Eanhquske Enghaerig, Tenth Wis Cenlerenea® 1922 Bakema, Rarer. SBN90 54100605 Behavior of reinforced concrete water towers during Manjil-Roudbar earthquake of June 1990 ‘A.M. Memari & M.M.Ahmadi International Insite of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology. Tehran tran B.Rezace ‘Sharif University of Technology Tehran, Iran ABSTRACT: The behavior of to reinforced 1990 earthquake of Manjil-foudbar is investi standard 519 according to which the structurs 2800 which has superceded the foraer. Also several PGA's are indicated. The effect investigated. 1 INTRODUCTION The June 20, 1990 earthquake in Tran inflicted enoraous danage to. an area vell ‘over 10,000 Kat. This magnitude 7.3 to 7.7 rthquake caused extensive destruction of structures within a radius of lesa than 40 Ka fron the epicenter, where it vas featinated to be located near the town "of Manjil. The nearest accelerograph to the epleenter (40.Ka) recorded. high ground acceleration of 0.65 g at Abbar ( Noinfar {and Naderzadeh (1990)). In Rasht, located bout 60 ka north of Maajil, the danage vas finor to most buildings. tlowever, several Bldrise buildings with five to eight atories collapsed. Another type of structure that collapsed vas a 1500's? reinforced concrete water tower. Two other” siailar and new Towers with 2500 a} capacity that were empty at the tine of the earthquake received only sone perimeter cracking in the shaft. Figure L shows a picture of one of the 2600 n° towers (tover 2) and Figure 2 shove the collapsed 1500 a! tover (tover 1). Tt is the purpose of this” paper to investigate the behavior of these toxers during the earthquake and offer an explanetion to the reasons and node of failures, In addition, sone inprtant factors regarding aodeling and other effects are explored. To this end, first a sinple single degree of freedon and then a two degree of freedon nodel for sloshing effect. were stodied. “Later s more refined bean model was investigated, and finally a vell refined Finite element” model vas examined. The selonic loading is in the form of spectral acceleration. The selanic lateral forces according to the older Iranian loading code concrete elevated water tanks during the June 22, janted, The level of seismic design forces based oh fee were designed ere conpared vith the standard level of selanie forces according to LEDRS for ‘te of sloshing and secondary monent is also Figure 1. Picture of cracked tank 2 (standard 519) (ISIBI (1971) end the recent Iranian code for eeisaic resistant design of buildings (standard 2800) (EHEC (1988)) are ‘computed the sdequacy of designs with fuch forces “explored 2 DESCRIPTION OF STRUCTURES ‘The collapsed structure (tover 1), which was Dbuilt some 20 years ago, was a reinforced concrete elevated water tank vith a height fof 47m and a capacity. of 1500 m> . This Lover rested on a eat foundation. The “shaft with the inside dianeter of Sa had s height Sf 25.58 and a thickness of 0.3m. The other two towers (tower 2), that received only 4953Figure 2. Ploture of collapsed tank 1 in the fora of perineter cracking in the shaft above the door opening, pave a “height of 50m with a capacity of 2500 99. The hatte for thes toners have an inner diameter of Ta, height Of 25m) and thickness of 0.58. A echenetic iagran of the exterior elevation of tover 2 fa shom in Figure 3. and the digensicns of various parte are illustrated in Figure 4. “is. ean be seen in Figure 4 the tank is divided into two cylindrical tanks, each with» capacity of 1260'm, the inner tank with a radius of Te and’ the other with a Tadiue of 10s, The walle of the tanks are prestressed concrete, The cylindrical tank [e supported on the shaft through eranaition funnel with interior column. The foundation consist of double walled transition section which ‘reata on a 20 since damage Figure 3. Elevation of tank 2 b/s i 4 ase Tet 7 i 5 Figure 4. Dimensions of tank 2 Aiaeter mat supported on piles. There are 24 piles each with # height. of 30m and Glaneter of 1.28, where 10 of then are Jocated on a circle “of radiue Se and the rest on a circle of radius 9 ‘The tovers Were designed according to the standard §19. The level of seismic design forces will’ be discussed later. A new building code, standard 2600, has superseded the old code and the’ seisnic load Fequiresents for this nev standerd vill also ‘be studied: 3 GROUND MOTION Trere is no record of the ground notion in the vepicenteral region, and the nearest accelerograph wat 40. Ke avay with a peak, Ground acceleration (PGA) of the 0.65 ¢. It Te expected that the nountaineous area of Manji and Roudbar experienced at least that acceleration, Rasht ie located onan overburden of medium fine and granular soil This overburden apparently amplified the base rock motion in such away that the predominant period of excitation of the ground surface nearly matched the period of Rdrise buildings and other tall structures ftuch as the water’ toners. The evidence of the collapse of sone five to eight story bulldings and relatively winor damage to short baildings confires this assertion. 4984In order to eatinate the ground aotion in Rasht several attenuation ‘relations were used with the results shown in Table 1. "The Aistance to the epicenter vas 60 Ka with « Tocal depth of 18 Ke and the magnitude used yas 7.3. Although there is some scatter ‘among the results, the average values Guggest the base rock motion in Rackt to be 165 0a/e? (0.17g), 18 cx/s, and 15.5 ox for acceleration, velocity, and dispiacenent, Fespectively. When several other equations for estimating acceleration were used the value of 0.17 turned out to be reasonable. Uaing & soil amplification factor of 1.5 ve ‘obtain the maxinun ground motion to be 248 for en/s? (0.25), 27 cn/s, and 23 cw acceleration, ' velocity. and. dlsplacenent, Feapectively. This maxima groand Acceleration is little less than the value 0.29 obtained by using several of the Snatrunentally measured peak ground acorleration in the area (ITEES (1991)}. ‘Table 1, Eatinated base rock notion based on attenuation relations. Equation by Accs Yel. displ. (en/sect) (ea/sec) (ea) Eetere & Rosenblueth 178 a a (1363) Miekey(1971) 163, 2 2s Orphal & Lahoud 172 i a (a978) Me Guire(1977) 180, 2 u In order to obtain the response of the structure. to the ground notion, « linear flastic design ‘response spectrum (LEDES) based on Newmark method waa prepared. ‘The amplification factors were obtained for = damping ratio of 5% for the reinforced uncertainty of the ‘sn faaht LEDRS were concrete tower. “Due to factual ground motion iso. made for PGA. of 03g and 0.38 for comparison purposes. Since only acceleration spectra are to. be used. for medal ‘superposition analysis, the logarithnic scale acceleration spectra were converted to farithnetic scale es shova in Figure 5. This Figure shows the acceleration spectra for POA of 0.25g, 0.34, and 0.385. To study the response of ‘the structure were it designed according to standard 2800, the acceleration ‘Spectrum according to this code ie also plotted in Figure & 4 ANALYSTS USING A SINOLE DBGREE OF FREEDOM (S00F) NoDEL structure consists ate is used to ‘The firet model for the of # SDOF oscillator. Thie Figure 5. Spectral accelerations compare the level of design forces suggested by Standards 519 and 2600'to the capacity of the structure, and also to see the level of forces created in the structure due to various possible ground notion in the area. Consider” the simple oscillator shown in Figure 6, In. this wodel the weight of the tank and water is concentrated at the cantilever end of the stick, and the weight of the shaft is assumed. to be unifornly Gistributed throughout its height. Tt is of interest to study the behavior of the tovers st “various water levels in tanks. It is Delieved that tover Twas 1/3 full at the tine of the earthquake, while tover 2 vas empty. According to standard 519, the seismic coefficient is caleulated fron the following © = 0.05/7 » 0.05 wo Were T le period of buflding, although this standard gives an equation for” the period of the» buildings, it does not have provisions for inverted’ pendulum type structures. Stendard 2800 “defines the Selasle cocfficient ae c= ABL/R «2 Where A is the ground acceleration coefficient based on the seignic map of the farea, ubich in this case it will be 0.35, I fe the importance factor vhich may be taken fas 1.2; Ris the behavior coefficient or ensure of ductility which according to the code for inverted pendulum may be assuned 2.5; and Bis. the" response coefficient calculated according to the following Be 2 (t/t? @