a) Impulsive component p1

b) Convective component p2

Figure 20: Hydrodynamic pressures (API-650).

The impulsive hydrodynamic pressure (p1) API solution (figure 20.a) is compared with the numerical results obtained by means of the approach developed in this research solving the equation systems (4) for Acc1=0.16g, considering that the maximal pressure occur at the middle of the transversal section (L=2R=30.48m, HL=10.99m) of the tank by lateral excitation (see figures 21 and 22.a).

Acceleration

Acceleration

Figure 21: Maximal pressure at the middle of the transversal section of the tank.

15

Vctor Flores C., Hctor A. Snchez S., Mara J. Prez de la C. and Carlos Corts S.

a) Impulsive component p1

b) Convective component p2

Figure 22: Comparison of the API solution with numerical results obtained by the approach of this research.

Figure 22.a shows the comparison of the API solution with numerical results. It is observed that the variation of the impulsive hydrodynamic pressures describe the same pattern (elliptic curve) and their values are very close (see table 4). Impulsive pressures h=0 API p1 (Mpa) 0.0133 This research pHDYI (Mpa) 0.0126

Table 4: Impulsive hydrodynamic pressures

The convective hydrodynamic component p2 (figure 22.b) is calculate with the API solution (15) and applying the equation (17), taking into account the numerical results of the total pressure (pT) computing by [1] and the approach of this research ( pHDYI ).
5.4 Numerical results of the total pressure of the cylindrical tanks for different acceleration levels [1]

Lateral excitation

a)

Variation of the total pressures for 4 acceleration levels

b) Variation of the total pressures in the fluid

Figure 23: Comparison of the total distribution of the total pressure (pT) of the cylindrical tank for different acceleration (t=32.16mm).

16

Vctor Flores C., Hctor A. Snchez S., Mara J. Prez de la C. and Carlos Cortes S.

Figure 24: Dynamic response of the tank.

The objective is to study the dynamical behavior of the cylindrical tank for different acceleration levels (Acc1=0.16g, Acc2=0.32g, Acc3=0.40g and Acc4=0.45g) and constant thickness t=32.16mm. The figures 23.a, b and 24 show the distribution of the total pressures (pT) when the container is completely full and submitted to the lateral excitation due to the sloshing effect generated by the seismic action of the fluid on the steel walls and gravitational force. The numerical results of the total pressures distribution (figures 23.a) observe that these distributions have a linear variation as the rectangular geometric case. The impulsive component for rectangular geometry and equivalent convective component of the circular tank for different acceleration are shown in figures 25.a and b.

a) Impulsive component pHDYI for rectangular geometry

b) Equivalent convective component lindrical tank

pHDYC for cy-

Figure 25: Impulsive and convective hydrodynamic components.

5.5

Comparison of the hydrodynamic pressures distribution

Finally, the numerical results of the hydrodynamic pressures for cylindrical tank are compared with simplified procedures of the relevant codes [2, 4] (see figure 26.a and b). In particular the figure 26.b (Acc1) is shown the (impulsive and convective) hydrodynamic pressures, it is observed that the maximal values at the base of the vessel are very near for the numerical results by FEM with the two code approaches, but at the free surface (H=10.99m) the result is different for CFE [4] values about 35% in relation to others two solution, additionally the numerical solution by FEM represent the average of the API [2] solution.

17

Vctor Flores C., Hctor A. Snchez S., Mara J. Prez de la C. and Carlos Corts S.

a) (Impulsive +convective) hydrodynamic pressures by FEM

b) Comparison of the (impulsive and convective) hydrodynamic pressures

Figure 26: Comparison of the hydrodynamic pressures (FEM, [2, 4]).

CONCLUSIONS

The numerical results obtained to distribution of the impulsive pressures ( pHDYI ) generated by a horizontal acceleration for the rectangular geometry by means of the procedure developed and based on the method the finite element (FEM) through of the discretization dominion with triangular elements, satisfying the Laplace equation, showing a good agree between others solutions as the Westergaard. The convective component ( pHDYC ) is determinate considering this impulsive pressures ( pHDYI ) and the total pressure ( pT ) is obtained with fluid-structure interaction model composed by quadrilateral shell elements shells63 and fluid80 coupled [1], for different, thickness t and acceleration levels. The hydrostatic and dynamic response (impulsive and convective pressures) of the full steel cylindrical tank is study as a fluid-structure model composed by quadrilateral shell elements shells63 and fluid80 coupled [1], for different acceleration levels and (t=32.19mm). It is observed a good agree results between numerical and theoretical result, for the hydrostatic case. The dynamic response of the cylindrical tank is analyzed, involving the numerical modeling by FEM and simplified procedures of the two relevant codes [2, 4]. The impulsive component (p1) with API solution is compared with the approach developed in this research, regarding that the maximal pressure occur at the middle of the transversal section of the tank by lateral excitation, describing the same pattern (elliptic curve), and their values are very close. Finally, it is observed that the maximal hydrodynamic pressures at the base of the vessel are very near for the numerical results by FEM with the two code approaches, but at the free surface the result is different for CFE [4] code about 35% in relation to others two solution; additionally the numerical solution by FEM represent the average of the API [2] solution.

18

Vctor Flores C., Hctor A. Snchez S., Mara J. Prez de la C. and Carlos Cortes S.

REFERENCES

[1] ANSYS Release, ANSYS, Inc. Theory Reference, ANSYS Inc., 2005. [2] API Standard 650, Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage, Eleven Edition, 2007. [3] ASCE, Fluid/structure interaction during seismic excitation, A report by the ASCE Committee on Seismic Analysis on Nuclear Structures and Materials of the Structural Division, USA, 74 pp., 1994. [4] CFE-93, Manual de diseo de obras civiles diseo por sismo. Comisin Federal de Electricidad, IIE, Mxico D.F., 1993. [5] T. W. Cooper, and T. P. Wachholz, Performance of petroleum storage tanks during earthquakes. ASCE, 2003. [6] Y.C. Fung and E.E. Sechler, Thin-shell structures. Ed. by Fung, Prentice-Hall, Inc. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1974. [7] M. A. Haroum and W.G. Housner, Seismic design of liquid storage tanks. ASCE, Proceedings J. of Technical Councils, Vol. 107, No. TC1, April, 191-345, 1981. [8] M. A. Haroum, Vibration studies and test of liquid storage tanks. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 11, 179-206, 1983. [9] W.G. Housner, Selected earthquake engineering papers of George W. Housner. ASCE, New York, 1983. [10] P.K. Malhotra, T. Wenk and M. Wieland, Simple procedure for seismic analysis of liquid-storage tanks. Structural Engineering International, 2003. [11] I. Nachtigall, N. Gebbeken, and G.J. Urrutia, On the analysis of vertical circular cylindrical tanks under earthquake excitation at its base. Engineering Structures, 2003. [12] E. Rosemblueth, and N.M. Newmark, Fundamentos de ingeniera ssmica. Ed. Diana. Mxico, 1976. [13] O. C. Zienkiewicz, El mtodo de los elementos finitos. Ed. Revert. Barcelona, 1980. [14] O. C. Zienkiewicz, R.L. Taylor, and P. Nithiarasu, The finite element method for fluid dynamics. Ed. Elsevier, Butterworth Heinemann, 2000. [15] S. H. Snchez, and S.C. Corts, Structural behavior of liquid filled storage tanks of large capacity placed in seismic zones of high risk in Mexico. Proceedings 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, B.C., Canada, August 1-6, 2004, Paper No. 2665, 2004. [16] S. H. Snchez, S.C. Corts, L.J. Alamilla, M. Prez, De C., C.V. Flores and R.E. Contreras, Comportamiento ssmico de tanques de almacenamiento de lquidos de gran capacidad ubicados en zonas ssmicas. Reporte del proyecto de Investigacin SIP20060825, IPN. Mxico, 2007. [17] S.T. Timoshenko and S.P. Krieger, Theory of plates and shells. 2Ed. McGraw-Hill Int., Tokyo, Japan, 1959.

19