Effects of The Vertical Component and Frequency Content of Ground Motions On The Seismic Response of Above Ground Tanks PDF

ASIAN JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING (BHRC) VOL. 18, NO.
3(2017)
PAGES 411-432
EFFECTS OF THE VERTICAL COMPONENT AND FREQUENCY

CONTENT OF GROUND MOTIONS ON THE SEISMIC RESPONSE
OF ABOVE GROUND TANKS
E.M.B. Boudjellal and A. Kadid

Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Technology, University of Batna 02, Algeria
Received: 28 February 2016; Accepted: 27 May 2016
ABSTRACT
In this paper six tank models, three cylindrical and three rectangular with the same liquid
capacity but with different slimness: tall, medium and shallow are numerically simulated
using FEM in order to investigate their seismic behavior under three seismic components of
four distinct ground motions with different frequency parameters. The results showed the
important effect of vertical component of earthquakes on the response of rectangular tanks
especially when its frequency content in the same range as that of the tank, while the
cylindrical tanks were less affected by the vertical component and of the frequency content
of the records.
Keywords: Rectangular and cylindrical tanks; fluid-structure interaction; vertical

component; frequency content.
1. INTRODUCTION
Reinforced concrete liquid storage tanks are one of the imperative environmental
engineering structures, which have become very widespread in recent decades. These
structures are widely used for storing water for drinking and firefighting or treating waste
water, or other liquids. Heavy damages can be caused by strong earthquakes; consequently,
the dynamic response of water tanks is the matter of special concern, and this type of
structures must show satisfactory performance, especially, during earthquakes. The analysis
of the dynamic response of water tanks under earthquake loading is associated with the fluid
structure interaction domain. Natural frequencies, mode shapes and liquid sloshing effects in
storage tanks have been evaluated by numerical as well as by analytical methods. Usually
analytical solutions are restricted to regular geometric tank shapes such as cylindrical and
rectangular whose walls are straight and upright. Furthermore, their fundamental equations

E-mail address of the corresponding author: mouatez.boudjellal@gmail.com (E.M.B. Boudjellal)
412 E.M.B. Boudjellal and A. Kadid
are still not fully developed in the case of three dimensional problems. Also, the nature of
dynamic sloshing in cylindrical tanks is better understood than that in rectangular tanks.
To understand the dynamic behavior of liquid storage tanks many research groups have
concentrated their investigations on the seismic behaviors of liquid containers and on the
earthquake-resistant design methods of liquid storage tanks. Housner [1] developed a simple
procedure for estimating the hydrodynamic effect of liquid in rigid tanks, proposing a
mechanical model based on two lumped masses: an impulsive mass rigidly attached to the tank
wall at a proper height, and a convective mass that can oscillate horizontally against a restraining
spring; Haroun [2] presented a detailed, analytical method for rectangular tanks. In his work, the
hydrodynamic pressures were calculated using classical potential flow approach assuming rigid
wall boundary conditions. Unfortunately, the flexibility of the wall in the structure is not entirely
accounted for, because, under strong ground motions flexible tank walls may have significant
effects on the seismic response of both tall and broad tanks.
Fischer and Seeber [3] studied the dynamic response of liquid storage tanks including
both liquid-tank and liquid-soil interaction. The analysis was performed analytically by the
generalized-coordinate approach and then numerically using the complex frequency
response analysis. The study showed the great influence of variable soil stiffness upon the
damping ratio of the shell-liquid-soil system. Choun and Yun [4] proposed a new sloshing
analysis method for rectangular tank systems with a submerged structure using the velocity
potential and the linear water wave theory. They found that sloshing response is very
sensitive to the characteristics of the ground motion and the configuration of the Fluid-
structure system and the submerged structure shows a tendency to decrease sloshing
amplitude, hydrodynamic pressure, and base shear, while it shows a tendency to increase the
overturning moment. They concluded that, for the ground excitation dominated by low-
frequency contents, the sloshing response increases significantly; additionally, the
contribution of the higher sloshing modes also increases. Chen and Kianoush [5] studied the
effect of wall flexibility on hydrodynamic pressures in two-dimensional concrete rectangular
tanks using an approach referred to as the sequential method. Their comparative study
showed that the lumped mass approach overestimates the base shear and wall displacements.
Livaoglu [6] Evaluated the dynamic behavior of fluid–rectangular tank–soil/foundation
system, by modeling the interaction effects of fluid by Housner’s two mass approximations
and soil/foundation system by the cone model. His results showed that the displacements
and base shear forces generally decreased, with decreasing soil stiffness. However,
embedment, wall flexibility, and soil–structure interaction (SSI) did not considerably affect
the sloshing displacement. Jaiswal et al. [7] made an experimental and numerical study on
sloshing frequency of liquid contained models of different shapes and tanks with internal
obstructions, they found that as the size of the obstruction increases, the first sloshing
frequency decreases. Chen et al. [8] proposed structural model using the generalized single
degree of freedom system to considers the effect of flexibility of tank wall on hydrodynamic
pressures of concrete rectangular liquid containing structures. They concluded that the
current approach in design codes and standards does not truly represent the behavior of
liquid containing structures. Kianoush and Ghaemmaghami [9] investigated the effect of
earthquake frequency content on the seismic behavior of fluid rectangular tank system using
four different seismic motions, taking into account soil–structure–liquid interaction.
EFFECTS OF THE VERTICAL COMPONENT AND FREQUENCY CONTENT OF … 413
Hashemi et al. [10] proposed an analytical method to determine the dynamic response of 3D
rectangular liquid storage tanks with four flexible walls, subjected to horizontal seismic
ground motion, by deriving a simple formula that evaluates convective pressure and surface
displacements in a similar rigid tank, Moreover, they developed a mechanical model, which
takes into account the deformability of the tank wall. Cheng et al. [11] Compared the effects
of seismic base isolation with rubber pad and non-seismic isolation of above-ground
concrete rectangular tanks through the finite element model of the liquid-solid interaction.
They found the isolation pad markedly reduces the liquid sloshing height.
From this wide range of studies on the dynamic response of the liquid containing
structures, many factors need to be addressed for a better understanding of the seismic
response of above ground tanks like wall flexibility, three-dimensional geometry, the three
component of the ground motion etc. In this context, the primary objective of this study is to
investigate some effects of the seismically excited above ground tanks like: The behavior of
impulsive and convective modes and their natural frequencies and modal participation ratios
of 3D fulfilled tanks; The effect of geometry slimness, the vertical seismic component and
its frequency content, on sloshing wave height and structural response of above ground
tanks.
2. MODELING ASPECTS
2.1 Tanks geometry and materials
Figure 1.Cylindrical tank geometry Figure 2.Rectangular tank geometry
Most tanks have slimness ranging from 0.3 to 3. Tank’s slimness is given by the
relationships or ; where H is the height of the fluid in the tank, R is the
inside radius of cylindrical tank and 2L is the inside length of rectangular tank.
In this study, two types of above ground tanks are used, cylindrical and rectangular; for
each type, three different geometries of tanks with slimness ratios of 3.0, 1.0 and 0.3 are
used. The dimensions of the tank models are as follows, Table 1.
Table 1: Dimensions of cylindrical and rectangular tank models

Circular Tank Rectangular Tank

Height ofthe Radius of the Height of the Length of the Width of the
liquid H [m] tank R [m] liquid H [m] tank Lx [m] tank Ly [m]
Shallow 2.43 8.10 2.56 8.55 5.70
Medium 5.42 5.42 5.72 5.72 3.82
Tall 11.27 3.76 11.90 3.97 2.65
The dimensions of the tank models are chosen in such a way that they all have the same
capacity of liquid, 500 m3, while the thickness of the wall is kept constant for all tanks:
tw=0.2 [m]. It is also assumed that the length to the width ratio of rectangular tanks is equal
to 1.5. The material properties used in this study are summarized in Table 2.
Table 2: Material properties

Concrete Water
Modulus of elasticity E=32000 MPa Bulk modulus Bl=2100 MPa
Poisson’s ratio ν=0.2 Masse density ρl=1000 Kg/m3
Masse density ρ=2500 Kg/m3
2.2 Finite element models

The static and dynamic finite element analysis of systems, such as tanks, that contain both
fluid and solid elements can be very complex. Creating a finite element model of fluid-solid
systems that accurately simulates the behavior of the real physical system, requires making
many assumptions like considering the fluid as inviscid, irrotational, incompressible with
relatively small displacements on the fluid boundary.
Such assumptions can be considered in the finite element package software ADINA
through special elements called Potential-based fluid elements. This type of element can be
used in static, frequency and transient analyses and can be coupled with ADINA structural
elements; ADINA uses a formulation called Linear Potential-Based Element (Infinitesimal
velocity formulation) where the velocities and the density changes are infinitesimally small
[12].
The two types of typical cylindrical and rectangular liquid tanks were modeled using the
FEM software package ADINA. The Concrete wall is modeled with 3D Solid 8 nodded
elements, while the water is modeled with 3D Fluid 8 nodded elements, using Potential-
based fluid elements with free surface. The tanks are supposed to be anchored to a rigid
moving base.
2.3 Earthquake records and frequency content

Three of primary significance in earthquake engineering and most important characteristics
of earthquake motion are : the amplitude, the frequency content and the duration of motion;
The duration of all earthquake records was taken as 10 seconds and they were scaled so that
the peak ground acceleration is equal to 0.5 g.
There is good agreement among researchers concerning the influence of the frequency
content on the seismic response of civil structures. Several frequency content parameters
have been proposed; A common and simple frequency content parameter is the predominant
period (Tp), which defines the period at which the acceleration response spectrum reaches its
maximum value.[13] Another parameter called mean period (Tm) defined by eqn.1 can also
be used:
(1)
where are the Fourier amplitudes of the entire accelerogram; and : are the discrete
Fourier transform frequencies between 0.25 and20 Hz. The Fourier amplitude is defined as
the square root of the sum of the squares of the real and imaginary parts of the Fourier
coefficients [13].
Another ground motion parameter that provides information about frequency content is
the ratio of PGV to PGA, where PGV is the peak ground velocity and PGA is the peak
ground acceleration [14].
In this study four different earthquake ground motions are considered: Chichi aftershock
(1999), El-Centro (1940), Izmit-Kocaeli (1999) and San Fernando (1971). Despite the fact
that these earthquakes have the same duration and scaled to have the same peak ground
acceleration (PGA), they have different frequency contents as shown in Table 3.
Table 3: Frequency parameters for each ground motion chosen during the ten seconds
Predominant Mean
Earthquake Direction Vmax / Amax[s]
Period (Tp) [s] Period(Tm)[s]
N-S 0.240 0.301 0.053
Chichi Aftershock
E-W 0.300 0.361 0.078
(1999)
V 0.100 0.283 0.044
N-S 0.560 0.543 0.111
El Centro (1940) E-W 0.520 0.721 0.272
V 0.100 0.174 0.068
N-S 0.420 1.219 0.275
Izmit-Kocaeli
E-W 0.520 1.346 0.380
(1999)
V 0.160 0.605 0.148
N-S 0.380 0.487 0.099
San Fernando
E-W 0.420 0.378 0.056
(1971)
V 0.300 0.303 0.083
0.6 0.6 0.9

0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2 0.4

0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
-0.2 -0.2 -0.1 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
-0.4 -0.4
"a" "b" "c"
-0.6 -0.6 -0.6
Figure 3. Earthquake records for Chichi aftershock earthquake1999: a-N_S, b-E_W and c-
vertical components
0.6 0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2 0.2
0 0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
-0.2 -0.2 -0.2
-0.4 -0.4 -0.4

"a" "b" "c"
-0.6 -0.6 -0.6
Figure 4. Earthquake records for El Centro earthquake 1940: a-N_S, b-E_W andc-vertical
components
0.6 0.6
0.6
0.4 0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2 0.2
0 0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
-0.2 -0.2 -0.2
-0.4 -0.4 -0.4

"a" "b" "c"
-0.6 -0.6 -0.6
Figure 5. Earthquake records for Izmit-Kocaeli earthquake 1999: a-N_S, b-E_W and c-vertical
components
0.6 0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2 0.2
0 0 -1E-15
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
-0.2 -0.2 -0.2
-0.4 -0.4 -0.4

"a" -0.6
"b" -0.6
"c"
-0.6
Figure 6. Earthquake records for San Fernando earthquake 1971: a-N_S, b-E_W and c-vertical
components
3. ANALYSIS RESULTS
3.1 Modal analysis

A modal analysis of tank models was performed in order to determine the natural periods of
the first two convective modes and the first three impulsive modes and their modal
participation factors(MPF) in the three different Cartesian directions (X,Y,Z), the results are
summarized in Error! Reference source not found. and Error! Reference source not
found..
The FEM models of the tanks are validated by comparing the fundamental natural
periods obtained from the FEM models to those obtained according to Eurocode 8 for both
cylindrical and rectangular tanks and the results are summarized in Table 4 and Table 5.
The natural periods of the impulsive and convective responses in Eurocode 8 for
cylindrical tanks are given in eqn.2 and 3.
(2)
(3)
where:
: is the impulsive natural period [s]
:is the convective natural period [s]
, : are coefficients for the natural impulsive and convective periods components
which can be obtained from table A.2 in part 4 of EC8.[15].
: Height to the free surface of the liquid;
: Tank’s radius;
: thickness of the tank wall;
: mass density of liquid;
: Modulus of elasticity of tank material.
For a ground supported rectangular tank the period of oscillation of the first sloshing
mode is:
(4)
where is the length of the tank in the direction of loading (earthquake direction).
And for the natural period of the first impulsive mode of vibration is given by
eqn. 5:
(5)
where is the deflection of the wall on the vertical center-line and at the height of the
impulse mass, when the wall is loaded by a load uniform in the direction ofthe ground
motion and of magnitude .
is the width of the wall perpendicular to the direction of loading (earthquake
direction) and is theimpulsive mass. The impulsive mass can be obtained as the sum of
the impulsive mass obtained from Error! Reference source not found.part 4 of EC8
[15]plus the wall mass. For tanks without roofs the deflection may be calculated assuming
the wall tobe free at the top and fixed on the other three sides.
Table 4: FEM cylindrical models validation

Cylindrical Tank(X-X or Y-Y Direction)
Convective Period Tc [s] Impulsive Period Ti [s]
ADINA EC8 ADINA EC8
Shallow 5.932 5.948 0.021 0.025
Medium 3.524 3.539 0.035 0.032
Tall 2.859 2.870 0.072 0.061
Table 5: FEM rectangular models validation

Rectangular Tank (X-X Direction) Rectangular Tank (Y-Y Direction)
Convective Impulsive Period Convective Impulsive
Period Tc [s] Ti [s] Period Tc [s] Period Ti [s]
ADINA EC8 ADINA EC8 ADINA EC8 ADINA EC8
Shallow 7.064 7.068 0.096 0.079 4.895 4.902 0.111 0.091
Medium 3.995 3.997 0.161 0.158 3.156 3.157 0.251 0.244
Tall 3.185 3.189 0.130 0.114 2.598 2.606 0.228 NA
We can see from Table 4 andTable 5that the numerical results of the periods of
convective and impulsive modes are in good agreement with the empirical formula in
Eurocode 8.
From tables 6 and 7, we can notice that the natural periods and MPF of cylindrical tanks
in both horizontal directions are identical because of symmetry. The impulsive MPF are
greater for tall tanks than those of medium and shallow rectangular and cylindrical tanks.
However, the shallow tanks for the two types have bigger convective MPF. The third mode
of vibration in the cylindrical tanks and the first mode in the rectangular tanks vibrate in the
vertical direction, thus suggesting a possible influence of the vertical component of ground
motions, especially for rectangular tall tanks
The mode shapes of the numerical models are shown in Figure 7, Figure 8, Figure 9, and
Figure 10.
Table 6: First two convective modes of cylindrical and rectangular tanks with MPF
Cylindrical Tanks
MPF [%]
Tank Mode Period [s]
X Y Z
st
1 2.859 0.00 11.09 0.00
Tall
2nd 2.859 11.09 0.00 0.00
1st 3.524 31.56 0.00 0.00
Medium
2nd 3.524 0.00 31.56 0.00
1st 5.931 50.77 0.00 0.00
Shallow
2nd 5.931 0.00 50.77 0.00
Rectangular Tanks
MPF [%]
X Y Z
1st 3.184 12.17 0.00 0.00
Tall
2nd 2.598 0.00 8.25 0.00
1st 3.995 33.84 0.00 0.00
Medium
2nd 3.155 0.00 24.47 0.00
1st 7.064 49.90 0.00 0.00
Shallow
2nd 4.895 0.00 46.20 0.00
Table 7: First three impulsive modes of cylindrical and rectangular tanks with MPF
Cylindrical Tanks
MPF [%]
X Y Z
1st 0.072 0.00 64.86 0.00
Tall 2nd 0.072 64.86 0.00 0.00
3rd 0.057 0.00 0.00 57.91
1st 0.035 50.83 0.00 0.00
Medium 2nd 0.035 0.00 50.91 0.00
rd
3 0.032 0.00 0.00 28.36
1st 0.021 17.08 0.00 0.00
Shallow 2nd 0.021 0.00 17.08 0.00
3rd 0.020 0.00 0.00 9.43
Rectangular Tanks
MPF [%]
X Y Z
1st 0.458 0.00 0.00 37.41

Tall 2nd 0.228 0.00 55.16 0.00
3rd 0.130 53.53 0.00 0.00
1st 0.284 0.00 0.00 8.01
Medium 2nd 0.251 0.00 31.37 0.00
3rd 0.161 21.35 0.00 0.00
1st 0.112 0.00 0.00 0.87
Shallow 2nd 0.111 0.00 10.50 0.00
3rd 0.096 6.43 0.00 0.00
Figure 7. Impulsive mode of fulfilled cylindrical modes

Figure 8. Convective modes of fulfilled cylindrical tanks
Figure 9. Convective modes of fulfilled rectangular tanks

Figure 10. Impulsive modes of fulfilled rectangular tanks
3.2 Time history analysis

Newmark’s Method is used to obtain the time history response of the FEM tank models
under each earthquake ground motion. A Rayleigh damping matrix is adopted related to the
damping ratio desired in convective modes and impulsive modes. For convective mode,
damping ratio is considered to be 0.5% and for the impulsive modes is defined to be
5.0%(which is considered for contribution of concrete tank wall).Our full filled tank models
are first analyzed under the two horizontal components and then analyzed again under two
horizontal and one vertical components, in order to investigate the effect of the vertical
component on tank response and sloshing height.
Sloshing wave height

The maximum values of the wave height for cylindrical and rectangular tank models in
each analysis are presented in Table 8. The values of the wave height are more important for
the “EL CENTRO (1940)” and “IZMIT-KOCAELI (1999)” ground motions. These results
are an indication of the influence of the frequency content of the records. The frequency
parameter of ground motion that has an important effect on sloshing wave height is the ratio
of PGV to PGA. The effect of vertical component on the sloshing wave height in cylindrical
and rectangular tanks is not significant.
Table 8:Sloshing wave high of cylindrical and rectangular tank models under the four ground
motion. (2H: two horizontal components; 2H+V: two horizontal and vertical components)
Earthquake Tall [m] Medium [m] Shallow [m]
Component
record Cyl Rec Cyl Rec Cyl Rec
CHICHI [2H] 0.523 0.266 0.587 0.302 0.658 0.296
Aftershock
[2H+V] 0.523 0.269 0.587 0.302 0.658 0.296
(1999)
EL CENTRO [2H] 2.023 2.324 1.727 1.936 1.450 1.429
(1940) [2H+V] 2.023 2.319 1.727 1.933 1.450 1.428
IZMIT- [2H] 2.671 3.124 4.660 5.743 2.935 3.467
KOCAELI
(1999) [2H+V] 2.671 3.123 4.660 5.746 2.935 3.467
SAN [2H] 0.538 0.609 0.614 0.482 0.779 0.464
FERNANDO
[2H+V] 0.538 0.609 0.614 0.482 0.779 0.464
(1971)
1.50E-03
"a" 2H 2H : max_displ=0.914E-03 m at time= 4.82 sec
2H+V 2H+V: max_displ=0.916E-03 m at time= 4.82 sec
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
-1.00E-17
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00
-5.00E-04
-1.00E-03
-1.50E-03
1.50E-03
"b" 2H 2H : max_displ=0.957E-03 m at time= 3.14 sec
2H+V
2H+V: max_displ=0.957E-03 m at time= 3.14 sec
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
-1.00E-17
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00
-5.00E-04
-1.00E-03
-1.50E-03
"c" 2H 2H : max_displ=-1.006E-03 m at time= 8.98 sec

1.50E-03
2H+V
2H+V: max_displ=-0.997E-03 m at time= 8.98 sec
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
-1.00E-17
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00
-5.00E-04
-1.00E-03
-1.50E-03
"d" 2H 2H : max_displ=0.875E-03 m at time= 8.78 sec

1.50E-03
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
-1.00E-17
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00
-5.00E-04
-1.00E-03
-1.50E-03
Figure 11.Cylindrical tall tank response in the Y-Y direction for a- CHICHI aftershock, b- EL
CENTRO, c- IZMIT-KOCAELI and d- SAN FERNANDO (2H: two horizontal components;
2H+V: two horizontal and vertical components)
5.00E-04 "a" 2H 2H : max_displ=0.325E-03 m at time= 4.82 sec

4.00E-04
3.00E-04
2.00E-04
1.00E-04
-5.20E-18
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00

5.00E-04
3.00E-04
1.00E-04
-1.00E-040.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00

"c" 2H 2H : max_displ=0.326E-03 m at time= 8.98 sec

5.00E-04 2H+V 2H+V: max_displ=0.342E-03 m at time= 4.92 sec
3.00E-04
1.00E-04
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00

-1.00E-04

5.00E-04 2H+V: max_displ=0.340E-03 m at time= 8.78 sec
2H+V
3.00E-04
1.00E-04
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00

-1.00E-04
Figure 12:Cylindrical medium tank response in the Y-Y direction for a- CHICHI aftershock, b-
EL CENTRO, c- IZMIT-KOCAELI and d- SAN FERNANDO (2H: two horizontal components;

2.50E-04
1.50E-04
5.00E-05
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00

-5.00E-05

2.50E-04
1.50E-04
5.00E-05
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00

-5.00E-05
"c" 2H 2H : max_displ=0.223E-03 m at time= 10.18 sec

2.50E-04
1.50E-04
5.00E-05
-5.00E-05 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00
-1.50E-04
1.50E-04
5.00E-05
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00

-5.00E-05
Figure 13. Cylindrical shallow tank response in the Y-Y direction for a- CHICHI aftershock, b-
6.00E-02 "a" 2H 2H : max_displ=53.537E-03 m at time= 5.50 sec

5.00E-02
4.00E-02
3.00E-02
2.00E-02
1.00E-02
0.00E+00
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00
6.00E-02 "b" 2H 2H : max_displ=48.860E-03 m at time= 3.30 sec

5.00E-02
4.00E-02
3.00E-02
2.00E-02
1.00E-02
0.00E+00
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00
6.00E-02 "c" 2H 2H : max_displ=48.745E-03 m at time= 9.00 sec

4.00E-02
2.00E-02
0.00E+00
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00
2H
6.00E-02 "d" 2H : max_displ=47.234E-03 m at time= 8.82 sec
2H+V
4.00E-02
2.00E-02
0.00E+00
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00
Figure 14. Rectangular tall tank response in the Y-Y direction for a- CHICHI aftershock, b- EL
CENTRO, c- IZMIT-KOCAELI and d- SAN FERNANDO (2H: two horizontal components;
2H 2H : max_displ=56.119E-03 m at time= 5.50 sec

6.50E-02 "a"
5.50E-02
4.50E-02
3.50E-02
2.50E-02
1.50E-02
5.00E-03
-5.00E-03
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00
-1.50E-02
-2.50E-02
6.50E-02 "b"
5.50E-02
4.50E-02
3.50E-02
2.50E-02
1.50E-02
5.00E-03
-5.00E-03
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00
-1.50E-02
-2.50E-02
2H
6.50E-02 "c" 2H : max_displ=53.159E-03 m at time= 9.02 sec
2H+V
5.50E-02 2H+V: max_displ=55.525E-03 m at time= 5.26 sec
4.50E-02
3.50E-02
2.50E-02
1.50E-02
5.00E-03
-5.00E-03
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00
-1.50E-02
-2.50E-02

6.50E-02 2H+V
5.50E-02
4.50E-02
3.50E-02
2.50E-02
1.50E-02
5.00E-03
-5.00E-03
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00
-1.50E-02
-2.50E-02
Figure 15. Rectangular medium tank response in the Y-Y direction for a- CHICHI aftershock, b-

7.00E-03
5.00E-03
3.00E-03
1.00E-03
-1.00E-03
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00
-3.00E-03
-5.00E-03

7.00E-03
5.00E-03
3.00E-03
1.00E-03
-1.00E-030.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00
-3.00E-03
-5.00E-03
"c"
7.00E-03
5.00E-03
3.00E-03
1.00E-03
-1.00E-03 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00
-3.00E-03
-5.00E-03

7.00E-03
5.00E-03
3.00E-03
1.00E-03
-1.00E-03
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00
-3.00E-03
-5.00E-03
Figure 16. Rectangular shallow tank response in the Y-Y direction for a- CHICHI aftershock, b-
Tanks responses:
The choice of the recorded points is the point with the absolute maximum displacement
value of tank wall response in the Y-Y horizontal direction has been taken and its
displacement recorded during the time of ground excitations. Time from 0 to 1 sec represent
the static response and from 1 to 11 sec represent the dynamic response under ground
motion.
Despite the fact that all tanks have the same wall thickness (20cm), the horizontal wall
displacements under the horizontal ground motions only were more important in rectangular
tanks compared to cylindrical tanks. The maximum displacement value reaches 56 mm in
rectangular tanks (Figure 15-a) while in cylindrical tank it reaches only 1 mm in tall
cylindrical tank (Figure 11-c). This can be explained by the increased resistance of the
cylindrical shape even for the static pressure and the natural impulsive periods of cylindrical
tanks, which where were very small and outside the range of the mean periods of the ground
motions. On the other hand, the impulsive natural periods of rectangular tanks were within
the same range of the mean periods of the ground motions.
The effect of the vertical component of the ground motions on cylindrical tanks was
insignificant in the tall configuration (Figure 11). Adding the vertical component results in
an increase of about 9% in the horizontal displacement for the medium cylindrical tank
under CHICHI and SAN FERNANDO records, while for the shallow cylindrical tank, the
increase is about 11% for the CHICHI record.
The rectangular tanks were found to be more susceptible to the vertical component
compared to cylindrical tanks and the increase in the horizontal displacement was about 24
% especially for the tall rectangular tank. This effect is more pronounced when the period of
the vertical component of ground motion is close to the natural period of vertical mode
(Figure 14).
Figure 17 and Figure 18 show the maximum displacement of tank models under “IZMIT-
KOCAELI (1999)” ground motion.
Figure 17. Maximal displacement in the Y-Y direction of cylindrical tanks under “IZMIT-
KOCAELI (1999)” ground motion
Figure 18. Maximal displacementin the Y-Y direction of rectangular tanks under “Izmit-Kocaeli
(1999)” ground motion
4. CONCLUSIONS
The results obtained from this numerical study are presented in terms of the maximum
structural wall displacement and sloshing wave height obtained from time history analysis
under different seismic ground motions. It is found that the rectangular tanks are more
affected by the seismic excitations than cylindrical tanks since they have impulsive natural
period close to the frequency characteristics of the earthquake records, it was also found that
the vertical component can have an important effect on rectangular tanks when its mean
period is close to the natural period of the vertical mode of vibration. Finally, the frequency
content of the accelerograms influences drastically the parameter responses such as the
sloshing wave height and the horizontal displacements. The ratio of PGV to PGA seems to
affect the sloshing wave height but it needs to be further investigated.
REFERENCES
1. Housner GW. The dynamic behavior of water tanks, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America, No. 2, 53(1963) 381-7.
2. Haroun MA. Stress analysis of rectangular walls under seismically induced hydrodynamic
loads, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, No. 3, 74(1984) 1031-41.
3. Fischer FD, Seeber R. Dynamic response of vertically excited liquid storage tanks
considering liquid-soil interaction, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics,
16(1988) 329-42.
4. Choun YS, Yun CB. Sloshing analysis of rectangular tanks with a submerged structure by
using small-amplitude water wave theory, Earthquake Engineering and Structural
Dynamics, 28(1999) 763-83.
5. Chen JZ, Kianoush MR. Dynamic response of concrete rectangular liquid storage tanks, in
Fourth International Conference of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Tehran,
Islamic Republic of Iran, 12-14 May 2003.
6. Livaoglu R. Investigation of seismic behavior of fluid–rectangular tank–soil/foundation

systems in frequency domain, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 28(2008) 132-
46.
7. Jaiswal OR, Kulkarni S, Pathak P. A study on sloshing frequencies of fluid-tank system, in
The 14 World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing-China, 2008.
8. Chen JZ, Ghaemmaghami AR, Kianoush MR. Dynamic analysis of concrete rectangular
liquid storage tanks, in The 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing,
China, October 12-17, 2008.
9. Kianoush MR, Ghaemmaghami AR. The effect of earthquake frequency content on the
seismic behavior of concrete rectangular liquid tanks using the finite element method
incorporating soil–structure interaction, Elsevier-Engineering Structures, 33(2011) 2186-
2200.
10. Hashemi S, Saadatpour MM, Kianoush R. Dynamic behavior of flexible rectangular liquid
storage tanks subjected to seismic ground motion, in 15 WCEE, LISBOA, 2012.
11. Cheng X, Chen W, Zhu H. Effects of base isolation on seismic response of concrete
rectangular tank, EJGE, No. 8, 20(2015) 2149-66.
12. ADINA. Theory and Modeling Guide, Volume I: ADINA Solids & Structures, ADINA R
& D, Inc., Watertown, USA, December 2013.
13. Ellen MR, Norman AA, Jonathan DB. Simplified frequency content estimates of earthquake
ground motions, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, No. 124,
151(1998) 150-9.
14. McGuire RK. Seismic ground motion parameter relations, Journal of the Geotechnical
Engineering Division, ASCE, No. 4, 104(1978) 481-90.
15. Eurocode 8: Design provisions of earthquake resistance of structures, Part 4: Silos, tanks
and pipelines, European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, 1998-4, 2006.

Effects of The Vertical Component and Frequency Content of Ground Motions On The Seismic Response of Above Ground Tanks PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Effects of The Vertical Component and Frequency Content of Ground Motions On The Seismic Response of Above Ground Tanks PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ASIAN JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING (BHRC) VOL. 18, NO.

EFFECTS OF THE VERTICAL COMPONENT AND FREQUENCY

E.M.B. Boudjellal and A. Kadid

Received: 28 February 2016; Accepted: 27 May 2016

Keywords: Rectangular and cylindrical tanks; fluid-structure interaction; vertical

2.1 Tanks geometry and materials

Figure 1.Cylindrical tank geometry Figure 2.Rectangular tank geometry

Table 1: Dimensions of cylindrical and rectangular tank models

Circular Tank Rectangular Tank

Table 2: Material properties

2.2 Finite element models

2.3 Earthquake records and frequency content

0.6 0.6 0.9

0.2 0.2 0.4

0.6 0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2 0.2

-0.4 -0.4 -0.4

0.2 0.2 0.2

-0.4 -0.4 -0.4

0.6 0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2 0.2

-0.4 -0.4 -0.4

3.1 Modal analysis

Table 4: FEM cylindrical models validation

Table 5: FEM rectangular models validation

1st 0.458 0.00 0.00 37.41

Figure 7. Impulsive mode of fulfilled cylindrical modes

Figure 8. Convective modes of fulfilled cylindrical tanks

Figure 9. Convective modes of fulfilled rectangular tanks

Figure 10. Impulsive modes of fulfilled rectangular tanks

3.2 Time history analysis

Sloshing wave height

"c" 2H 2H : max_displ=-1.006E-03 m at time= 8.98 sec

"d" 2H 2H : max_displ=0.875E-03 m at time= 8.78 sec

5.00E-04 "a" 2H 2H : max_displ=0.325E-03 m at time= 4.82 sec

"b" 2H 2H : max_displ=0.343E-03 m at time= 3.14 sec

-1.00E-040.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00

"c" 2H 2H : max_displ=0.326E-03 m at time= 8.98 sec

0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00

"d" 2H 2H : max_displ=0.314E-03 m at time= 8.78 sec

0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00

"a" 2H 2H : max_displ=0.132E-03 m at time= 4.82 sec

0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00

"b" 2H 2H : max_displ=0.153E-03 m at time= 3.14 sec

0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00

"c" 2H 2H : max_displ=0.223E-03 m at time= 10.18 sec

-5.00E-05 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00

0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00

6.00E-02 "a" 2H 2H : max_displ=53.537E-03 m at time= 5.50 sec

6.00E-02 "b" 2H 2H : max_displ=48.860E-03 m at time= 3.30 sec

6.00E-02 "c" 2H 2H : max_displ=48.745E-03 m at time= 9.00 sec

2H 2H : max_displ=56.119E-03 m at time= 5.50 sec

"d" 2H 2H : max_displ=39.699E-03 m at time= 8.42 sec

"a" 2H 2H : max_displ=6.405E-03 m at time= 4.28 sec

"b" 2H 2H : max_displ=6.386E-03 m at time= 3.16 sec

"d" 2H 2H : max_displ=6.597E-03 m at time= 8.80 sec

6. Livaoglu R. Investigation of seismic behavior of fluid–rectangular tank–soil/foundation

You might also like