Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Background
The purpose with this presentation is to demonstrate different calculation methods and design principles for seismic response of "full containment" (stand-alone steel inner tank, separated from outer concrete cylinder) LNG (liquefied natural gas) tanks to show how an earthquake can impact the design of the steel inner tank. The basic principles of anchoring/no anchoring of the steel inner tank is a significant factor of the costs of an LNG tank.
NEED2012
Background
Relevant projects Risavika: H = 20 m (Ht = 21 m), R = 22.5 m, H/R = 0.89 Lysekil: H = 37.5 m (Ht = 38.2 m), R = 16 m, H/R = 2.34 Lysekil: High H/R-ratio is a challenge when considering safe shutdown earthquake (SSE - return period 4975 years. Operating basis earthquake (OBE) - return period 475 years)
NEED2012
Background
Response calculations and design are normally based on hand calculations using standards Analyses, both explicit and implicit, have been executed to compare and validate the hand calculations Parameters of interest: Base shear and overturning moment (foundation, stresses in bottom insulation layers) Compressive stress in tank wall ("elephant foot" buckling, EC8-4 A.10) Uplift and anchorage of tank
NEED2012
Eurocode 8, Part 4 (Silos, tanks and pipelines) Chapter 2: General Chapter 4: Specific rules for tanks Annex A: Seismic analysis procedures for tanks
NEED2012
Foto: Norconsult. An LNG tank is a complex structure. Here is the outer concrete wall from one of our projects - picture is taken from below and upwards.
NEED2012
NEED2012
NEED2012
NEED2012
NEED2012
NEED2012
without anchors
NEED2012
with anchors (higher stress on compression side, reduced risk of uplift on tension side)
Without anchors
NEED2012
With anchors
Without anchors
NEED2012
NEED2012
NEED2012
NEED2012
With anchors (elastic bed gives generally higher compression forces than rigid bed)
10
NEED2012
2.5
11
NEED2012
NEED2012
12
Number of anchors = 2
OBE
SSE
NEED2012
Malhotra/EC8-4:
NEED2012
Simplified calculations:
= 1.5 = 5 % Max. value of spectrum
13
q No (1.0) Yes?
NEED2012
NEED2012
Why not implicit analysis with response spectrum step? Material model for the fluid? Interaction between the fluid and the flexible steel wall? Hydrodynamic pressure: Motion of the fluid due to seismic excitation is preserved as "snapshot" of max. pressure ("pushover" analysis)
14
NEED2012
Results obtained from implicit analysis are in good agreement with hand calculations SSE: Uplift and stress in wall OK with anchors, not OK without. Unanchored case: Highly increased stresses due to extensive deformations OBE: OK with and without anchors. Unanchored case: Increased compressive stress is moderate An implicit analysis is more conservative than an explicit analysis. It is in good agreement with hand calculations and may not give any new information of the behaviour that can be found by simplified methods.
15
Summary
Several types of calculations/analyses - benefits and limitations Simplified hand calculations Simplified procedure - Malhotra Implicit analysis Explicit analysis Which results are trustworthy? Unachored tanks: Increased compressive stress when uplifted (Eurocode, implicit model (moderate!)) Anchored tanks: Increased compressive stress due to tension in anchors (explicit model)
NEED2012
Summary (continued)
Overturning moment [MNm] Base shear [MN10] Tension in anchoring [kN] Compression in tank wall (with anchors) [MPa 10] 0 500 1000 Hand calculations (Malhotra) Abaqus implicit Abaqus explicit
NEED2012
16
Conclusions
Calculation method may govern the decisions regarding the necessity of anchoring the tank Advanced FE methods (explicit analyses) tend to give reduced values of the governing parameters (hand calculations are more conservative) The complexity of explicit analyses is very high and need a lot of engineering time
NEED2012
17