Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 6

SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) EFES April 2015

Finite Element Analysis of Underground


Water Tank with different Safe Bearing Values
of Soil
Punith C #1,Usha *2 , Jayalakshmi Raju *3, M. Adil Dar *4 .
#1
Lecturer,Civil Dept., SEACET,Karnataka, India
2
Lecturer, Civil Dept.,Brindavan College of Engg, Karnataka, India
3
P.G. Scholar ,SDDIET,Kurukshetra University, India
4
P.G. Scholar ,SDDIET,Kurukshetra University, India

Abstract Underground liquid storage tank as part of


environmental engineering facilities and primarily used for
water and Sewage treatment plants and other industrial wastes.
Normally, they are constructed of reinforced concrete in the
form of rectangular or circular configurations. The behavior of
liquid storage underground tank during earthquakes is more
important than the economic values of the tanks and their
contents. A good understanding of the seismic behavior of these
structures is necessary in order to meet safety objectives while
containing construction and maintenance costs. In this paper
Underground water tank with different safe bearing values of
soil is used to analyze the typical behavior caused by seismic
load. The finite element method (FEM) is selected as the
examination method for the underground water tank. The most
challenging part of this dissertation is seismic calibration stage
which is executed by SAP2000 FEM package.

Keywords- underground water tank, Finite element modeling,


earth quake loads, SAP 2000.
Fig 1: Detail of an RCC water tank

I. INTRODUCTION
Storage reservoirs and underground water tank are used to II. OBJECTIVES
store water, liquid petroleum, petroleum products and similar
liquids. The force analysis of the reservoirs and tanks is about
the same irrespective of the chemical nature of the product. To understand governing loads and carry out
All tanks are designed as crack free structures to eliminate any literature review related to underground water tank.
leakage. Water or raw petroleum retaining slab and walls can Development of finite element model of underground
be of reinforced concrete with adequate cover to the water tank using Structural Analysis Package (SAP
reinforcement. Industrial waste can also collected and 2000) software.
processed in concrete tanks with few exceptions. The To study the behavior of underground water tank
petroleum product such as petrol, diesel oil, etc. Are likely to under different safe bearing values of soil using
leak through the concrete walls, therefore such tanks need analytical methods.
special membrane to prevent leakage. Reservoir is a common To know about the design philosophy for the safe
term applied to liquid storage structure and it can be below or and economical design of water tank.
above the ground level. Reservoirs below the ground level are To study the displacement and deformation pattern of
normally built to store large quantities of water whereas those underground water tank and are compared for
of overhead type are built for direct distribution by gravity different safe bearing values of soil.
flow and are usually of smaller capacity. To study the base moments, side wall moments and
settlement of underground water tank structure by

ISSN: 2348 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 83


SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) EFES April 2015

considering dynamic type of loading when the tank is


empty and full water level conditions.

III. DESIGN REQUIREMENTS

In water retaining structure a dense impermeable concrete is


required therefore, proportion of fine course aggregates to
cement should be such as to give high quality concrete.
Concrete mix weaker than m20 is not used. The minimum
quantity of cement in the concrete mix shall not be less than
30KN/m3 .The design of the concrete mix shall be such that
the resultant concrete is sufficiently impervious. Efficient
compaction preferably by vibration is essential. The
permeability of the thoroughly compacted concrete is
dependent water cement ratio. Increase in water-cement ratio
increases permeability, while concrete with lower water
cement ratio is difficult to compact. Other causes of leakage in
concrete are defects such as segregation and honey combing. Fig 3. FEM analysis of underground water tank subjected to dry soil
All joints should be water tight as these are potential sources pressure
of water leakage. Design of liquid retaining structure is
different from ordinary R.C.C structures as it requires that
concrete should not crack and hence the tensile stresses in
concrete should be within permissible limits. A reinforced
concrete member of liquid retaining structure is designed on
the usual principles ignoring tensile resistance of concrete in
bending. Additionally it should be ensured that tensile stress
on the liquid retaining face of the equivalent concrete section
does not exceed the permissible tensile strength of concrete.
The co-efficient of expansion due to temperature change is 11
x 10-6 /oC and co-efficient of shrinkage may be taken as 450
x 10-6 for initial shrinkage and 200 x 10-6 for drying
shrinkage.

Fig 4. Underwater tank subjected to internal water pressure.

Fig 2. Finite element analysis of underground water tank.

A) Finite element analysis of underground water tank.


Fig 4 Underwater tank subjected to sub lateral soil pressure.

ISSN: 2348 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 84


SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) EFES April 2015

6 Black cotton soil or other shrinkable or 130-


B) Bearing capacities of different rocks expansive clay in dry 160
condition (50 % saturation)
Sl. no description Sbc(kpa)
1 Rocks (hard) without laminations and 3240
defects. For e.g. granite
trap & diorite IV. ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
2 Laminated Rocks. For e.g. Sand stone and 1620
Lime stone in sound
condition DESIGN CASES:
3 Residual deposits of shattered and broken 880 Case 1: Tank is full and
bed rocks and hard Case 2: Tank is empty.
shale cemented material The above cases are extreme cases and hence the underground
4 Soft rock 440 tank design has been carried
out considering these two cases.
C) Presumptive safe bearing values for different types of
Sandy soil DESIGN CALCULATIONS:

Sl no description SBC Case 1: Tank is full .


1 Gravel, sand and gravel, compact and 440 a. Maximum soil pressure = 18000 x 4.875 x (1-sin30/
offering resistance to 1+sin30)
penetration when excavated by tools Ps = 32951.5 N/m2
2 Coarse sand, compact and dry 440
Ps = 32.95 KN/m2
3 Medium sand, compact and dry 245 b. Maximum water pressure = 9810 x 4.875
4 Fine sand, silt (dry lumps easily 150 Pw = 47823.8 N/mm2
pulverized by fingers) Net pressure at the bottom of wall = Pw - Ps
5 Loose gravel or sand gravel mixture, 245 Pnet = 14872.25 Nm2
Loose coarse to medium These pressure values have been incorporated in the finite
sand, dry element software.
Simultaneously these values are utilized for the further
computation of forces.
6 Fine sand, loose and dry 100

D) Presumptive safe bearing values for different types of


Cohesive soil

Sl description SBC
no
1 Soft shale, hard or stiff clay in deep bed, dry 440
2 Medium clay readily indented with a thumb 245
nail
3 Moist clay and sand clay mixture which can 150
be indented with strong thumb pressure
Fig 6 moment co-efficients
4 Soft clay indented with moderate thumb 100 Moment Co-efficient and individual wall panels, top and
pressure bottom hinged.
Vertical walls fixed.
5 Very soft clay which can be penetrated 50
several centimeters with Hence appendix 01 is created which is based on IS 456-2000
the thumb and the design of top
Slab has been carried out.
Assumptions for design of top slab:

ISSN: 2348 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 85


SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) EFES April 2015

Loads:

DEAD LOAD = 2KPA

LIVE LOAD = 5KPA

FOLLOWING INPUT DETAILS ARE CONSIDERED IN THE FEM


MODEL:

1) K SPRING CONSTANT = 250 / 0.005 = 50,000

2) UNIT WEIGHT OF SOIL = 18 KN / M3

3) KA = 0.33

4) UNIT WEIGHT OF WATER = 10 KN/M3

5) SURCHARGE PRESSURE = 10 KN/M2

6) DEPTH OF OVERBURDEN = 3.15M


By considering the above loads and the geometry, the
following mathematical model
has been created.
Fig 7. 3D model hiding top slab to highlight internal walls

Case 1 : Tank is full


1.5 x (Self weight + internal water pressure + lateral dry soil
pressure
+ Surcharge + live load + floor finish)

Fig 6 3D complete model

Fig 8 3D model resultant BMD M11 direction minimum


Combination : ENEVOLOP { case 1, case 2 }

ISSN: 2348 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 86


SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) EFES April 2015

Case 2 : Tank is full Fig 9 3D model resultant BMD M11 direction maximum
Note: Since it is envelop minimum and maximum forces are produced.
1.5 x (Self weight + lateral submerged soil pressure +
surcharge+ live load + floor finish)

JOINT DISPLACEMENT AND JOINT ACCELERATION


V. CONCLUSIONS 1) Displacement value is decreased with increased in safe
bearing values, in all conditions.
TIME PERIOD AND FREQUENCY 2) Due to water hammering action displacement is high in full
1) It is well known that natural time period goes on decreasing water level condition compared to empty condition in both X
with increasing in frequency. and Y direction, due to seismic vibrations.
2) Time period is high when the underground water tank is 3) Acceleration value is decreased with increased in safe
full water level compared to empty. If the underground water bearing values, in all conditions.
tank is full of water obviously it takes more time to complete 4) Acceleration is little bit high in full water condition due to
one cycle of free vibration than the empty tank. water hammering action by earthquake compared to empty
3) Frequency is less when the tank is full compared to empty. condition in both X and Y direction.
If the tank is full obviously it takes less rotation per second.
BASE MOMENT
DEFORMED SHAPE DUE TO DIFFERENT LOADINGS 1) Base moment value is very high in safe bearing value
The deformed shape are extracted for safe bearing value 150KN/m2 compared to safe bearing value 500KN/m2 , in all
500KN/m2 conditions.
1) The deformation is negligible in all loading conditions. 2) Due to high lateral force and water force, the base moment
2) The maximum deformation due to full water load is only is high in full water level condition compared to empty
364*E-3m. condition in all considered safe bearing values.
3) Due to uniform distribution of water, and external loading
at top, the deformation is more at the center of the side walls SETTLEMENT DUE TO SEISMIC LOADS
of tank. 1) Settlement value is high in safe bearing value 150KN/m2
4) Since the vehicular load (live load) at the top portion, hence compared to safe bearing value 500KN/m2 , in all conditions.
the maximum deformation is at top portion of tank.

ISSN: 2348 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 87


SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) EFES April 2015

2) Due to water load, the settlement is high in full water level [4] Kenneth S. Okiongbo, Edirinakpofure (2012) Investigation of
Soil Aggressiveness towards Underground Fuel Storage Tanks and
condition compared to empty condition in all considered safe
Water Pipelines in Parts of Bayelsa State, Southern Nigeria
bearing values. Department of Geology & Physics, Niger Delta University,
Amassoma, Nigeria, Vol.4, pp761-767
SIDE WALL MOMENTS [5] Anumod A.S, Harinarayanan S, S.Usha (2014) Finite Element
Analysis of Steel Storage Tank under Seismic Load International
1) The side wall moment in all considered safe bearing values
Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) ISSN:
and in all conditions is almost linear . But if we compare 2248-9622 Trends and Recent Advances in Civil Engineering
among those water level, side wall moment is little bit varying [6] Sani, J.E.,Nwadiogbu, C.P.Andyisag.L (2014) Reliability
in full water condition compared to empty condition. Analysis of an Underground Reinforced Concrete Rectangular
Water Tank IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering
2) During earthquake, due to water hammering action the
(IOSR-JMCE) e-ISSN: 2278-1684, p-ISSN: 2320-334X, Volume
displacement is little bit high in safe bearing value 150KN/m2 11, Issue 1 Ver. V, PP 58-68 Finite Element Analysis of
compared to safe bearing value 500KN/m2 . Underground water tank with different safe bearing values of soil
3) The side wall moment is decreasing with increasing safe 2014-15 Dept of civil engineering - NCET, Bangalore Page 79
[7] M.S. Dixit, K.A. Patil (2009) Study of effect of different
bearing values.
parameters on bearing capacity of soil Department of civil
Engineering, IGC 2009, Guntur, India
With this, finally we concluded that, for every load case the [8] Santhosh kumar. T.G, Benny Mathews Abraham, A.Sridharan and
soil with safe bearing value 150KN/m2 has higher value. Babu. T. Jose Bearing Capacity Improvement of Loose Sandy
Foundation Soils through Grouting International Journal of
Hence the underground water tank in soil with safe bearing
Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) ISSN: 2248-9622
value 150KN/m2 will get affect more than the underground www.ijera.com Vol. 1, Issue 3, pp.1026-1033
water tank in soil with safe bearing value 500KN/m2 during [9] DR. Abdulmuttalib I. Said , Ammar A. Abdulmajeed (2011)
earthquake. Seismic analysis of liquid storage tanks Journal, Department of
Civil Engineering, University of Baghdad, No.3 Vol 17, pp 610-
Therefore for heavy and important structures such as
619
underground liquid storage tanks, dams, bridges etc., the soil
with higher safe bearing values are preferred. Since joints are TEXT BOOKS
the weakest positions in the underground water tank, hence [10] Krishna raju N Advanced RC Design, CBS publisher and
distributors, New Delhi, 2009.
providing the rubber dampers at the joint segment is one of
[11] Punmia B.C, Ashok kumar jain, Arun K. Jain Water supply
the methods in earthquake resistant design. This method can engineering, 2 nd Edition Lakshmi publications (p) Ltd, New
be use practically by conducting some more investigations and Delhi, 2011.
experiments to make underground water tank earthquake [12] Gurucharan singh and Jagadish singh Water supply and sanitary
engineering, 6 th Edition, Standard publishers distributors, 1705-
resistant.
B, Nai Sarak, Delhi-6, 2003.
[13] Santosh Kumar Garg Water supply engineering, 22nd revised
Edition, Khanna publisher, New Delhi, 2013. Finite Element
Analysis of Underground water tank with different safe bearing
VI. SCOPE OF FUTURE WORK values of soil 2014-15 Dept of civil engineering - NCET,
Bangalore Page 80

1. The analyses can be extended by considering when tank is CODES/STANDERDS


half water level condition. In this way, the behavior of [14] Indian Standard IS 456 - 2000 Plain and reinforced concrete -
code of practice 4 th Revision, Bureau of Indian Standards, New
different safe bearing values of soil are observed more Delhi, India.
sensitively. [15] Indian Standard IS 1893 (Part 1): 2002 Criteria for Earthquake
2. Furthermore, the analysis can be carried out by considering Resistant Design of Structures, 5 th Revision, Bureau of Indian
circular shape of underground water tank. Standards, New Delhi, India.

REFERENCES
[1] T. Cakir, R. Livaoglu, A. Dogangun (2008) Effects Of Different
Backfill Soil Types On Dynamic behaviour Of Rectangular Tank
Wall Considering Backfill wall-Fluid Interaction The 14th World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering October 12-17, 2008,
Beijing, China
[2] Takahashi kenji, Ohnishi yuzo, Xiongjun,Koyama tomofumi
(2008) Tank Model And Its Application To Predicting
Groundwater Table In Slope Dept of geotechnical engineering,
Vol. 27 (12): 2501-2501
[3] Prof.R.V.R.K. Prasad, Akshayab.Kamdi (2012) Effect of revision
of IS 3370 on water storage tank International Journal of
Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) ISSN: 2248-9622
Vol. 2, Issue 5, pp.664-666

ISSN: 2348 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 88