A DESIGN RATIONALE FOR CIRCULAR

SILOS BASED ON FINITE ELEMENT

ANALYSIS

A THESIS BY

MD. ALA UDDIN

Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the

degree of

..
MASTER OF SCIENCE IN CIVIL ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

BANGLADESH UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY
- - .- -

1111111111111111111111111111111111
#88056#

NOVEMBER, 1994
 R 11,
624-15)( ••
~q9~ A DESIGN RATIONALE FOR CIRCULAR
ilL SILOS BASED ON FINITE" ELEMENT
ANALYSIS

A THESIS BY

MD. ALAUDDIN

Approved as to the style and content on November 29, 1994 by

£~94-
Dr. Sohrabuddin Ahmad
Professor
Chairman
(Supervisor)
Department of Civil Engineering
BUET, Dhaka

A . N . tv\ . ct J.9....L-
Dr. A. M. M. Safiullah Member
Professor and Head
Department of Civil Engineering
BUET, Dhaka

~
Dr. M. Shamim Z. Bosunia Member
Professor
Department of Civil Engineering
BUET, Dhaka

~~~
Dr. Md. Wahha$Uddin Member
Professor (External)
Department of Mechanical Engineering
BUET, Dhaka

ii
 TO
MY

TEACHERS

iii
 DECLARATION

Declared that, except where specific references are made to other

investigators, the work embodied in this thesis is the result of investigation carried
out by the author under the supervision of Dr. Sohrabuddin Ahmad, Professor of
Civil Engineering, BUET.

Neither this thesis nor any part of it has been submitted or is being
concurrently submitted in candidature for any degree at any other institution.

Author

r
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The author expresses his indebtedness to Dr. Sobrabuddin Ahmad,

Professor of Civil Engineering, BUET, for his continuous guidance, invaluable
suggestions and affectionate encouragement at all phases of this work.

Profound gratitude is expressed to Dr. Sobrabuddin Ahmad for providing

the author the valuable Finite Element Program that was the basic tool in this
research.

The author is grateful to Dr. M. Shamim Z. Bosunia, Professor of Civil

Engineering, BUET, for his constructive and valuable suggestions at various stages
of this work. .

The author expresses his deep gratitude to Mr. Md. Golam Mohiuddin,
Associate Professor of Industrial and Production Engineering, BUET, for providing
valuable reports and information, as well as for facilitating a visit to Narayanganj
silo site, which were very useful in this research.

Heartiest thanks are expressed to Mr. M.A. Malek of Civil Engineering

Department for typing this thesis with extreme care.

Particular appreciation is expressed by the author to all his friends and

colleagues for their encouragement and support
 CONTENTS

Declaration IV

Acknowledgement V

Abstract IX

Notations X

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 General 1
1.2 History and Past Research 3
1.3 Objective and Justification of the Research 4
1.4 Scope of the Study 6
1.5 General Remarks 7

Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction 8
2.2 Types and Defmition 8
2.3 Effect of Stored Material and other Factors on
Silo Analysis and Design 9
2.4 Pressures in Silo 11
2.4.1 The Janssen Method 11
2.4.2 The Reimbert Method 14
2.4.3 The Airy Method 15
2.4.4 Pressure Normal to Inclined Surfaces 16
2.5 Flow Patterns 17
2.6 Total Pressure - Static plus Overpressure 18
2.7 Effect of Eccentric Discharge and Non-symmetrical Flow 19
2.7.1 ACI 313-77 Approach 20
2.7.2 Safarians Method 21
2.7.3 A more nearly Rational Procedure 21
2.8 Loads in Silos 23
2.8.1 Dead Loads 23
2.8.2 Live Loads 23
2.8.3 Wind Loads 23
2.8.4 Seismic Loadings 24
2.8.5 Thermal Effects 25

vi
 2.8.6 Other Loads 25
2.8.7 Load Combinations 26
2.9 Silo Roofs 26

Chapter 3: ANALYSIS OF SILOS

3.1 Conventional Method of Analysis and Design
3.1.1 General 28
3.1.2 Design Steps - Conventionally Reinforced Concrete Silos 28
3.1.3 Analysis and Design of Circular Silos 29
3.1.4 Analysis of Prototype Silo 37
3.2 Finite Element Analysis
3.2.1 General 39
3.2.2 The Finite Element Program 39
3.2.3 Finite Element Idealisation of Silo 41
3.2.4 Determination of Forces and Moments at a Section 43
3.2.5 Capability of the Program at the Present Stage 44
3.2.6 Analysis and Presentation of the Results 46
3.3 Comparative Study
3.3.1 Mode of Comparison 47
3.3.2 Forces Obtained from Both the Methods of Analysis 48
3.3.3 Moments Obtained from Finite Element Analysis 50
3.3.4 Hoop Force due to Wind Load Predicted by Finite
Element Analysis 51
3.3.5 Remarks 51

Chapter 4: PARAMETRIC STUDY

4.1lntrodeuction 53
4.2 Silo Parameters 53
4.3 Stress Resultants in Silos 54
4.4 Effect of Variation of Parameters
4.4.1 Effect of Height of Vertical wall 55
4.4.2 Effect oflntemal Diameter of Silo 59
4.4.3 Effect of Inclination of Conical Hopper with Horizontal 62
4.4.4 Effect of Bottom Thickness of Vertical Wall 63
4.4.5 Effect of Conical Hopper Thickness at Top 65
4.4.6 Effect of Depth of Bottom Ring Beam 66
4.4.7 Effect of Unit Weight of Stored Materials 67

vii
 4.4.8 Effect of Angle ofIntemal Friction of Stored Material 69
4.4.9 Effect ofCo~efficient of Wall Friction 70
. 4.4.10 Effect of Wind Pressure Intensity 72
4.4.11 Effect of Height of Hopper Bottom Above Floor Level 73
4.5 Remarks 74

Chapter 5: A DESIGN RATIONALE

5.1 General 75
5.2 Basis of the Proposal 76
5.3 Proposed Design Rationale 76
5.3.1 Maximum Values of Stress Resultants 77
5.3.2 Variation of Stress Resultants in Vertical Direction 98
5.4 Comparison of Results Obtained from Propoesd Design
Rationale with those of Finite Element Analysis 99

Chapter 6: CONCLUSIONS
6.1 General 105
6.2 Findings from the Investigation 106
6.3 The Design Rationale 108
6.4 Scope for Future Research 109

List of References
Appendix

viii
 ABSTRACT

The current practice of silo analysis is based on several assumptions and

idealisation. Analysis of silo by Finite Element method and comparison of the
results with corresponding values obtained from conventional method reveals that
the. conventional method cannot predict all the stress resultants (forces and
moments) required for silo design. Again the functions predicted by the
conventional method deviate largely from the actual values for a region near the
ring beam of a silo. Conventional method can analyse a silo for axisymmetric
loading only and cannot evaluate various types of moments which may be of
considerable magnitude. Since silo is an elevated structure it may be subjected to a
considerable amount. of wind load which is non-axisymmetric in nature.
Earthquake loading haS significant effect on silo behaviour which is also non-
axisymmetric. Finite Element approach can analyse a silo for axisymmetric as well
as non-axisymmetric loadings easily. It was, therefore, felt that the application of
Finite Element will lead to a realistic analysis and to a more rational design
procedure for silos.

With this objective an extensive investigation was carried out on the

behaviour of silos of different types under various loading conditions using the
Axisymmetric thick shell Finite. Element program by Alunad. A number of
parameters influencing silo behaviour were selected and a detail parametric study
has been carried out to reveal the sensitivity of stress resultants with respect to a
particular parameter. From this study it became obvious that the effect of restraint
provided by the ring beam at the bottom of vertical wall can not be ignored.
Actually, the moments developed in a silo are due to the restraint provided by the
thickened ring beam at the bottom of vertical wall (top of conical hopper). The
behaviour of silos under non-axisymmetric loading, such as wind load, has been
studied elaborately. It was observed that wind load produces considerable
meridional force and circumferential moment in the vertical wall which must be
considered in the design of a silo.

A detail study has also been carried out to know the effect of temperature
difference between inside and outside of a silo. The conventional equations for the
computation of meridional moment and circumferential moment have been
modified to take into account the effect of restraint provided by the ring beam.

Finally, on the basis of the study a design rationale has been presented.
Using this rationale the stress resultants required for silo design can easily be
computed.

ix
 NOTATIONS

A = Area; Interstice dimension

. Ar = Area of ring-beam cross section
As = Area of tensile reinforcement per unit width
A's = Area of compression reinforcement per unit width
Asv = Area of reinforcement in vertical direction per unit width
C = Reimbert's characteristic abscissa
Cd = Overpressure coefficient
Ci = Impact factor
C2, C3 = Factors for ring-beam analysis
D = Diameter; Dead load
E = Modulus of elasticity
F = Force
Fm = Meridional force per unit width
G = Shear modulus of elasticity
H = Horizontal force; height of storage zone
H' = Total height of vertical wall (Type-3)
= Moment of inertia
= Torsion factor
= Load factors for live and dead load
= Ccoefficient for wall temperature gradient
= Factor for ring beam analysis
= Length of column; Length of conical hopper
= Moment; Meridional moment; Circumferential moment
M' = Moment applied to ring-beam by column
= Nominal (theoretical) ultimate strength of wall per unit width
= Ultimate load
= Hydraulic radius
= Temperature
=Temepratureof&medmmerial
= Atmospheric temperature .

x
 U = Cross-section perimeter
f = Depth of stored material above point in question; upward
.' distance from bottom of vertical wall (Type-I, Type-2)
f' = Upward distance from bottom of vertical wall (Type-3)
a = Opening width; width of rectangular or polygonal silo
a' = Fictitious length for side of rectangular silo

beff = Effective width

d = Effective depth of flexural section, from compression face of

concrete to centroid of tensile reinforcing,

d' = Distance from compression face of concrete to centroid of

compression reinforcing bars

e = Eccentricity

ecc = Subscript meaning" eccentric" or "eccentricity"

eff = Subscript indicating" effective"
f = Actual or computed stress

fc = Compressive stress; compressive stress in concrete

f~ = Unit compressive strength of concrete

is = Computed tensile stress in reinforcing steel

f; = Ultimate tensile strength of concrete

j; = Specified yield strength of steel

g = Acceleration due to gravity; subscript meaning "gravity"
h = Wall thickness; subscript indicating" hopper"; depth of vertical

wall below pressure zone

h' = Height of hopper bottom above floor level

I = Distance measured downward from top of conical hopper

m = Concrete shrinkage coefficient; subscript meaning "meridional"

max = Maximum; subscript meaning "maximum"

min = Subscript meaning "minimum"
a = Subscript indicating" initial"

p = Lateral pressure due to stored material

q = Vertical pressure due to stored material; intensity of wind

pressure
r = Radius; subscript meaning "ring-beam"

s = Subscript meaning "static" or "steel"

t = Thickness; subscript meaning" total", "top"

u = Subscript indicating "ultimate"

xi
v = Subscript meaning "vertical"
Wcr = Width of crack

w}. W2, W3 = Width of crack due to various loadings

x = Subscript for "x-direction"

y = Subscript for "y-direction"

X, y = Co-ordinates of centroid
L1 = Displacement (linear); deflection

L1T = Temperature difference, outside and inside wall faces

L = Sum of reinforcing bar perimeters per unit width of wall

a = Angle of hopper slope; subscript for forces or pressures on

sloping surface
at = Linear coefficient of thermal expansion
fJ = factor for crack-width computation
e = Angle around perimeter; subscript meaning" tangential"

direction
A, = Factor for ring-beam analysis

f.l = Angle of wall friction (storied material against wall or hopper)

f.l' = Coefficient of wall friction (tan f.l)

v = Poisson's ratio

p = Angle of internal friction for stored material

(J" = Stress
rjJ = Strength-reduction factor; subscriptfor "meridional" direction

If/ 1' If/ 2' If/ 3 = Factors for crack-width computation

xii
 CHAPTER!

INTRODUCTION

1.1GENERAL

The custom of storing grain in upright containers is centuries old. Not until
the mid 1800's, however, relatively large storage containers were built for
coinmercial purposes. Since then silos and bunkers have come into extensive use
not for storing grain alone but for storing a wide variety of granular materials. In
agriculture and industry improved production methods and mechanisation of
handling have opened the way for large storage complexes, with sophisticated
filling, unloading and handling systems.

Bunker or Bin is the tenn applied commonly to a structure in which dry

granular materials are stored. Such structures, generally elevated above the ground,
may be rectangular or circular in plan and may comprise one or more
compartments.

The tenn 'Silo' includes both deep bins and shallow bins, the latter usually
referred to as bunkers. However the tenn 'Bin', 'Silo' and 'Bunker' have different
meaning in different. parts of the world. Actually the tenn 'silo' represents deep
bins.

As stated above concrete silos and bunkers may be single or multiple and of
various plans. (Fig. 1-1). The most common shape is circular, since under unifonn
lateral pressure around the circumference the circular wall is under tension with no
bending moment. For this reason, circular silos are built with diameters far
exceeding practical lateral dimensions for rectangular or square silos.
Unfortunately, large diameter circular silos usually have several discharge
openings. All of them or all but one are eccentric so that a moment free condition is
 -L~
~.

, I I

(a)

INTERSTICE WrTH_
FLAT INSIDE WALLS

INTERSTICE

POCKET BIN
(b) (e)

(d) (e)

(f) (g)

Fig. 1-1. Typical Silo and Bunker groups

 seldom realised. Again, non-symmetric loadings, such as wind load or earthquake
load, may produce meridional or circumferential bending moment in the silo wall.
From the architectural point of view, circular silos are also more pleasant looking.
Although circular form costs more but requires less construction material compared
to other shapes.

Concrete IS the material most frequently used for Silo or Bunker

construction. Usually it is cast in place, but occasionally, it is precast. It may be
conventionally reirIforced or prestressed, unlined or lined with protective material.

Concrete may be used for the complete structure - foundation, walls, roof,
and flat bottom or hopper; or certain components (such as the hopper bottom
supports or roof) may be of steel while the remainder is concrete.

Wheather steel or concrete will prove more economical for a particular

application depends. on many factors including cost, size, complexity of the
structure, locations of silos, and problems of delivering construction materials to
the site.

A circular silo essentially consists of a number of axisymmetric structural

elements, namely the roof, cylindrical vertical wall and the bottom. The top roof
may be of concrete, doweled to the walls by providing full or partial continuity of
walls or it may be supported in a marmer permitting free expansion and contraction
and slight movement due to lateral forces. The vertical wall may be of uniform or
varying thickness. Flat bottom may create problem in the removal of material. On
the other hand conical hopper, either of uniform or varying thickness, is self
cleaning.

Vertical wall and conical hopper of a silo may be monolithically

constructed and supported on columns or continuous circular vertical wall. Again
vertical wall and conical hopper may be supported separately. Various types of
supports and foundation are shown in the Fig. 1-2. Since silos are elevated
structures, overtuming moment due to lateral load must be considered in the design
of foundation

2
 ~
tV
~ 0
u ~
:r:
C
0
u
<J)
-
tV
0

- --
:r: <J) E
~
0
~ J: ::>
:r: c
0
~
CJ>

(0) ( b) (c)

:r:

k\. /: .c:
.c

(d) (e) (f) (g)

Fig. 1-2. Typical Vertical cross section of silos. (a) Silo walls on continuous footing, silo bottom consisting
of tunnel and fill around and on top of tunnel. (b) Silo on raft foundation, independent hopper resting on
pilasters attached to wall. (c) Silo with wall footing and independent bonom slab supported on fill. (d) Silo
with hopper-forming fill and bottom slab supported on thickened lower wall. (e) Silo with multiple
discharge openings and hopper-forming fill resting on bottom slab, all supported by columns; raft
foundation with stiffening ribs on top surface. (f) Silo on raft foundation, with hopper independently
supported by a ring beam and column system. (g) Silo walls on continuous footing; bottom is a slab on
grade.
1.2 HISTORY AND PAST RESEARCH

The fIrst large silos were constructed over 120 years ago for storing grain.
Today, silos are increasing rapidly in height, diameter and storage capacity. The
variety of stored materials are also on the increase. Designers and builders are
employing higher strength steels and concrete, prestressing, and a great variety of
withdrawal systems having high throughput.

Before 1860, designers assumed that granular material behaved as a

quasiliquid and exerted pressures similar to hydrostatic pressure. These
assumptions lead to overdesign for static horizontal loads and bottom loads, but
failed to account for the vertical material friction load on the walls. Early in the
1880's, Roberts [35] discovered that the pressure on the bottom of a grain silo did
not increase after the material depth reached twice the silo width. The friction
between the granular material and the wall transferred weight to the wall. In 1885,
Janssen [17] derived formulas for granular material pressures on the silo walls and
bottom. The fIrst period of growth in silo design, starting with Roberts [35] in 1882
and ending with Ketchum [24] in 1909, was characterised - for that time - by
experimental precision and great clarity of formulation. In the middle period,
Reimbert [32] introduced the 'antidynarnic tube', and modifIed Janssen's formula
based on a hyperbolic function. Reimbert's formula is used in many codes around
the world. Few other contributions were made until 1965 as investigators primarily
tried to relate flow pressures to Janssen's static pressure.

Since 1965, many excellent studies have appeared in the literature. The
experimentation reflects the precision of modem technology, and the formulations
reflect the clarity of the early investigators.

Several investigators questioned and investigated many of Janssen's basic

assumptions of a constant ratio of vertical to horizontal pressure, and constant
density. Cowin and Sundaram [12] derived a modifIed Janssen formula reflecting.
linear variations in both variables.

One of the most important silo developments in the last two decades is the
increased understanding of granular flow. Jenike [18] defmed mass and funnel flow
and derived differential equations for mass flow. Johanson [22] used the method of
characteristics to determine the stresses in converging .flow charmels. Walker [40],
followed by Walters [41], developed the most practical and simplest approaches for

3
calculations of mass-flow pressures. Clague and Wright [10] and Bransby et al [8].
have experimentally measured the pressures created by mass flow. Johanson [23]
and Williams [42] developed formulas for computing discharge rates from mass-
flow conical hoppers.

1.3 OBJECTIVE AND JUSTIFICATION OF THE RESEARCH

While earlier silos were only for more or less sedentary storage, the silo of
today often plays an active role in the manufacturing and distribution process.
Mixing, blending, proportioning - all are done using the silo as a vital part of the
process system.

In Bangladesh, silos for granular materials are constructed mainly to fulfil

storage requirement. The volume of annual food-grain import is considerably high
in our country. In contrast of normal storage facilities such as godown, silo facility
requires lesser time for the withdrawal of granular material from ship. In case of
normal storage facility the unloading time for a large ship may be as high as two or
three months. On the other hand, pneumatic unloading of grain reduces the
unloading time, greatly. Due to this reduction of unloading time, shipping charge
becomes lower. At the time of national emergency supply of food grain should be
at a higher rate. Only silos, using mechanical withdrawl system, can provide this
facility. Again silos require less plan area than normal storage facility for the same
capacity.

Recently, the desire to withdraw stored material faster has led to a demand
for larger capacity silos, having either greater height or greater diameter or both.
Each new trend brings new challenges to silo designers and builders.

Remarkable progress has already been made in understanding the behaviour

of granular material in silos. This progress has resulted largely from years of
experiments conducted in many parts of the world to study the pressure of stored
granular materials against the walls and bottom of silos.

A number of structural analysts have attempted to develop a procedure for

silo analysis and design. The methods followed for silo analysis and design,
however, are more or less the same. These methods are based on several
assumptions and idealisation of silos, and much remains to be leamed in this
respect.

4
 A designer is interested to know the exact state of stress in a loaded body
even though he may use simple formulas in his design process. In conventional
methods exact analysis of stress is not possible and designers prefer short and
approximate methods. In such cases the approximation must be rational and the
designer should have a clear idea about the degree of approximation. The extent of
error of an approximate method can be assessed only when the exact state of stress
is known. But the exact analysis of a complicated structure like silo is not possible
because of the limitation of analytical formulation of the problem. In that case we
can use a suitable numerical technique like Finite Element approach.

Again the conventional method stated above, can deal with the design of a
silo for only axisymmetric loading dile to gravity and stored materials. But a silo is
an elevated structure which may be subjected to tremendous lateral loads due to
wind and earthquake. The conventional methods can not incorporate the effect of
lateral loads in their design procedures effectively. Ahmad, S. [3, 4, 5] developed a
general Finite Element program (1969) for the analysis of axisymmetric shell
structures for symmetric as well as non-symmetric loadings. Initial work carried out
by the author with this program in his undergraduate research [7] has revealed the
potentials for developing a design rationale for silos based on the use of this
program in the detailed analysis for axisymmetric as well as non-symmetric
loadings. Observing the drawbacks of conventional methods and versatility of
Finite Element method, a study was undertaken with the following objectives:

i) To investigate the state of stress in silos using Finite Element method

of analysis.
ii) To compare the design values of various stress resultants obtained
from conventional method and Finite Element method.
iii) To investigate the effects of various parameters on the values of stress
resultants required for silo design.
iv) To develop a simple and straight forward design rationale for
circular silos.

5
1.4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

For developing a design rationale for circular silos, conventional methods

are studied in details to find out its drawbacks in respect of approximations and
stress conditions.

A full-scale model or prototype is selected for comparison of conventional

analysis with Finite Element analysis. For conventional analysis a FORTRAN
program is developed which is also capable of computing temperature stress and
meridional force due to wind. Design values of stress resultants obtained from the
conventional method are compared with those obtained from Finite Element
analysis. Stress resultants such as meridional moment and circumferential moment,
which can not be obtained from conventional method, are also studied with their
distribution along a vertical section.

Various forces and moments required for silo design such as meridional
force, meridional moment, hoop force and circumferential moment vary with the
changes of a number of parameters. These parameters include both the geometric
dimensions and the properties of the stored materials. In order to know the
influence of various parameters on the overall behaviour of a silo, a sensitivity
analysis or parametric study is carried out. The results of the parametric study are
essential in visualising the structural response of silo and in establishing the relative
importance of different parameters. For parametric study the same model is
selected. In every case of analysis only one parameter is varied and the others are
kept constant. Finally, on the basis of the parametric studies, a design rationale is
developed.

For the analysis of ring beam of a silo a conventional method is suggested

by Safarian and Harris [36]. Using this method a FORTRAN program is
developed, a detailed investigation is made, and a design recommendation is
presented for ring beam.

In this study a systematic way is followed in presentation. Some general

aspects of silos and various methods of pressure computation are presented in
Chapter 2. Different types of loadings which should be considered in silo design
are also discussed in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 deals with the review of the
conventional methods of analysis, various aspects of the Finite Element analysis
used in this research and a comparative study of both the methods. Details of the

6
parametric study is presented in Chapter 4. Subsequently, on the basis of the
findings in Chapter 4, a design rationale is presented in Chapter 5. Finally, in
Chapter 6 findings of the study are discussed.

1.5 GENERAL REMARKS

The investigations into the behaviour of silos revealed that the conventional
method cannot predict moments developed in silo, while the Finite Element
method can predict them easily. The effect of restraint provided by the ring beam
or roof slab can also be assessed by Finite Element method while conventional
method can not do that.

Parametric study is done to reveal the SenSItiVItyof various stress

resultants with respect to different parameters. This acted as a guide for the
development of a design rationale. The suggested design rationale can deal
effectively with the analysis and design of silos having wide range of parameters.

***

7
 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 INTRODUCTION

Reinforced concrete silos have almost replaced the normal concrete and
steel storage structures for storing coal, cement, food grains and other granular
materials because of their ease of construction, greater capacity, economy in
handling of material and superior architectural qualities. In modem world there are
a number of silos in evry country. The codes and standards of silo design vary from
country to country. These include DINlO55 silo code in Germany, CH302 silo
code in the Soviet Union, the French silo code, and the ACI 313 standard
recommended practice in the United States. In this research work all the codes have
been studied and ACI 313 standard recommended practice is followed for analysis
and design. However, for the computation of pressure and frictional force in
conical.hopper the German silo code is followed.

2.2 TYPES AND DEFINITION

The proportions of a bin, especially the ratio of material depth to least

lateral dimension, affect the behaviour of stored materials both at rest and during
discharge. Since bin geometry affects pressures, it is classified either as a silo (deep
bin) or a bunker (shallow bin). Proper classification (which should also consider
the flow condition) may soon be feasible, but presently the following methods are
widely used in practice:
(a) Empirical approximations - preferred by many engineers. Two such
approximations are:
I. By Dishinger [2]
H > 1.5A
 2. By the Soviet Code [39]
H > 1.5]) forcircular silos
H > 1.5a for rectangular silos

Where H = height of storage zone

A = interstice dimension
D = diameter of circular silos
a = width of wall of rectangular silos

If the storage structure in question satisfies either of the above, it is considered a

silo. If it satisfies neither rule, it is considered to be a bunker.

(b) An approximation based on the position of the plane of rupture. Fig.2-I

shows bins of two different depths. The plane of rupture is determined by the
Coulomb theory. Neglecting friction against the wall, for the case of a vertical wall,
and horizontal top surface, the Coulomb plane of rupture is midway between the
angle of internal friction ( p) and the vertical wall. (For other wall positions or
surface slopes, the plane of rupture can be located analytically or graphically - by
Culmann's method for example). According to A Reimbert [33], the angle of
rupture should be given by (Jr/4 - P /3) rather than by the classic definition (Jr/4 - P
/2), both shown in Fig.2-1. If the rupture plane intersects the top surface of the
stored material, the bin is a bunker (Fig.2-Ia), otherwise it is a silo (Fig.2-Ib).

However, engineers do not agree on the location of the plane of rupture.

Some would start the plane at the bottom of the hopper, point C of Fig.2-Ib, while
others would pass it through point D, at the bottom of the vertical wall. Thus, by
one interpretation the bin would be a silo; by the other, a bunker.

2.3 EFFECT OF STORED MATERIAL AND OTHER FACTORS

ON SILO ANALYSIS AND DESIGN

The physical properties of materials stored in silos and bunkers influence

the flowability of the material and the forces which the material applies to the silo
walls and bottom. Obviously those properties will vary from one material to
another, but they may also vary within a supposedly uniform material. In materials
of this latter type (coal is a good example) large variations of properties occur
between materials from different sources or even in materials from a common
source. The physical properties may also vary with age of the material, degree of
compaction, and changes of environment.

9
 Plane of
Top of material
rupture
By Classic approach in Bunker -,
(90-P)/2 I I
-----,----

By Reimbert approach
(45 -P/3)
(a) Bunker

:.
"
: :

: Top of material
: in8i1°i
: L

-l
Plane of
rupture

By Classic approach
(90 -P)/2

By Reimbert approach
(45 -P/3)

(b) Silo

Fig.2-1 Classification of bins using plane of rupture

 For pressure computation, the properties considered most important are unit
weight ( y), angle of internal friction ( p, approximately the same as angle of
repose), and the coefficient of friction ( f.I.') between the stored material and the bin
wall.

Other properties that may influence flowability or pressure include particle

size and gradation (which affect moisture content), physical strength (which affects
degree of compaction), cohesiveness, and shrinkage or swelling characteristics.

Unit weight, 1, may vary with depth below the surface of the stored
material, the lower material being compacted by pressure from that above. Unit
weight may vary also with time in storage, and with the method of filling.

Wherever the unit weight is expected to vary, it is prudent to obtain material

properties from laboratory tests covering the full range of materials to be
encountered. The tests should include 1, p, and f.I. ~ and may also consider the
variation of these properties with pressure from the material above.

The coefficient of friction, f.I.' between stored material and the bin wall may
.also vary with age of the bin. Whether the wall is metal or concrete, it will
probably become smoother with age, from abrasion by the sliding material.
Powdery materials (cement, for example) may adhere to the walls causing the
coefficient of friction ( f.I.') to approach the coefficient of internal friction (tanp).
Materials containing oils or waxes (soya beans, for example) may lubricate the
wall, thus reducing the friction coefficient, and increasing lateral pressures on the
walls.

Table 2-1 [CommentaIy of ACI 313-77] gives approximate values of unit

weight, angle of internal friction, and coefficient of friction against steel and
concrete for various materials. The Table shows values typical of what might be
given by tests, but cannot possibly give precise values or the range of values for
any given material. Caution must be exercised in using these values. •.._",
"
Some materials are hot when stored. Cement, cement clinker, and fly ash
are examples. Large volumes of hot stored material can cause serious thermal
stresses on walls, bottom, and roof of the bin structure. It is important to learn in
advance the temperature of the material to be stored. Abnormally cold materials
could conceivably be as troublesome as hot materials.

10
2.4 PRESSURES IN SILO

Early silo designers did not recognise the vertical friction between the stored
material and the vertical wall, assumed lateral pressures to vary hydrostatically.
Subsequently analytical methods have been developed that consider wall friction.
These methods provide means for computing (I) Pressure of the stored material
against vertical wall, sloping surfaces, and flat bottom; (2) friction forces and wall
compression forces; and (3) vertical pressures at various depths in the stored
material itself.

Analytical methods normally give the static pressures (pressures when

material is at rest) only. The structural designers need to know the final total
pressure, or "Design Pressure". This design pressure can be estimated by modifying
the computed static pressure to account for material movement, eccentric
discharge, and other pressure-affecting conditions or by using analytical methods
intended to give design pressures directly.

The analytical methods are based on equilibrium of the stored material in a

static condition. Elastic interaction with the bin structure is not considered, nor is
strain energy in either the stored material or the structure. In this study at first the
static pressure is computed which is converted to design pressure from multiplying
the static pressure by overpressure factor which is discussed in Article 2-6. Three
widely used methods for computing static pressures in silo are briefly discussed
here.

2.4.1 The Janssen Method

The mltior breakthrough in computation of stored material pressures came in

1895 when H.A. Janssen developed equations for computing lateral and vertical
pressures of granular material in deep bins [17].
Janssen's method is based on equilibrium of a thin horizontal layer of stored
material, as shown in Fig. 2-2. Equating the vertical forces to zero gives

qA + r Ady = A[ q + dY~;] + j..l'p(Udy)

Where q = static vertical pressure at depth Y below surface of stored material

A = area of horizontal cross section through the silo
U = perimeter of horizontal cross section
p = pressure of stored material against walls at depth Y

II
 Hopper

(a) Silo

t-
I P

(b) Horozontallamina

p = Horozontal pressure between wall and stored

material, assumed uniform around perimeter U

Y Ady. = Lamina weight

J.r'p = Friction force per unit area of wall in contact
with lamina

Upward and downward pressures are assumed uniform

over entire area

Fig. 2-2 Horizontal lamina for derivation of Janssen's

equations
Table 2-1. Physical Properties of Granular Materials [2].

Material Unit Wcigh~ y Angle of Rep- Coefficient of wall Friction. j.l

per kg/m' ose. Deg. = p Against Concret, Against Stee

88 1,410 33 0.60 0.30
Cement Clinker
84 - 100 1,344 - 1,600 24 to 30 0.36 - 0.45 0.30
Cement Portland

106-138 1.810-2.210 15 to 40 t1.20 -0.50 0.36 - 0.70

Clay
50 - 65 800 - 1,040 32 to 44 0.50 - 0.60 0.30
Coal, Bituminous

60 -70 960 - 1,120 24lo 30 0.45 - 0.50 0.30

Coal, Anthracite

38 600 40 0.80 0.50

Coke
38 600 40 0.30 l1.30
Flour

Gravel 100 - 125 1,600 - 2,000 25 to 35 0.40 -0.45 -

Grain (small): Whea~ Com,

Barley, Beans (navy, kidney) 44 - 62 736 - 990 23 to 37 0.29-0.47 0.26-0.42

Oats, Rice. Rye

Gypsum in Lumps, Limeston 100 1,600 40 0.50 0.30

Iron ore 165 2,640 40 0.50 0.36

Lime, Burned (pebbles) 50 - 60 800 - 960 35 to 55 0.50 - 0.60 0.30

Lime, Burned, Fine 57 910 35 0.50 0.30

Lime, Burned, Coarse 75 12,00 35 0.50 0.30

Lime, Powder 44 700 35 0.50 0.30

Manganese ore 125 2,000 40 - -

Sand 100 - 125 16,00 - 2,000 25 to 40 0.40 - 0.70 0.35 - 0.50

Soy Beans, Peas 50-60 800 - 960 23 0.25 0.20

Sugar Granular 63 1.000 35 0.43 -

Substituting kq for p, and "hydraulic radius" R for A/V and rearranging, the
differential equation of equilibrium becomes

dq fl' k
-=y --q
dy R

The solution to this differential equation is the Janssen formula for vertical pressure
at depth Y and is given by

12
 q = YR [I _ e-P'kYIR] (2-1)
j./ k

Koenen improved Janssen's method by introducing the term

k=(I-sinp) or simply k = tan' (45° - pi 2 )

(I+sinp)

which is the Rankine coefficient for active earth pressure - the ratio of horizontal
pressure to vertical, Hence, to compute the horizontal pressure p, Eq. (2-1) is
multiplied by k. Thus, the Janssen equation for horizontal pressure is

(2-2)

The wall friction force is p'p per unit area of wall at depth Y. Vertical
friction forces cause vertical force in the wall: compression if the wall is supported
from below, tension if suspended from above. Integrating from the top of the
stored material to depth Y, the vertical force in the wall (per unit of wall perimeter)
at depth Y is given by

V = p'Jpdy = y R[Y-~(I- e-"'kYIR] (2-3)

Y p' k

The above derivation makes no assumption as to shape of the silo cross section. If
the cross section is circular, then the hydraulic radius is

JrD'/4
R = area 1 perimeter = --- = D 14
JrD

in which D is the inside diameter.

The silo wall designer needs to know the total vertical force applied to the
wall by friction from the stored material. This force, from materials above any
depth Y, is equal to the weight of those materials minus the upward force from
vertical pressure q. The friction force, per unit length of wall, from above is

V=R(yY -q) (2-4)

13
2.4.2 The Reimbert Method

In 1953 and 1954, Marcel and Andre Reimbert [34] presented their method
for computing static pressure due to stored material. Their derivation recognises
that at large depths Y, the curve of lateral pressure becomes asymptotic to the
vertical axis.

The Reirnbert equations for static pressure are as follows:

Vertical pressure at depth Y below stored material surface is

(2-5)

and lateral static pressure at depth Y is

(2-6)

For circular silos the terms Pmax and C (characteristic abscissa) in the above
equations are:

yD
PmM = 4j.1.'

C=~-"--3
4j.1.'k

For polygonal silos of more than four sides:

yR
Pmax =
j.1.'

C= L h
47<j.1.'k 3

For rectangular silos, on the short wall of width G:

C=_G __ h
7<j.1.'k 3

14
For the longer wall of width b:

a' h
C=----
Jrj.lk 3

Where a' = (2ab - a')/ b

In the equations above, R and k are defined as for the Janssen method. Friction
force is determined in the same manner as for Janssen's method, using Eq.(2-4)

2.4.3 The Airy Method

Developed in 1897, the method of Wilfred Airy [6] presents separate

solutions for bunkers and silos. Airy's equations were derived considering static
equilibrium of wedge shaped portions of stored material above the plane of rupture.

Bunkers: Fig. 2-3a shows dimensions used in Airy's equation for bunkers.
Using symbols of this thesis, Airy's equations for bunkers are as follows

Lateral pressure at depth Y is

(2-7)

Where fJ = tan p
and vertical pressure at depth Y is

q=P (2-8)
k

Silos: Fig. 2-3b shows similar dimensions for silos. Airy's derivation for a
silo leads to:

15
 Surface of grain
E D
c

A"
I. D

(a) Bunker

c Surface of grain

Plane of
-.
D

fJ'p
rupture l,,' E
/
h

(b) Silo

Fig. 2-3 Dimensions for use in Airy's equations.

 Lateral pressure at depth Y is

yD 1 + fl'
p= 1- (2-9)
fl + fl' 2Y( ).
-. fl + fl' + 1- flfl'
D

and vertical pressure at depth Y is

(2-10)

2.4.4 Pressure Normal to Inclined Surfaces

Pressure on an inclined swface, such as the sloping wall of a hopper, is

usually computed as:

qa = psin2a+qcos2a (2-11)

This equation can be derived from equilibrium of a triangular element of material

as shown by Fig.2-4.

The German Silo Code: German Code considers the sloping wall, where
0
a > 20 to be. subject to both normal pressure, qa' and friction force per unit
,

area, Va . If angle ex between the hopper wall and the horizontal is greater than 200,
the code suggests a simple method in which the effects of material in the hopper
and. of material above the hopper are considered separately, and then both are
added together.

From-material in the hopper (Fig. 2-5a):

Normal pressure qa =2.4yR(sin'a)/.J17 (2-12)

Friction per unit area V = ~ (2-13)

a 2

This loading is applicable also to hopper bunkers.

From material above the hopper (Fig. 2-5b): Pressures p f and qf at the top
of the hopper are computed first for the filling condition. Then normal pressures are
computed for the upper end and lower end of the sloping wall, as follows:

16
 q cosa
2
~qCOSa

cosa
I

Fig. 2-4 Pressure on inclined surface ( ACI Code)

 D

( a ) Material in the hopper

q
o

Upper

( b) Material above the hopper

n

Fig. 2-5 Hopper pressure diagrams ( German Silo Code)

 Upperend, qa ,
= (q,cos-a+Pjsiwa , )(I+Sin2aJ
4,u' (2-14)

Lower end, qo = qf cos' a (2-15)

Friction force per unit area of inclined wall is

Va = 0.5 xaverage qa (2-16)

2.5 FLOW PATTERNS

Flow of stored material from silos is of two main patterns, funnel flow (core
flow) and mass flow. In mass flow, all of the stored material is in motion during
discharge. In funnel flow, movement occurs only in a channel within the stored
material, and this channel is surrounded by nonflowing material. The two types are.
illustrated by Fig. 2-6.

Since loads and stresses are related to flow pattern, the structural engineer is
required to consider the effect of flow pattern in designing silos or bunkers.

In mass-flow, the hopper is sufficiently steep and smooth to cause flow of

all the solids, without stagnant regions, whenever any solid is withdrawn. Mass-
flow silos are usually recommended for cohesive materials (coal, for example),
materials that degrade with time, powders (unless means of withdrawal such as
aeration are used), and materials in which segregation needs to be minimized.

Funnel flow occurs when the hopper is not sufficiently steep and smooth to
force material to slide along the walls, or when the outlet of a mass-flow bin is not
fully effective. In a funnel-flow silo, solid flows toward the outlet through a
channel that forms within stagnant material. Usually, funnel-flow bins are suitable
only for coarse, free-flowing or slightly cohesive, nondegrading solids in which
segregation is unimportant.

Fig. 2-7 shows charts by Jenike [19] that may be used to predict (for two
shapes of hopper) whether mass flow or funnel flow will occur. The regions
marked "uncertain" indicate conditions under which flow type may change
abruptly. These conditions should preferably be avoided, since they may lead to
nonsymmetric flow patterns and frequent vibration and shock loads, which can
seriously affect the silo.

17
 .<=
o
o
~ E
'"
0.
0.-0
~
o C
I 0
0.

'"
'~"
(a) Mass flaw

Effective
transition

Stagnant--
solid

(bl Funnel flow

(or core flow)

Fig. 2-6 Mass flow and funnel flow

 40.

30• Funnel- flow

. jJ.' 20°

Moss flow
10.

O.
10. 20. 30. 40. 50.
Cone
ec
(Q)

50.

40. Funnel- flow

jl. 30.

1
20.

I
7ep Mass - flow

J\-
ec
10.

0°
10. 20. 30. 40. 50. 60.
Slotted opening
ep
(b)

Fig. 2-7 Mass-flow / funnel-flow bounds (after Jenike-Johanson)

 2.6 TOTAL PRESSURES - STATIC PLUS OVERPRESSURE

The total pressures may be called "operation", or "flow" pressures. Total

pressures, both lateral and vertical, can exceed computed static pressures by a wide
margin. In earlier silo designs overpressures were not considered, even though as
early as in 1950s, it was fairly well recognised that overpressures occur during
emptying. The result of ignoring overpressure is to reduce the overall factor of
safety. A marginal structure is produced, with increased probability of bulging
walls, damaging cracks, or even collapse.

Overpressures are due to various causes, including arching of the stored

material; collapse of material arches; sudden change of flow channels, velocities,
and directions; and changes between fimnel flow and mass flow.

There are two general approaches to determine total pressures. One is to

modify the computed static pressure using "overpressure factors"; the second is to
compute total pressures directly. At the present stage of development, neither
approach is completely satisfactory.

In 1977, the American Concrete Institute published its standard _

"Recommended Practice for Design and Construction of Concrete Bins, Silos and
Bunkers for Storing Granular Materials (AC! 313-77) and Commentary". A
revised edition of this standard appeared in 1983.

Table 2-2 and Table 2-3 show the minimum values recommended by ACI
313 for overpressure and impact factors.

Material design pressure against walls and bottoms are determined as

follows [2]:

I. Static pressures are obtained using either Janssen's or Reimbert's method.

When calculating vertical frictional forces on silo walls, ACI 313 uses a slightly
modified form of Janssen's equation for frictional force.

v = (rY - 0.8q)R (2-17)

By either Janssen's or Reimbert's method, static unit pressure normal toa surface
inclined at angle a to the horizontal and at depth Y below the surface of stored
material is computed as

18
 Table 2-2 Values of overpressure factor, Cd

OVERPRESSURE FACTOR Cd

VI '"II •.
AI
FOR

WHEN
POWDERY-COHESIVE
LIKE CEMENT OR FLOUR I

-
Ilo
-
Ilo
-
Ilo •.
EMPTYING
DONE PNEUMATICALLY
IS

5 "'
~
"Io
-5
Ilo
-5
Ilo
"
rio
AI
xlo
TOP OF MATERIAL AND SILO --. 2 3
Ilo Ilo
~~ z I- l- I-
Z z I-
z I-

\
~ 2~
'"'" 'i!!" z'"'" '" z'"'" '" w'" 'w;!i" '"z w'"
w w w w w w
Z
<D <D
• <D <D
"
O~

"", 'W" "", 'W"" ,"" 'W"" ~ II! "",'" W"

E
"
Z
'"
z
xI."
° '"
"
o£ "''''
00
"'
'"'"~ !:?~ ~
.. 0
OJ
0

'-" N ill ~
'" ~ 0
"'~ '"
'"~
.. - -

-
"-
..-
I, '" 0
"! '"'"~ '"~ °
~
0

'"'" "-
~
0
..
0

""'~ -'"
0

-
I
~
- -

..
I
-of
"-

-I
\ ..
'"'"~ '"~ '"'"~ '"'"~ "~
'" 0'"
-
0
<D
- ° '" "'~
"- ~ "
0

..
"- \
-I '" '"'" ~ g
"'" "-'" <D-'" "l'" ~ ~
0 0 0
I
LATERAL
PRESS.
DESIGN
CURVE - ,./ '"~ - '"
0
oj
0
oj

..
"-
LATERAL STATIC
PRESSURE CURVE
-I BY JANSSEN'S
REJMBERT'S ,~
OR
'" '" '" '" '"., <D'" 0 0

E THEORY ___ '"~ -'" ~

" "~ - ~ ~ '"
~
0
0 0

\ oJ oj

USE SAME PRESSURE WITHIN HOPPER

I"
HEIGHT OR, IF
.. "'~
lr ...J.J
0
DESIRED, REDuCE PRESSURES IN ACCORDANCE WITH
a.. ..J ilim HYDRAULI C RADIUS
I I
I
r-o...Ji;: <l: CHANGE.
Q.:x:::::! ~...J
~ ~
~
\LlJ...ZVl
0- / I
oc°C) lr:f I
WI~IOO
Q..t-71-a..t-
g,~~~~~
BOTTOM OF HOPPER
FLAT SLAB OR FILl IT I IF DESIRED,
TOP OF FILL
PRESSURES MAY BE REDUCED fROM
TO TOP OF FLAT SLAB AS SHOWN
::tou-ott')
OVERPRESSURE FACTOR Cd FOR
:
CONCRETE
'"'"-'
0
USE IN CALCULATING DESIGN
BOTTOM '" 0'"~ '"-~ 0~ '"'"- 0"'~ '"'"~ 0~
'"~ '"
~
BOTTOM PRESSURES IN SILOS '"
(SEE NOTE 6 ) STEEL 0
~ "'" ~ '"~ '" '" ~ '"~
0 0 0 0 ~
BOTTOM - ~ " - -" '" '" ~
-
.Cd values given In rhis table are bwdeqllare for the higher loads associated Witll mass flow.
NOTES:
J. Cd factor for lateral pressures is givell for the bottom of each height ZOlle sllow1l.
2. III the regioll of a flow-correcting Illsert (e.g., Buhler.Nase) lateral pressures may be many times greater t1IQIIstatic, and
the Cd values abol'e are 1l0t suflicient.
3. Silo bottom pressures /Iced f10t be considered larger rhall tile pressure caused by J 00% of weight of silo contents.
4. If H] < H "21-f l' use the seco/ld Cd value from the top for the ellflre silo height H.
5. Vollies of factor Cd for HID between those gil'e/l I" Table 2-2s1,01lId be determined by linear interpolation.
6, Values of Cd [actor given IfI Table 2.2[or calculating design bottom pressures sllall be IIIultiplied by 0_ 75 for noncolJeslve
material except for homogenizing silos in whiell pllellmatic withdrawal is used.
7. The Cd [actors showlI In Table 2.2are minimum recommended vahles. However, lower Cd factors may be used, but only
for particular cases for which the designer call demonstrate rh~t Slid, lower Cd factors are satisfactory_
 • 2 ,
qa = psm a +qcos. a (2-18)

Table 2-3. Recommended Minimum Values ofImpact Factor Ci

Ratio of volrnne drnnped in one load to total Silo capacity

1:2 1:3 1:4 1:5 1:6 and less
Impact Concrete bottom 1.4 1.3 1.2 I.I 1.0
Factor Steel bottom 1.75 1.60 1.5 1.35 1.25

2. Design pressures Pd~' qd~. qa,d~ are obtained by simply multiplying

the static pressure by the appropriate overpressure correction factor Cd (or impact
factor C;, which applies to bunkers only). The overpressure factor does not apply to
frictional force; thus:

Pd~ =Cdp
qd~ = Cdq (2-19)
v,,~= V
Pressure increase due to eccentric discharge must also be considered.

2.7 EFFECT OF ECCENTRIC DISCHARGE AND

NON-SYMMETRICAL FLOW

Experimental studies show that withdrawal of granular and powdery

materials through eccentric openings causes lateral pressure changes much different
from the pressure change occurring during withdrawal through a concentric
openmg.

Early tests showed that the pressure increase due to eccentric discharge,
compared with that of concentric discharge, occurs on the side opposite to the
discharge opening eccentricity, and that the pressure decreases on the side nearer to
the opening.

More recent tests were made by Pieper [30, 31] and his associates on
laboratory scale model silos and bunkers, using different arrangements of discharge
openings. These tests revealed that pressures due to eccentric discharge are erratic,
that they may increase or even decrease against any side at different levels and at
different storage depths above the opening. This irregularity causes horizontal and
vertical bending moments in silo and bunker walls.

19
 All these nonsymmetrical flow conditions cause non-uniform pressures on
the silo walls. The nonuniform pressures cause horizontal and vertical bending
moments, which should be considered in design of the concrete silos. In circular
steel silos, however, because of the flexible character of the thin circular walls,
horizontal bending moment is usually not considered, the walls merely change in
shape so that horizontal bending moment practically does not occur. Nevertheless,
if there is possibility of a pressure decrease, which could cause denting of the wall
towards the inside, such a condition should be checked and prevented. There are
several methods for considering the effect of eccentric discharge. Some silo codes,
standards, and other methods for computing material pressures consider, in varying
degrees, the effect of eccentric withdrawal.

The following discussion introduces several approximate methods for

computing additional lateral pressures P <cc due to eccentric discharge. Such
computed values are usually added to calculated lateral pressures computed for the
concentric discharge condition to obtain design pressures P d" .

2.7.1 ACI 313-77 Approach

This approach is given by the Commentary to ACI 313 [2] for lateral
pressure increase:

Assume the increase of design lateral pressure to be at least 25 percent of

the static pressure at the bottom of the silo when an opening is next to the silo wall.
If the eccentricity (e) of the opening from the center of the silo is less than radius
(r), consider the increase to be at least 25% of elr. Assume this design pressure
increase to be constant from the top of the hopper (or hopper forming fill ) to a
height equal to D (or a or b) and to reduce linearly from that point to the top of the
silo. The increase need not be multiplied by Cd. Expressed as an equation, the
design pressure at any depth Y below the surface of the stored material would be

Since the pressure variation around the wall (perimeter) is unknown, it is

common to assume the increased pressure all around.

Recent experiments show that the lateral pressures computed by this method
are inadequate, and therefore it is suggested to increase the computed values of
Pe<e by 50%.

20
 2.7.2 Safarian's Method [37, 13]

Eccentric discharge may be considered by adding a correction, P,ee' to the

lateral design pressure, P des' computed at depth H by either the Janssen or
Reimbert formula; P ,ee is assumed to be constant from the top of the hopper (or
hopper forming fill) to a height equal to D (or a or b) and to reduce linearly from
that point to the top of the silo. Within height H - D, the lateral design pressure at
depth Y is then:

(2-20)

The correction P,ee at depth His:

where PH = static pressure at depth H.

Pressure P; is the lateral static pressure at depth H in an imaginary silo, as

shown by Fig. 2-8 and Fig. 2-9. For rectangular silos, the imaginary silo is
determined as shown by Fig. 2-8. When the opening is displaced toward side a,
correction P,ce for sides a is computed using an imaginary silo measuring
(a+2ea)x b. (If ea is larger than a, the imaginary silo should measure 3ax b)
Similarly, if the opening is eccentric toward side b, the imaginary silo will measure
(b+ 2eb)X a. If both eccentricities occur, each correction is computed separately,
using the first described imaginary silo to determine P 'ce for sides a and the
second for sides b.

The imaginary circular silo of Fig. 2-9 is centered on the discharge

opening and has a radius equal to that of the actual silo plus the eccentricity.

Where multiple discharge openings occur, even though the group IS

centrally located, eccentric discharge is always possible and should be considered.

2.7.3 A More Nearly Rational Procedure

Many design engineers believe that the methods given above for .
determining additional lateral pressures due to eccentric withdrawal do not offer a
satisfactory solution to nonsymmetrical withdrawal conditions, and that these are
not reliable and do not account for the actual flow pattern.

21
 Silo

'--~Pecc 'HJa = ~Pi)~a -(PH'a

(increose)
For both II all walls

------ ------,
N
"-
.D
V IShe~r force~
(Friction) I' vi
I
Outline of imaginary
'I "" (
510 a
..
for eccentricity
, I Joward shorl wall)
j I
.D
I
I , Silo I

N
"-
.D

I
I
I
I
I
~t~i
_ _ __ _ _ _ I ----I.J - 0'ISC harge opemng
.

a
[(Pecc)~Q = ~Pi)~a-(PH)a
(decreose l
Consider only when checking
r-- --, sleel woll 'for denting
L.. __
__-1

Fig. 2-8 Pressure change due to eccenuicity of discharge opening in

rectangular silo
 .----- Use for whole circumference

(Peee lH = (Pi lH- PH

( increase)

Probable variation
of pressure changes
due tue eccentric discharge

r-- Outline of imaginary silo

I
\
\
/
/
"- "- .••.•...•
--- . ./' (PeeelH =(PilH- PH
(decrease 1
Consider only when checking
sleel silo wall for denting

Fig. 2-9 Pressure change due to eccentric discharge opening in

circular silo(after Safarian)
 Colijn and Peschl [11, 27, 28, 29] have suggested an approach for
computing overpressures in silos due to nonsymmetrical flow or eccentric
discharge of material. Their approach assumes that the maximum horizontal
discharge pressure (PI) in the circular flow channel (Fig. 2-10) is twice that of
static pressure in the same channel:

P, =- 2y D, /4p' (2-21)

and the maximum static pressure p, in the silo (away from the flow channel) is

P, =-yD/ 4p' (2-22)

Where r = turit weight of stored material

D I = diameter of flow channel
D = silo diameter
p' = coefficient of wall friction

Then the pressure differential,

!1p = p, - P, = (y D / 4p')(2D, /D -I) (2-23)

and the eccentric wall loading is expressed as

F = MD, = (yD' / 4p')(2D,' / D' - D, / D) (2-24)

From the above equation,

F is maximum when D, = 0.25,

D,

D
and F = 0 when -' = 0.5.
D
yD'
Hence, Fm~ = - 0.125-- (2-25)
4p'

If force F is assumed acting as a concentrated load, then the approximate maximum

positive and negative horizontal bending moments may be expressed as follows:

M m~ =- 0.125FD
(2-26)
M min = + 0.090FD

22
 F

D /'
.---t-.....
I
I "'
/' I. "
11\
11'
d diD
0.25 05

Flow channel

Moment
F.D/2

0.16

F
Deformation

Fig. 2-10 Forces and moments on silo wall (after Colijn and PescW)
 The horizontal reinforcement needed to resist these bending moments
should be added to the reinforcement computed for pure tension and temperature
effects.

2.8 LOADS IN SILOS

The principal loads for silo and bunker design come from action of the
stored material. Other loads includes dead loads, equipment loads, wind, floor and
roof live loads, seismic loads, forces from thermal effects and forces applied by
restraint of attached items.

2.8.1 Dead Loads

Dead loads include the weight of the walls, roof, ring-beams, hopper, plus
the weight of items supported by the silo. The suppported items include inside and
outside stairways and service platforms, equipment on the silo roof (such as dust
collectors and conveyors), buildings supported by the roof, overhead gallery, etc.

2.8.2 Live Loads

Pressures due to stored materials are considered in Art. 2.4. Under strength
design methods, these pressures are treated as live load. Live loads on platforms,
roof, and floors should be as required by applicable building codes, or larger. In
some cases a buildup of dust (cement dust, for example) may cause significant live
load, perhaps much more than the code-specified floor or roof load.

2.8.3 Wind Loads

All silo and bunker structures should be designed to resist the overturning
effects caused by wind or earthquake forces. Wind and earthquake loads should not
be assumed to act simultaneously. Whichever of these loads is more serious should
be used in design.

As for buildings, wind loads for silos or bunkers can be in any lateral
direction, and generally should be considered as positive (inward) pressures on the
wind-ward side, acting simultaneously with suction (negative pressure) on the lee-
ward side. Wind pressure distribution should preferably take into account adjacent
structures.

23
 Circumferential bending due to wind on the empty silo or bunker should be
considered. Wind may affect the stability of empty silos, and of all narrow silos or
silo groups, particularly those made of steel, wood, or fiberglass. Foundation
pressures and colmnn stresses, however, may be worse with wind acting on the full
silo.

In conventional method the silo is. considered as vertical cantilever beam

with complete fixity at the level of ring beam for wind load analysis (Fig. 2-11).
The wind pressure is assumed 36.9 psf (equivalent to a wind velocity of 120 mph)
on a surface normal to the directions of wind all over the depth and a reduction
factor of 0.6 is used to take into account the effect of circular geometry.

For Finite Element analysis it is assumed that the pressure distribution

around the circumference depends on the Renolds number. The distribution
assumed here is taken from Reference [3] by Ahmad and is shown in Fig. 2-12.

It has been found that about seven Fourier harmonics represent the above
distribution quite accurately. The Fourier coefficients used are show in Table 2- 4.
In case of a different distribution around the circumference, the Fourier co-
efficients will have to be recalculated.

Table 2-4. Fourier Coefficients for the Pressure Dstribution of Fig. 2.11

Harmonics Coefficients
0 0.24706
1 0.31387
2 0.58763
3 0.42213
4 0.02466
5 -0.11481
6 -0.00451

2.8.4 Seismic Loading

Earthquake loads may affect both stability and strength of silos and bunkers.
Walls and colmnns supporting silos and bunkers may be particularly vulnerable to
.earthquake forces. The foundation, especially if supported on piles or on caissons,
may also be affected.

24
 A
A
Silo

Hopper

( a) Vertical distribution

( b) Section A - A

Fig. 2-11 Wind pressure distribution in conventional method.

 2,00
r
1,75

~ 1.50
CD
~ 1,25 ~

'"
Q.

~ 1.00
,

::;] \
lJl
18 0.75
a:"C 0,50 \
c:
~ 0,25 \
'5
-
\ /"
-'c: ° r
Q)
'13 -0,25 \ /
;e
~ -0,50 /
o
() -0,75 "-
-1.00

° 30 60 90
Angular Distance a
120
(Degree)
150 180

Fig. 2-12 Variation of Wind Pressure along the circumferential

direction on a horizontal plane
 In computing stability against overturning due to earthquake, the entire
weight of the stored material may be used. However, if the silo has an
independently supported bottom, the material weight must be divided between silo
walls (fnction) and the bottom structure.

2.8.5 Thermal Effects

Two types of thermal effect may need to be considered. The first is a

through-the-wall temperature gradient, important in concrete walls, caused by
storing material that is much hotter than the air temperature around the silo.

The second is the daily temperature changes due to intense sunlight which
may cause expansion and contraction of silo groups. Stresses due to this action can
be large enough to cause wall concrete to crack. Seasonal temperature change can
also have a similar effect.

2.8.6 Other Loads

(i) Loads from External Restraint: A silo is a flexible membrane. The wall
of an isolated circular silo under uniform internal pressure around its circumference
expands radially. Such a wall has a high horizontal membrane tensile stress, but no
horizontal bending moment. Vertically it will have compression and a small
(usually not computed) vertical bending moment. .

However, if at any point the silo wall is attached to something that restrains
its radial movement, the wall is "dented", and significant horizontal and vertical
bending moments occur. These bending moments, when their effect is added to the
hoop tension and vertical compression, could cause wall failure.

Anything that, in effect, causes a "hard spot" in the wall can generate this
problem. It could be a platform connected to two separated silos or a structural
member or rigid duct connected to each.

(ii) Equipment Loads: In addition to dead load, equipment items may apply
severe live load on the silo Structure. Theoretically, equipment manUfacturers
should be able to predict the load their equipment will impose; but if this
equipment is vibrating, it may bring about changes in other loading. For example,
the stored material may become compacted, acquiring higher density and altered
flow characteristics with resultant changes in lateral and vertical pressures.

25
 Belt conveyors and their structural supports can bring large live and dead
loads to a silo structure. Often, the end of a conveyor bridge will be supported on a
silo roof. This bridge will transfer lateral wind load to the silo, as well as vertical
dead and live loads.

2.8.7 Load Combinations

Certainly all reasonable load combinations should be considered by the

designer. Combinations that are extremely improbable are, of course, usually
neglected (combinations including both wind and earthquake, for example).

What load combinations should be considered is a matter of experience and

judgement. Table 2-5 shows a matrix ofload types and suggested combinations for
silo or bunker design. Combinations not shown would ordinarily be ignored. This
should not be taken as a fast rule, however, the designer must be alert to special
circumstances that warrant considering other combinations than those shown.

Table 2-5. Suggested Load Combinations for Silo or Bunker Design.

Types of Load Combinations

A B C D . E
Dead Load X X XX XX XX
Floor and Roof Live Load X :t X
Material Pressure •• Static X X X
Over Pressure X X X
• Modification X X X
Thermal Loads X X X
Equipment Loads X X X
Wind
X X
Ear1hquake
X X
Restraint Loads :t :t :t
= "consider or neglect, whichever is more severe"
::!::
• = for eccentric flow, flow-improving device, etc.
•• = consider also material piled outside
X = consider
XX = consider, but reduce if required by code.

2.9 SILO ROOFS

Designers are divided on the subject of attachment of concrete roof slabs to

silo walls. Some believe that the slab should be supported only vertically at the
walls (on elastomeric material or heavy tar paper) so as to be free to contract or

26
 Elevalor tower ~ This portion af roof is.
doweled into walls

\
'Shear pin

(a)

/This portion of roof is

@00@QWOI'S
Sh.arpin
-800000
. Shearpin

( b)

(c)

Fig. 2-13 Roof expansion-controlling devices.

 . . •
• [(;;::.Ir .=. =.=. r. ---j
• •

(a)
(b)

r. • . .•
\ ~~---"
Drip groove/ "'- Dowels

(e)
(d)

Dowel

Inside vertical
reinforcing
extends into
roof slab

(e)

Fig. 2-14 Typical silo roof-to-wall details

 expand with temperature changes and to move slightly during earthquake. On the
other hand, attaching the roof slab to the walls stiffens tall silos against wind and
earthquake loads and reduces lateral deformations (Fig. 2-13 and Fig. 2-14).

Roof systems should be designed for dead and live loads, including all
expected equipment loads. Live load deflections should preferably not exceed
1/360 of the span.

Roof structures usually consist of a reinforced concrete slab on steel beams.

For very small units a slab without beams may be sufficient. Cast-in-place concrete
beams are of limited use. The most commonly used system - steel beams with
concrete slab - is particularly well adapted to slipforming because the steel beams
can be incorporated in the slipform work deck.

Ample bearing on the concrete wall should be provided at the ends of the
steel beams, and the concrete below and to each side of the beam should be
reinforced to prevent undue cracking or even a concrete fallout after some years of
sefVlce

The roof slab should be at least 4 inch (100 mm) thick. Either deformed
reinforcing bars or welded wire mesh reinforcing may be used. When the slab is
keyed or doweled to the wall it is subjected to combined bending and tension. If the
tension is significant, it must be considered in design.

Extra reinforcing bars should be added around roof slab openings. For
openings larger than 2 ft. square, diagonal corner bars should be provided.

Heavy loads acting on the roof between supporting beams and wall
preferably should be transferred to the supports by providing additional beams.
Light and moderate concentrated loads, however, may be supported by the roof
slab merely by adding extra reinforcing bars beneath the loads.

***

27
 CHAPTER 3

ANALYSIS OF SILOS

3.1 CONVENTIONAL METHOD OF ANALYSIS AND DESIGN

3.1.1 General

A munber of authors have attempted to present design methods for silos in

their papers and textbooks. But the methods followed for silo design have been
more or less the same and these are based on several assumptions and idealisation
of silos.

3.1.2 Design Steps - Conventionally Reinforced Concrete Silo

The whole design process can be divided into the following steps:
i) Determination of silo geometry. The shape and size must be chosen to
provide the desired capacity, also considering how the silo is to be filled,
how material will be withdrawn, and required elevation of roof and silo
bottom to align properly with other plant structures or process systems.
ii) Determination of the necessaI)' properties of the material to be stored,
including the temperature it will have when placed in the silo. The design.
engineer must determine the values of y, p and f.J. ~
iii) Determination of what, if any, other structures or equipment will be
attached to the silo walls or roof and to determine how much force each of
these items will apply.
(iv). Selection of the method of computation of internal pressure and
overpressure.
 v) .Computation of static and design values of lateral pressure on the walls at
various depths below the surface of the stored material and to adjust the
design pressure for eccentric discharge
vi) Design of the silo walls.
vii) Design of the bottom. This includes bottom slabs, bottom supports, steel or
concrete hoppers, and ring beam, depending on the type of bottom system
selected.
viii) Design of the silo roof and roof supports.
ix) Design of the foundation.

3.1.3 Analysis and Design of Circular Silos

Whether isolated or connected in groups, circular silos are usually fIrst ()

designed as single silos. Interaction among silos of a silo group is then considered
and necessary modifIcations are made where necessary.

In the conventional analysis and design of circular silos certain assumptions

are necessary. Some of these are listed below:
i) The radial pressure from the stored material is uniform around the
circumference at a particular elevation.
ii) Silo is a thin-walled cylinder stressed in circumferential tension only due to
lateral pressure and there is no bending moment or shear.
.iii) If the ring beam is monolithic with the vertical wall or conical hopper there
is no effect of the restraint provided by the ring beam either on the vertical
wall or on the conical Hopper. ~••..
iv) The vertical wall can expand freely at the bottom of pressure zone.
v) The conical Hopper can expand freely at its junctions with the bottom of
ring beam.

The analysis and design of circular silo can be performed following the
steps below:

(aJ Selection of minimum wall thickness

Minimum wall thickness depends on material strength, permissible crack

width and details of reinforcements. According to the assumption of the horizontal
tension without bending moment may create regularly spaced vertical cracks, and
the entire resistance would be provided by the hoop steel. Except for its influence
on the width of those cracks, the thickness of concrete would be unimportant,

29
provided it is sufficient to (i) protect the steel (ii) ensure proper bond strength at lap
splices and (iii) resist the vertical force.

But, actually, the lateral pressure distribution is not unifonn and the ring
beam (if exists) provides some restraint due to which there may be some momentin
the vertical wall. This moment cannot be computed by conventional method. To
resist the accidental bending moment, a minimum wall thickness is to be selected.
Conventionally walls having two layers of reinforcement should be greater than 8
inches in thickness.

According to portland cement Association [9] a lower limit of wall

thickness is given by

h. = mE ' +f s
-n+!I c."" ] D/2
mm [ ff Pd" (3-1)
S c,len .

where is = allowable (WSD) stress, generally 40 to 45% of h

ie t<" = the allowable stress for concrete in tension (PCA suggests 0.1 fc)

n = modular ratio, Es
Ee

m = concrete shrinkage co-efficient and assumed to be equal to

0.0003

The metric equivalent of the above equation is

h . = mE s
+f s
-n+!I e.te" ] D/2
mm
[ 100 Islcoten P des (3-2)

Regardless of the thickness suggested by the above equation, thicknesses less than
6 inches should not be used.

(b) Determination of required horizontal (hoop) reinforcing

The horizontal tensile force per unit height of cylindrical wall is

F=PdcsD/2 ( WSD method) (3-3)

F" = k,PdcsD /2 ( USD method) (3-4)

where k, is live load factor (ACl. 313-17 recommends 1.7).

The hoop steel required per unit height is:

30
 A, = F! f, (WSD)
(3-5)
A, = F;, !((bfy) (USD)

where (b is the strength reduction factor (0.9 for tension as per ACI 318).

(c) Determination of vertical load in the wall

After getting the minimum waIl thickness in 'step-a' the thickness should be
checked for adequacy insupporting the vertical load. Vertical force per unit length
of wall is the largest at the bottom of the silo, but vertical stress may be higher in
the thinner wall at the elevation where waIl thickt)ess changes.

Sources of vertical force (meridional force) include: (i) friction from the
stored material above the height in question; (ii) roof live load and dead load
including equipment and structures mounted on the silo; (3) weight of the waIl
itself above the height in question; (4) for lower walls load imposed by the silo
bottom system; and (5) overturning moment due to wind or seismic action.

Total factored (ultimate) meridional force Fw per unit width of the waIl is . . •.
given by (not considering wind)

Fw = 1.7 x (Vertical friction force + roof and other vertical live load)
+ 1.4 x (wall self weight above + roof and other Dead load)

All terms in parenthesis are per unit length of wall.

This computed ultimate vertical load should not be greater than

(3-6)

Walls that will notfail by buckling: The Commentary to ACI 313-77 offers
some suggestions for considering bucking of circular walls, as follows: a
1. For circular walls with uniform radial pressure that restrains buckling:
(a) For walls that are continuous around the entire circumference (no
openings) use the permissible axial load strength of Eq.3-6; that is,
buckling does not need to be considered.

3\
 (b) For walls with openings but no stiffening member at the opening
edge;

(3-7)

2. For circular walls not subject to uniform radial pressure (including walls below
the pressure zone):
(a) For walls continuous throughout their entire circumference (no
openings) the limiting stress is

(3-8)

(b) Adjacent to openings that have no stiffening members at their sides,

the limiting stress is

(3-9)

in which ho is the height of the opening.

(d) Checking the adequacy of selectedwallfor lateralload~

Lateral load due to earthquake or wind (whichever is worse) should now be

considered in combination with the vertical loads. Different load factors are used,
of course. According to ACI 318 [1], the factored combinations are

With wind:

0.75 (lAD + l.7L + 1.7W) (3-10)

or
0.9D + l.3W (3-11 )

whichever is more severe.

With earthquake:

0.75( lAD + 1.7L + l.lE) (3-12)

or
0.9D + 1.43E (3-13)

whichever is more severe.

32
 In Eq.3-10 and Eq.3-12, live load L should have its full value or zero, whichever
leads to larger required strength per unit length.

(e) Determination of steel neededjor thermal stresses

In building design, certain levels of temperature difference. are commonly

ignored. Similarly, for walls of silos having hot stored materials, a difference of up
0
to 80 F (44.S°C) is often ignored. When this is done, the design temperature of the
hot material whose actual internal temperature is T, becomes

(3-14)
or
(3-15)

It has been observed that the temperature of hot granular materials in silos is
not uniform but drops appreciably near the wall.

In the case of hot cement, for example, 8 in. of cement adjacent to the inside
face of the silo is commonly assumed to act as an insulating material with
temperature varying linearly across the strip. <l--. .

Fig. 3-lb shows the temperature variation through the 8 in. (20 cm) of
cement and the silo wall. The temperature difference 81' between inside and
outside face of the wall is

(3-16)

Temperature drop, 81', within the wall is a portion of the total design
temperature difference, corresponding to the ratio Kt of the thermal resistance of
the wall alone to that of cement, wall and outside air combined. Values of 81' may
be obtained from

81' = [(1')
I des - l' JK
0 t (3-17)

where K, is determined by heat transfer analysis. For cement, it is shown in Fig.3-

la. Assuming shape and/or restraint to prevent warping (curling), the thermal
ultimate bending moment per unit of wall height is

(3-18)

(in-Ib per ft when E~is psi and h is in.)

33
 0.35
- I

03
-
/
••••••••• 0.25
.r=
/VI
g:J /V .

.r= 0
/
I
g:J + 0.2
./
o ~
<i
••••••••• O. 15 ./
V
II V
0.1
/
0.05

6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Wall thickness, h ( inch)

(a) Determination of K t for use in computing liT for wall

of cement storage silo ..

1.8 inch.:.h .1
Ti,des Outside face

T; = Temperature of stored cement ( of) of silo wall

Tj,des= (T - 80 of) Design temperature

T,
T2
of stored cement
To = Design winter dry-bulb temperature (oF)
R3
h ~ Silo walilhickness
To

(b) Temperature drop across silo wall

liT = [,T;,d.' - To] xKt

Above curve is based on the following assumptions

1. Rres;stence of 8 inch ( 203 mm ) cement ( considered to
act as insulating material) = 3.92
2. Resistance of 1 inch (25 mm) thick concrete ~ 0.08
3. Resistance of outer surface film = 0.17

Fig. 3-1 Computation of liT for wall of cement storage silo

The factor of 1.4 in the above equation is the load factor, Kg.
Using poisson's ratio, v = 0.2 above equation can also be written as
. (3-19)
M X,u
t = M, y,u
= 2
1.25£ c h a,t:>.TKg

The required additional steel area is approximately:

M (3-20)
A = x'.U for horizontal reinforcement
'.X /y(d - d')
M (3-21)
A = yt.u for vertical reinforcement
'.Y /y(d - d')
In each case, the thermal reinforcing should be added to the layer closer to the cold
side.

(j) Selection of tentative hoo~bar sizes and spacings

The pressure varies continuously with depth and so does the required area
of hoop reinforcing. A practical solution, however, would vary the bar spacings (or
size or both) by groups.

(g) Checking of crack width

Although very fine, well distributed and harmless shrinkage cracks are
always present in conventionally reinforced concrete, significant silo wall cracks
due to silo loading can be prevented or minimised in width so as not to be harmful.
Cracks that are too wide may: (1) admit moisture, damaging the reinforcing steel or
the stored material; (2) allow fine stored material to escape; or (3) be objectionable
in appearance, Cracks also reduce the capability of the wall to resist horizontal
bending moment without appreciable distortion of the wall.

. The designer must decide what crack width is acceptable. A limit of 0.008 .
ill. 1S often used for silos exposed to the weather, storing moisture-sensitive
materials such as grain, cement, fly ash, etc.

Crack width due to pure tension in a circular bin wall is estimated by the
method shown by Lipnitski and Abramovitsch [26], which considers the effects of
both short-term and long-term horizontal (hoop) tension .

. 34
 In this method, it is asswned that the walls are in pw'e h0l1zontal tension
and that the hoop reinforcing is centrally located. The total crack width Wcr for a
vertical crack is given by

(3-22)

where WI = crack width that would be caused by a short-term occurrence of 7~o/'

the horizontal tension force per unit height due to the unfactored sum
of static pressure plus overpressure
W2 = that portion of WI due to force Tst, the horizontal tension per unit
height due to unfactored static pressure alone, acting during the
presence of force Ttot
W3 = the crack width due to long-term application of horizontal tensile .
force, Tst

Values of WI, W2 and W3 are each estimated using the formula

(3-23)

in which f, is the actual steel stress under theunfactored tensile force Tst or Ttot
(I, = T / A,), sC, is the crack spacing, and 1//" is a constant.

The estimated crack spacing is given by

(3-24)

where A is the gross concrete area per unit height, /3= 0.7 or 1.0 for deformed and
plain hoop bars, respectively, and Io is the sum of the hoop-bar perimeters per unit
height of wall.

The constants If/J, 1f/2, and 1f/3, used to compute WI, W2, and W3, respectively, are:

If/, = 1- 0.7[0.8AJ,'J but not less than 0.3 (3-25)

1;ot

If/, = 1- O.7[O.8AJ,'J but not less than 0.3 (3-26)

1'"

35
 11/.= 1- 0.35 08A
. c. 1',]
, but not less than 0.65 (3-27)
'1', [ T
"
ACI 313 suggests that 4.5JJj psi be used for the tensile strength of concrete in
2
the above equations for If. (In metric units ft' = 1.194,fJ: kglcm )

Since tensile forces Tst and Ttob As, and Lo all vary with depth below the
surface of the stored material, it is better to calculate crack width at the bottom of
each group of hoop bars having a common size and spacing.

Often a designer will compute We, at only that elevation where the lateral
pressure is maximum. This is a mistake; since this method may indicate larger
crack widths at higher elevations.

If the computed We, is larger than its acceptable limiting value, crack width
may be reduced by modifying wall thickness, by increasing the hoop steel area As,
or by increasing the sum of perimeters Lo. Changing wall thickness should be the
last resort, since the other two parameters can be modified more easily. It should be
noted that while factored (ultimate) pressures are used to compute the steel area
needed for strength, service pressure (unfactored) are used to compute crack width.

(h) Design of conical hopper

The conical concrete hopper may be rigidly attached to the silo wall, as in a
bunker, but ordinarily it is supported by a concrete ring-beam around the upper
perimeter of the hopper. The bottom of the hopper preferably should not be
restrained or supported. Fig. 3-2 shows dimensions to be used in computing vertical
pressures and pressures normal to the walls of a conical hopper.

The conical hopper shell is subject to two tensile membrane forces. The
meridional force, Fm, is parallel to the generator line of the cone. The tangential
force Ft , is in the plane of the shell and horizontal. The meridional force per unit
. width at depth Y is computed from equilibrium of the loads on the cone below that
depth. These loads, shown in Fig. 3-2 , are the resultant of vertical pressures, qdes

(at depth Y), and W, the combined weights of WL, (material in the hopper below
depth Y),and Wg (hopper plus equipment supported by the hopper below depth Y).

According to USD;

36
 a at depth Y
Silo bottom
and hopper
base

\ "tJ'
b'
",.
Qdes
at depth Y
-; >-
~ Fm

Conical hopper

Fig. 3-2 Forces In conical hopper in conventional method of analysis

 F = 1.7 [ qd,., D + W]L + 1.4<[ ' W ] (3-28)
m" 4sina nDsina . nDsina

(3-29)

Both forces are maximum at the upper edge of the hopper, and approach
zero at the lower edge.

The minimwn acceptable thickness for the hopper is determined considering

the acceptable crack width, as for a circular silo wall. It is preferable, however, that
the shell thickness is never less than 5 in. The required reinforcement area per unit
width of shell is

A, reqd=F"", /(~fy) (meridionally) (3-30)

A, reqd = F",/ ( Ny) (horizontally) (3-31)

(i) Design of the ring beam

Simply supported ring beams are usually designed for the horizontal
component of F mu only. If the hopper wall is eccentric to the centroid of the ring-
beam, the beam will also receive uniform bending moment. The monolithically cast
ring-beam and conical shell is very stiff, however, and this moment is usually
neglected in design of ring-beams with all-around support. The area of longitudinal
steel in such ring-beams is arbitrary, but should not be less than 0.5% of the cross-
sectional area of the beam.

The ring-beam and upper edge of a conical hopper supported at isolated

points along its boundary by columns, pilasters, or wall pockets (Type-l and
Type-3) can be designed in the manner shown in Appendix- 1.

3.1.4 Analysis of a Prototype Silo

In this study a prototype silo is analysed using both conventional method

and Finite Element method and a comparison is made thereafter. For this purpose a
prototype of standard dimensions with common properties is used. The geometric
parameters of the prototype are shown in Fig. 3-3. Data used for prototype silo is
given below.

37
 Ttop
o

T bottom

t top Type.' ]
: [ Type.2 1
I
........
fl rf.>
« h

~om / ~JJj]:t;;"1
Fig. 3-3 Diagram showing various dimensions of a silo
Dimensiom:
Height of vertical wall, H = 160.0 ft.
Diameter of the silo(internal), D = 30.0 ft.
Overall depth of silo (From bottom of hopper to top of
vertical wall) = 180.0 ft
Size of Bottom Ring beam
(A) Depth of bottom ring beam, d = 42.0 inch
(B) Width of bottom ring beam at top, b = -12.0 inch
(C) Width of bottom ring beam at bottom = 30.42 inch
Thickness of vertical wall at top, Ttop = 6.0 inch
Thickness of vertical wall at bottom, Tbollom = 9.0 inch
Thickness of hopper at top, ttop = 9.0 inch
Thickness of hopper at bottom, tbollom = 5.0 inch.
Angle of conical hopper with horizontal = 55.0 Degree

Properties of stored material:

Unit weight of material, y = 50.0 Ib/cft
Angle of internal friction, p = 30.0 degree
Co-efficient of wall friction, f.l' = 0.45

Properties of construction material:

Modulus of elasticity of concrete, Ec = 3.Ox106 pSI
Unit weight of concrete, Yc = 150.0 Ib/cft
Ultimate strength of concrete, f~ = 3000.0 pSI
Poisson's Ratio of concrete, v = 0.2
Modulus of Elasticity of steel, Es = 29.Ox106 psi
Ultimate strength of steel, J; = 60000.0 pSI.
Air pressure due to wind = 36.9 psf

Other data:
Stored material Grain.
Method of pressure computation Janssen's Method
Design Method WSD

To avoid duplication, the results of analysis using both conventional method

and Finite Element method are presented in article 3-3 and a comparative study is
made using both the results.

38
 3.2 FINITE ELEMENT METHOD OF ANALYSIS

3.2.1 General

Finite Element approach is a powerful and versatile numerical tool for the
analysis of complex structures. In this technique a high speed digital computer is
essential. Analysis of silos using this method is discussed in the following articles.

3.2.2 The Finite Element Program

(a) Features ofthe computer program

Ahmad [3, 4, 5] developed a very general Finite Element computer program

for analysis of axisymmetric shell structures. This computer program is a thick
shell Finite Element program capable of analysing axisymmetric shells loaded
symmetrically as well as non-symmetrically. It can also deal adequately with thin
shells.

The cubk'type of element (Fig. 3.4) has four nodal normals, each having
five degrees of freedom - axial, radial, tangential and two inplane rotations as
shown in the figure .

.The program at present can handle isotropic elastic material. The material
properties are defined for every element, thus allowing the program to deal with
materials varying from element to element.

Using Fourier analysis the non-symmetric load acting on an axisymmetric

shell is replaced by a set of harmonics and each harmonic is treated separately and
the loads are presented circumferentially by

R) {'LR cosn(}}
{T
. Z = 'LZ: cosn(}
'Ll: sinn(}
(3-32)

where R, Z and T are in radial, axial and circumferential directions respectively.

The displacements and stresses are calculated independently for each

harmonic and the results are automatically super imposed to give the final effects of
the loading at every node. If these vary circumferentially, the fmal results are .
calculated at a specified number of sections along the circumferential direction and
the results are printed for every point indicated by its angular distance from the

39
z

• r

(a) Axisymmetric Element

z", v

s,w r', u

~
a

(b) Displacement components

Fig. 3-4 Axisymmetric thick shell element (cubic).

 reference diameter ( e = 0° ). As the results are symmetric about this diameter only
one half of the shell needs to be taken into consideration.

This Finite Element program has been adapted and used for the analysis of
silo for the following load cases.

i) Gravity (Self weight), considered axisymmetric

ii) Stored material pressure, considered axisymmetric
iii) Temperature difference, considered axisymmetric
iv) Wind load considered, asymmetric

(b) Assumptions and limitations of the program

The axisymmetric thick shell element computer program developed by

Ahmad is based on some assumptions such as the material within an element is
isotropic, elastic and obeys Hooke's law. This program cannot deal with branching
as would be encountered in certain axisymmetric shell problems. The performance
of the element suffers with sharp kinks. Moderate kinks can however be treated by
taking smaller elements near the kinks.

(c) Modifications of the program

The author has adapted the above mentioned program. In order to analysis
the silo, considerable modifications and additions are made specially in respect of
input of data and output of results. The modifications are discussed below:
i) As stated earlier, due to its highly general nature, the program needed large
volume of input Data, the preparation of which was time consuming. A
subroutine is, therefore, written to generate the necessary data for silo with
minimum input.
ii) In the original program the output was stresses in global co-ordinates which
could not be used conveniently for design. Huda [15] modified the program
to obtain the stress resultant N 1» N (),M ~ and Me directly from the computer
for the analysis of Intze tank. The same modifications are adapted for silo
analysis.
iii) The original program treated axisymmetric loads such as gravity load,
temperature load, and the stored material pressure (requiring one harmonic
only) and non-axisymmetric loads such as wind, earthquake (requiring a
number of harmonics) separately. Considering this fact the program was
modified in such a manner that the analysis is carried out in a single

40
 hannonic for gravity, temperature difference and stored material pressure
while that for wind load is carried out with as many hannonies as desired.
The flexibility of the original program had to be sacrificed to some extent to
attain this specific goal.

The output of the original program is the nodal displacement in the

ascending order of the nodes for every right hand side (load case). Huda
[15] has modified the program to offer choice between nodal points and
Gauss integrating points for stress calculation. The same procedure is
followed for silo analysis.

In silo analysis, three different types are considered. In each type the
geometric dimensions, the loading conditions and the support conditions are
different as shown in Fig. 3-5. In order to handle the three types in a single
FORTRAN program necessary modifications were also made.

The program, in its present form, can provide the stress resultants directly
necessary for silo design.

3.2.3 Finite Element Idealisation of Silo

For Finite Element analysis, the silo is represented by a chain of unbraced

axisymmetric shell elements placed end to end. Since the program can not deal
with branching the actual structure needs idealisation. these idealisation is needed
mainly near joints. In this case the following assumptions are made.

Type-l and Type-2

i) The mid surface of vertical wall meets with the mid surface of
the bottom ring beam.
ii) The bottom supporting ring beam is divided in to two parts. One part
(one-third) is associated with the vertical wall as a part of shell
with greater thickness. Another part (two-thirds) is associated
with the conical hopper as a part of shell of greater thickness.
iii) The bottom of the vertical wall is assumed to be supported by
column for Type-I and by continuous wall for Type-2. The whole
structure is supported at the junction of vertical wall and conical
hopper in such a way that there is no vertical displacements but there
may be radial movements. Idealisation of Type-I and Type-2 is
shown in Fig. 3-6.

41
 ., .,
.,
'iij
3:
0
'E
.,
3:
0
'E
.,
3:
0
'E
>" "
> >"

Ring Beam Ring Beam

Column as a
support for
Vertical Wall and Continuous Wall
Conical Hopper as a support for
Vertical Wall and
Conical Hoppar

B
B

Conical Hopper li. Conical Hopper ,l[. Column as a

support for
C6nicai Hopper
(a) Type - 1
(b) Type - 2
(c) Type - 3

Fig. 3,5 Various Types of silos depending on ring beam support

(a) Ring Beam Supported by column
(b) Ring Beam Supported by Monolithic Continuous Wall
(c) Ring Beam Supported by Separate Column
 2
2

3
3
4
4
5

5
6

6 7

8
7

9
8
10

9
11

10 12

11
1'2 13
13
14
15
16 14
17
18
15
2 16
20
22 17

25 18

6 19
7
8
9
20
10
11
12 21
13

22

(a) Type-1, Type-2 23

(b) Type-3
25 24

Fig, 3-6 Idealisation and element numbering of silos

 Type-3

In Type-3 it is considered that the vertical wall and the conical

hopper with ring beam are completely separate components of silo.
These are independent structures. In this case the whole analysis is
perfonned separately and the element numbering of the conical part
is independent of that of the vertical wall. The idealisation of Type-
3 is shown in Fig. 3-6. Owing analysis the vertical wall is considered
as problem-I with the stored material pressure in the pressure zone
only and the wind load all over the depth. The conical part is
considered as problem-2 and subjected to symmetric load only with
no wind load acting on the conical hopper. In Table 3-1 the length
of different elements are shown.

In Type-3 the vertical wall is considered to be supported on

foundation such that the foundation acts as fixed support at the
bottom. The conical hopper is supported by ring beam on separate
columns. In this case only one displacement is considered to be zero
i.e. the columns support the ring beam only vertically. The centre of ~
column section passes through the node which is closest to the centre
of graVityof the ring beam section.

The actual Structures are shown in Fig. 3-5 . Fig 3.6 shows the scheme
followed in diViding the silo into 38 elements in Type-I and in Type-2. In Type-3
the vertical wall is diVided into 25 elements and the conical part is diVided into 15
elements. Length of different elements are shown in Table 3-1.

Near the junctions the element shapes become somewhat odd due to lack of
continuity of slopes of the middle surface of the two elements on the two sides of
the junction. Such elements near the junctions can be kept smaller compared to
other nonnal elements in order to limit the shortcomings of the odd elements.

42
 Table 3-1. Length of Elements in Finite Element analysis.

Vertical Wall COIucal Hopper

Silo Type Element No. Length of Element Element No. Length of Element
ItolO 80%ofH 26,27 d/3
TYPE-! II to 21 (18.011I) % of H 28,37 Ll64
& 22 to 23 1.0%ofH 29,36 7L/64
TYPE-2 24 to 25 d/6 30 to 35 Ll8
38 12"
I to 14 {H - 0.025(H+h)}/14 I to 2 b/2
15 15 %of (H + h) I 3 to 4 bj/2
16 1.0 % of (H + h) 5, 14 Ll64
TYPE-3 17 to 18 d/2 6,13 7L/64
. 19 to 22 {h - d. 0.04 (H + h)}/4 7 to 12 Ll8
23 to 24 15 %of (H + h) 15 12"
25 1.0%of (H+h)

Alternatively, a technique applied by Huda [15] and illustrated in Fig. 3.7 as

applied to joint 'A' and joint 'B' may be used to eliminate the shortcomings. This
makes the nodal normals of each element perpendicular to its middle smface at the
node. This technique consists of removing small quantity of material from one side
of the middle smface and adding it to other side so that the odd shaped element
now assumes a normal shape. Shifting a small quantity of material from tension
side to compression side or vice versa does not change the total quantity of strain
energy so long as the behaviour of the material is linearly elastic. Since the Finite
Element formulation is based on the minimisation of strain energy the above
idealisation does not affect the stiffness term, though it ensures a gentle behaviour
of the element.

3.2.4 Determination of Forces and Moments at a Section

The forces and moments that act at a section are shown in Fig. 3-8. These
are the Meridional force N(>. Hoop force No. Meridional bending momentM(> and
Circumferential bending moment Mo. In silo analysis Meridional force and Hoop
force are positive for tension and negative for compression. Moments producing
inside tension is negative and outside tension is positive. In some places in this

43
 Vertical Wall ,--
Vertical Wall

Support

Ylr-~

(a)-i. Joint A, Type-1, Type-2

(b)-i. Joint A, Type-1, Type-2

b ~I
T
d

_L
~ Centroidal
:~ I Distance
; Col~mn Column
Support

(a)-ii. Joint A, Type-3

(b)-ii. Joint A, Type-3

(a)-iii. Joint B (b)-iii. Joint B

Fig, 3-7 Idealisation of joints

(a) Actual Joint
(b) Idealised Joint

.-
 study the melidional bending moment is denoted by only meridional moment and
circwnferential bending moment by circumferential moment.

These quantities are required for design and are to be calculated from the
local nodal stresses. The procedure described below demonstrates how to calculate
these forces from stresses. Fig. 3-8. shows the stresses acting at top and bottom of a
nodal normal. These stresses have two subscripts. The first subscripts indicates the
direction and the second subscripts indicates wheather it is at top or bottom of the
nodal normal. Now the forces and moments acting at the node can be calculated as
follows:

Np (O'~/+ O'~b)xl12
No = (0'01 + O'Ob) x II 2
M~= (O'~I- O'~b) xl 2112
Mo = (0'01 - O'Ob) x 12112

where" t " is the nodal thickness of the shell.

3.2.5 Capability of the Program at the Present Stage

The Finite Element program developed in this work for the analysis of silo
can provide a designer all the necessary stress resultants (Forces and moments)
and their locations required for a silo design. With this program a designer has the
following options:
I) Silo analysis using FPS or MKS method.
2) Silo analysis using WSD or USD method.
3) Silo analysis using Janssen's or Reimbert's method of pressure
computation.
4) Silo analysis of anyone of the three major types considered in this
study.
5) Silo analysis for Grain or Cement (cohesive) material.

The load combinations considered are:

a) Self weight
b) Self weight + Stored material pressure
c) Self weight + Stored material pressure + wind
d) Self weight + wind.

44
 OOb

(a) Nodal Stresses

z' N~

r'

a M~

(b) Local Axes

(c) Forces and Moments

Fig. 3-8 Forces and Moments with nodal stresses acting at

a node of an axisymmetric shell .
 If USD method is used then ACI load factor is considered for analysis. For
the above load combinations following load factors are used.
a) 1.4xSelfweight
b) 1.4xSeif weight + I. 7xStored material pressure
c) O.75x(1.4xSelfweight + 1.7xStored material pressure + l.7xWind
pressure).
d) O.9xSelfweight + I.3xWind pressure.

The present program provides the following stress resultants:

i) The absolute maximum values of various forces and moments either
in vertical wall or in conical hopper along with the maximum
positive values and maximum negative values. These are required for
the thickness selection of silo components.
ii) Distances from a reference point for all the stress resultants stated in
(i)
iii) Values of various forces and moments at each node for individual
effect (load case).
iv) The values of moments developed due to temperature difference at
each node.
v) The program considers three types of load at a time - gravity load,
stored material pressure and wind load. For wind load it calculates
forces and moments at an angle of 15° interval along the
circumference. For each node it considers the four load
combinations mentioned above and for combination (c) and (d) at 13
separilte points along the circumference. After considering all the
possibilities it finds out the maximum forces and moments at a node.
Finally for all the nodes either in vertical wall or in conical hopper, it
provides design values of each force or moment (positive and
negative) in the ascending order of node number. It also gives the
load combination number from which the maximum values are
calculated.

45
 3.2.6 Analysis and Presentation of the Results

(a) Analysis for self weight, material pressure and wind load

As stated earlier a prototype silo with data given in Art.3.1.3 is analysed

using' both conventional method and Finite Element method and the results are
presented in Art. 3.3 for comparison.

(b) Analysis for temperature difference

In Finite Element analysis an elaborate study has been made to know the
behaviour of meridional bending moment and tangential bending moment due to
temperature difference across the silo wall. In this analysis a broad and practical
range of various geometric dimensions and temperature difference has been
studied. Temperature difference of inside and outside of silo for all the nodes has
been taken the same in some cases. On the other hand in some other cases
temperature difference, LIT, varied from node to node. Geometric parameters are
also varied in this investigation. Vertical wall below pressure zone in Type-3 is
considered separately. In this research, temperature difference is considered only
in the pressure zone. Below the pressure zone (Type-3) inside and outside
temperature are the same. But due to temperature difference in pressure zone
considerable moments also develop in this portion. Fig. 3-18 and Fig. 3-19 show
the variation of ratio of moment at any depth "y" to the moment at the bottom of
pressure zone in percent, "R", with "(y/h)xIOO".

According to conventional method, (Eq.3-19) moments due to temperature

difference are given by

(3-19)

where MTtu = Ultimate circumferential moment

Myt,u = Ultimate meridional moment.

This equation can also be written as

(Ii - Ih/Ji) (3-33)

or

(fi - Ihlji) (3-34)

where at . = Coefficient of thermal expansion of concrete
L). T = Temperature difference across the wall

46
 C, =A constant and in this study it is expressed as 'Temperature
Coefficient' .

According to the conventional method C, is constant for all the depth of

vertical wall and corncal hopper and the same for circumferential moment and
meridional moment. Finite Element analysis. predicts values of C, for the vertical
wall and conical hopper and it is observed that beyond a certain distance from the
ring beam this values are constant. Further, C, is not the same (0.1042) for
circumferential .
moment and meridional moment. Values of C, may increase 50%
or more near the ring beam where restraint exists. Actual variation of C, for
meridional moment and circumferential moment. for various types of silos are
shown in Fig. 3-10 to Fig. 3-19. The symbols (H, 1"; L, l) used in this presentation
are shown in the Fig. 3-9. On the basis of this study a set of Design Curves are
recommended for the determination of C,. These curves are presented in Fig. 3-20
to Fig. 3-24. Using these curves, equations adapted for meridional or
circumferential moments are as follows:

(3-35)

(3-36)
In the above equations

Cx' = Temperature coefficient for Circumferential moment in (ft - lb/ft)

Cy, = Temperature coefficient for Meridional moment in (ft - lb/ft)

For vertical wall below pressure zone in Type-3 the Moments (Meridional
or Circumferential) at any depth "y" can be obtained as follows:

Moment at depth y = (R x Moment at bottom of pressure zone)/] 00

Values of "R" can be obtained from Fig. 3-22.

3.3 COMPARATIVE STUDY

3.3.1 Mode of Comparison

In orderto reveal the merits of Finite Element method of analysis in relation

to conventional method of analysis of silo, a comparative study is made. Results
obtained from both conventional method and Finite Element method are presented
in the same figure. At first, the stress resultants which can be obtained from both
conventional and Finite Element method are presented. A number of forces and

47
 --n-
T I
I

H H

Y
Y
Y W

Y'

(a) Type - 1
(b) Type - 2
(c) Type - 3

Fig. 3-9 Various Types of silo depending on ring beam support

with various symbols.

(a) Ring Beam Supported by column

(b) Ring Beam Supported by Monolithic Continuous Wall
(c) Ring Beam Supported by Separate Column
 100
~
.. . . .
--.: ..
90 1'2. ...
.~
0

80 C-

.
.
o •

70 0

.
o 0

60
~
.
t- 0

x .
:r: so
--
>-
40 c-
~
~
f- 0

30 .
.
c
.
20
~
.

o -" , ~
'.
... .. ..
o 2
" " " '" "10"
4 6 8 12 14 . 16
Temperature Coefficient x 100

Fig. 3-10 Temperature coefficient for meridional moment in vertical wall

( Type-1, Type-2 )
 100
..... .
~. •....•••
...
..
90 'F-
e
.
t-
1,--
f..
80
.... -
.. r-
70
..
u
-
.. .
I-
.. ..
a
60
.
a ..
~
x
50
.. .
-..>-:r: ..
... .
40

~ ..
30
..
.. .
.
20 ..
~
f-
,1
;
;
10 i

o
6
, ,
7 8
,
9 10
,,".,

Temperature Coefficient x 100

11
,

12
,
13
iU
14

Fig. 3-11 Temperature coefficient for circumferential moment in vertical

wall (Type-t, Type-2 )
 100
~ .
. ..
~
~
~
. .... ... " .....
90
...
80
. ~

..• .
70 •
.•
•
~

60 •
••
•
I •
>< •
~ 50 •
--
I
>-
~
e-
.,.••
40
.,.•.'"

•Ii-
30 •
• .
••
.
20 •
:
.
~
10 ."
.~~
~
~
~
..
- ,
~;.. ... .".
o
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Temperature Coefficient x 100

Fig, 3-12 Temperature coefficient for meridional moment in vertical

wall ( Type-3 )
 ......~,.).:
100
I

, r::-., , -.
. , 1-,
90 ,

...-
.. .
80
..
...
70 ~
...
..
..' ..
-
...'' .
~
~
~
~
60 ~
.' .
.• '
~
8
x
~
... •
"

50 .' •
--
I
>-
-
,

.. .
"
•

40 -
~•
.
,
~
30 •
••
..•
~ •
20
~ ~ -..
"
•
10
•
, .
o I I I I
} "

I •
I I
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Temperature Coefficient x 100

Fig. 3-13 Temperature coefficient for circumferential moment in vertical

wall ( Type-3 )
 100 ,
- - ! I
I .
-- 1
i\-- -
90 )
-I-
= _
-
n

80 i

..
"

70
- .-
60 •
-
0

0 t-
0 o
~
x
50 -.
--•••
-J.

.
40

.- -
30 r t-
....
..
20
-

10
- \ ~
o
6
"""
7
, ""
8
"
9 10
'" I""",
11
- .. . . ,.-, ," ,
i:>.:.
12 13 14
Temperature Coefficient x 100

Fig. 3-14 Temperature coefficient for meridional moment in conical

hopper ( Type-1, Type-2 )
 100
..-
90
f-
\.. ...
.•. . ...
.. .

80 0 0
- .

... . ..
70
..
I ..
60 = .. ..
~
.
x
50 -
--•••
..J o _

-
ooo

40
~
. ..
10-

30 o.

-
f--
..
20
.
.

10 J= -
o
6
'"''''''
7
"""
8
'"
9
" "1\'
Temperature Coefficient x 100
10 11
"
12
" "
13
"
14

. Fig. 3-15 Temperature coefficient for circumferential moment in conical

hopper ( Type-1, Type-2 )
 't,

100

:~
..
, 90
l-
.
80
.
t-
-
70 .

60
.
.
x
-l
~
50
.
•••
,

40
.
30
t.
20
~
\-. ...-
~
~
~ .
10
f-
F . . / .
.--;--:
2
, ,

4
. -~

6 8 10 12 14
Temperature Coefficient x 100

Fig, 3-16 Temperature coefficient for meridional moment in conical

hopper ( Type-3 )
 100

~
\
.. ......-
.

90 C-
~
.-..
~
~
~ ..
80 .

~
~
~
E ...
~
70 I-
~
~
.
60
.. .
.
x -.
-•••
50
-'
.
-
40 ..
..
30

20

.
10
. ..
.
2 4 6 8
J./
. .
10 12 14
Temperature Coefficient x 100

Fig. 3-17 Temperature coefficient for circumferential moment in conical

hopper ( Type-3 )
 100

90

r
80
~
~
~
~
70
t
E
E
60 ~
F
F
x
1:: 50

40

30

20 /

10 r
~
~
•
I
~
t ~
l-
,, , ,
.

-20 o 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

R

Fig. 3-18 R for meridional moment in vertical wall below pressure

zone ( Type-3 )

R = (moment at depth y)/(moment at bottom of

of pressure zone)x1 00
 100
~
f-

90

80

~
f-

70 0

60
-
0

x ~
50

40

f-
30
~

20

10
~
r

o , , , ,
l-
, .,, . , , , ,
-40 -20 o 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
R
Fig. 3-19 R for circumferential moment in vertical wallbelow pressure
zone ( Type-3 )

R = (moment at depth y)/(moment at bottom of

pressure zone)x1 00
 100
I
~ I Meridional Moment
90
I --
Circumferential Moment

80
I
, ---
I
I
a 70
a I
~
x 60 I
I
-->-
I
50
I
,
E I
40
E I

I
30 I
I .

I
20
;
I
I
10
(
o '-
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Temperature Coefficient x 100

20
. I

~ I Meridional Moment
18 I

I
--
Circumferential Moment

16
I ---
14
:
I
I
a I
a
~ 12 .
I
x I
10
-->-
I

8
~ I
I

~
6 -

4 ~

2
"""",, r---....
\

0
8
f-
"
r----
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Temperature Coefficient x 100

Fig. 3-20 Temperature coefficient for vertical wall ( Type-1, Type-2)

(A) Full height
( B ) Enlarged Lower portion of ( A )
 100

0 I
I
90
; -
Meridional Moment

Circumferential Moment

80
---
I
a 70 --l
a
~ I
~ 60 I
I
-..>-
I
50 I

40
~ ;
I
30 I
I
20 I

10 :, ..........•
I ---::::.
7 ~
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Temperature Coefficient x 100

14

~
.

;
I
12
-
Meridional

Circumferential
Moment

Moment
I
I
---
10 I

I
a
rE
a
~ 8
x :\
I
):6
:\
I 1\
I

4
t=
t=
_.\
\

, \
J )
..- ./
2 I

7
".;," "
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Temperature Coefficient x 100

Fig. 3-21 Temperature coefficient for vertical wall (Type _3 )

( A ) Full height
( 8 ) Enlarged Lower portion of ( A )
 100
Meridiooal Moment
~ --
90 Circumferential Moment
---
80

70
0
0
~
)( 60

-
J::
>-
50

40

30

20
/
10
/:
•...•.•.. \

o-40 -20 o 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

R

40
Meridional Moment
~ --
35 Circumferential Moment
---
30

25
0
0
~
)( I
20

-
J::
>- 15
/i
10
/ I
r
J
I
5 "- --- -..:,
~ -~ -
o-40 -20 o 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
R

Fig. 3-22 Ratio of moment at any depth y to the moment at the

bottom of pressure zone ( Type - 3, below pressure zone)

R = ( Moment at depth y ) I ( Moment at bottom

of pressure zone)x1 00
( A ) Full depth
( B ) Enlarged lower potion of ( A )
 100
\
~~ \
90
. -
Meridional

Circumferential
Moment

Moment

80
\
\
---
\
0
0
~
70
I. ,,
\

x ~
~ 60
--
...J

""
~
~
50

40

30

~
20
E

10 ~~
" -..
o
6 7 8 9 10
,
11
r---r--..
12
~
13 14
Temperature Coefficient x 100

25

Meridional Moment
~
Circumferential Moment

20

,
I

0 I
0
~ 15
X
~
--
...J

"" 10

5
\
\
\
\
o \
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Temperature Coefficient x 100

Fig. 3-23 Temperature coefficient for conical hopper ( Type-1, Type-2)

( A) Full depth
( B ) Enlarged lower portion of ( A )
 100

90
0 -
Meridional Moment \
\
Circumferential Moment

80
--- \
\

70
, i
0
E I
0
~ I
x 60 I

--•••
...J

50 I

40
~
30
1
20
l-i
10 U)
-"
o
o 2 4 6 8
- -- -- 10 12 14
Temperature Coefficient x 100

50

45 ~
~
~
-
Meridional

CirCUmferential
Moment

Moment
:/

40
---
35
0
0
~ 30 ~ I
X I
~
E
25 I
--•••
...J

20 I \
i

15 I
i
10
~
~

- =--
~/
5~

o
o 2
-4 6 8
-"
/
/
/

10 12
~
14
Temperature Coefficient x 100

Fig. 3-24 Temperature coefficient for conical hopper ( Type _3 )

( A) Full depth
( B ) Enlarged lower portion of ( A)
 bending moments, which can be obtained only from Finite Element analysis and
conventional method provides no means for the computation of such functions, are
presented later. In case of hoop forces, meridional moments and circumferential
moments due to wind load, the maximum values are shown considering 13
equidistant points (at intervals of ISo) along the circumference at each node.

3.3.2 Forces Obtained from Both the Methods of Analysis

(a) Meridional force

Vertical wall: In the vertical wall meridional force due to self weight and
stored material pressure are more or less the same both for conventional method
and Finite Element method, and it is negative all over the depth (Fig. 3-2Sa and
Fig. 3-26a).

Various stress resultants such as meridional force, hoop force, meridional

moment and circumferential moment due to wind load VlUY circumferentially as a
result of non-symmetric distribution of wind pressure in circumferential direction
(Art. 2.8.3). Fig. 3-27 to Fig. 3-29 show the circumferential variations of various
stress resultants on a horizontal plane at different levels for different types of silos.
,
From these diagrams, the locations of maximum wind effect for different stress
resultants are obvious. These diagrams also indicate that the locations of maximum
effe~t may change depending on the level of the horizontal plane.

Both positive and negative meridional force develop for wind load.
Investigation shows that maximum positive meridional forces occur at e = 0° for
all types of silos and maximum negative meridional forces, away from the bottom
supports, occur at e = 180°.Near the bottom support maximum negative meridional
force occur between e = lOSo and e = 120°. At e = 0° the wind direction is
perpendicular to the surface and the diametraI line is parallel to the wind direction.
Fig. 3-30a and Fig. 30b show positive meridional forces ate = 180° for all types
and negative meridional forces at e = lOSofor Type~1 and Type-2 and at e = 1200
for Type-3. Finite Element analysis and conventional analysis are in close
agreement in respect of positive meridional force for the upper part of the vertical
wall (Fig. 3-30a). But for lower portion of the vertical wall the conventional
method and Finite Element method predict different values. The negative
meridional force due to wind predicted by conventional method is always greater
than that of Finite Element method (Fig. 3-30b).

48
cO
 2500

Conventional,Type 1,2,3
2000
Finite Element, Type 1,2

Finite Element, Type 3

1500

13
.5 1000

>-
8 500
c:
in'"
i5
o
........
........
-500 .......•.••••

-1000 0 -5000 -10000 -15000 -20000

Meridional Force ( Ib / ft )
(a) Vertical Wall, Y = Distance from bottom of pressure zone
( upward positive)

o
Conventional,Type 1,2,3

50 Finite Element,Type 1,2

Finite Element, Type 3 .. ....

'

.. ..
'
'

13 100
.5
•••8 ..'
..
'
150 ....
c:
.....
~ ..'
i5 200
.. .'
'

250 .'

300 0
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Meridional Force ( Ib / ft )
(b) Conical Hopper, £ = Distance from bottom of ring beam

Fig. 3-25 Meridional Force due to self weight along vertical section
 2500
Conventional,Type 1,2,3

Finite Element, Type 1,2

2000
Finite Element, Type 3

1500
.<::
()

-"' 1000
>-
2lc: 500

~
o a

-500

-1000 a -10000 -20000 -30000 -40000 -50000

Meridional Force ( Ib / ft )

(a) Vertical wall, Y = Distance from bottom of pressure zone

( upward positive)

a .';
.,',
,,-
.,'
,,
.,' ,,'
50 -'

:2100
()
.S
"" 150
2lc:
'"
~ 200
Conventional,Type 1,2,3

Finite Element,Type 1,2

250
Finite Element, Type 3

300 a 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000

Meridional Force ( Ib / ft )

(b) Conical Hopper, £ = Distance from bottom of ring beam

Fig. 3-26 Meridional Force due to stored material pressure along vertical
section
.,., 3000

Meridional Force
-- .. -_ ..
Meridional moment

£ 2000 Hoop Force Circumferential moment

E .••. - - , ........ ........ --
Q)
E
/
,
0
:> 1000 ,,
a;
c:
0
:2 ........
- -
r--, - _::-< .:..:.:: - .•- -- -- ..- -- •....,
I
I

'. .... ...... .... ..

..... ......... ,

....... -- .. ..... ,- --- - ---- --- ..

iii 0 .'

-.,
:>
- --- .. --- ......'-..!.... '. ..... . '
'

- -- ........ -- ..... ."

I

-.,
" ....
I
....
~ -1000
Q)
~ //
/
-- £
0
I>- I- ,/
a;c: -2000 ~
0 F- .£
'6 I- e.
.~ r 8
r I
:> -3000
o 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180
Angular Distance 0 ( Degree)

(A)AtY= 1455 inch.

.,.-,
_ 4000
.,-.,
i! 3000
---- ..............
Meridional Force
--
Hoop Force
........
Meridional moment
- - --
Circumferential moment £
"" -- E
"E
Q)
r Q)
E
g 2000 0
:>
a;c:
f-
~
"" -- •...
:>
a;
~

o r ><- , ~
'6 1000 ..... ~
'"
,/

'5i / .... J11

E
:> /
---- "- "-
~- --- .. - ...........
- / .. --- _-- ......... ........ .........
:J
~
,--- .. ---- -_ .. -
-.,
., 0 . :: :..... ~ ...•.-.::..
~~.~~; .-;~--......... ......... .--.--),. .......... G

Q)
~ -1000
I-
f- /
'.
-- -- -
£

~- ""
f- ,/
.£
a;
c:
r
F'
,/ -

""- ......
Q)
~
0
l>-
.Q -2000 ......•
-0
"iij
:> t
r "-- I
e.
0
0

-3000
0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180
Angular Distance 0 ( Degree)

(B )At Y = 843 inch.

Fig. 3-27 Forces and Moments along circumferential direction on a

horizontal section due to wind pressure (Type-1, Type-2 )
- 10000

-
<=
<=
8000
:--........ Meridional
-- Force Meridional moment
- - --
f!
E
~
~
"'- HOOp Force
........
Circumferential
-- moment

6000 "
"
E
0
::;;
0; 4000
E '"
<:
0
'C
.~
2000
~
t '\
::;; t
- - -- --
-
<=
f!
t
--
0 t.e. e.e..c .:,:.; .•.•...
e: --
-:::: - ~
......... .......... ....... . .... . . ....

"~ -2000 ••
~ t
'" "-
"
""- ~

-
0;
~
~ -4000
-0
.~ "= "-g
::;; -6000 I

o 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180

Angular Distance 0 ( Degree)

( A ) At Y = 383 inch. o
_15000

-
<=
<=
,B 12000 •.•.•.••
Meridional
-- Force

Hoop Force
Meridional
- - --
Circumferential
moment

moment

E "'-
........ --
9000
"E ••~
0
::;;
0; 6000
<:
""
0
:g
"
::;; 3000
I". I.

'\
-
-
<=
f!
.~.....
0 ~--:;; ......... ......
"\

'\ "I\.
-
.
-
<=

~" -3000
f!
"" j....--
0;
is -6000
•• i'- L.-- ~
~
'C ~ a.
.<: g
"
::;; -9000
•• I
0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180
Angular Distance 0 ( Degree)

( B ) At Y = 226 inch.
Fig. 3-28 Forces and Moments along circumferential direction on a
horizontal section due to wind pressure ( Type-1, Type-2)
" 2000
,. -,,
" 0 / .•..
.•..
"E 1000
,,
•E /
a
- .... -- --- - ----
/
"
0;
......... -,"-; --... .. - .....' .... ..... ...... ...
.........
c
g 0 .... -----
.•.. ------ -.-
u
"• -_ .. - - .-' ."./ .. ..... .... ........ ...... ... ...... ... .•.. ,
"
~ /

"
"g
-1000

/
/
/

Meridional Force Meridional moment

--
/ -- ...... -
~ -2000
Hoop Force Circumferential moment
0;
c "" ........ --
II
"•
" -3000
o 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165

Angular Distance 0 ( Degree)

3000
"
" ~
"-E
- --
"- "-
2000
-...........
•E "," , .•..
"..
a c
1000
.•..
c ~
/
.•.. ,
---- .. ---
g /
u
"• ~..._. ~ -"- .. -'. . .....
.•..
. , -..... .... ...... .... . ........
0 ..... .. _- ---- -_ .. -
"
~ ~_.-- .--- -/-. .......... ....... ..
..........
....... . ...~ .•.....•.... .•.. ,
" ~ /

" -1000
~ /
i'-....
'.
--. "
~
ol' ~ .'"
/ Meridional
-- Force
...... -
Meridional moment
"
0;
c
-2000
F
c-
Hoop Force
........
Circumferential
--
moment "- i'--- ~
II g
~ ~ I
-3000
" o 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180

Angular Distance 0 ( Degree)

16000

"
" 12000
~
~
@] Meridional Force
--
Meridional moment
...... - -
"
"
"E ~ ~
Hoop Force
........
Circumferential
--
moment
"
•E ~ .......
8000
a
~
"
0;
c
g ~
.•...•...•...•. I-
4000 -

2 --
u
"• ~
"
~ 0
~
F.' ..." .:,:.1. ••••••• .......
.•...•...•..
~ c
.•..•......
"~
-
-4000
a
~
0;
c
I--
g -<lOOO

~
" -12000
o 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 185 180
Angular Distance 0 ( Degree)

Fig. 3-29 Forces and Moments along circumferential direction on a

horizontal section due to wind pressure at (A) Y 1517 =
inch, ( B ) Y 986 inch, ( C ) Y 8 inch ( Type-3 ) = =
 2000
,,
,, Conventional,Type 1,2,3

Finite Element, Type 1,2

1500
Finite Element, Type 3

~
J:::
U
.s 1000

>-
Q)
u

-c
en
II)

is
500

-'. --. ". -. -

a ..... .... ...... ...
.....
. . .....
-500
a 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000
Meridional Force ( Ib / ft )

(a) Positive (Tensile) Meridional Force

2000

Conventional,Type 1,2,3

Finite Element, Type 1,2

1500
Finite Element,Type 3

J:::
U
oS 1000 '" ,..•...
~
>- , ..
Q)
.•.•'~~.~
u
c "1":-."
tl 500 .........•
is ........ " . .. .
'
...... ...•...
"
a ........ ....
. .
.........•.•
-sao
a -2000 -4000 -6000 -8000 -10000 -12000 .14000
Meridional Force ( Ib / ft )

(b) Negative (Compressive) Meridional Force

Fig. 3-30 Meridional Force in vertical wall due to wind pressure.

 Conical hopper: For conical hopper the meridional forces due to self weight
in Finite Element analysis of Type-! and Type-2 are almost identical to those
obtained from conventional method (Fig. 3-25b). However, this is considerably
smaller in Type-3. On the other hand for material pressure, conventional method
always underestimates the value of meridional force in conical hopper in relatiOilto
Finite Element analysis (Fig. 3-26b). Again for Finite Element analysis, in Type-3
lesser meridional force develope than those in Type-l and Type-2.

(b) Hoop force

Vertical wall: Both in conventional method and in Finite Element method

the Hoop force due to self weight is zero for most part of the vertical wall (Fig. 3-
3!). But Finite Element method provide some positive and negative hoop force
near the ring beam. The positive hoop force is negligible but negative hoop force
due to self weight in Finite Element method is appreciable.

Due to grain load, hoop force predicted by conventional method and Finite
Element method are almost identical for the upper part of the vertical wall
(Fig. 3-32) . Near the ring beam some discrepancy is observed. In conventional
method there is no negative hoop force for the vertical wall. But in Finite Element
method there exists considerable negative hoop force near the ring beam in Type-l
and Type-2 and near the foundation in Type-3.

From Fig. 3-33 it is obvious that hoop force due to self weight is very
small in comparison to that of stored material pressure and this can be neglected for
design.

Conical hopper: Hoop force in conical hopper due to self weight and stored
material pressure are in close agreement for conventional method and Finite.
Element method in Type-! and Type-2 beyond certain distance from the ring
beam (Fig. 3-34a and Fig. 3-34b). Finite Element analysis predicts much smaller
hoop force near the ring beam than that of conventional method. Fig. 3-35
compares the hoop forces for grain load and self weight. From this the relative
importance of these two functions is revealed. In conventional method the
maximum hoop force occurs at the junction of conical hopper and ring beam but in
Finite Element method the maximum value of hoop force is found at a considerable
distance from the ring beam. For Type-! and Type-2 the distance of maximum
hoop force is about 25% of the length of the conical hopper and for Type-3, it is
about 14% of the length of conical hopper. The maximum value of hoop force in

49

.G\...
 2000

Conventional,Type 1,2,3

Finite Element,Type 1,2

1750 -
------
Finite Element, Type 3
............

1500

1250

131000
.5'
>-
~
c 750
tl
Ci
500

~
250
~

.
o .---- ----------- --- .---- ..--

.250 .
'

::
....... ...... ................ ....... .......... ....... ..'
........ ........ ................
~, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
-500
-4000 -3000 -2000 -1000 o 1000
Hoop Force ( Ib / fl )

Fig. 3-31 Hoop Force in vertical wall due to self weight.

 2250

~ Conventional,Type 1,2,3

2000 Finite Element,Type 1,2

-----_.
Finite Element, Type 3
.............
,

,
"

~ '.
1750

'.,
,,
1500

1250
f\
~
J::
()
1000
\
.!:
~
>-
'c"
.

'\
-'"
.
()
750
en \
is
500
I

250
,
,:;.
o - - -- ----------- 1----------- - - -- ------ -
.... ........ .. '
..................

.250
....
.... ............
.500

, , , ,
.750 "
.20000 .10000 o 10000 20000 30000
Hoop Force ( Ib / ft )

Fig. 3-32 Hoop Force in vertical wall due to stored material pressure.

n
 2000
Fin~e Element Analysis

"" Type-1, Type-2

"
Self weight

1750 Material pressure ------

\,
Type-<!
Self weIght ............
Material pressure ---
1500
1\
\
1250 '. \
\
\
~ 1000 \
.I:. \
o
.5 \
\
>- \
~ 750
c
Cll \
"lii \
is
\
500
\
I

250
\
\t.,
.-\;
---- .-----_ .../ ------------ ,.------..:.-:: .-'
o
\
.---
-250

-,"", - -~
.... ..~

-500
, " , , , , , " " ,
-20000 -10000 o 10000 20000 30000
Hoop Force ( Ib - fI / fI )

Fig. 3-33 Hoop Force in vertical wall due to self weight and stored
material pressure.
 a "
'.
'-- ". --. -'- ..'
",

50

....
100
;:::
() ...•.....•.....
.~
~ 150
••• .......
Q)
() ....•
c ....
'"
7ii 200
is Conventional,Type 1,2,3

Finite Element,Type 1,2

250
Finite Element, Type 3

300 a 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

Hoop Force ( Ib 1ft)

(a) Due to self weight

a ....... --. ........... . .......

--- --. '-,
-,- -'- -.
50

~ 100
;:::
()
.~
••• 150
Q)
()

-'"
c

is'"
200
Conventional,Type 1,2,3

Finite Element,Type 1,2

250
Finite Element, Type 3

300 a 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000

Hoop Force ( Ib 1ft)

(b) Due to stored material pressure

Fig. 3-34 Hoop Force in conical hopper.

 o . ", - - --- - --.
",
". ".
~
"-
'-. -', J
.•
- --
-
'. ,
50
. --
-5 100
.-.
-.-.
---- - -
-:~-

.5
.-
.- ...- .
..............

••• -- .
~ 150
/ --..- ..
--.... Finne Element Analysis
-- ... .
~ /'
is 200
Type-1, Type-2

.- ....
/' 8elfwelght

...
. Material pressure
Type.3
------

250
- Setfwelght ............
Material pressure ---
~ ,
300
o 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000
Hoop Force ( Ib 1ft)

Fig. 3-35 Hoop Force in conical hopper due to self weight and stored
material pressure.
conventional method is about 21% greater than that of Finite Element value in
Type-I and Type-2. But the maximum value of hoop force in Type-3 of Finite
Element analysis is about 10% greater than that of conventional method.

3.3.3 Moments Obtained from Finite Element Analysis

Conventional method of analysis of silo can not predict any value of either
Meridional moment or Tangential moment due to any loading. But Finite Element
method can predict those easily. The variation of meridional moment and
Circumferential moment predicted by Finite Element method for different load
cases are discussed in the subsequent articles.

(a) Meridional moment

Vertical wall: The value of meridional moment due to grain load is

considerable near the ring beam (Fig. 3-36). Both the negative and positive
meridional moments in Type-I and Type-2 are much grater than that of Type-3. In
Type-3 the maximum negative bending moment occurs at bottom of vertical wall.
In Type-I and Type-2 the maximum negative value occurs at the junction of
vertical wall with the ring beam and maximum positive value occurs at a small
distance above this.

Analysis of vertical wall in Type-I and Type-2 are similar for self weight
and grain load (Fig. 3.36) but for wind load analysis there is slight difference in
loading. In Type-2, due to wall support of the ring beam, the conical hopper is not
subjected to the wind pressure. But in Type-I, through the opening of column,
wind may create pressure on the conical hopper. For this reason wind load analysis
is shown for three different cases, separately. Fig. 3-37a and Fig. 3-37b shows the
bending moment due to wind load. From this figure it is clear that the difference
between Type-I and Type-2 is negligible.

Conical hopper: Conventional method predicts no value of meridional

moment in conical hopper for any of the stated load cases. But Finite Element
analysis predicts considerable amount of meridional moment in conical hopper
( Fig. 3-38). For Type-I and Type-2, at the junction of conical hopper and ring
beam, negative bending moment develops due to grain pressure. In Type-3, at the
same point positive meridional moment is predicted. For all the types the
meridional moment reduces sharply as the distance increases from the junction of
hopper and ring beam.

50
 2000
Fin~e Element Analysis
Type-1, Type-2

setfweight

1750 - Material pressure ------

Type-3
.
.............
-- _.
self weight
Material pressure

1500

1250

~ 1000
13
c
>-
~
c 750

tl
i:5
500

250
:
.".
, - .. _- .• - .....
-_.:.._---------- --~....•-------
o
f-
----------- -------------- ,.
-- ,

-250
?)
f-
-- - - .•..•.. ...
,.-

,
-500
-6000 -4000 -2000 o 2000

Meridional moment ( Ib - ft / ft )

Fig. 3-36 Meridional moment in vertical wall due to self weight and
stored material pressure.
 2000
.-
Finite Element,Type 1
--
Finite Element Type 2
1500 - - --
~
u
f-
f-
: Finite Element, Type 3
........
.!: 1000
~
>-
CD
J!
-'" ~/
U
C

<Jl
i5
500
f-
C-
f-
f-

/ f- . .....
..:' .
a
r ./
f- ...•.
~( ................... ........ ............................. ........................... . . ...........
-500
a 500 1000 1500 2000

Meridional moment ( Ib - ft 1ft)

(a) Positive Meridional Moment

2000
....
<;
•.. Finite Element Type 1
--
Finite Element, Type 2
1500 - ---
~
u
c
1000
~
c- /
/) Finite Element, Type 3
........

>-
CD
c
/ ....
..

----
U

-'"
C

<Jl
i5
500
~

......
.. ..
...
..
........

a
J ... .......
..... ..
....

-
"C- ,.::.r:~...... ............ ................. ................ ................ ............... ............
r
-500
a -100 -200 -300 -400 -500 -600 -700

Meridional moment ( Ib - ft 1ft)

(b) Negative Meridional Moment

Fig. 3-37 Meridional moment in vertical wall due to wind pressure.

 - -- -
o --- .. - .... l- .
-------} .,.. .....
-'. ----
50
,-... ...
..:,--

."5 100
I,
/
..
.!: ~
I
••• ,
'" 150
o
c
Fin~e Element Analysis
~ Type-1, Type-2
15 200
Self weight
Material pressure ------
~ Type-3
250 Self weight ............
~
~ Material pressure ---
~
300
-6000 -4000 -2000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000
Meridional moment ( Ib - ft 1ft)

Fig. 3-38 Meridional moment in conical hopper due to self weight and
stored material pressure.
 Due to wind load meridional moments also develop but these are
insignificant in comparison to the moment developed by stored material pressure
(Fig. 3-39a and Fig. 3-39b).

For all the load cases the meridional bending moment is significant near the
ring beam because of the ring beam restraint.

(b) Circumferential moment.

Vertical wall: Circumferential moment, developed due to grain pressure is

insignificant over all the depth of the vertical wall except near the ring beam (Fig.
3-40). In Type-3 the tangential bending moment due to stored material pressure in
the vertical wall is insignificant .

Tangential bending moments, both positive and negative, develop due to

wind load on the vertical wall (Fig. 3-41a and Fig. 3-41b). The maximum value of
tangential bending moment exist in the top portion of the vertical wall and it
reduces to zero at the bottom of vertical wall.

Conical hopper: Tangential bending moment in conical hopper predicted by

Finite Element method forall the types due to wind load is negligible (Fig. 3-42a
and Fig 3-42b). But these values for the grain pressure are somewhat higher for
Type-3 than for Type-l and Type-2 (Fig. 3-43).

3.3.4 Hoop Force due to Wind Load Predicted by Finite Element Analysis

Conventional method provides no means of prediction of the hoop forces

due to wind load neither in vertical wall nor in conical hopper. But Finite Element
method can predict them. Fig. 3-44 through Fig. 3-45 show the variations of
maximum hoop forces in the prototype. But these values are insignificant except at
the bottom of vertical wall.

3.3.5 Remarks

Investigation of the prototype silo reveals that the conventional method can
not predict the values of all the stress resultants required for silo design accurately.
The conventional method is completely unable to compute the values of meridional
moment and circumferential moment. Finite Element method, on the other hand,
analyses silo to obtain meridional force, hoop force and moments and compute
these values with acceptable accuracy. In practice Finite Element analysis of a silo

51
 0 .----
.--- ----
-- -_.-
50 , .~
• \
.r:;
0 100
.£:
•••OJ
0 150 ~,
-c:
CIl

is'" 200
~:

Finite Element, Type 1

\
250
~
~
"' Rnite Element,Type
------
2

t
300 0
100 200 300 400 500 600 -700
Meridional moment ( Ib - ft / ft )

(a) Positive Meridional Moment

0
... -------- 1--------
.. --- ..... --
.

... --.7;; '

...
50
.•,
.r:;
0
100 ,
,,
,
,, 0
I
.£: •
•••OJ 150 ••
,
0 ••
-'"
c:
CIl

is 200
,,
,
,

250
,,•
••
.
(,
Finite Element,Type 1

Finite Element, Type 2

------

300
0 -50 -100 -150 -200 -250 -300

Meridional moment ( Ib - ft / ft )

(b) Negative Meridional Moment

Fig. 3-39 Meridional Moment in conical hopper due to wind pressure.

 2000
Finne Element Analysis
Type-1, Type-2
8elfwelght

1750 f-' Material pressure -----_.

Type-3

I-
Setfwelght ............
Material pressure --- I
I
1500
I
I
I
I
1250
I
I
I
I
1000
J::
C,)
.5
I
I
>-
750 ,,I
,,,
'"
C,)

-'"
c:
C1l

is
500 ,
,
I
I
I
250 I
!I
- "l
,- . ".
a..,.--_ '.
....
o - ----------- -----------
'- ....•. ;
0

-
~
r:

.250
"I:
;J
r .--.~.'"
, " , , , , ,
-500
-2000 -1500 -1000 -500, 0 500
Circumferential moment ( Ib - ft / ft )

Fig. 3-40 Circumferential Moment in vertical wall due to self weight and
stored material pressure.
 2000

Finite Element, Type 1

Finite Element, Type 2

1500
Finite Element,Type 3
.l:
<.>
c:
1000
>-
~ ....././
c:
ttl
en 500
is

o
...... ......
.... ...-
.::.::::: •...•::: .. ...
'

-500
o SOO 1000 1500 2000
Circumferential moment ( Ib - ft 1ft)

(a) Positive Circumferential Moment

2000,

Finite Element,Type 1

Finite Element, Type 2

1500
Finite Element, Type 3
.l:
<.>
,", 1000
>-
~
c:
-m 500
is .. '

.. ..
'
'

o
..... ....
......
...... ....
':::.
-500
o -500 -1000 -1500 -2000 -2500
Circumferential moment ( Ib - ft 1ft)

(b) Negative Circumferential Moment

Fig.3-41 Circumferential Moment in vertical wall due to wind pressure.

 o
_ .... -
Finite Element, Type 1

50 ,, Finite Element, Type 2

,,
.•
13 100
.S .••
••
••• •
~ 150 ••,
c:
.~
(f)

is 200
.•
••
,,
,

250

300 0
50 100 150 200
Circumferential moment ( Ib - ft / ft )

(a) Positive Circumferential Moment

r .' .' .' FInite Element, Type 1

"
50
" ,, Finite Element, Type 2

,
.,
.c 100
<.> ••
.S •,
•,
•••
(])
150 •,
<.> •,,

-
c:
«l
(f)

is 200
•,
•
,,
.
,,
250

300 0
-50 -100 -150 . -200
.Circumferential moment ( Ib - ft / ft )

(b) Negative Circumferential Moment

Fig. 3-42 Circumferential Moment in conical hopper due to wind pressure.

 0
t
.._--- .._-~-..- .. - ..
. - --- ---
~
~
--
- _-f" - ---
.- ,

--- -
50 ,-
t r
,,
.<:: 100
t \ ,
0 ~ ~
.s
~ t ',I
••• .150 "
Q)
0 \

-
c
Ol
.!!1 200
I
\
\,
Fin~e Element Analysis

Self weight
Type-1, Type-2

Material pressure ------

~ ,, Type-3
250 ............

300
t
~
Setfwelght
Material pressure ---
-1000 .500 o 500 1000 1500 2000
Circumferential moment ( Ib - It / It )

Fig. 3-43 Circumferential Moment in conical hopper due to self weight and
stored material pressure.
 2000

"'= 5" Finite Element, Type 1

--
Finite Element, Type 2
1500
--- -
Finite Element,Type 3
........
.s::
<.l
c:
~ 1000
>-
Ql
<.l
c:
/1
Cll 500
'li5
i5
~~ .

0
\
.......
.,d .................. ....................... ............... ........ . ....................... ................. ....
-500
o 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000

Hoop Force ( Ib / ft )

(a) Positive (Tensile) Hoop Force

2000

Finite Element,Type 1

Finite Element, Type 2

1500
Finite Element, Type 3
~
.s::
<.l
.5: 1000
>-
Ql
<.l

-'"
c:
Cll

i5
500

o ...... ....
...........
... ,,::: :::::::::::::':', ::':::": ........... .
-500
o -SOD -1000 -1500 -2000 -2500
Hoop Force ( Ib / ft )

(b) Negative (Compressive) Hoop Force

Fig. 3-44 Hoop Force in vertical wall due to wind pressure.

 0
<::....:..- ------ - -',
---.

50 ..---- .----
.
-- -- ---
-',
- -'
,• Finite Element, Type 1
--'
Finite Element, Type 2

~ " - ----

.r::. 100 ~"

t.l •
-'= 0
0

•••
'"
t.l
150
0
• .,0

-'"
c:
lJ)

is 200
~
•
0

250
f
I-

~
~,
"- --- --.
I-
300 0
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Hoop Force ( Ib 1ft)

(a) Positive (Tensile) Hoop Force

0 ._-~ --, ,
,,• Finite Element, Type 1
50

••
,,
, .,.. ----- ')
,,
--
Finite Element, Type 2
- ---

~ 100
.r::. •,
'-'
.!:
,
• /
•
••• 150 1-',• V
/ ,

1-'
'c:"
t.l 1-'•
l
-'"
lJ)

is
I- •

200
I- ~

c-
C-
00

I-
o
,,
,,
250
I-

I-
- ~- --- . -,
~
l-
I-
300 0
-200 -400 -600 -800 -1000 -1200 -1400 -1600

Hoop Force ( Ib 1ft)

(b) Negative (Compressive) Hoop Force

Fig. 3-45 Hoop Force in conical hopper due to wind pressure.

.•.
may not be possible. Because a high speed digital computer and a suitable
computer program may not always be available. Hence an attempt will be made to
develop a simple but rational analysis procedure based on this extensive study for
quick calculation of forces and moments required for design. Again there are a
number of parameters (geometric parameters, material properties) affecting the
values of both forces and moments. For this purpose it is necessary to examine the
effect of various parameters on the overall behaviour of silo. Therefore a
parametric study applying Finite Element approach is made. Results of this study is
presented in the following chapter.

***

52
 CHAPTER 4

PARAMETRIC STUDY

4.1 INTRODUCTION

In the previous chapter the conventional and Finite Element methods are
applied for the analysis of a model silo and a comparative study is made. From this
study some drawbacks of the conventional approach is revealed. On the other hand
the potentials and melits of Finite Element analysis have become apparent.
However, the analysis and study of a model silo is not enough for the
understanding of the overall behaviour of silo. The development of a design
rationale for circular silos requires an extensive study of the effect of variations of
parameters on different stress resultants. )
I
4.2 SILO PARAMETERS

Behaviour of silos can be influenced by a number of parameters, which

include geometric dimensions of silo, the properties of the stored materials and
wind velocity. These are listed below along with their ranges of study.

Table 4-1. Geometric parameters (Fig. 3-7) of a Silo

Name oflhe Parameters Range

Height of vertical wall, H 40 ft. 10 280 ft.

Internal diameter of silo, D 10 ft. to 100 ft.

Thickness of vertical wall at bottom, Tbn"om 6 inch to 13 inch

Thickness of conical hopper at top, ftop 6 inch to 13 inch

Depth of ring beam, d 24 inch to 96 inch

Inclination of conical hopper with horizontal, a . 40° to 75°

Height.ofhopper bottom (opening) above floor level, h' 8 ft. to 25 ft.

Table 4-2. Material Properties

Name of the Parameter Range

Unitweight, r 35 lb/cft. to 160Ib/cft.
Angleof internalfiiction,p 150to 500

Coefficientof wallfiiction,JI 0.2 to 0.7

Other parameter

Effect of variations of wind pressure on stress resultants are also studied.

The range of wind pressure on silo was 9.2 psf to 103 psf which are equivalent to a
wind velocity of 60 to 200 miles per hour.

4.3 STRESS RESULTANTS IN SILOS

Conventionally designing a silo requires only two forces - meridional force

and hoop force, for various components of the structure. But Finite Element
analysis has revealed that there may be considerable meridional and
circumferential moments under different loading conditions. So in this study four
stress resultants, shown below, are considered:

a) Meridional force, N<p

b) Hoop force, No
c) Meridional moment, M<p
d) Circumferential moment, Mo

Since silo is an elevated structure the value of above stress resultants vary
along the height for the vertical wall or conical hopper considerably. To arrive at an
economic design these variations must be considered. Evidently the value of a force
or moment at any location is a function of its maXimum value. In this chapter,
therefore, only the sensitivity of maximum values for various functions with respect
to various parameters are shown.

In this study, as mentioned in Chapter-3, four loading cases are considered.

Parametric study, however, is made on three load cases - self weight, stored
material pressure and wind pressure. Temperature effects have already been
discussed in Chapter-3 in details. According to code of practice (ACI) temperature
steel is provided in addition to what is required from the analysis for other loads.

54
 In the design of any concrete structure it is mandatory to know the critical
locations where maximum values of forces and moments occur. As for example, a
rational design for moment requires both the maximum value of moment and its
location with reference to a fixed point. In this study, as mentioned earlier, the
variation of maximum values of various stress resultants with parameters are
presented graphically. The location for these maximum values may change also
with the change of various parameters. A comprehensive study also has been made
on the location of maximum forces and moments. These are not presented
graphically but discussed in the subsequent article in details for each of the
parameter separately. For the vertical wall these locations are expressed by the
distances from the bottom of vertical wall. For conical hopper the similar approach
is followed and the distances are measured from the junction of ring beam and
conical hopper.

In Fig. 4-1 to Fig. 4-10 the effect of variation of height of vertical wall, H on
various stress resultants are shown. The variation of H from 40 ft. to 280 ft. is
shown on the horizontal axis of each figure. The forces and moments are plotted as
ordinates. In a similar way the effects of other parameters are shown in Fig. 4-11 to
Fig. 4-72. The results are discussed in details in the following section.

4.4 EFFECTS OF VARlATiONOFPARAMETERS

4.4.1 Effect of Height of Vertical Wall, H

Fig. 4-1 through Fig. 4-10 show the effect of variation of H on various stress
resultants (maximum values) for various parts of silo.

(a) Vertical wall

(i) Meridional force: For all of the Type-I, Type-2 and Type-3 maximum
meridional forces in the vertical wall due to stored material pressure vary linearly
with changes of H (Fig. 4.Ia and Fig. 4.2a). Maximum meridional force due to self
weight also shows linear variations. In this case the meridional forces are always
compressive. Due to wind load both tensile and compressive meridional forces
develop and the variations are not linear. The higher the vertical wall, more is the
rate of increase in meridional forces. For all the silo types and for all the load cases
these maximum values occur at the bottom of veltical wall.

55
 60000

40000
i
~
"" 20000
-

.-.-._- .--
_. .-. ---.-----r- I _'-"

.c
Q) a
-- >--_.- I
u ..~ ..~~.::.._..r-~---L----+
~~'!:--~ I
o -20000
LL
co
............. ..................
- - - .. ..............
I....~.:
_ .._ ..- ..- ..1.

5
~ '. - 0
0

'0
-40000 0
o •
....
.;: ~
0

Q) -60000
0
0
0
......... 1

::2 ~
l-
". I
-80000
';.
....
~ I
-100000 a 50 100 150 200 250 300
Height of Vertical Wall, H ( It )
Self Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Posrtive
Negative
-- -
-----
Positive
Negative
__._.._ ....-
( a ) Vertical Wall

35000

30000

- -- - - - -- - - - I
::. 25000
.c
--.; 20000 - ,- ~

u I
o
LL
15000
coc 10000
o
'0
.~ 5000
::2
a
-5000
o 50
_
.. .. .. ..

100
.. 7.~.

150
.. .. ..

f'
200
--"r"'
_ _
,=- - .._ .. ....

250
.. --
..-

300
Height of Vertical Wall, H ( It )
Self Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
-- Positive
Negative
- --
-----
Positive
Negative
.._ -
_----- ..

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-1 Change in maximum Meridional Force due to change in H

(Type-1, Type-2)
 40000

20000
----'----
f--
--- ---'-
--_.----- -_._.-'--
--
<l:'

f1
o ..
- - - - - ...
_ .._ _ - ._ .._ _ -
.. ..
....
.. .. ..
-. -- ....~.. :~
:~::~:
..1--.__ ._---
..
. -- ..•..._ .. .•.•. :
~ -20000
o - ..... "":":', :

lL
OJ -40000
-- . ....
c:
o - .- - .
:g -60000 - .- - ..
..
'"
:2 ---.
-80000 ..
f-
-
-100000
o 50 100 150 200 250 300
Height of Vertical Wall, H ( It )
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
_._--
_ .._.'-

-( a ) Vertical Wall

35000
~
30000
<l:'
£ 25000
-- --
-- - ---
/
~ 20000
o
lL
OJ 15000
c:
o
:g 10000
'"
:2
5000

o
o 50 100 150 200 250 300
Height of Vertical Wall, H (It )
Self Weight Material Pressure
Positive Positive
Negative ......... Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-2 Change in maximum Meridional Force due to change in H

(Type-3)
 Fig. 4-5a shows the variation of meridional forces due to change in H for all
the load cases for Type-3 below pressure zone. The trend of variation is similar to
the variation in pressure zone as explained above.

(ii) Hoop Force: Conventional method can not predict any negative hoop
force for stored material in vertical wall. But Fig. 4-3a shows that in Type-l and
Type-2 considerable negative hoop force develop and increases nearly linearly with
the increase of H. Positive hoop force, due to grain develop forall types and the
values are much greater than those of other loadings. For pressure zone in all the
types the positive hoop force due to grain is the most predominant. It increases .
initially parabolically with decreasing rate up to a: value of H about 165.0 ft.
Beyond this the hoop force in pressure zone due to material pressure remains
constant with the increase of H for all types.

For Type-3 there exists no negative hoop force in the pressure zone due to
material pressure. For other loads such as self weight and wind load some hoop
forces develop. But these are very small in comparison to that due to materials
(Fig. 4-3a and Fig. 4-4a). Below the pressure zone in Type-3, (Fig. 4.5b)
considerable hoop forces of both signs exist due to wind load and material
pressure. For material pressure the trend of variation is similar to that of vertical
wall in pressure zone. But due to wind load there exist considerable positive and
negative hoop force below pressure zone ofType-3 .

For all the types and for all the load cases the maximum negative hoop
forces occur at the bottom of vertical wall. In Type-l and Type-2 the location of
maximum positive hoop force is more or less fixed and it occurs at a distance of
7.75 ft. to 8.5 ft. from the bottom of vertical wall. For Type-3 the maximum
positive hoop force exists at the bottom of pressure zone (top of ring beam).

(iii) Meridional Moment: Considerable positive and negative meridional

moments occur in Type-l and Type-2 due to material pressure (Fig. 4-6a). In this
case maximum positive and negative meridional moment may be as high as 1835
lb-ft./ft. and 7058 lb-ft./ft. respectively. For other loads meridional moments are so
small that their effect may be neglected in design. For Type-3 negligible negative
meridional moment develop in the pressure zone due to material pressure (Fig. 4-
7a) and the highest positive meridional moment is only about 750. lb-ft./ft. In
vertical wall below pressure zone in Type-3 the negative meridional moment at the
bottom of vertical wall (foundation level) due to material pressure is considerable

56
 30000

- ------ ---- --
- - - -
20000

~ 10000
"
.••. .••. -- -
------_.-- _._.-._--
_._-_.
o ............'._ __
._' .._ .. .. ..
.. ....... ........ .. ..... ..... ...... .... "... .... .. ......
"-"-"- -
.... ... .. .. -"- -
.. ...
" .. ....
~
o
~ -10000
- - -- ---- --- -
0-
o -- ----- - - -- -
o - -- - - - - - - --- - - -
I -20000 ----
-30000
o 50 100 150 200 250 300
Height of Vertical Wall, H (It )
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
----- Positive
Negative
__
-----
.. ..-

( a ) Vertical Wall

40000
~

- - - - .. - - - -
~
~
- - - -- -
--
~ f--
30000
~ ~ , .••.
~
--
""
,Q 20000
~
~
~
.••.

~
'~
"0
(J
~
~ 10000
0- I-
0
0
I
0 _ .. _ .._ .. -
.._ .. _. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .._.' .. .._ .. .. ..-
.-

-10000
o 50 100 150 200 250 300
Height of Vertical Wall, H (It )
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
-- --- _._.-
Positive
Negative .........
Positive
Negative -----
Positive
Negative _ ..-..-
( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-3 Change in maximum Hoop Force due to change in H

(Type-1, Type-2)
 25000

- -- - - - - - -- - - -
"-
-
20000 ,.-
'" "
'"
:::.
15000 '"
/
f1 /

/
~ 10000
a
u..
a.
g 5000
I

o _ .. - -------._ ..- _ .._ .._ .. .._ ..

f- .._ .._ .._ ..-
~-
.. . ..>-.. .. ..
' ..
--
.. -

-50000 250 300

50 100 150 200
Height of Vertical Wall, H (It )
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
_._.-
_.. _ .. -

( a ) Vertical Wall

50000

-- - - ---- -- - -
40000

'" "
-~- --
'"
f1 30000

'"~
~ 20000
a.
a
a
I
10000

00 50 100 150 200 250 300

Height of Vertical Wall, H (It )
Se~Weight Meteriel Pressure
Positive Positive
Negative ......... Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-4 Change in maximum Hoop Force due to change in H (Type-3)

f"'.- ...
 60000

40000
~
_.-.-.-' -'-
.- -,-'-'-'-
-
4"
f1
20000
~
-'_._' .-'

'"
C,)
~
0
~.•.. 1"«'::;-:-:-:""-:::-:: --------------
...................
_ .._ ..-.._ ..-. -..-..
a -- --- .... --- .........--:..:':':" .
u.. -20000
0;
- - - - .... --- -- ':'"."-'-'"
c -40000 .- ..
a
:2Q; .....
- - ..
::2
.60000
- .....
-80000
-
. ..
.100000
0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Height of Vertical Wall, H (ft ) _

Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
__._.-
.._ ..-

( a )Vertical Wall below pressure zone

15000

---
- - - --
10000
_.-'-
_.-.- _.-.-'-'-
-
1--
4" 5000 _.-._._'-
.0 -' 1-'-'-'-'-
o
'<t ~.,.. -------------- ..-.. .. .. - __-
-- .-:::..~..-..-..- .... ..--.
f.', _::::--:~~................... .... .... ....
.l:~
.5000 ... .
- - ... .
--. ,_
Q.
.- -
g -10000 ..- .
I .....
..-
-15000 .- ...
.
.

.20000
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Height of Vertical Wall, H ( ft )
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive -- Positive -_. Positive
_._.-
__
.. ..-
Negative ......... Negative ----- Negative

( b ) Vertical Wall below pressure zone

Fig_ 4-5 Change in maximum Meridional Force and Hoop Force due to
change in H (Type-3)
 4000

--
-=
2000

- ,..---- ,..- --
1----------- ,..---------
._____ ._0 ----------- f-------
I-

-= 0
~,•.•...:.;.:.::.:.:.::.:.:.: ..j:-: ••••~ •••-- •••••••••••••.••••• " .•.•.•,_.,_ ...-•... .•.••.•...•.•.•..••.•......•.•....... ".,",':".:" '.:.
,Q

-c::
Q)

E
-2000

0
E -4000
(ij
c::
0
'0
-6000 - --
-;:: - - - - - - .- - .. .. . .. - .- ..- .- - - - - - - .- .- - .-
-- -
Q)
~ -8000 - --
-
I-
-10000
o 50 100 150 200 250 300
Height of Vertical Wall, H (ft )
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive -- Positive --- Positive
_._.-
_ _ ..•.
Negative ......... Negative ----- Negative
..

( a ) Vertical Wall

2000

=- -- - - - 1--- - - - -- - - - --
- ---------- -- -
- '--
1---

-
-
---=, 1000
--.. 1----------- ---------- ----
-
0 : ,::-: :::.:::.:::::::::.- .:::':'::;;::':"::.:.:.::. ...::.:. ...•.•... _ .._. _ •••••••• I'T'O ••••••••••••••••• ~......•.. _ ..
_.c::
,Q
~-1000
:
:
Q)
E -2000
o : - - -- .
.!: -3000 -
-. .
'c"::
_2 -4000
:
~
'.
- ..-. --. - .._- --- -.
32 : -- .. _- - .._-
~
(;:;
-5000
: ". -. -
~
~
-6000 0
50 100 150 200 250 300
Height of Vertical Wall, H (ft )
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
_.---
_ .._ ..-
( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-6 Change in maximum Meridional Moment due to change in H

(Type-1, Type-2)
 1000

- - -- - - - - -- -
~ 800
*' - - -- -
*',
.0
600

:::. 400
..-
..- ..- -..-
_.---- f-' .-
'E
Q) ..... -.
E 200
o :
E :
1i'i a - - - - - - -- - _. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .- - - .- - - - - - - - - - -
c ~
~
~ .200 ,.
'C ~ '
Q)

:2 -400
.....•........
-.. "-"-" "
,. .. .. _ ..
'. .. "-"--'-"-" .. _'._ ..
.600 300
a 50 100 150 200 250
Height of Vertical Wall, H ( It )
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
---_.
Positive
Negative
_._0-
_ _
.. ..-

( a ) Vertical Wall

8000

- ~-- - - -- - - - -- -
..- - -
- - -
~

*',
f!
6000

':;:::'"
c
4000
- .- ~-
Q)

E
o
E 2000
1i'i
c
o
'5
.~ 0
- - --------- --------- --.------ --------- ----_.
:2
~
~
-2000 a 50 100 150 200 250 300
Height of Vertical Wall, H ( It )
Se~Weight Material Pressure
Positive Positive
Negative ......... Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-7 Change in maximum Meridional Moment due to change in H

(Type-3)
and may be as high as 2790 lb-ft./ft. for H = 280 ft. (Fig. 4-l0a). Due to wind load
maximum positive meridional moment of2424Ib-ft./ft. may develop in the vertical
wall below pressure zone. Both positive and negative meridional moments varies in
a way similar to meridional force or hoop force variations. For other cases not
mentioned above negligible moments may exist. Maximum negative meridional
moment always occur near the restraint i.e at the bottom of vertical wall. Maximum
positive meridional moment for Type-l and Type-2 occur at a distance of 4.0 ft. to
4.5 ft. from the bottom of vertical walL In Type-3 below pressure zone both
maximum positive and negative meridional moment due to wind load occur at the
foundation leveL The positive and negative moments occur at different
circumferential locations.

(iv) Circumferential moment: Maximum circumferential moment in vertical

wall is predominant due to wind load for all types and among all load cases
(Fig.4.8a,Fig. 4-9a and Fig. 4-l0b). Considerable negative circumferential moment
may also be developed due to material pressure (Fig. 4-8a) in Type-l and Type-2.
For other load cases circumferential moments are negligible for design. For wind
load, positive and negative circumferential moment may be as high as 1893 lb-ft./ft.
and 2203 lb-ft./ft. respectively for Type-l and Type-2. For Type-3 these values are
1890.0 lb-ft./ft. and 2196.0 lb-ft./ft. as shown in Fig. 4-9a. The variations of
circumferential moments due to wind pressure in all the cases follow the same
pattern initially increasing and then remaining constant with change of H above
150 ft. Due to material pressure, negative circumferential moment developed in
Type-l and Type-2, remain more or less constant. It varies from - 1127 lb-ft./ft. to
-1406 lb-ft./ft. for H varying from 60 ft. to 280 ft. (Fig. 4.8a). Maximum
circumferential moments due to wind load in pressure wne occur within top 15%
to 30% of the vertical wall depending on the value of H. Maximum negative
circumferential moment due to stored material pressure occur at the bottom of
vertical wall for Type-l and Type-2. In Type-3 and below pressure zone the
maximum positive and negative circumferential moments occur at the level of top
of ring beam and they remain constant when H varies from 70.0 ft. to 280.0 ft.(Fig.
4.8b). Here the maximum positive and negative circumferential moments are 844.0
lb-ft./ft. and 958Ib.ft./ft. respectively.

(b) Conical Hopper

(i) Meridional force: Variations of H affects only the maximum meridional

force due to stored material pressure as shown in Fig. 4-1b and 4-2b. The patterns

57
 3000
~
<I:'
-- 2000
~
._'
_. -
_. -
_.-'-'- -"
<I:'

f1
:::: 1000
~

•.•..."
_/ .- -'
c
Q) •.•...

E
E
o a -- - - - -- - - - ~-- - - -...,-- - - -- -
...........
.... ................... ................... ................... ..................
Oi ..•..
:;:: ...•...
as -1000 - - - - - ...•.•...
- - -,",,:: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
~ .•.••.•..••.•..
"- ._ .. .. "- ._ .._ .._ .._ .._. _ .._ .._.
:J
2 -2000 "

G
-3000
a 50 100 150 200 250 300

Height of Vertical Wall, H ( fI )

Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
......... Positive
Negative
---
----- Positive
Negative
__._.-
.._ ..-

( a ) Vertical Wall
600
~

--
<I:'

<I:'
400

200
- ----- - -
1---

..- - .-' -
f1
-'
-
~
c
Q)

E
a ...... ........ ... ....... .. ..... .... .... .. .....
_
.. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.. ..... .... ..... .... .. .....
____ ______
.. .. .. .. .. . .. ..-
0
E
-200 -" ,,- " ..-.'
"

Oi -- -
:;::
c
-400
-- - - - - - -
- - - - -- - - -
Q)
~
Q)
-600
E
:J
=
-- - ---- -- - -- -
G
u
~ -BOO
~
-- -----
-1000 ~
a 50 100 150 200 250 300
Height of Vertical Wall, H (f1 )
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Pos_
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Pes_
Negative
__._--
.._ ..-

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig.4-8 Change in maximum Circumferential Moment due to change

in H (Type-1, Type-2)
 3000

e
I-
""- 2000 - ~- - ,..- -
--.-'~.-'-'--
""
f1
~
1::
1000
~
, ..,,0
-'
~
'Eo"
E
0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -
0;
E -1000 •.....
'"
$! ....•.~
.
••.................
5 -2000
~
_
.. ..-..
"- ._ .. "-"-"-
._.._ .._ .._ ..- ,,-"-"-

G
-3000
o 50 100 150 200 250 300
Height of Vertical Wall, H ( ft)
Sen Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
-- --- _._ ..
Positive
Negative. .........
Positive
Negative -----
Positive
Negative
_ .._ ..•

( a ) Vertical Wall

2500

-
"" 2000

-- ----
""
f1

-'"
c:
1500
.-
,. --
E 1000
0
E
0;
:;:;
c: 500
~
'"
~
'E" 0
-
:::J
~ -- --------- e--- ______
--------- --------- -----
G ~
-500
o 50 100 150 200 250 300
Height of Vertical Wall, H (ft )
Sen Weigh! Material Pressure
Positive Positive
Negative . .. . •. . •. Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig.4-9 Change in maximum Circumferential Moment due to change

in H (Type-3)
 3000

E -_.-.- .-.-'-
--
""
""
2000
~
-' ---,-,-'-' ~-_.--_.-. .---'-'--
- - - -- - - -
,Q 1000

-
~
c
Q)

E
0
- - f-. - - --
"':':
':"':'.::.:'" ........ ................... 1--•• -._,,~".,.,;
0
:2: _
.. .. ..~.~.:.~::
:.:-..-..-.. .. _ ••7
:'.":::'.7:'::-:-"".,._ ..•..•.........
(ij
c
0
-1000 - " .. .. .. .. ..
- .. .. ,
"-
'5 -, .. , ,
'C
-2000 - .. ,
Q)
-'- .. - , -
:2:
.
- .. ..
- --
-3000 250 300
0 50 100 150 200
Height of Vertical Wall, H ( ft)
Material Pressure Wind Pressure
__._.-
Se~Weight
Positive
Negative .--
........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
.._ ..•

( a ) Vertical Wall below pressure zone

1000
_.-'-'-._' .. . ._. .-
--
"-'-,-,-,
750
""
"",Q 500

-c
Q)

E
250
- - -- -
0 0
:2: "';..'
..-..... .... ....... .. .... .. .... ...... .....
-- .-......... .............. ..... .. .. ..
(ij
.250
- .. .. .. ..
... . .
""c
~Q) -- - ,
., ... .
- ---- -
-Q)

E
:>
-500

0
u
~ -750

-1000
~ '" 1-.•. - ••_ .• .._ .. .. .. _ ..-.._ .. .._ ..-.'-"-" .._ .._ .._ .._ .. ,,-"-"

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Height of Vertical Wall, H ( ft )
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive -- Positive --- Positive
_-----
.._ ...
Negative .......... Negative ----- Negative

( b ) Vertical Wall below pressure zone

Fig.4-10 Change in maximum Meridional and Circumferential Moment

due to change in H (Type-3)
of variation for Type-I, Type-2 and Type-3 are the same. Initially the slope of the
curve is relatively steep. As the depth of the vertical wall increases the rate of
increase of meridional force in the conical hopper due to material pressure
decreases and at H = 200 ft. and above the variation becomes asymptotic to a value
of 30000 lb/ft. while other variables of the model remained fIxed. Meridional
forces in conical hopper due to other loads are negligibly small. Due to self weight
the meridional force is only about 4.5% of that of material pressure. For all the
above mentioned cases maximum meridional forces occur at the top point of
conical hopper i.e. at the junction of ring beam and conical hopper.

(ii) Hoop Force: Maximum hoop force in conical hopper due to material
pressure also varies in a way similar to that of meridional force as mentioned in
previous paragraph (Fig.4-3b and Fig. 4-4b). In conventional method the maximum
hoop force occurs at the top point of conical hopper but in Finite Element analysis
it occurs at a distance of 6 ft. to 6.75 ft. from the junction of conical hopper and
ring beam.

(iii) Meridional Moment: Meridional moment of both signs in conical

hopper due to material pressure are predominant (Fig.4.6b). The maximum positive
and negative meridional moment at H = 180.0 ft. may be as high as 1510 lb-ft./ft.
and 4810 lb-ft./ft. respectively for Type-l and Type-2. In this case the positive
meridional moment is almost independent of the variation of H, but negative
meridional moment varies considerably with the change of H. Initial variation is
parabolic and beyond a depth of H of about 125.0 ft. the variation becomes almost
linear. For Type-l and Type-2 positive meridional moment due to wind load is
relatively higher and the highest value of this is about 925 lb-ft./ft. for H = 200 ft.
In this case the variation is approximately linear. In Type-3 only the maximum
positive meridional moment is considerable (Fig. 4.Th). It increases with a higher
rate for lower value of H and the rate of increase decreases gradually as the height
of vertical wall increases and fInally it becomes independent of the variation of H.
For other load cases meridional moments remain constant at a negligible value. In
Type-l and Type-2 the maximum positive meridional moment occur at a distance
of 3 ft. to 4 ft. from the junction of conical hopper and ring beam and the negative
meridional moment exists at the junction. For Type-3 the maximum positive
meridional moment develop at the junction of ring beam and conical hopper.

(iv) Circumferential moment: Circumferential moments in conical hopper

are very small for all the load cases except due to material pressure. For Type-l

58
and Type-2 maximmn negative circumferential moment due to material pressure is
only worth consideration (Fig. 4.8b). Initially it increases with decreasing rate and
above a height of 150 ft. its variation follows a straight line pattern. For Type-3
only the positive circumferential moment due to stored material pressure is
considerable (Fig.4.lOb). For the model data and at H of 280 ft. the maximmn
circumferential moment is 1967 Ib-ft./ft.. It increase with a decreasing rate as H
increases and finally becomes asymptotic to a horizontal line. For all the cases the
maximmn circumferential moments occur at the junction of ring beam and conical
hopper.

4.4.2 Effect of Internal Diameter of Silo, D

(a) Vertical wall

(i) Meridional force: Variation of internal diameter of silo has considerable

influence on the maximmn meridional force in the vertical wall due to material
pressure and wind load for Type-I, Type-2 and Type-3. For all the types the
pattern of variations are same (Fig. 4-11a, Fig. 4-12a and Fig. 4-15a). Maximmn
negative meridional force due to stored material pressure increases with decreasing
rate and when the diameter of the silo exceeds about 45ft., it increases linearly.
Both positive and negative meridional force due to wind load initially decreases
with the increase of D. When D exceeds about 27.5 ft. then the maximmn
meridional force increases in a decreasing rate and finally it becomes more or less
constant with the variation of D. From this study it is found that the maximmn
meridional force whether negative or positive occur at the bottom of vertical wall.

(ii) Hoop Force: Variation of Diameter D has significant influence on the

positive and negative hoop forces due to material pressure for Type-I and Type-2
(Fig. 2.13 a). In this case the negative hoop force increases at a faster rate than the
positive hoop force. For Type-3 there exists only positive hoop force in the vertical
wall due to material pressure and the variation is similar to that in Type-I. For
other load cases, not mentioned above, maximmn hoop forces are negligibly small
in comparison to that of material pressure.

Positive hoop force below pressure zone in Type-3 due to material pressure
show similar variation as that in pressure zone but in this case the rate of increase is
similar. Variation of negative hoop force below pressure zone is nearly linear.
Considerable positive hoop force develop below pressure zone due to wind load
(Fig. 4.15b).

59
 60000
._,-'-'-'-'- .-'-'-'-'-'-
40000
.------ -'
~
;;:: 20000
---.- .-'-"
--£ a
..-.,_ ..-..- ..
Cll

"
~ -20000 - - - ...................~.• .."-"-... ....-...._._-.
..
".. ..,.....
:;':" . .. ... .. .. ...... .. . .. ........ .. ..' .. ..
' ' '

-. _ .._ .._ .._ .. .. .. .._ .. ..

'

a
U- - - -- - -
rn
c
-40000
- - - - - - -,-
a
:g -60000 - ----- --
-------
li>
:2 -80000 - -- ------- -
---
-100000

-120000 a 40 60 80 100
20
Internal diameter of silo, D ( ft )
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
__
_._--
.. .. -

( a) Vertical Wall

300000
/
/
250000 /
/

:: 200000
~ / "
~
.0
"
Cll 150000
~ ""
o" ~
.

" "
U-
100000
t ""
rn
c
I-
..- ..-
o t ..- ..-
'5
"a5
:2
50000

a
I-

~
~
- - -- - -
- .. .. _ _ ..
.. .. .._", .. .. .. ..

-50000 a 100
20 40 60 80
Internal diameter of silo, D ( ft )
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
_ .._ ..-
_._.-

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-11 Change in maximum Meridional Force due to change in D

(Type-1, Type-2)
 40000
~
J. J____________
~ '- '- ._.-.-._._.-._._. -

20000
"-._._._.-'- .-'-"
='
~ 0
,Q
............ .-:'",'.~:
.~~:.::-:.: :'.~:.~:
'.~ ..~.:.~..._., ..•... :... ........ . ........... .......... ..........
CD
C.l
~
-20000
, .'
,.x' ..,
__
.. .. .. .. .. .._ .. .. _ ..
0 / ,
u.. ,,
,
«ic -40000 ,,
,
- --
,
0
32 -60000
,
- ,,
, ,,
Q; ,,
-- - - -
:2 -- --
-80000 -- - . - - - - - -
-----
-100000
0 20 40 60 80 100
Internal diameter of silo, 0 ( It)
.
Self Weight
Positive --
.........
Material Pressure
Positive ---
-----
Wind Pressure
Positive _._'~
_ .._ ..-
Negative Negative Negative

( a ) Vertical Wall, pressure zone

350000

//
.c ,,/
::'250000 ,;
CD ,;
C.l

~ 200000 ,;
"
,;
«ic ,;
,;

_Q 150000
:g v'"
Q; ~,;
:2 100000 ,;
,;
/'
/'

50000 /'
/'
/'
_/'
_/'

20 40 60 80 100
Internal diameter of silo, 0 ( It )
Se~ Weight Material Pressure
Positive Positive
Negative _.. Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-12 Change in Maximum Meridional Force due to change in 0

(Type-3).
 200000

100000
-- - - -- - - - -
-
.

- - -
~ 0 -- -- - - - - --
- -- - - - , ,
.. .. . ... ......... ...........
" ,
- - - .'- .
.....
....
Q)
~ -100000
o ....
LL

a-
.- ..
0-200000
o ....
I ...
..
-300000 ...
.
-400000
0 20 40 60 80 100
Internal diameter of silo, D ( It )
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
-- --- _._.-
Positive
Negative .........
Positive
Negative -----
Positive
Negative
_ .. _ ..-

( a ) Vertical Wall

400000

- -
---
300000

=-
- - -'
.

.c
200000 -
:
- - -
==-
Q)

~
100000 c
I-

-
--- - - - --- --,
.

.•......•
~ 0 - --, -'.
a-
g -100000 -
- --. . , ,

I
'... ... ,

!= ...
-200000
~
-300000 ~
o 20 40 60 80 100
Internal diameter of silo, D (It )
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive --
.........
Posjtive --- Positive _._--
_.. _.'-
Negative Negative ----- Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-13 Change in maximum Hoop Force due to change in D

(Type-1, Type-2)
 160000
~
~
140000
,,'
~
120000
I-
"
<I:'
- 100000 ~
~
~ " ""
-- " "
,Q
~
Q)
u
~
80000 ~
~
,.--
0
u. 60000 "
0-
0
~
40000
t-
,,'
-- -- "
--. --
0 ~
I I-
20000 l-

0
~
~
I-
-- /
i--/
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. _ _
.. .. .. .. .. .._." ..

-20000
0 20 40 60 80 100
Internal diameter of silo, 0 ( ft )
Se~Weight
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Material Pressure
Positive ---
---- .
Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
_._
_
..
.._.'.
Negative

( a ) Vertical Wall, pressure zone

500000

400000
~
--" --'
/ " "
~
300000
-- "
-
<I:'
,Q 200000
~

~ -- /
/ --
/
/
/

--- - -
~ 100000
o /

U.
o~ - - .... .. . .. ... .
....
0-
o ~
"
. . ..
~ -100000 ....
-200000
~ .. .
-300000
0 20 40 60 80 100
Internal diameter of silo, 0 ( ft )
Self Weight Material Pressure
Positive Positive
Negative Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4.14 Change in maximum Hoop Force due to change in 0 (Type-3)

 100000

- '-'_.-'--'--'-'
J. _.-- _.-.-'-
.-'-'-- -'-
50000
".~.~
'-._.-._' --.-"
~
J: 0
CIl
C
o
::.>< -,~:::,::::-:
..::-::.::-::
..,-"<:..: ..~..~.~. .. .. . .
'6 •..•. ~...•... - .- - - .. .. ..
'C
'" -50000
:2 - - - -- --, ....- .... _-
- -- '-,
-""- .. " •.. - ..
. -"- .. -',
-100000
0 20 40 60 80 100
Internal diameter of silo, D ( ft )
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive -- --- _._.-
Negative .........
Positive
Negative -----
Positive
Negative
_ .._ ..-

( a ) Vertical Wall below pressure zone

80000
c
c
f-

60000
f-
/" "
r- "
r- ~""
--fa
<l:' r-
r- ..- " "
..- ..-
40000
f-

..- ..-~
--
f-
'"
()
~ f-
f-
0
u.. 20000 f-
..- ..- _.-.-.--_.- -.-.-.-.-'-
C-
o
0
r-
r- - - _.-._-.--.--'-
I
0
r-
I-
I-
-- _ ..
-.-.;::::-

::'.~i:"'::'
c.:::._._.-'-
~.::-:-..:....:::-:-: ...:-....
- .... _--- _--
.. .. __ _
-'-""":::"::::"::::"::. ......................
..- .. .. .._ .. ..
......................
I- --- - --- - ---- --
, , 1- .. _ .. _ .• - .. - .. _ ..
- ---- ----- --- - -
,
f-
-200000
20 40 60 80 100
Internal diameter of silo, D ( ft )
Self Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive -- --- _._ ..
Negative .........
Positive
NegatIve -----
Positive
Negative
__ .. ..-

( b ) Vertical Wall below pressure zone

Fig. 4-15 Change in maximum Meridional Force and Hoop Force due
to change in D (Type-3)
 Maximum negative hoop force due to stored material pressure for Type-l
and Type-2 occur at the bottom of the vertical wall and maximum positive hoop
force occur at a distance of 7ft. to 15ft. above the bottom. For Type-3 the
maximum positive hoop force in pressure zone occur within a distance of 3 ft. to
11.5 ft. from the bottom of pressure zone depending on the value of diameter.
Maximum positive hoop force below pressure zone in Type-3 occurs at the top of
that portion (top of ring beam) and negative value occurs at the bottom of vertical
wall.

(iii) Meridional Moment: Both positive and negative meridional bending

moments are predominant for material pressure for all types in pressure zone and
show a sharp sensitivity with the changes of diameter (Fig 4.16a). Positive
meridional moment due to material pressure increases with a increasing rate and it
may be as high as 22160 Ib-ft./ft. when D is 100 ft.. Maximum negative meridional
moment also follow the same pattern of variation but the rate of increase is much
greater and the maximum value may reach 127000 Ib-ft./ft. for a Diameter of 100
ft. For Type-3 the maximum positive meridional moment increases almost linearly
(Fig. 4-17a). In this case relatively greater meridional moment of both signs occur
due to wind load and it becomes constant with the changes of D when D exceeds
about 50 ft. Below pressure zone of Type-3 a relatively higher meridional moment
of both signs develop due to wind load and stored material pressure.

Maximum negative meridional moment always occurs at the bottom of

vertical wall. But the location of positive meridional moment is sensitive to the
change of diameter D. For Type-1 and Type-2 this occurs within a distance of 2 ft.
to 8 ft. for the range of diameter considered. This distance vary from 1 ft. to 3 ft.
for Type-3 from the bottom of pressure zone.

(iv) Circumferential moment: Negative circumferential moment due to

material pressure is sensitive to the change of diameter for all the range considered
for Type-1 and Type-2 (Fig. 4-18a) and it increases with an increasing rate. In this
case considerable maximum circumferential moment of both sign develop due to
wind load. For Type-3 considerable circumferential moment of both sign occur
only due to wind load (Fig. 4-19a). In this case both positive and negative
circumferential moment becomes approximately constant when diameter exceeds
about 50.0 ft. For diameter below 50.0 ft. the variation can be approximated as
linear. Circumferential moment below pressure zone is predominant only for wind

60
 50000

25000

- - -- --- - -- -
---
-- --- --- -'- ....

f1 -25000
f- -'. '- ..
. ...
~
'
....
"E
~ -50000
~ ..
.
'. ...
o ~ .. .
:2 -75000 ~ ....
(ij
c
o
~
~
. .. .
ii -100000 ...
'C ~ ...
'" -125000 ~
:2
~
-150000 ~ 100
0 20 40 60 80
Internal diameter of silo, D ( ft )
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive --
.........
Positive --- Positive _._0-
_ _
.. ..-
Negative Negative ----- Negative

( a ) Vertical Wall

40000 f-
f-

--
'*' 20000
- - - - -- - --
'*' -- - - - - --
-- - - - - - - - -- . .. -
.- __ .0_ ..
f1 a .,

- - ......
-c
'" -20000
E
.- ...
.....
....
0
:2 .. . .
.....
.
(ij
c -40000
.
2
"0 ...
'C
-60000 ...
'"
:2 .
-800000 20 40 60 80 100
Internal diameter of silo, D ( ft )
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive -- Positive --- Positive _._.-
__
Negative ......... Negative ----- Negative
.. .. -

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-16 Change in maximum Meridional Moment due to change in D

(Type-1, Type-2)
 5000

•..•
•..• •..•
~4000
=::
•..• •..•
'7 3000 •..• "
,Q
~ •..•
•..• •..•
1:: 2000
•..•
•..•
Q)

E •..• •..• •..•

:!ii
(ij
1000

::::-_.:::::.
--- -_.-.-'
~.-'--
- _.-,_.--_.
15 a
-"-"-"
- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -
_ .._ .._~.~~.~~.~ _C
-----------
'6
'C
Q) '. "- .. _ ..
::;;-1000 .. ..

20 40 60 80 100
Internal diameter of silo, D ( It )
Self Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
--
-----
- Positive
Negative
_._--
_ .. _ ..-

( a ) Vertical Wall, pressure zone

200000
c
~
~
E ,
t ,/
::: 150000
C ,/
=:: E ,/
,/

~ ,/
,Q ~
t ,/

•... •...
~100000
1:: C
Q) ~
•..• •..•
~
E E •..• •..•
o
::;; 50000
i= •..• •..• -
--- - - -
(ij ~
c:
o E 1--
'6 E
0':
Q)
a
I::
- - - ~- - -- --. ----------.
-';;

::;; E
~
i=
-50000
0 20 40 60 80 100
Internal diameter of silo, D ( It )
Se~Weight Material Pressure
Positive Positive
Negative ......... Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-17 Change in maximum Meridional Moment due to change

in D (Type-3)
 10000
I

!:. 5000
.

;;:: ------------- .=.=.=.~._.~-::::_=-=-:::_::-

--- _._.-.-.-.---- -
f1 a '.:"':'. '. ..
____
..- .. .. .. .. .. .._ .. .. .. .. .. ____
-
c -5000
CD
":'.::"7.:..,:,.::..,,:,.:..~._ ..••
";':-..,:':;-"-"-"-"
- -- -
- ---
E
~ -10000 - - - .. -
.- - -- .
]i -15000
c
CD
.
- ..- .
$ -20000
E
- ...
::J
e -25000 --.
G
-30000 a
20 40 60 80 100
Internal diameter of silo, D ( It )
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
__
_._.-
.. ..•

( a ) Vertical Wall

10000

-
;;::

;;:: 5000
-- - - -
- - -- - - -
f1
-_-_
-
cCD a -..
- - - - - - .- .-- -. ',_
I--
.. .. .. .. .. .. .'
-
'
--- ---_.-
. .. .. ";":::"::::":.: .. '.::':':::':'::~'
E
o
~
- -. .-- ...
::;;; .
--- ----
]i -5000
- - - ...
~-
c
CD

E .10000
- - - - ..
- ..
G-
::J
(J

~
-- - -
-15000 a
20 40 60 80 100
Internal diameter of silo, D ( It )
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
PoSitive
Negative
--_.-
_ .._ ...
( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-18 Change in Maximum Circumferential Moment due to change

in D (Type-1, Type-2)
 6000
~

-*'*' 4000
~
.-.-.- .•••.....
.-._-_.-.-.

--'-'
,Q

-c
2000 I
.••........
,. .......

----- ----
Ql
~.
E
0 0 ----------- - - -- -
- - - --- - --
- --
-- -- -
- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - -
:2 ....••.....••...
Oi ..•.•...•.•.
:;:;
c -2000 ..
~Ql ..•.....••...
Ql
~ .'.
E ,
:J -4000
()
~
....••...
-"- .._ .._ .._ .._ .._ .._ .._ .. _ _ .._ .._
.._ .. .. ..

G
-6000
0 20 40 60 80 100
Internal diameter of silo, D (ft )
Sel/Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
-------- Positive
Negative
__
_0_--
.. ...

( a ) Vertical Wall, pressure zone

50000

- 40000
/
*' - /

""
.0
-
~
-
C
Ql
E
30000
E ,,' "
o 20000 " .

:2 - "
co ~/ ""
'E 10000
: ~~

--- - -- ------~----- ----------

~
$ I--~
~
~ 0 -
- - -----------
2 ~
G ~
-10000
o 20 40 60 80 100
Internal diameter of silo, D ( ft )
Se~ Weight Material Pressure
Positive Positive
Negative Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-19 Change in maximum Circumferential Moment due to change

in D (Type-3)
load (Fig. 4-20b). The pattem of variation is similar to that of pressure zone of
Type-3.

In Type-1 and Type-2 maximum positive circumferential moment occurs

within a distance of about 3 ft. to 8 ft. from the bottom of vertical wall and
maximum negative circumferential moment develop at the bottom of vertical wall
for material pressure. Circumferential moments of both signs due to wind load for
all types occur at the top of the vertical wall.

(b) Conical Hopper

(i) Meridional force: Meridional force in conical hopper due to material

pressure only is predominant among those of all other loads cases for all types of
silos (Fig. 4-11 b, Fig. 4-12b). For all types the maximum meridional force
increases with a increasing rate upto a diameter of about 50 ft. and beyond that the
variation follows a linear path.

For all of the three types the location of maximum meridional force vary
with the change of diameter. In Type-1 and Type-2 the maximum meridional force
occur within a distance of 0 to 7 ft. from the junction of ring beam and conical
hopper. For Type-3 this range is 2 ft. to 8 ft ..

(ii) Hoop Force: Maximum positive and negative hoop force due to stored
material pressure is the most predominant in all types of silos. Negative hoop force
exist only when the diameter exceeds about 50 ft. for Type-1 and Type-2 (Fig. 4-
13b) and 55 ft. for Type-3 (Fig. 4-14b). In each type maximum hoop force due to
material pressure increases initially with increasing rate and when D exceeds 40 ft.
it varies linearly.

Maximum positive hoop force occurs within a distance of 2 ft. to 15.5 ft.
from the top of the conical hopper (Junction of hopper and ring beam) for Type-I
and Type-2. For Type-3 this range is about 2 ft. to 5.5 ft .. Maximum negative hoop
force always occurs at the junction of ring beam with conical hopper.

(iii) Meridional Moment: Maximum meridional moment in conical hopper

of both negative and positive signs are predominant due to material pressure for
Type-land Type-2 (Fig. 4-16b). For Type-3, only positive meridional moment due
to material pressure is predominant and increases with an increasing rate (Fig. 4-
17b).

61
 6000
.-.--_.-.-"
-
== 4000
==, . -.-'-'-'--
••...
,-,-'-'-'-

f1 2000 _._.-.-'
-
C
Ql
E 0
'--
- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - .. -.. "-- ..-..
:~:::.~:~~:
- . ........ .......... .. ......... .. ... ....
0 . ~''''''''-''''~:.:....:'
' .... ". ........ ...
:2:
c;; -2000
0
c
- -- . - --,
- - - - - :::""."::-
'5
'C
Ql -4000
~:o:.::.:':~::..:..
':':':.:.~ -
.••...
.=".::
:2: .

-6000
0 20 40 60 80 100
Internal diameter of silo, D (ft )
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
-----
_ .._ ..-
( a ) Vertical Wall below pressure zone

3000

-
==
== 2000
~
~
-'-'----
_.-._---_.- ---------

-
f1 ~ .1-'--
c
Ql
E
1000

E _.-'- ---'-- -'

. ............... .. ....................... ....................... ......................
-.,- ..-..
0 0
:2: --"':'::,::,: . .. .
..-- -- -- - ---- --- --- - ---- -----
c;;
:;:;
c -1000
E "- '-"- "- .. -- ------- -
---
..-.._ ..-.._ ..-
Ql
~
~
"-. -..-"-
~
E -2000
::J
()
--._ .. ..
~
G
-3000
0 20 40 60 80 100
Internal diameter of silo, D (ft )
Self Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
__
-----
.. ..-

( b ) Vertical Wall below pressure zone

Fig. 4-20 Change in Maximum Meridional and Circumferential Moment

due to change in D (Type-3)
 Negative melidional moment develop near the ring beron. Positive
meridional moment in Type-3 also occur near the ring beatn. Maximum positive
meridional moment exist within a distance of 2 ft. to 6 ft. from the junction of ring
beatn and conical hopper in Type-l and Type-2.

(iv) Circumferential moment: In Type-l and Type-2 the maximum positive

and negative circumferential moments due to material pressure are dominant (Fig.
4-l8b). For Type-3, only maximum positive circumferential moment due to
material pressure is considerable (Fig. 4-19b).

Maximum negative circumferential moment occur at the top of hopper and

maximum positive circumferential moment exists within a distance of 1.5 ft. to 6 ft.
Ji-om the junction of ring beatn and hopper for Type-1 and Type-2. For Type-3 the
maximum positive circumferential moment develop near the ring beatn.

4.4.3 Effect of Inclination of Conical hopper with horizontal, a

(a) Vertical wall

(i) Meridionalforce: Meridional force in vertical wall IS independent of

variation of a (Fig. 4.21a).

(it) Hoop Force: Hoop force due to stored material pressure changes
considerably with the change of a and it decreases in a linear fashion with increase
of a (Fig. 4.22a). But for the maximum negative hoop force the rate of decrease is
much more pronounced. The location of both maximum positive and negative hoop
force do not change with change of a.

(iii) Meridional Moment: Maximum meridional moment in vertical wall due

to material pressure changes considerably with the change of a (Fig. 4.23a) and it
decreases in a linear fashion with the increase of a. The rate of decrease for
maximum negative melidional moment is much more pronounced. The locations of
maximum meridional moment does not change with the change of a.

(il) Circumferential moment: Maximum negative circumferential moment

only decreases considerably with the increase of a (Fig. 4.24a). The location of
maximum circumferential moment remains fixed due to change of a.

62
 40000

=- 20000
--
fl

'"
t.l
~
o
u..
0
.. _ .._ .._ .. ___
.. .. .. ..- .._ .. _ .. _ ..- ._ .._ .._ .._. _ .._ .._ .._ .. .._ .._ .._ .. ___
.. .. .. ..-
.. .......... .. .. .. .. .. .... .__ ...
Cii
<:: .20000
.Q
-0
.;::
'"
::;; -40000
------- - -- - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- ------ - - - ---- - - - -- - -- - - - -
.
-60000
40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
Inclination of conical hopper, a ( degree)
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive -- Positive --- Positive _._.-
_ _
Negative ......... Negative ----- Negative
.. ..•

( a ) Vertical Wall

40000
... •.. -
~
~
~
... ... ~
=- 30000
~
----
--
fl
F

'"
t.l
20000
o
u..
Cii
<:: 10000
o
'C
.;::
'"
::;; 0 .. .. .. .. .. .. ..- ,,~
.. .. .. .. ~.: .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. '.

-10000
40 45 00 ~ w • ro 75
Inclination of conical hopper, a ( degree)
SelfWeighf Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive -- --- _A_'.
Negative .........
Positive
Negative -----
Positive
Negative
_ .._ ..-
( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-21 Change in maximum Meridional Force due to change in a

(Type-1, Type-2)
 30000

'"" - - -
- - -- - - - - -- - -- - - - - - - - - -- - -
20000

~ 10000
.0

e-.-._.-. '-'_0_. -_. ..-

~ 0 1::-" '. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..- .. ..- .. ..- .. .. .. .. ........ .. .. .. ..
o .. .. .... .. ... ...... .... .. .. ' ...... .. .. ... ..
lL
C-
-- ----- ---- ----
------
O -10000
o
I
. --
. - .- - - -
- - - ...- -
-20000
. ----
- -- -- --
-30000
40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
Inclination of conical hopper, a ( degree)
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
-- --- _._.-
Positive
Negative .........
Positive
Negative -----
Positive
Negative
_ .._ ..-
( a ) Vertical Wall

40000
--- - - - - - -
- - - - -- - --
30000
--- - - --
--
4=

~ 20000

'"e
o
'::i. 10000
a
o
I
'_. -_.
o '
__ -
. .. ,. .. .. .. .. .. .. '._ .. .. .. .. .. ..- .. .. .. .. _ _ .._.' .._ .. .. .. .. ..

-10000
40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
Inclination of conical hopper, a ( degree)
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Posttive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
__.-.._ ....-
( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-22 Change in maximum Hoop Force due to change in a

(Type-1, Type-2)
 4000

~._._--.-_._._.-. --
2000
- -- -----_.-
- - - - --'-'-'-'
-.==== a
---._-_.
_ .._.__ .._- ~-_._-----.- .'-
--_._-_.- - - - ~- - --
'-.-._.-
.. _ •••••••••••••••• wo' ••• _ •• wo •••••••••• ..:.: •••. ..............
,......c :." ':." ':." ':.:'; :

£2

-c:
Q)

E -4000
-2000

... ..
.
- ... -
.
0 .
:;; .- -
c;; -6000
... - .. -
- ....-
c:

. .- .- -
0
'6 -8000
.
- - -
'C
..
-
Q)

.
- - - - .-
:;; -10000

-12000
40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
Inclination of conical hopper, a ( degree)
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive.
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
-----
-'._ ..-
( a ) Vertical Wall

4000

-.
== 2000
:.
- - - - -- -- - -- - - -
==
£2
-c:
Q)
a
------_.
.,•.••..,..•...••.•....•
f-.-._-_.- _._-_._. _._._._-- --------- -
.••.•."' ..•...••.•...•
--
_._._---
...•.••..••.•...,•.••.._ ••... •••••• _ •••••••
' •••••• H •••••••
_.'._ .._ .._ .. ~__ _ - _ _ _ - .=.=._.-
.. .. .. .. .. .. ..

E -2000
.- - - - - - - - - - -
o
:;;
- - - -
c;;
c: -4000 .- - - - - - - - - - -- - --- -
'6
o
- - - - - --
. - - - - - .- - - -
~ -6000

-8000
40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
Inclination of conical hopper, a ( degree)
Self Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
__._--
.._ ..-

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-23 Change in maximum Meridional Moment due to change in a

(Type-1, Type-2)
 3000

-
;I::

;I::

.0
2000
~
-------- ._._._-- _._._--- 1--------- --- -_.

-c:
1000
Q)
E
0
:2:
c;;
0
~-- -.
...
-
.. .. ..
- -..- - -.. - - ..>-- -.. ..-- -- ---- --
... .. - - --
.... ...

:;:;
- - - . .- - - - .-
.- - - - - - - - -
c: -1000 - .

-"
Q)
~ - -
- - -
Q)

E -2000 - - - - - - .- - - -
- -
.. .. .. .. .. ..
- - - ._ .. _ .. _ .. _ ..
__ .. ..
!:"",.-."l'.- .. .. .. .. .. .. +... .. .. ..
"-"-"- 1-..
"
0
~
-3000
40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
Inclination of conical hopper, a ( degree)
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
--_.-
-,,_ ..•

( a ) Vertical Wall

1000
••

- ---
;I::

;I::
750

500 --- - - -
f1 ~ - - - - - - - .,..
-c:
Q)

E
250
1----- --- --- - -I---
••
---- -
0 0 ... .. .. .. .. .. --. -- . .... -- -- .-- . .. -- -- .... -- .
:2:
c;;
1=-- .._ .._. "-"-"-"- ._ .. _ __
.. .. .. 1- .. _ .._ .. - ..
"-"-"_ .. _. - .. _ .. -._.,
:;:;-250 '-"
c:
~
-- - -----
-
J!! -500
E - - . - - . - - - .. - - - -
-- - ------ -- - -- ---
.
"~ -750
- - - - .- .- -
o 1>--
-1000
40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
Inclination of conical hopper, a ( degree)
Self Weight I Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive --
.........
Positive --- Positive _._.-
__
.. ..-
Negative Negative ----- Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-24 Change in maximum Circumferential Moment due to change

in a (Type-1, Type-2)
(b) Conical Hopper

(i) Meridional force: Maximum positive meridional force due to stored

material pressure increases noticeably due to change in a only when a exceeds 65°
for all the types (Fig. 4.21b and Fig. 4.25a). For a below 65° it is more or less
constant with the variation of a.

(ii) Hoop Force: Maximum positive hoop force due to material pressure
only decreases almost linearly with the increase of a for all the types (Fig. 4-22b,
Fig. 4-25b). The locations of maximum hoop forces are more or less fixed.

(iii) Meridional Moment: Maximum meridional moments of both signs due

to stored material change in Type-l and Type-2 due to change in a. Both these
cases the variation of meridional moment may be approximated by a straight-line
(Fig.4.23b).

For Type-3 the maximum Positive meridional moment due to material

pressure (Fig. 4.26a) changes with changes in a . Initially it decreases slightly, then
it increases.

(iv) Circumferential moment: Maximum circumferential moment, both

positive and negative, in conical hopper decreases due to increase of a in a linear
fashion (Fig. 4.24b) for Type-l and Type-2 due to material pressure. For Type-3
the maximum positive circumferential moment due to material pressure initially
decreases and then it increases (Fig. 4-26b).

4.4.4 Effect of Bottom Thickness of Vertical Wall, Tbottom

(a) Vertical Wall

(i) Meridional force: The variation of bottom thickness of vertical wall

slightly influence the maximum positive and negative meridional force due to wind
load (Fig. 4-27a) and the variations are linearly decreasing. It has no effect on the
meridional forces due to material pressure. Only the maximum negative meridional
force due to self-weight increases due to the increase in weight of concrete with
higher Thol/om .

In Type-3, changes in Thol/om has no effect on maximum meridional force in

pressure zone due to wind or material pressure. (Fig. 4.29a). Due to self weight
only the maximum negative meridional force increases linearly with the increase of
ThOI/Om.

63
 35000

30000
- I- • - -- - - - - -- - -- - - - - - - - - - - -
=
- 25000
,Q

~ 20000
~
o
LL
Cii15000
c
o
:g 10000
Q)
::2E
5000

o
40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
Inclination of conical hopper, a ( degree)
Se~Weight Material Pressure
Positive Positive
Negative Negative

( a ) Conical Hopper

50000
l-
I-

~--- ---
40000 f--
--
-
=
,Q 30000
I.
---- - - - - -- --
Q)

E
& 20000
a. , "
g
I
10000
.

45 ~ ~ ~ ffi ro 75
Inclination of conical hopper, a ( degree)
Se~Weight MaterialPressure
Positive Positive
Negative Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-25 Change in maximum Meridional Force and Hoop Force due
to change in a (Type-3)
 8000

4:'

- - -~- - - - ~-- - -- -- --
--
-. 6000

- - -- - - - - --
4:'

f1
:;:- 4000
c
'Eo"
:2 2000
c;;
c
o
'5
a
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"i::
'"
:2
.
-2000
40 45 ~ U 00 • ro 75
inclination of conical hopper, a ( degree)
Se~Weight MaterialPressure
Positlve Positive
Negative Negative

( a ) Conical Hopper

2500

4:' " .•.. .•..

-. 2000
4:',
.•.. .•..
.•.. .•..
-~-
--
.0
::::. 1500
- +-- - -- -----

-- - -- - --- - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - - - ---- ---

- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - -
-500
40 45 ~ U 00 • ro 75
Inclination of conical hopper, a( degree)
Se~Weight MaterialPressure
Positive Positive
Negative Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-26 Change in maximum Meridional and Circumferential Moment

due to change in a (Type-3)
 30000
-'-'-._. -'-'-'-,- ----'-'- -----'- -'-'-'-' --------
15000 ------'-
.

~ _ .._ .._ .._ .. _ ___

..- .. .._'.- .. .. .. ..- ._ .. .. _ _._ _ _ _ _ _
. .. ..~.. .. .. .. .._-- ,,-"-"-'-
..
o
u. -15000
... ....... ...... ..
.. ...... ..... .. .. .. ..... ........
... ..... ....
OJ
c:
~ -30000
.",
Q)

:2 -45000 - - - -- --- ----- ---- - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- --

-60000
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Bottom thickness of vertical wall, Tbottom (inch)
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
-- --- _._.-
Positive
Negative ......... Positive
Negative -----
Positive
Negative _ .._ ..-
( a ) Vertical Wall

35000

30000
f- .- - - --
::. 25000
,9
~20000
~
~ 15000
OJ
5 10000
'6
"ij3 5000
:2
o f'-c. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. _
.. .. ,.~
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. _ .. .. ..- .. .. .. ..

-5000
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Bottom thickness of vertical wall, Tbottom (inch)
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
_-----
.._ ..-

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-27 Change in maximum Meridional Force due to change in

Tbottom (Type-1, Type-2)
 30000
~
r- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - -- - - - -
20000

--*'
f1
10000

~._--._._. ._.
'"~ a .. _ .. .. .._ .. .. .. .._,. .. ..
........ ..- .. ..
.. ...... .. ..... .. ..... ..... .. ...
.. .. .. .. .. "_ .. .. ..
..... .. .. ... ... ..
.. ..
..
o
lL
c. -10000
- - -- - - - - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - --
o
o - - -
I
- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -- - - - -
-20000

-300006
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Bottom thickness of vertical wall, Tbottom (inch)
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Pos_
Negatlve
__._--
.._ ..-

( a ) Vertical Wall

40000

"-- - - f-- - -- - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - -- -- --
30000
~
--
*'
f1 20000
c-
c-
c-
o

f-
f-
~ ,
.f 10000
c-
o

c.
o c-
o
,,-.
c-
I
a p .. .. .. ..
-
_.
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .._ .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
- -
.. .. .. .._ .. .. .. ..
c-
f-
f-
-100006
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Bottom thickness of vertical wall, Tbottom (inch)
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Pos_
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Nega1lve
---
-----
Positive
Negative
_._.~
_ .._ ..-
( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-28 Change in maximum Hoop Force due to change in Tbottom

(Type-1, Type-2)
 20000
t
l. - - .1.... - -
10000
t
o
t
~
___ ___ _ ___ ___ ___
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..- "._"._ .. ..- -"-"_.'_ .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..- .. .. .. ..-
~ -10000 .. .. .. .. .... '. ........ ...... ...... .. .. ..
o
u.
'
.. .... .. .. .. .. ". . .. .. ..
'
".
(ij -20000
c
o
:2
~ -30000
'"
~ -40000
- - - - - - - - ......- ....- - . .....- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-50000
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Bottom thickness of vertical wall, Tbottom (inch)
SeW Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
_._.-
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
_.._ ..-

( a ) Vertical Wall

25000
~-- - f-- - -. - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- --- -
20000

;;-15000
--
,Q
-;; 10000
~
o
u.
a. 5000
o
o
I ----~._.
_ _-._. ..-- ._ .._.'-"-'
- _ .._ .._ .._ ..
1-._._. .-
o~ _
.._ .._ .. .. .._ .. _ .._ .. ,'-"-"-"-
.. .. .. .. .. ..

-5000
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Bottom thickness of vertical wall, Tbottom (inch)
SeW Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure.
Positive -- Positive --- Positive
_._.-
_ .._ ..-
Negative .... . .... Negative ----- Negative

( b ) Vertical Wall

Fig. 4-29 Change in maximum Meridional Force and Hoop Force due
to change in Tbottom (Type-3)
 Maximum positive and negative meridional force due to wind load below
pressure zone in Type-3 decreases linearly with increase of Tboffom (Fig. 4-30a). For
positive values the rate of decrease is more pronounced.

(ii) Hoop Force: The effect of change in Tbol/om in Type-l and Type-2 on
maximum hoop force is limited to these functions due to matereial pressure only
(Fig. 4.28a). In this case both negative and positive maximum values decreases
linearly with the increase of T bol/o';'. The rate of decrease for negative values is
much more pronounced. In Type-3 only the maximum positive hoop force in
pressure zone due to stored material pressure changes slightly and linearly due to
change in Tbollom (Fig. 4-29b). Below pressure zone of Type-3, only maximum
positive and negative hoop forces due to wind load decreases linearly with change
in T boffom but the rate of decrease is relatively smaller (Fig. 4.30b).

(iii) Meridional Moment: In Type-l and Type-2 the maximum positive and
negative meridional moment due to stored material pressure increases with a
decreasing rate (Fig. 4.31a). For Type-3 and in pressure zone only the positive
maximum meridional moment increases linearly with change in Tboffom (Fig. 4.33a).
In this type below pressure zone, maximum positive meridional moment due to
wind and maximum negative meridional moment due to material pressure increases
linearly with the increase in Tbol/om(Fig, 4-34a).

(iv) Circumferential moment: For Type-l and Type-2 the maxunum

circumferential moment due to wind and material pressure changes with change in
Tbollom (Fig. 4.32a). But this change is not significant for design purpose. In Type-3
the varation in maximum circumferential moment due to increase in T boffom is
negligible (Fig. 4-33b) for the pressure zone. In this type, below pressure zone, the
maximum positive and negative circumferential moment due to wind load increase
with increase in TbOl/om (Fig. 4-34b). But the maximum values are so small that the
changes can be ignored

(b) Conical Hopper

(i) Meridional force: Changes in Tbol/om in Type-l and Type-2 has little
effect on the maximum meridional force for all the load cases (Fig. 4-27b).

(ii) Hoop Force: Hoop force variation in conical hopper due to change in
Tbol/om is again negligible for all the load cases (Fig. 4-28b).

64
 40000

,...-.-._. --_.-._- '-'-._-- -.-._-_. -._----- -_._.

~ 20000 - -
-...
f1

u
'"
~
o
0
___
.. .. .. .. --_ .._------ _ _ _ _. _ .._ .._ .._ .. ------------
.. .. .. .. ------------ ___
.. .. .. ..-
LL ....... -- -- ..... -- -- -- -- --- -- .... -- -- ---
~ -20000 -- .... -- -- -- -- -- -- ---
_Q ---
u
-;::
:a:'" -40000
- -- - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-60000
6 7 8 9 10 11 - 12 13
Bottom thickness of vertical wall, Tbottom (inch)
SeijWeigh! Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
PoslIIve
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
__._.-
.._ ..-

( a ) Vertical Wall below pressure zone

15000
r

10000 - --- - - - - -- - - ---

-...
"" 5000
_.
f1
~
-- -.
'"
U
~
0 0
LL
c-
o
,._ __ ___ ___
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..- ._ ..
-- .... --- ......... --- -- --- -- -- ....... .... -- -- --
_-._ .._ . ________ c ___
------------ ------------
I
0 -- -- .... ..... -- -- --- -- -- ........... -- ......
-5000

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - -
-10000
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Bottom thickness of vertical wall, Tbottom (inch)
Seij Weigh! Material Pressure Wind Pressure
-- --- _._.-
Positive
Negative .........
Positive
Negative -----
Positive
Negative
_ .._ ..-
( b ) Vertical Wall below pressure zone

Fig_4-30 Change in maximum Meridional Force and Hoop Force due to

change in Tbottom (Type-3)
 4000

-- -.. ._------ _.._._---- _._-_.-

-
""
""
f!
2000

0
F-"---
f-'---'--
~..."'...=..."'.,
--
.-._._- --
• •:.:.:.••"' ••••••
H•••••
\ '
----_._
_ -'-'-'-
.._",_.'-- -_.._ .._ ..- •..•.•.•..•...•..•...•..•.. •.•.•.••.•.•.• •.•.•. .....••.•...•.......••.••..
-c: -2000
III
E
0
:2 -4000
c;;
c:
-6000
-. .'.
0
15 - '. - - .. ...
-'III" '- ..-- . ....
:2 -8000 - .- ...-. -. - - . .
- - - - - ..- -
-10000
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Bottom thickness of vertical wall, Tbottom (inch)
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
_0_'-
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Nega1ive
---
----- Positive
Negative
__
.. ..-

( a ) Vertical Wall

2000
F--
~
-- - - -.
- - -- -- - - -- - - - - -- - - --
F-------- ------_. ._._0_0- -------- --_._--. ----_. __ . ---_.---
~ 1000

-
""
"" 0 .._ .._ .._ .. .
.0
................
'.''''.'.'''''.=.'~.'=.'.=.'=.'- ,•.•.•......... _-- _ .•..•...--_ ......
":.:.:,::.:.:.::.:.:,::.' _._~--_..
:::..-1000
1:
III
E '2000
o
...
~ -3000 - ..- --. -
c:
-- - - - ..- ..- - -. .
~ -4000
-'I"II - - .....- ..- .... .. ..
:2 -5000
- - ..
-6000
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Bottom thickness of vertical wall, Tbottom (inch)
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive -- Positive --- Positive ----- _
_ .. ..-
Negative ......... Negative ----- Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-31 Change in maximum Meridional Moment due to change in

Tbottom (Type-1, Type-2).
 3000

'*'-- ::.. .- .. . -
'*'fl
2000 '- - - +-. ,
- ,-- -

-c:
CD
1000
.

- -- - - - - -- - - "- - -- - - - - -.
E
0 -- - -- -.......
0 ................ ...... .... ,. ............. "
- --
....... .... "
:2 ," '" " " " "

(ij
:;:;
c: -1000
CD
~ ------. .- - - - - .- - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - .- - - - - - - - - - .- - - - - - - - - - -
-CD
E
:J -2000
._ .._ ..- ._ .._" .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .._ .._ .._ . -.._ ..-.._ ..
..-'
()
~ ~,,-,,-"-"
(3
.3000
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Bottom thickness of vertical wall, T bottom (inch)
Seij Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive -- Positive --- Positive
_._.-
_ .._ ..-
Negative ......... Negative ----- Negative

( a ) Vertical Wall

600
~
...
--'*''*' 400

fl 200 _. - .. _. ..- - . --- - -_.- ._._---- _._--._.

-c:
CD
E
0
.._
....... .. .. .......
.... " ..... .... ...... " . .. ...... ... .. .... ..
"

_
.. .. .. .._ .. .. .. . .. '._ .. +-.. .. .. .. .. ..-"-"- _ _
" " ...... ...... ..............
._ .._ .._ .._ . _ .._ .._ .._ ..
0
:2 -200
(ij
'E -400 - - ..- ..-
~ - ... .. .- -
~ -600 - .- - - - - -. ... .
:J
~ .800
- - .- - - - - - .- - - -
(3 - - .- - - - - -
.1000
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Bottom thickness of vertical wall, T bottom (inch)
SeijWeight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
-- --- _._.-
Positive
Negative ......... Positive
Negative -----
Positive
Negative
_ .._ ..-
( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-32 Change in maximum Circumferential Moment due to

change in T bottom (Type-1, Type-2).
 1200

- - -- - - -
~ 1000 -
-
'*'
'*'fa
800
-- - - - - f--- --
600
--
-c:
III
E
400
;;..-
. - - - - . .
0
200
:2
(ij
c: a .. .. .. - .. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .. - - - - - - - - .. - - - - .. .... - - .. - - - - - - - - - .. - -
0 .
'i5
.;:: -200
III
:2 -400 ;;. .. _ .._ ..-.. .. -.. _ .. _" .. .. _.' .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.

-600 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Bottom thickness of vertical wall, Tbottom (inch)
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Neglrtive
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
__._--
.._ .. -

( a ) Meridional Moment

3000

-
'*''*' 2000 '-. -- . _ .. - . - - '-'

:: 1000
c:
III
E
o a - .. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .. - - .. - - - - -
:2 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - -
(ij
••ai -1000
~
~ ~
" -2000 c
~
i:3
_
..-..-.. .. .. _ -..-..-..- _ _ _ .. .. .. .. _. -"-"_.'_ .. .. _ .._ .._ .. .._ .._ .. _ ..- .- .._ .._ ..-
-3000 =
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Bottom thickness of vertical wall, Tbottom (inch)
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
_._.-
_ .._ ..-
( b ) Circumferential Moment

Fig. 4-33 Change in Meridional and Circumferential Moment in vertical

wall due to change in Tbottom (Type-3).
 3000

'-'---- _.--_.-'
-
iI:' 2000
iI:'

fa 1000
_.-.---- -_.----- -'-'---- --------- -

1: ~
~ .- - - - - -- - - - - -- - -
'"Eo 0 r
:2 1".:;;':.:;;.::.;;.::: ""::'::.::.:,::.:.:,::.:.:.. •.;.:.. .... :,;...•..•...,-..- _ _
~ -- •••• ',.,..••f.
,,": ':":":::':':." ::::":::-. '-"-"-"-" -.. ..-.. ..

r
.... ........ ... ....
Cii -1000
c: - - - ..- - . - . -
o --- '- - - .... - - - .- - - -
'6 - - .- - ..
.~ -2000
:2
.. .-- - - .- - .-
~
-3000
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Bottom thickness of vertical wall, Tbottom (inch)
SenWeighl Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive -- Positive --- Positive
_._.-
_ .._ ..-
Negatlve ......... Negative ----- Negative

( a ) Vertical Wall below pressure zone

- -
.----_.- ,-'-'--- _.--_.--
1000
-------- .-' -

-
iI:'

iI:'

fa
500
f-.-.----
~
~

-'"
~
c:
E
0
r
r
f .... ......... ...... .. ... ..
........ ...... ..... .. .. .... .. ...... .. .....
~-- - - - .. - - - - .- - - - - - - . - ...... .. .. ..... ... ..
:2
0
~
- - - - - - - . - - - - - .. . - - - - - .- - -- - - - -
..
Cii -500
:;::;
c: ~._..- -.. "-"- ..-..- .-.,,_ _ ..-.
~
..
~
'" -1000
r .. _ .._ ..-..- -.. .. .._ ..
E "-'''- ._ .._ .._ ..-.
'"
u
~ ~
~
(3 -1500
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Bottom thickness of vertical wall, Tbottom (inch)
Sen Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive -- Positive --- Positive
_._.-
_ .._ ..-
Negative ......... Negative ----- Negative

( b ) Vertical Wall below pressure zone

Fig. 4-34 Change in maximum Meridional and Circumferential moment

due to change in Tbottom (Type-3)
 (iii) Meridional Moment: Variation of Thol/om
has considerable effect on the
maximum negative meridional moment due to grain (Fig. 4.3!b).

(iv) Circumferential moment: Circumferential moments developed in

conical hopper due to various load cases are relatively smaller. Only the maximum
negative circumferential moment due to material pressure in Type-! and Type-2
varies noticeably (Fig. 4-32b).

4.4.5 Effect of Conical Hopper Thickness at Top, (top

Since the change in hopper thickness has no effect on the vertical wall for
Type-3, vertical wall mentioned in the subsequent paragraphs refers to vertical
wall in Type-! and Type-2 only.

(a) Vertical Wall

Variation of top.thickness of conical hopper, ttop,has no effect on any of the

stress resultants e.g. meridional force, hoop force, meridional moment and
circumferential moment (Fig. 4-35, Fig. 4-36a, Fig. 4-38a, Fig. 4-39a).

(b) Conical Hopper

(i) Meridional force: Variation of top thickness of conical hopper, ttop, has
little effect on the meridional force in any of the types (Fig. 4-35b, Fig. 4-37a).

(ii) Hoop Force: Variation of top thickness of conical hopper, ttop, has also
little effect on the hoop force in any of the types (Fig. 4-36b, Fig. 4-37b).

(iii) Meridional Moment: Maximum meridional moment of both signs due

to material pressure and maximum positive meridional moment due to wind load
varies with the variation of ttop for Type-! and Type-2 (Fig. 4-38b). For Type-3 the
maximum positive meridional moment shows considerable sensitivity with the
variation of ttop(Fig. 4.40a).

(iv) Circumferential moment: In Type-! and Type-2 the maximum

circumferential moment due to material pressure varies with the variation of ttop
(Fig. 4-39b) but magnitudes are small. For Type-3 maximum positive
circumferential moment due to material pressure increases considerably with the
increase of tlop(Fig. 4.40b).

65
 30000

20000
.;::
--. 10000
£!
o
~
o
u. -10000
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. - _ .. .._., __
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
(ij
c .. .. ........... ................. ...... ..... .. ....... ...... .... .. ... .... ... .. ....... .....
o -20000
'C
~ -30000

-40000
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -
-50000
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Top thickness of conical hopper, ttop ( inch)
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Posltive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Posltl ••••
Negative
e
__._.-
.._ ..-

( a ) Vertical Wall

35000

~
30000
F
~
-- .- - -- - - ---
e
::. 25000
~
i
£!
20000
~
~
~
~ 15000
(ij
t
~
B 10000
'C ~
0;:: ~
'" 5000
:2 ~
o .. .. .. .. .. .._ _'._ .. .. .. .. .. .- .. _ .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .._ .. . .
.. .. .. .. ..
.

-5000
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Top thickness of conical hopper, ttop ( inch)
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
----- Positive
Negative
_
-----
_ .. ..-
( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-35 Change in maximum Meridional Force due to change in ttop

(Type-l, Type-2)
 30000

-- - - -- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - -
20000

---=
f1 10000

'2o"
lL
a. o --- _ ._._._-
._._._- ._._._-
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
._._---- -------- --------
..
.. .. .... ......... .. .. .. .......... ........ ...... .. ...... .... .. .... .... ... ..............
.. .. ..
... ..
o
o
I
-10000

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - - - --
-20000
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Top thickness of conical hopper, ttop ( inch)

__._
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
-- --- ..
.._ ..-
Positive Positive Positive
Negative ......... Negative ----- Negative

( a ) Vertical Wall

40000

-- - - -- - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - -- - - -- --
30000

---=
f1 20000

'"
2
~ 10000
a.
o
o
I ~-
o~.. .. .. .. .. _ .. _ - _ - _ ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

-10000
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Top thickness of conical hopper, ttop ( inch)
Se~Weight
Positive --
.........
Materiel Pressure
Positive ---
Wind Pressure
Positive
_._
__-
..
.. ..
Negative Negative ----- Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-36 Change in maximum Hoop Force due to change in ttop

(Type-1, Type-2)
 35000
-
~
r
30000
F r .- -- ---- ---- f----
"" 25000 ~
£" ~
.

CD ~ .

E 20000
o ~
lL
~
~ 15000
o ~
:g roooo
CD
~
::;;;
~
5000
~
o 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
6
Top thickness of conical hopper, ttop ( inch)
SeijWeight Material Pressure
Positive Positive
Negative . Negative

( a ) Conical Hopper

50000

40000
'-- - - -- - - - - -- - - -- - - - -

--.""f2 30000
~ 20000
E
o
lL
a. 10000
g
I
o

-10000
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Top thickness of conical hopper, ttop ( inch)
SeijWeight Material Pressure
Positive PosIIIve
Negative . Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-37 Change in maximum Meridional Force and Hoop Force due
to change in ttop (Type-3)
 4000
t~

-
;f;'

;f;'

,Q
2000

0
1--- - 1--- - -
~._._._.1--------. ----_._.
..... :.:.. .... :.:. ..~
.•..•... f"'.'-"-"-',
:
--
,....•.•... _.,-.,
--
-------- -------- ._._"_.- -------
._ ._--
"-"-"-'- ..__ --.._._ ..- ._ .._ .._ ..-
- 1---

-'"
<:
E
-2000

.
a -4000
~
(ij
<:
a -6000
'6
.;::
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
'" -8000
~

-10000 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Top thickness of conical hopper, ttop ( inch)
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Posttlve
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
__._.._ ....-
( a ) Vertical Wall

3000

2000
-
-
;f;'

;f;'

.0
1000 - - -- - -- - - --
:..------- ----_.--- --------
- - - - - --
__._._0- ---- - --
-
- -
o ~., ••••••• loI_'., ••••••• ... :.•.•.,:.:.:" ..•.•. ..•• ....:.: ...:.:.: ..•':.:.....:.:.
: : ..• ... ..
:~'.:.:.:,::.:.:.::.:.:.: .:.:.::.:.:: :,: :.:.. : ".::':':.::.:.:.:':':'::
"E ::.:..:.::.:..:.::.:..:.::

'" -1000
E
a
.

~ .-2000 .

<:
.2 -3000
"tl
.;::
'"
~ -4000
------- -- - --- -- -- - ---- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -
-5000
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Top thickness of conical hopper, ttop ( inch)
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
_-----
.._ ..-

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-38 Change in maximum Meridional Moment due to change

in ttop (Type-1, Type-2)
 3000

=
;;- 2000
f-- - f-- - - ._- . _. _. . .
,Q
~
1000
C
'"
E
o
:;;
0
,...- - - f-- - -- -
..........
-..--
..... - -....- ...-..- - - - -- - - -- - -
.. .... .. ...... ....
f-
0; f-
:;::; f-
~ -1000
f-
t--- - - - - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
~ f-
" -2000 b. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .._'._"
~
_ .. .. .._ .. _. _ .. .. .. .._ .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
f-
<:5 f-
-3000
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Top thickness of conical hopper, ttop ( inch)
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
_ .._ ..-
-.-.-

( a ) Vertical Wall

800

--== 600

- --- - - - .- - - --
400
- .- - -
,Q

-c 200
--
_. -
_._. ._. -_. ._.- ---_._.- --_._-_. _._- -
'"
E
0
:;;
0 ............... .... ...... .. ...... .. .... ... .. .. ........... .... ..... ...
0;
:;::; -200
.. .. _ _
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. '._ .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
c
~
-"
'"
'E"
-400

- - ----
--- ------
~
<:5
-600
- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -
--
-800
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Top thickness of conical hopper, t,op ( inch)
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
__._.._.'...
( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-39 Change in maximum Circumferential Moment due to change

in ttop(Type-1, Type-2)
 10000 .

~
-
""
8000

- -- - - -
""
f1 6000
-
~
E
- - -- - -~- - -
c
Q)
E 4000
t
-- -~
0
:i!: .

0;
c 2000
0
'5
";:
Q)
0 ------- .. --------
:i!: -------. -------- -------- ------- -------

-2000
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Top thickness of conical hopper, ttop ( inch)
SenWeighl Malerial Pressure
Positive Positive
Negative . . . . . . . .. Negative

( a ) Conical Hopper

4000

-
""

- -- - - - -
~ 3000
f1

-- - - - -
1--
"E
- --
Q) 2000

- -
- - -" - -
E
o
:i!: -
0; 1000
:g
~
~
E 0
:J
f::
- - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
G
-1000
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Top thickness of conical hopper, ttop ( inch)
SenWeight MaterialPressure
Positive Positive
Negative ......... Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-40 Change in maximum Meridional and Circumferential moment

due to change in ttop (Type-3)

.~
I ."
4.4.6 Effect of Depth of Bottom Ring Beam, d

Since depth of bottom ring beam has no effect on the analysis of vertical
wall in Type-3, the vertical wall mentioned in the subsequent paragraphs refers to
the vertical wall ofType-l and Type-2 only.

(a) Vertical Wall

(i) Meridional force: variation of depth of ring beam has no effect on the
meridional force due to various load cases in the vertical wall (Fig. 4.4la).

(ii) Hoop Force: Due to increase in the depth of ring beam d, only
maximum negative hoop force due to stored material pressure show sensitivity.
(Fig. 4-42a). In this case the maximum negative hoop forces due to grain load
decrease approximately linearly with increase in d.

(iii) Meridional Moment: Maximum positive and negative meridional

moment due to grain in Type-l and Type-2 decreases with increases of d (Fig. 4-
44a). But the rate of decrease of the maximum negative meridional moment is
much higher.

(iv) Circumferential moment: Variation of d has influence on the maximum

negative circumferential moment in the vertical wall due to stored material only.
(Fig. 4.45a). In this case the maximum negative circumferential moment decreases
linearly with the increase in d.

(b) Conical Hopper

(i) Meridional force: In Type-l and Type-2 maximum positive meridional

force due to stored material only decreases with increase in the depth of ring beam
(Fig. 4-4lb). In Type-3 the maximum positive meridional force due to material
pressure only decreases linearly (Fig. 4.43a).

(ii) Hoop Force: The maximum positive hoop force due to material pressure
only decreases (Fig. 4-42b). For Type-3 the maximum positive hoop force due to
stored material pressure only decreases with the increase in the depth of ring beam
(Fig. 4-43b).

(iii) Meridional Moment: Maximum negative and posluve meridional

moment due to material pressure in Type-l and Type-2 decrease with the increase
of d (Fig. 4.44b). For Type-3 the maximum positive meridional moment due to

66
 30000

---- f-._._.- --_.-. __._0_- _._._.- ._-_._0 ._._.- _0_0

15000

--
;I::

f! 0
u
'"
~
_ .._ .. .._ .._ .._. _ .._ .._ .. .._ .._ .._ ..-"-"-"- ._.._ .._ .. .._ .._ .._. _ .._ ..
0
U- .15000 .. .... .... .. .... .. ... .. .. .. .. ........ ... .... ... ..... ...... ...........
n;
c
0
'5 -30000
'C

'"
::;;
-45000 - -- - - - - - -- -- -- -- - -- -- - - - - -- - -- -- - - - - - - - ----- - - -

.60000 90 100
20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Depth of ring beam, d ( inch)
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
_.---
_.._ .. -

( a ) Vertical Wall

35000

30000
~
- - -- f...-
- --- .

--
;I:: 25000
.c
;::. 20000
~
-

~ ~
o 15000
U-
n;
c 10000
o
'5
'iii 5000
::;;
o .. .. .. _ ..
.
.. _. _ .. .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
. .. . .. ... .. .. ... .. .. ....
.5000
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Depth of ring beam, d ( inch)
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
-- --- _._0-
Positive
Negative .........
Positive
Negative ----- Positive
Negative
_ .._ ..-
( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig.4-41 Change in maximum Meridional Force due to change in d

(Type-1, Type-2).
 30000
~
20000
-- 1-- -- --- --- -- -- - - - 1-- --- -
'l:'
-- 10000
:Q

~ o .. .. .. .. .._- ._._0_. ------- ._-_._

.. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. ..
. ._._.- ----
.. .. ...... .. ....... .. ....-
.... .. .. .... .. .... .. .. .. ..
o .. .... ..... .. ... .. .. ....
U.
Q.
g -10000
--- -- - .. ----
I .- - - - - - - -- - - - - - --
---- --- - -
-20000 ----

-30000
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Depth of ring beam, d ( inch)
Sel/Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
__._.-
.._ ..-

( a ) Vertical Wall

40000

t -- 1--
- - - - -. -
30000
~ - - - - - - -- -
~ --
--
'l:'
:Q 20000
~
~
~
Ql ~
()
~ ~
0
u. 10000
Q.
0 ~
0
I
0 .. .. .. .. _ .._. _ -
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. _ - __
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
~
~
~
-1000~0 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Depth of ring beam, d ( inch)
SeWWeight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
__._.-
.._ ..-
Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-42 Change in maximum Hoop Force due to change in d

(Type-1, Type-2).
 35000

30000 - - - -- -
;I:
-- --
~ 25000
--- ---
~ 20000
o
LL
..
-- --
0; 15000
c:
o
:g 10000
--
:2
'"
5000
:
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Depth of ring beam, d ( inch)
SenWeighl Material Pressure
Positive Positive
Negative ......... Negative

( a ) Meridional Force

60000
c

50000 ....
'.... .... ....
-
;I:

,Q
40000 .... ....
....
-- -- --
'"
()
~
0
LL
30000
---- -- - --
a. 20000
0
0
I
10000

30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Depth of ring beam, d ( inch)

SenWeight Malerial Pressure
Positive Positive
Negative . .. . . . . . . Negative

( b ) Hoop Force

Fig. 4-43 Change in maximum Meridional Force and Hoop force in

conical hopper due to change in d (Type-3)
 4000

~ r
2000
- - - - -. --- ----
--
""
"" 0
~
r ----
,..._._.- _._._.- ._._--- ---'-'- ._._.-. f:.=.=.=

_ ,.._._ .._ . _ .._ ..

:::::1._.

,g ~ ..•...".••.., ..,•........•.. ,•.•. .••....... ,._ .. .•. ....,....•......•... .•.. ...•••......•.

"-,,.•.•.,~ ..•

-
~
c
Ql
E
-2000
~

0
::;; -4000
(ij
~.-.
c
0 -6000 _.- 00' - ---
'5
0-0

.", ---- 0"

.----- ----
Ql
::;; -8000 0 ,-- 00

-10000
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Depth of ring beam, d ( inch)
Se~Wei9ht Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negatlve
---
-----
Positive
Negative
_._.-
_ .._ ..-
.( a ) Vertical Wall

4000

--
""
2000
-- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -. - - - -- .
---- _._._.- -_._._- -'---'-
-'-'-" ._-_._. _._.- ------
"".0 0
-- _. ._ .._. ....... .. .. _ .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..-
.....:.•J.:: •.. ':." : '.:' ':: .. .. .

-
~
C
Ql
E
-2000
..

0
::;; - .. .- - - - - - ~-
,
- .. .. 0 0
- .. 0 0 0 0 0 0 _0 , , 0

..
0

(ij -4000 .'

..- -
c .. 0 .
.Q

- .- -
..
""0
.", Ql -6000
..

::;; ..
..
..
-8000
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Depth of ring beam, d ( inch)
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
_ .._ ..-
-.-.-

( b ) Conical 'Hopper

Fig. 4-44 Change in maximum Merodional Moment due to change

in d (Type-1, Type-2)
 3000

-
>l:'
>l:' 2000
.£
_._. _._._.- _._._ . ._-_._- ------- ------- ------
_ 1000
c
CD
E
o -- -- -......- ....
- ..-......
- -- - - --
- -- ..-- -........... - - -..-
::!E o .- .... ... ..... .... .........
1ti
:;::;
ai -1000 . - - - - ..- - - -
- - - - .- - - - - - . - - - - -
. .
.... - - .- .- - - .- - ..
- _ _ ..
~
:::l -2000
~
.. .. .. .. .. .. ..- _
.._.' .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
(3
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Depth of ring beam, d ( inch)

__._.._ .....
SeW Weight . Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Posltive
Negative
--
......... Positive
Negative
- --
-----
Positive
Negative

( a ) Vertical Wall

1000

-
>l:'
>l:' 500
-- - -. - - - -- - - - - -- - - - ,...- .
.£
_._- --_._-- -_._--_.
-
c
CD
E
0 ........ ..
-"-"
__ ___ _
._---_. _._---- --_._ .. -_._--- '--_ ..
.. .... .... ...... .. ......
.. .. .._. .. .. ..• .. .._.'-" _ .._ .._ ._ .._ .._ ..• .._ .._ .._ ..
.. f- .._ ..'
0
::!E
1ti -500
.. .
~ ...- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - . .- - - -
. .
-- - - - -
~
~
E -1000 .- - - - - - ..-
:::l
~
(3
-1500
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Depth of ring beam, d ( inch)
SeW Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
_ .._ ..•
( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-45 Change in maximum Circumferential Moment due to change

in d (Type-1, Type-2)
material pressure decreases sharply for the initial variation of d and then the rate of
decrease slows down (Fig. 4-46a).

(iv) Circumferential moment: Maximwn circumferential moment of both

sign due to stored material pressure in Type-l and Type-2 decreases with
decreasing rate with respect to the increase in the depth of ring beam (Fig. 4.45b).
For Type-3 the maximwn positive circumferential moment due to material pressure
decreases sharply for the initial variation of d and then the rate of decrease slows
down (Fig. 4-46b).

4.4.7 Effect of Unit Weight of Stored Materials, r

(a) Vertical Wall

(i) Meridional force: Meridional force due to stored material pressure is

always negative. It increases linearly with the increase of unit weight of stored
material (Fig. 4.47a). For all the three types of silos maximwn meridional forces
are approximately the same. For Type-3 and below pressure zone maximwn
negative meridional force also increases linearly with the increase in unit weight
of stored material (Fig. 4.49a).

(ii) Hoop Force: For Type-l and Type-2 both positive and negative hoop
force exists and increases linearly (Fig. 4.48a). But in Type-3 only positive hoop
force exists and it increases linearly with the increase of r. Below pressure 'zone in
Type-3 both positive and negative hoop force increase linearly as unit weight
increases (Fig. 4-49b). Variation of r has no effect on the location ofmaximwn
hoop forces for all the three types of silos.

(iii) Meridional Moment: Maximwn meridional moment, both positive and

negative, increases linearly for all the three types of silos (Fig. 4.50a). In Type-3 no
negative meridional moment exists and the maximwn positive meridional moment
increases at a rate of 14.1 lb/ft. per unit increase of y. Maximwn positive and
negative meridional moment below pressure zone in Type-3 also increase linearly
with respect to the increase of unit weight (Fig. 4.52a). For Type-l and Type-2 the
maximwn negative meridional moment occur at the bottom of vertical wall and the
maximwn positive meridional moment occurs at a distance of 4.5 ft. from the
bottom of vertical wall. For Type-3 and in pressure wne the maximwn positive
meridional moment occurs at a distance of 1.71 ft. from the bottom of pressure

67
 14000

~12000 ,
-
<I:'
<,I:'10000
",
.0
:::::. 8000 ",
"E
~ 6000 " ,
o
::;;;
4000
,
' ..•.
"iii
c
o ~-- - -
'i5 2000
'C
- 1-- -- 1--
- - -- -
'"
::;;; o ---- ------- ------- ------- ------ -- - -- - - ........
.
-2000
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Depth of ring beam, d ( inch)

Sen Weight Malerial Pressure
Positive Positive
Negative •••. . . .. . Negative

( a ) Meridional Moment

5000

<I:'
;;- 4000

.0 ""
':E 3000 " '.'

'"
E "" ,
~ 2000
..•.
"iii ..•.
..•.
~
e
1000
- - - 1-- - -
~
1-- - - -- - - -
:J ,0
------- ------ ------- ------- ------- .. -_ ..
u
~ ........ -------
<:5
-1000
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Depth of ring beam, d ( inch)
Sen Weight Malerial Pressure
Pos~ Posltiw
Negative Negattve

( b ) Circumferential Moment

Fig. 4-46 Change in maximum Meridional and Circumferential moment

in conicl hopper due to change in d (Type-3) .
 0

-20000

" •.
-
<I:'

:fa
~
-40000

-60000
..•...•.
",
" .•...•..
".",.0,
Q)
<.>
~
t
0 -80000
f- " '.,
LL f- •••• .c,..
", .•..•.
OJ t
c:
-100000
.. ..
~;"
0 ...•..
'0 t .;,.

..
.....: ...: ..• ~.
'''',
';::
Q) f-
:2 -120000
tf- .. ;...;. .•..;..;. . ..;. ..
.:"

-140000
f-

-160000
t
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Unit weight of stored material ( Ib / CU.ft)
Type-1, Type-2 Type-3
Positive Positive
Negative ......... Negative

.( a ) Vertical Wall

100000

-
80000
<I:'
.0

Q) 60000
<.>
~
0
LL
OJ
c: 40000
0
'0
';::
Q)
:2 20000

40 60 80 100 120140 160

Unit weight of stored material ( Ib / CU.ft)
Type-1, Type-2 Type-3
Postttve Positive
Negative ......... Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig, 4-47 Change in maximum Meridional Force due to change in unit

weight of stored material.
 100000

80000

.--:: ~
60000 ,-::::--
~
-- ~- -
~ 40000 -"""
£!
Q)
u
~
0
20000
- ----
LL
0
C-
O
0 =~ .... .....
.... .....
I -20000
r .
". ..... .... " . ..... ......
..... .....
~ .... .... .... '"
-40000 '" ..... ....
f- ......
r
"
".
r
-60000
20 .40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Unit weight of stored material ( Ib / cU.ft )
Type-1,Type-2 Type-3
Positive Positive
Negative . .. . . .. . • Negative

( a ) Vertical Wall
160000

~
140000
,,'
~ 120000f-
~
""
--
:: 100000
~
""
""
"
- ... " " .............-- ~

----
Q)
u
~ ~
0 80000 ,,-

--
LL
~
,- "
.
C- ,,;
O 60000
0
I
"" ~

-
" ;.-----
40000

20000

40 60 80 100 120 140 160

Unit weight of stored material ( Ib / CU.ft)
Type-1,Type-2 Type-3
Positive Positive
Negative .. . . . . . . . Negative

( b ) Conical H.opper
Fig. 4-48 Change in maximum Hoop Force due to change in unit weight
of stored material.
 o
~
r
-20000
r
,,
,
*'- -40000 ,,
, ., .,
., .
e -60000 ,,
'", ,
o ,, .

,,
~
c
-80000 , . ,.
o ,,
:g .100000 ,,
,,
<;; ,,
., .
::l: -120000 ,
,,
,,
,,
-140000 ,

-160000 160
20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Unit weight of stored material ( Ib / CU.ft)
. Material Pressure I
I Positive -- Negative - - - - - .

( a ) Meridional Force in Vertical Wall below pressure zone

40000

30000
~

~
----
-.,
*'
f1
20000

----- ----
~
~

0
lL.
"
~

c-
10000

o
--
0
0 "
I ",
-10000 ".
".
". ",
".
". , ", ,
-20000 '"
'" ", ,
" ",
"
-30000
20 40 60 80 100 .120 140 160
Unit weight of stored material ( Ib / CU.ft)
Material Pressure I
I Positive -- Negative - - - - -

( b ) Hoop Force in Vertical Wall below pressure zone

Fig. 4-49 Change in maximum Meridional Force and Hoop Force due to
change in unit weight of stored material (Type-3)
 10000

-
==
==,
£
5000

0
::- . ' - - -- - - - --- - -

-'"
~
c:
E
-5000 "
" "
" ",
" ",
0
~ -10000 ",

"
0; ",

c: " ",
"
0 "

15 -15000 ....
"
';: ",

",
'"
~
-20000
" ",
"
",
.. "
" " ",
- "
-25000
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

Unit weight of stored material ( Ib I cu,ft )

Type-1, Type-2 Type-3
Positive -- Positive
Negative .. .. . .. .. Negative

( a ) Vertical Wall

30000
,.:

~ .,
-
==
~
20000 ~

- - - - -
==,
£
~
~
~
- - - - - 1--
1--

-'"
c:
E
10000
~
~
~
- -- - - - -
0 ~
~ - ---- ---
0;
0
.... .......
------ -- -- --- -- -- -- - -- - -- -- -- -- - - - - -
c: .... .....
0 ..... .... .... .. ....
15 .... ...... ..
';: ........ -.....
-10000 .... ..... .......
'"
~ ...... ....

-20000
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Unit weight of stored material ( Ib I cu,ft )
Type-1, Type-2 Type-3
Positive Positive
Negative ......... Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig, 4-50 Change in maximum Meridional Moment due to change

in unit weight of stored material.
 2000

-
1000
;::
;:: ,-
0 - - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
,Q .
-.,
~
c -1000
E
0 -2000
"
'" "
", "
", "
",

"
:2 ",
",
"
c;; ""'""
:;::; ,

.,~.,
c -3000 "
'" " ...."
-
E -4000
U
::l
"
"
'" "
'" ",
",

~ " ", ",

B -5000

-6000
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Unit weight of stored material ( Ib / cu,ft )
Type-1,Type-2 Type-3
Positive Positive
Negative Negative

( a ) Vertical Wall

8000
l

-
;:: 6000
-~- - -
;::
,
- - --
,Q

-., - -
- ----
4000
c
.-
--
E -
0 2000
j...
:2
c;;
:;::;
.,~.,
c 0 - - - -....... -
- - - .- - - -- .- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - --------------
-E
::l -2000
u
"
'" ....... .....
", "
" ..... ",
" " ..... .. .... .. ,
'" .. .... .. ,
..
~
B
40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Unit weight of stored material ( Ib / cu,ft )
Type-1,Type-2 Type-3
Positive -- Positive
Negative . . . . . . .. . Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper
Fig, 4-51 Change in maximum Circumferential Moment due to change
in unit weight of stored material.
 2000 ~
t~ .

1000

=- t
t
=
,Q
, 0~
t~
-
~ -1000
c
Q)

E -2000
t
t
-- - - - - - --
- - -- --
0
::i[;
~
t~ - - - - -- - .
iii -3000 - - --
c
0
'6
t
t - -- - - . -
'C
Q)
-4000 ~
t~
---- --
::i[;
-5000
-- - -
t
-6000
t
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

Unit weight of stored material ( Ib I cU.ft )

I . Material Pressure I
Pcs_ -- Negative - - - - -

( a ) Meridional Moment in Vertical Wall below pressure zone

200
t
-==
,Q
0
t
~

~
-c
Q)

E
-200

~
- - - ..
--- ---
0
::i[;
-400
t - - -- -
iii
t -- - - - -
:;::;
c -600 - --
Q)
~
J!!
~
t~ - - - .- -
E
:J -600
--- - ....
u
U
~ t .
- - - - --
t
-1000
20 40 60 80 100 120 140
- 160
Unit weight of stored material ( Ib I CU.ft)
Material Pressure I
I ,POSitive -- Negative - - - - - ,

( b ) Circumferential Moment in Vertical Wall below pressure zone

Fig. 4-52 Change in maximum Meridional and Circumferential moment

due to change in unit weight of stored material (Type"3)
zone and below pressure zone the maximum positive and negative values occur at a
distance of 4.5 ft. from bottom of vertical wall and at the bottom respectively.

(iv) Circumftrential moment: Circumferential moments in vertical wall in

pressure zone for different types of silos also increase linearly with the increase in
unit weight (Fig. 4.5la). For Type-3, in the pressure zone the circumferential
moments due to material pressure is negligible. Below pressure zone in Type-3 the
maximum circumferential moments, both positive and negative, are also small and
these increase linearly with the increase of y. (Fig. 4.52b).

(b) Conical Hopper

(i) Meridional force:' Meridional force in conical hopper due to material

pressure is always positive. For all types of silos maximum meridional forces due
to material pressure increases linearly with increase in the unit weight (Fig. 4-47b)
and variations are the same. Maximum meridional force always exist at the top of
hopper.

(ii) Hoop Force: Hoop force in conical hopper due to material pressure is
always positive. Maximum hoop forces increase linearly with increase in unit
weight and the values of maximum hoop force for Type-3 is always greater than
that of Type-l and Type-2 (Fig. 4.48b). The location of maximum hoop force is at
a distance of 5.04 ft. from the junction of ring beam and hopper in Type-l and
Type-2. ForType-3 this distance is 2.54 ft..

(iii) Meridional Moment: Maximum meridional moment of both signs for

all types of silos increase linearly with the increase of unit weight (Fig. 4.50b). The
location of maximum positive and negative meridional moments are at a distance of
4 ft. from the junction of ring beam and hopper and at the junction respectively for
Type-l and Type-2. For Type-3 the maximum positive meridional moment exists
at the junction and negative maximum values occur at a distance of 7.11 ft. from
the top of hopper.

(iv) Circumferential moment: Maximum circumferential moment also

increases linearly for all types of silos with the increase of unit weight (Fig. 4.51b).
The variation of unit weight has no effect on the locations of maximum values of
circumferential moments. Maximum negative circumferential moments for Type-l
and Type-2 and maximum positive circumferential moments in Type-3 occur at the
junction of ring beam and hopper. Maximum positive circumferential moments in

68
Type-l and Type-2 exist at a distance of 2.97 ft. from the top of ring beam and
maximum negative circwnferential moment in Type-3 occurs at a distance of 0.6 ft.
from the top of hopper (junction of hopper and ring beam).

4.4.8 Effect of Angle of Internal Friction of Stored Material, p

(a) Vertical Wall

(i) Meridional force: Maximum negative meridional force for Type-l and
Type-2 are always slightly greater than those of Type-3. In this case the maximum
values decreases as the angle of internal friction increases and the variation may be
approximated by a straight line (Fig. 4-53a). Maximum negative meridional force
in vertical wall below pressure zone in Type-3 decreases with increasing rate with
increase of angle of internal friction (Fig. 4.55a). In pressure zone maximum
meridional force always occur at the bottom of pressure zone. But for Type-3 and
below pressure zone the maximum negative meridional force occur at a distance of
4.5 ft. from the bottom of vertical wall.

(ii) Hoop Force: Maximum positive hoop force for all types of silos
decrease with the increase of angle of internal friction (Fig. 4.54a). But maximum
negative meridional force in Type-l and Type-2 increases as the angle ofintemal
friction increases. For maximum positive hoop force, Type-l and Type-2 always
give the greater value than that of Type-3. In this case for lower value of p the rate
of decrease is very small and as the value of p increases the rate of decrease also
increases. The variation of maximum negative hoop force in Type-l and Type-2
can be approximated by a straight line. Below pressure zone in Type-3 both
positive and negative values of maximum hoop force decrease as the angle of
internal friction increases (Fig. 4.55b). For the smaller values of p the rate of
decrease is very small and as the value of pincreases the rate of decrease
gradually increases. Variations of angle of internal friction do not affect the
location of maximum hoop force.

(iii) Meridional Moment: Only negative meridional moment in Type-l and

Type-2 increases considerably with the increase of angle of internal friction and the
variation may be approximated by a straight line (Fig. 4.56a). Below pressure zone
in Type-3 the maximum negative meridional moment decreases appreciably with
the increase of p (Fig. 4.58a). Change in p has no effects on the location of
miOOmummeridional moments.

69
 o

-10000

-=
f1 -20000
CD
U

~ -30000
..•::.::..-:.':::'
(ij ~~
c ~..:"
o ..
'
;..;..;..;..;. ..;.

'C -40000 :...:..;. ...

.;: .;. •••• ;..,,: •.;.-.;10:
~
~:.. ;..:. .•..
CD
. ;..;.
::iE ."' ..•.;..;. ..; ...::-..::.:
'J.';":'
-50000

-60000
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Angle of internal friction ( Degree)
Type-1,Type-2 Type-3
PositiVe Posttlve
Negative ......... Negative

( a ) Vertical Wall

50000

- - -'
-
=-40000

f1
~
--.-:::.- -;.::::.:- l.----
--
~ 30000
~
o
u.
(ij ---- --- -
5 20000
'C
.;:
CD
::iE
10000

20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Angle of internal friction ( Degree)
Type-1,Type-2 Type-3
PosItiVe Positive
Negative Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper
Fig. 4-53 Change in maximum Meridional Force due to change in angle
of internal friction of stored rnaterial.
 30000

~
-
20000
- ----
<I:' 10000
--
,Q
Q) o
~
o
LL

g- -10000
o ...... .. ..... ....
I ... .. ... ... .. .. .. ... .... .. ...
... ... .. ...
-20000 .... .. .. .. .. .... ..
...

-30000
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Angle of repose ( Degree)
Type-1, Type-2 Type-3
Positive Positive
Negative Negative

( a ) Vertical Wall
70000

60000 ." --
--
<I:' 50000
- ."
"'- - -"
- ."
.0

-;- 40000

~
~
o
30000
--- - ---- - -
- -' 1---
--
o
o
I
20000

10000

20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Angle of repose ( Degree)
Type-1, Type-2 Type-3
Positive Pos~ve
Negative ......... Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper
Fig. 4-54 Change in maximum Hoop Force due to change in angle of
repose of stored material.
 a

-10000

--==
,Q -20000

~
,f -30000

- ----- -
(ij
o
c
- - - ---- - - -
'i5 -40000
- - --- - - - - -
-'"
'" - - - - - - -- -
- - - - -- - - - -
:2
-50000 ---

20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Angle of internal friction ( Degree)
I Material Pressure I
Pos_ -- Negative - - - - -

( a ) Meridional Force in Vertical Wall below pressure zone

15000

10000

--==
~
,Q
5000
'"
E
,f
g- a
o
I

-5000

-------
- - - -- ------- --------
-10000 - - - - - - - - - ~- - - - - - - - -
- -20
15 25 30 35 40 45 50
Angle of internal friction ( Degree)
I Malerial Pressure I
Positive -- Negative - - - - -

( b ) Hoop Force in Vertical Wall below pressure zone

Fig_4-55 Change in rnaximum Meridional Force and Hoop Force due to

change in angle of internal friction of stored material (Type-3)
 2000

,""- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - - - - -
0 ----- - --------------- - --- -- ------- -----
-
.;=
.;=
:Q
-2000
f-
I-
'-
-
C
Q)

E -4000
0
:2
iii
C -6000
0 .... ....
'C '. '" ' . ....... ....
'C
'. '.
Q) '" ' .. '.'" ..
:2 .8000 " . .....
'
'. '. .. .... '.
'
". ".
'. '.
'" '. '. ' .
.10000
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Angle of internal friction (Degree)
Type-1,Type-2 Type-3
Positive Positive
Negative Negative

( a ) Vertical Wall

12000

-
10000

- - - -
--- --
.;= 1--
8000
.;=
:Q 6000
--- - - ----
-c
Q)

E
4000
~ 1--

0
:2 2000
iii I
c
0
0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
'C
'C -2000 '-
Q)
:2 t
-4000 '- ........... ................ ................. ..............
~
'-
-600015
20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Angle of internal friction ( Degree)
Type-1,Type-2 Type-3
Positive Positive
Negative Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper
Fig. 4-56 Change in rnaximum Meridional Moment due to change
in angle of internal friction of stored material.
 500
c

-
<l:'
<l:'

a
0
~-- - - - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -
,,- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0

-c:
Q)
E
0
-500
r
C
r
r
~
(ij
••c:
Q)
-1000 .

~
.l!1
E
::J
,c.. ...... .. - ..... ..
.... .. .. ... .. .. ... ..
u -1500
~ ..... .. ......
.. ... .. .... ...
U .. ..... ...
... .. .....
-2000
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Angle of internal friction ( Degree)
Type-1,Type-2 Type-3
Positive Positive
Negative Negative

( a ) Vertical Wall

4000

-a
<l:'
3000
- - -
-- - - -
<l:',
- -
- - 1-- -
- - --
c: 2000

... - - - - - -- -
Q)
E
0
~
(ij 1000
••c:
Q)
~
.l!1
E
,
0
U
~
::J
,
c- o
--- 0

- - -- - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -
0
0

- -
U r ..
~ ........ ....... .... .... ........ ... .. ... ........ .. ........... .. .. .... .. .... ..
-1000
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Angle of internal friction ( Degree)
Type-1,Type-2 Type-3
Positive Positive
Negative Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper
Fig. 4-57 Change in maximum Circumferential Moment due to change
in angle of internal friction of stored material.
 500

-
~
~,
a
0

-
~ -500
c
Ql
E
o
~-1000

- -----
iii
c
o
---- ---
-f--

-------
'0
.5i-1500
~
.- - . - ..- -
-- - .- .----
.- - ...- - - - - -
-2000
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Angle of internal friction ( Degree)
. - Material Pressure I
I Pos""" -- Negative - - - - -

( a ) Meridional Moment in Vertical Wall below pressure zone

100

-
E
ai -100

o
~
iii -200
~
- - - --. -
- -- -
~ ..
. - - -
.l!!
.- . - - .
E -300
:J
. ... - .-- - - - - -
---- -- .

~
(3 . . - - -
.
-. .- -
-400
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Angle of internal friction ( Degree)
Material Pressure I
I ~o61t1ve -- Negative - - - - -

( b ) Circumferential Moment in Vertical Wall below pressure zone

Fig. 4.58 Change in maximum Meridional and Circumferential moment

due to change in angle of internal friction of stored material
(Type-3)
 (iv) Circumferential moment: Maximum negative circumferential moment
in Type-l and Type-2 increases approximately linearly with the increase of p (Fig.
4.57a). Below pressure zone in Type-3the values of maximum circumferential
moments are so small that it can be neglected in design (Fig. 4.58b).

(b) Conical Hopper

(i) Meridional force: Maximum positive meridional force in conical hopper
increases with the increase of angle of internal friction (Fig. 4-53b). In this case for
lower value of p the maximum meridional forces in Type-l and Type-2 is greater
than that of Type-3. But for higher values of p the reverse is true. The variation of
maximum meridional forces can be approximated by a straight line.

(ii) Hoop Force: Maximum positive hoop force in Type-l and Type-2 are
always smaller than that of Type-3 but for all the types of silos their pattern of
variations is similar. Maximum hoop forces in conical hopper increases as the
angle of internal friction increases (Fig. 4.54b). Variations of p has no effect on
the location of maximum hoop forces.

(iii) Meridional Moment: Maximum positive meridional moment in Type-3

increases more or less linearly with the increase of angle of internal friction (Fig.
4.56b). The location of maximum meridional moment is independent of the
variation of p.

(iv) Circumferential moment: Fig. 4-57b shows the variation of maximum

circumferential moment in conical hopper due to variation of angle of internal
friction. In this case only the maximum positive values in Type-3 increases linearly
with the increase of angle of internal friction. The location of maximum
circumferential moment are independent with respect to the variation of p .

4.4.9 Effect of Co-efficient of Wall Friction, p'

(a) Vertical Wall

(i) Meridional force: Fig. 4-59a shows the variation of maxnnum
meridional force in vertical wall due to material pressure with respect to co-
efficient of wall friction, fJ~ In this case the maximum negative meridional force in
Type- I and Type-2 are slightly greater than that of Type-3. For all the cases the
maximum meridional forces increase with a decreasing rate with respect to the co-
efficient of wall friction. Below vertical wall in Type-3 the maximum negative

70
 o

.10000

;;::
:;; .20000

~
o
LL
-30000
(ij :"':'::"':"':.'
c: :'-:"':'::.:
:"':,.
.Q -40000
"0
.;::
'.
--,
:.t:,,:
- :"':"':.,. , ':'-:'":":

'" " :.::.,' :,..:.. •.. :.::.,.

:2 " :" ..•. " ":'" :.- '"':.' " .•.. :.."' .•..•.•.
-- - .,
':,.'

.50000 " ", .

.60000
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Coefficient of wall friction Ji'
Type.1, Type-2 Type-3
Positive Positive
Negative Negative

( a ) Vertical Wall

70000

60000

-
;;::

,9 50000
~

'"
u
~ 40000
0 "'- ~

--
LL I~
(ij
c: 30000
0
-....
'5 I--.
.;::
20000
'"
:2
10000

o
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Coefficient of wall friction Ji'
Type-1,Type.2 Type-3
Positive Positive
Negative ....••••• Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper
Fig. 4-59 Change in maximum Meridional Force due to change in Ji'
 meridional force also increases in similar manner to that of vertical wall in pressure
zone.

(ii) Hoop Force: Maximum positive and negative hoop force exists in the
vertical wall due to material pressure for Type-l and Type-2 (Fig. 4-60a). No
negative hoop force exists in Type-3 in pressure zone. All the values of maximum
positive and negative hoop forces decreases with a decreasing rate as the co-
efficient of wall friction increases. Maximum positive hoop force for all the types
are more or less the same. Below pressure zone in vertical wall in Type-3 the
maximum positive hoop force decreases with decreasing rate with increase of co-
efficient of wall friction. But in this case as the value of ,u' increases the maximum
negative hoop force also increases (Fig. 4-61b). The locations of the maximum
. positive and negative hoop forces are independent with the change of,u~

(iii) Meridional Moment: Maximum negative meridional moments in

Type-l and Type"2 show a considerable variation with the variation of co-efficient
of wall friction (Fig. 4-62a). In this case the maximum negative values decreases
with decreasing rate as the coefficient of wall friction increases. For Type-3 and
below pressure zone the maximum negative meridional moment increases with the
increase of ,u'(Fig. 4.64a). Change in,u' has no effect on the location of maximum
meridional moment.

(iv) Circumferential moment: Only maxnnum negative circumferential

moment in Type-l and Type-2 decreases considerably with the increase in co-
efficient of wall friction ,u' (Fig. 4.63a). The rate of decrease becomes smaller as
the value of ,u' increases. The variation of maximum circumferential moment for
other cases may be neglected. In Type-3 and below pressure zone the maximum
positive and negative circumferential moments are very small and can be neglected
in design (Fig. 4.64b). Variations of,u' has no effect on the locations of maximum
circumferential moments.

(b) Conical Hopper

(i) Meridional force: Maximum meridional forces in conical hopper

decrease exponentially with the increase of ,u ~ For all the types of silos the
variation follows more or less the same path (Fig. 4-59b). The locations of
maximum meridional forces are independent of the variation of,u~

71
 60000

40000

=--
~
- -- ---
""'"-.

20000
,Q
Q)
u
~
0
LL 0
C-
O
0
.......... .. ....................
I
..- .... .......... ............ ....... ...
-20000 ..... .. .......
.. .....
.. .. ..'

L
~
-40000
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Coefficient of wall friction /l'
Type-1,Type-2 Type-3
Positive Positive
Negative . . . . .. . . . Negative

( a ) Vertical Wall

100000

80000 "
""
" ....
60000 "
" •.. •..•..
Q)

~
LL
o
-- -
I
15-
o
40000
-- --- --- --
20000

o 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

Coefficient of wall friction /l '
Type-1,Type-2 Type-3
Positive Positive
Negative Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-60 Change in maximum Hoop Force due to change in /l'

 o

.10000

-
=='
,9
Ql -20000
u
~
0
lL
CiJ
c: -30000
0

."'5 - - - -- - -
Ql
::2; - - ---
-40000 - - - .-- - -- -
-- -- -- - - - -
- - - - - - .- - - .- -
- - - - - .- .- - -
-50000 .
02 03 04 05 0.6 0.7
Coefficient of wall friction, Jl'
Material Pressure I
I Positive -- Negative - - •••••.

( a) Meridional Force in Vertical Wall below pressure zone

20000
~

~
---
-
15000
t
-
=='
,9 10000
Ql
t
t
~

U
~ ~
0 5000
lL ~
C-
O
tl-
0
I 0 I-
I-
~
-5000
-- .•• ~------ -
------ ----- ---- -------
-10000 ---------- ------ -- -.
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Coefficient of wall friction, Jl'
Material Pressure
Positive Negative .....•.•..

( b ) Hoop Force in Vertical Wall below pressure zone

Fig. 4-61 Change in maximum Meridional Force and Hoop Force due to
change in Jl' (Type-3).
 5000

a
~ - I- - .-

-
<I:'
<I:',

8
-5000
.. .. .. . .... .. ..
.. ... .. .. .. . ..
-
~
c:
Q)
E
-10000 .. .'
.. .. ....
'
'
.... .. ..
....

0
:2 .'
.'
(ij
c: -15000
0
'5
.;:
Q)
:2 -20000

-25000
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Coefficient of wall friction Jl'
Type-1, Type-2 Type-3
Posltlve Positive
Negative Negative

( a ) Vertical Wall

15000
'" .
" " .•..
.•..
-
<I:'
<I:'

8
10000
- - - - --
----------
-c:
Q)

E
5000

- -
0
:2
(ij
c:
a
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -
0
'5 .... ... .. ..... .. .. ..
.;: .- .. .. .. ..
..... ...... ."
-5000 .. ... ..
Q)
:2 .. .. '

-10000
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Coefficient of wall friction Jl'
Type-1, Type-2 Type-3
Positive Positlve
Negative. Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-62 Change in maximum Meridional Moment due to change

in Jl'.
 1000
-

-
~
~
,Q
0
~
-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - .- - - - - - - - - - - - -
>--.

-c
CD
E
-1000
.. .. .. .. . .. ... ..
,
.. ..
0 .. .. ... .. ......
~
.. ..
.. .... ..
0;
:;::; .... ... .

c -2000 ...
CD
~ ..
~
E ..
:J
0
~ -3000
G

-4000
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Coefficient of wall friction Jl '
Type-1,Type-2 Type-3
Poo~~ poom~
Negative Negative

( a ) Vertical Wall

5000

-
~
~
4000
"- ...• ....
.... ....
,Q

-
3000
-- -- ---
~
c
CD
E
0
2000
I-..
-- - 1--
- - - - -- - - - -
0; 1000
:;::;
c
CD
~ 0
CD
.~
E - - - - - - - - - - - - -..-.....
- - - - - - - - -........
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -..- - -...... ---------
.. .... ... ... .. ..... ..... .. ...... ..
:J .. ... ...... ..
~ -1000
G
-2000
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Coefficient of wall friction Jl'
Type-1,Type-2 Type-3
Positive Positive
Negative ......... Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper
Fig. 4-63 Change in maximum Circumferential Moment due to
change in Jl'.

\
I I
 500

I-
~
0::: 0
--
0:::
l-
f-
~
,Q ~

-c
CD
E
-500
I-

0
:2 -1000
c;;
c
0
'6
------ .. _~.. .
.",CD -1500
",
",
".
:2 ---- ---- ". ------- ---- . -----------
-2000
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Coefficient of wall friction, 11'
Material Pressure I
I Positive -- Negative" .

( a) Meridional Moment in Vertical Wall below pressure zone

100
-

0:::
--
0::: 0
-
-
c
,Q

- c -100
CD
E
I-
~
L

-
0 L
:2 C
c;; -200
:;::;
c f-
CD I-
~
- CD
E
:J -300
<.>
~
- ..... ------ ..
-"- .. '.
--. --- .. --- .. - ....
~ '"
-------- ---- ------- ..
G
-400
0.2 Q3 Q4 Q5 0.6 0.7
Coefficient of wall friction, 11'
"'~- Material Pressure I
I. P05 '".0 -- Negative .

( b ) Circumferential Moment in Vertical Wall below pressure zone

Fig. 4.64 Change in maximum Meridional and Circumferential moment

due to change in 11' (Type-3)
 (ii) Hoop Force: Maximum hoop forces in Type-l and Type-2 are always
less than that of Type-3. But the pattern of variation of these are same for all the
types of silos (Fig. 4.60b). In every case the maximum positive hoop forces
decreases exponentially with the increase of fJ~ The locations of maximum hoop
forces are independent of the variation of fJ ~

(iii) Meridional Moment: Maximum posItIve and negative meridional

moment in Type-l and Type-2 decreases with decreasing rate as the co-efficient of
wall friction increases (Fig. 4.62b). Maximum positive meridional moment in
Type-3 is dominating in this case and also show the same pattern of variation as
that of Type-l and Type-2. Locations of maximum meridional moments are fixed
with respect to the change in fJ~

(iv) Circumferential moment: Only in Type-3 the maxIIDum positive

circumferential moment is considerable in conical hopper due to material pressure
. (Fig. 4.63b). It decreases exponentially with the increase of fJ'. In this case the
maximum values always occur at the junction of ring beam and conicaI hopper.

4.4.10 Effect of Wind Pressure Intensity, q

Variations of maximum values of all stress resultants for all types of silos
with respect to the variation of wind pressure are always linearly increasing. In the
subsequent paragraph these are discussed briefly.

(a) Vertical Wall

(i) Meridional force: Maximum positive meridional force in Type-l and

Type-2 increases at a linear rate. Maximum negative meridional force in Type-l
and Type-2 increases at lower rate. The maximum positive and negative meridional
forces for Type-3 in the pressure zone show the same pattern of increase (Fig.
4.65a). Fig. 4.67a shows the linear variations of maximum meridional forces in
Type-3 below pressure zone due to variation of wind pressure.

(ii) Hoop Forces: Fig. 4-66a shows the linear variations of maximum hoop
forces with respect to the variation of wind pressure in all the types. For the vertical
wall below pressure zone in Type-3 the linear variations of maximum positive and
negative hoop forces due to increase in the wind pressure are shown in (Fig. 4-
67b).

72
 60000

-
-=
.c
40000

.--_.-_._.-._--
--_.--_.- -'-- _.-'-
Q)
()
20000
~
0
u..
(ij -'_.-
c 0
0 --- .•. 0:.
'6
'C
Q)
=:':''l:::;,:,-:::_.:.-; ''':::''_:'::::::''-'';"'':- "::':"::::':-_". __ "_.
._ _.. ..
:2 -20000 - .. _--

-40000
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Wind Pressure ( pst)
Type-1 Type-2 Type-3
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
--_ ...
_ .._ ..-

( a ) Vertical Wall

1500

1000
---
------= - - -
-
-
----
--
-
----
-
- 500
-- - - -
l.---:::'"- -
e a
~
:"'. -- '.
~
". ". ".
'. ". '-- --. - .. _-
(ij -500 -
c
". '.
".
'-
'-. -'- - --
o ". '.
'. '. --. --- -'.
:g -1000
Q)
". '.
". ".
'.'. ".
:2 '.
'.
-1500
'.
". '.
'.
". '.
'.
-2000
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Wind Pressure ( pst)
Type-1 Type-2
Positive Positive
Negative Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-65 Change in maximum Meridional Force due to change in wind

pressure
 6000

4000

- - --
--
;:
- - - -
£ 2000
Q)
u
~
- -
:::.::.: --------- ----_.--_.
.-.------ .-.-.----
~ 0
C-
O
o
I -2000

-4000
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Wind Pressure ( pst)
Type-1 Type-2 Type-3
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
__._.-
_ .. ..-

( a ) Vertical Wall

4000

--
;:
2000
--- -- --
£ ---
~ 0 ----
& - -- ---- -- . ----
---- ----
C-
O
".
". ....".
".
---- -- .---- -----
o
I -2000 ".
".
" . ....
".
-4000
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Wind Pressure ( pst)
Type-1 Type-2
Positive Positive
Negative Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-66 Change in Maximum Hoop Force due to change in Wind

pressure
 80000

60000

-
ol=
,Q
Q)
40000
<.>
~
0
u. 20000
(ij
c:
.2
"0 0
'C " .. - .. - .
Q)

:2 --- --. ---

-'- ---- - .. _- --.
-20000 .. --- - .. _-

-40000
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Wind Pressure ( pst)
Wind Pressure I
I ~OSitive -- Negative - - - - -

( a ) Meridional Force in Vertical Wall below pressure zone

15000

~ 10000

-
ol=
,Q
Q)
5000
2
o
u.
a. 0
o
o --- - .. _-
---
I '-- --- --.
-'- --- -'- ---
-5000

-10000
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Wind Pressure ( pst)
I Wind Pressure I
Positive -- Negative - - - - -

( b ) Hoop Force in Vertical Wall below pressure zone

Fig. 4-67 Change in maximum Meridional Force and Hoop Force due to
change in wind pressure (Type-3)
 (iii) Meridional Moment: The increase ofmaximmn positive and maximmn
negative meridional moments in Type-I, Type-2 and Type-3 are shown in Fig.
4.68a. For vertical wall below pressure zone in Type-3 the variations are shown in
Fig.4-70a.

(iv) Circumferential moment: The rates of increase of maximmn positive

circmnferential moments for all the types of silos are virtually the same (Fig. 4-
69a). For the negative values the rates of increase of the maximmn circmnferential
moments for all types of silos are also more or less the same. For Type-3, below
pressure zone the variations of maximmn positive and negative circmnferential
moments are shown in Fig. 4-70b.

(b) Conical Hopper

In Type-3 the conical hopper is completely separate structure and not

subjected to wind load. So the effect of wind pressure variation on stress condition
of silo is investigated only for Type-l and Type-2 and the linear variations of
results are shown graphically in Fig. 4.65b, Fig. 4.66b, Fig. 4.68b and Fig. 4.69b.

The variations of wind pressure intensity has no effect on the location of

maximmn meridional force, hoop force, meridional moment and circmnferential
moment for all the types and for both vertical wall and conical hopper. In Type-2
the hopper is not directly subjected to wind pressure because of continuous wall
support. But it is monolithically constructed with vertical wall which is subjected to
wind pressure. Due to the effect of wind pressure in vertical wall some moments
and forces are also developed in the hopper and the maximmn forces and moments
are always smaller than that of Type-I. In Type-I, the due to column support wind
pressure directly acts on the hopper.

4.4.11 Effect of Height of Hopper Bottom Above Floor Level, h'

Height of hopper bottom has no effect on the values of various stress

resultants in Type-l and Type-2. It affects only the behaviour of vertical wall of
silos ofType-3 below pressure zone.

(i) Meridional force: Fig. 4.71a shows the variations of maxnnmn

meridional forces in the portion mentioned above, but change of h' has little effect
on the various stress resultants.

73
 2250

-
""
""
£l
1500

-c:
OJ
E
750
,-'-'-'--
,-'-'-'--

0
::2 0
(ij
c:
0
:g -750
Q;
::2
-1500
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Wind Pressure ( psf)
Type-1 Type.2 Type-3
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
_._.-
__
.. ..-

( a ) Vertical Wall

2000

-
""
""
£l 1000
1500

-c:
OJ
E 500
0
::2
(ij 0
c:
0
'5
.;:: ...... -- .---- -.-
OJ -500 ----
::2 ..... .....

-1000
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Wind Pressure ( psf )
Type-1 Type-2
Positive Positive
Negative Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-68 Change in maximum Meridinal Moment due to change

in wind pressure.
 6000

----- --
~
~ •••••••
01:' 4500
'- ~
01:' ~.
3000

_ 1500
c
CD
E 0 ---
-, - ~ l--

~--.•.. .-
o
"
~ -1500
'fii"
:;::; ..•.•.
-3000
~ ~ •.•..•.....•.....•...
CD f-
E -4500 ..
:l - ..,"l'.~~~':':.:::..~_
2 -6000
(3
-7500
o 20 40 60 80 100 120
Wind Pressure ( psf )
Type-1 Type-2 Type-3
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Postt!ve
Negative
---
-----
Positive
Negative
.. _ ..-
_-----

( a ) Vertical Wall

450
•.....
01:'
'- 300
01:'

f!
-
c
CD
E
150

~- -- --
0
::;; 0 ----
......
0; ...
:;::;
c -150 ----
CD
~ ...
- CD
E
:l -300
u
...
~ ...
(3 ... ...
...
-450
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Wind Pressure ( psf)
Type-1 Type-2
Positive Positive
Negative Negative

( b ) Conical Hopper

Fig. 4-69 Change in maximum Circumferential Moment due to change

in wind pressure.
 5000

~ 4000

--'7'*" 3000

~
fa
C 2000
Ql
E
a
~ 1000
c;;
c
a
15
'C
0
--- --- -"- ..
Ql
~ -1000
--- --- --- -'- ---
--. -- ....
-2000
0 20 40 60 80
-'- --
100 120
Wind Pressure ( psf )
I Positive -
Wind Pressure
Negative _ •• __ :
I
( a ) Meridional Moment in Vertical Wall below pressure zone

3000

'*"
:;;;
2000

fa
~
-
C
Ql
E
a
1000

0
~
c;;
:;:;
-- '. "-
-. --
ffi -1000 '- -- -- --.
~ -- --
i3~ -2000 ". -'-
G - . -. "
'-
-3000
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Wind Pressure ( psf )
Wind Pressure I
I ~ositive -- Negative •. _ •. __ ,

( a) Circumferential Moment in Vertical Wall below pressure zone

Fig. 4-70 Change in maximum Meridional and Circumferential moment

due to change in wind pressure (Type-3).
 40000

---------- ---------- ---------- 1--------- ---

--
"" 20000
f1
Q) a
l2
o
l!-
c..._ .._ .._ .._ ..c. .._ .._ .._ .._ .. ,...._ .._ .._ .._ _ _ _ _. _
.. .. .. .. .. ...

e;; ..... ...... .. .. .... .. ....

c -20000
o .

'0
.;::
Q)
::;; -40000
--------- - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - -- - - - -- - -- - - - - .
.

-600004
8 12 16 20 24 28
Height of hopper bottom above floor level (It )
Sel/Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
. ........
Pos.ve
Negative
---
-_._- Positive
Negative
-----
__.. ..-

( a ) Meridional Force in Vertical Wall below pressure zone

15000

10000

--
""
f1
~ 5000 --'
Q)
U
~
0
I!-
a
C-
o .. _ .._ .._ .._. _ .._ .. _ .._ .._. _ .._ .._ .._ ..- '-"-"-"-"- .._.
0
I .... ..... ." .. ... .. ....... .... ..... .. .. .. ...... .... .. ..
.5000

- ---- -- -- --- - - -- - - --- - ---- - --- --- -- - - -

.10000 4
8 12 16 20 24 28
. Height of hopper bottom above floor level (It )
Se~Weight Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive
Negative
--
.........
Positive
Negative
- --
-----
Positive
Negative
_
_._.-
_
.. ..•

( b ) Hoop Force in Vertical Wall below pressure zone

Fig.4-71 Change in maximum Meridional Force and Hoop Force due to

change in height of hopper bottom above floor level (Type-3)
 2000

-'-'-'-'-' •...
.
_._._._. +-._._._._. _._._._._ .
f-.-

--
;: .

;:
1000
.0 l-

-c
Q)

E 0
I-
I-
-- - - - -- -- - f-- - -- - - - - f--
0
::2'
0;
c
0
~'~~'.':":"., ....".•.•.•• ......_-- ..•_- _._._ .._ .._. '-'--'-0'_'" '.'~

'0 -1000
'C
Q)

::2' - ~-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -
-2000
4 8 12 16 20 24 28
Height of hopper bottom above floor level (It )
SeWWeigh! Malerial Pressure Wind Pressure
Positive Positive Posttlve
Negative ......... . Negative Negative

( a ) Meridional Moment in Vertical Wall below pressure zone

~ 1500
;:
--
;: 1000

--_._.-.- -,-'-'-'- --_._.-.-

-. --'

-
£
c 500
Q)

E f-
0
0
::2' .. ..... ...... .........
........ ................ ......... .. ...
0; ~
:;:;
c
- ---- -- - - - - - - - - - -- -- - - - - - - - --- - - - - -- - -
Q) -500
~
.l!! f- .._ .._ .._ .._ .
E -1000 -..-..-.._ ..-. _ ..
::J
()
~ .-..- .-..-.._ ..-..- .-.
<3 .
-1500
4
8 12 16 20 24 28
Height of hopper bottom above floor level ( It )
SeWWeigh! Material Pressure Wind Pressure
Posrnve
PosItive Positive
Negative •.•...•.•
Negative Negative

( b ) Circumferential Moment in Vertical Wall below pressure zone

Fig. 4-72 Change in maximum Meridional and Circumferential moment

due to change in height of hopper bottom above floor level
. (Type-3)
 (ii) Hoop Force: Maximwn hoop force in vertical wall below pressure zone
also does not vaty with the change of height of hopper bottom above floor level
(Fig.4.71b).

(iii) Meridional Moment: Change in h' also has no noticeable effect on the
meridional moment in the vertical wall below pressure zone (Fig. 4.72a).

(iv) Circumferential moment: Only maximwn circwnferential moment due

to wind load is sensitive to the variation of height of hopper bottom above floor
level (Fig. 4.72b). Both the negative and positive maximwn circwnferential
moment increases approximately linearly with the change in h'.

4.5 REMARKS

From the parametric study a nwnber of important decisions can be made

regarding the design values of stress resultants and their locations required for silo
design. This study also revealed the relative importance of various parameters for
the determination of stress resultants and their locations. From this study it is clear
that the effect of stored material is the most predominant nearly for all forces and
moments. Positive and negative meridional forces due to wind are also dominating
for silo design. Circwnferential moments due to wind load are considerably high in
some cases. Only geometric dimensions influence the locations of maximwn stress
resultants for all types of silos. Among geometric dimensions the height of vertical
wall and internal diameter of silos have considerably greater effects than any other
geometric parameters. Material properties do not affect the locations of maximwn
stress resultants, but they play the most significant role in the determination of
magnitude of the maximwn forces and moments.

***

74
 CHAPTERS
A DESIGN RATIONALE

5.1 GENERAL

Investigations carned out in Chapter 3 and 4 has revealed the.characteristics

and overall behaviour of silo under various loading conditions.

In the conventional method the vertical wall and the conical hopper are
considered as separate structures which are subjected to membrane action only. But
actually they are not so. The restraint provided either by the ring beam or by the
ground support have significant effect on the overall behaviour of silo. Due to the
restraint, moments develop at different locations. Again negative hoop force of
considerable amount develop near the restraint.

Conventional method predicts the maximum hoop force in conical hopper at

the junction of ring beam with hopper. But due to either self weight or stored
material pressure the maximum hoop force occurs at a certain distance from the
junction of ring beam and conical hopper. For self weight this distance varies from
20% to 50% of the overall length L of conical hopper in Type-1 and Type-2. For
Type-3 their range is about 10% to 15% depending on the diameter of the silo.
Due to stored material pressure maximum hoop force occurs at a distance of 20%
to 30% of "L" in Type-1 and Type-2 and this range is about 10% to 20% for
Type-3.

On the basis of this study an attempt in made to propose a simple and direct
way of finding the moments and forces required to design the various structural
elements of a silo.
5.2 BASIS OF THE PROPOSAL

On the basis of the comparative study discussed in Chapter 3 it can be said

that the prediction of various stress resultants at different critical locations by
approximate conventional method may not always be acceptable. Besides,
traditional approach of analysis can not predict any type of moments at all. Despite
all such approximations and inaccuracies the conventional method of analysis has
been used with success in the past. Conservative design approach combined with
high factor of safety can be attributed to such success.

With the advancement of the techniques of structural analysis it is now

possible to deal with complex structures using the Finite Element method.
However, the application of Finite Element technique may not always be possible.
As a result a straight forward method for analysis which will enable one to carry
out the calculations easily but with acceptable accuracy is desirable.

Therefore, on the basis of the extensive study, a set of expressions for

moments and forces at the critical sections are suggested in the following articles.

5.3 PROPOSED DESIGN RATIONALE

The design of a reinforced silo structure consists of analysis, selection of

physical dimensions and calculations and placement of reinforcement. Among the
above three steps analysis is the most important. From analysis one gets various
forces and moments required for design.

Silo is a tall structure. Meridional and hoop forces developed in silo vary
vertically. For an economic design, these variations must be taken into
consideration: There are other stress resultants such as meridional moment or
circumferential moment having very localised effect. In this rationale, expressions
for maximum forces or moments in terms of different parameters (Art. 4.2, Fig.3-7)
of silo are presented in tabular form. These expressions are valid within certain
range of variation of the parameters mentioned above. Attempt has been made to
cover the usual ranges.

The expressions of various stress resultants are of empirical nature. Hence,

care must be taken to use proper units of measurements. For the proposed design
rationale the unit for forces is lb. and the unit of moments is lb-ft.. The forces and
moments given by the equation are for unit linear foot of the respective structural

76
element. The valid range of different geometric parameters and their units are
shown in the Table 5-1. This table also shows the symbols used for various
parameters.

Table 5-1 Range and Units of Parameters

Parameters . Notation Range Unit

Height of vertical wall H 40 t0280 . foot

Diameter of silo (Internal) D 10 to 100 foot

Inclination of conical hopper with horizontal a 40 to 75 Degree

Top thickness of vertical wall Ttop 4 to 9 inch

Bottom thickness of vertical wall lboffom 6 to 13 inch

Top thickness of conical hopper Itop 6 to 13 inch

Bottom thickness of conical hopper {bottom 4 to 9 inch

Depth of ring beam d 24 to 96 inch

Unit weight of stored material r 35 to 160 Ib/ft3

Angle of internal mction p IS to 50 Degree

Coefficient of wall mction p' 0.20 to 0.70

Intensity of wind pressure q 10 to 100 Ib/ft2

As stated above, vertical variation of various stress resultants, specially, for

meridional force and hoop force are important in silo analysis. Maximum values of
various forces and moments and their vertical variations are, therefore, presented
graphically. In this design guide only those functions which have significant effect
on the silo behaviour are considered.

5.3.1.Maximum Values of Stress Resultants

All the equations presented in this article for the computations of maximum
f9rces and moments are of the same form as given by

Maximum Force or Moment = kjj.ji ..t3.f4 /"

Here n is the number of parameters on which the respective function
depends. k is a numeric constimt and each of jj, ji, fj /" are factors
corresponding to a particular parameter. Values of jj, .ii, fj f,. are different for

77
different stress resultants and one set offj, /2, fi .... f" are applicable for one function
only.

(A) Type-l and Type-2

(a) Stress Resultants due to Self Weight.

i) Vertical wall
Meridional force: In this case the meridional force is always compressive
and at any level meridional force is equal to the weight of concrete above that level.
Maximum meridional force occurs at the bottom of vertical wall and it is given by

Fmax= rcH(Tbollom+ T1op) /24 + Dead loadfrom roof (lb/ft). (5-1)

3
. where Yc = Unit weight of concrete in lb/ft

Hoop Force: Maximum negative hoop force in vertical wall is relatively

higher and their values can be computed from Table 5-2.

ii) Conical Hopper

Meridional{orce: Meridional force in conical hopper due to self weight is
always positive and maximum value exists at the junction of ring beam and hopper
wall. Maximum meridional force can be computed as follows:

Wg (5-2)
FmM
(lb/ft)

where Wg total weight of conical hopper

=
Dc = centre line diameter of conical hopper at top in ft.

Hoop force: Table 5-3 shows the equations for hoop force computation
due to self weight .

78
Table 5-2. Maximum Negative (Compressive) Hoop Force in Vertical Wall
(Type-I, Type-2)

Fmax = - 868 fi.fi ..f3.f4.fj.f6fds

/, 1.0 +6.1 x I 0.3 (H - 39.6)°968

.il 1.0 + 0.0204(D _10)1220

10 _ 0.0140(a _ 40)°.794
.h
/4 1.0 + 0.0393(1;01' _ 4)'°02

I5 1.0 + 0.01 45(1/'ottom- 6)0811

I6 1.0 + 0.0375(1101' _6)°972

4
/7 1.0 + 0.0160(lbottom- 4/°°

.f8 0.9638 +2.23xI0.4 lid _361}'658

Table 5-3. Maximum Positive (Tensile) Hoop Force in Conical Hopper

(Type-I, Type-2)

Fmax = 169.5 fi.f2.f3.f4'.f5.f6

II 1.0 _ 3.03xI0.3(H _ 39.6/744

/2 1.0 +0. I 477(D _10)'137

f, 1.0 _ 0.026(a _ 40)°914

/4 1.0 + 0.1034(1'01' _ 6)°.986

/s 1.0 + 0.0288(hottom _ 4)"37

/6 0.95 +3.63xlO.4 lid _541}'65

(a) Stress Resultants due to Stored Material Pressure

i) Vertical Wall
Meridional force: Meridional force is always compressive and maximum
meridional forces can be obtained from the following equations:
(5-3)

where q = yD [I _ e-41"kHID ] (5-4)

m« 4p'k

79
 1- sinp
k =--- (5-5)
1+ sinp

R = hydraulic radius.

Hoop force: Maximwn negative hoop force can be computed using the
equations of Table 5-4. Maxirnwn tensile hoop force in veltical wall due to stored
material pressure is given by

(5-6)

where Pd,""" = CJ.k.gnm

Cd ,= Over pressm'e factor (Table 2.2)
k and gn"" are same as that ofEq. 5-4 and Eq. 5-5.

Meridional moment: Table 5-5 and Table 5-6 gives the equations for
maximwn meridional moment in vertical wall due to grain load.

Circumferential moment: Table 5-7 shows the equations for computing

maximwn circwnferential moment.

Table 5 -4. Maximum Negative (Compressive) Hoop Force in Vertical

Wall (Type-I, Type-2)

Fnmx = - 1273fj.j2 ..f3.f4.fj.f6.fds

Ji 1.0 + 0.0071(H _ 39.6)°827

h 1.0 + 0.0583(D _ 10)'916

13 1.0 - 0.0226(a _ 40)'°14

.f~ 1.0 - 0.0392(7/'0"om_ 6)'°53

15 1.0 - 0.0243(d _ 24)°732

16 1.0 + 00285(y- 35)

1, 10 + 0.008(p _ 15)1.311

j8 1.0 - o 8723(u' _ 020)"511

80
 Table 5-5. Maximum Positive Meridional Moment in Vertical Wall
(Type-I, Type-2)

M",ox = 91.3 ii.fi.fj.f4.fj:f6f7fil:f9

Ji 1.0 + 0.0331(H _ 39.6)°636
h 1.0 + 0.0574(D _ 10)1739
f3 1.0 -0.0141(a _ 40)°961

./4 1.0 + 0.0138(7;01' _ 4)'°23

h 1.0 + 0.1087(760tro", _ 6)0.988
/6 1.0 - O.Olll(d _ 24)°744

/7 1.0 + 0.0286(y- 35)

i8 1.0 + 00046(p _ 15)'027

/9 1.0 - 1.0073(1/'- 0.20)0614

Table 5-6. Maximum Negative Meridional Moment in Vertical Wall

(Type-I, Type-2)

Mnuu = - 362fi:fi:fj:f4:fj:f6f7:filfr;.iio

fi 1.0 + 0.0299(H - 396)""1 ; H s: 140'

1.0 + 4.2686(H - 39.6)"°534; H > 140'
h 1.0 + 0.0785439(D _ 10)'850
.

.f, 1.0 - 0.01943(a- 40)'013

.f4 1.0 + 0.0066(7;01' _ 4)'°13

/5 1.0 + 0.15483(760"0"' _ 6)°748
/6 1.0 + 0.0124(1/01' _ 6)0.492; ttop:$ 9"

10187 - 0.0029(1/01' - 9l"6; tlop > 9/1

17 10 - 0.0053(d _ 24)°986

18 1.0 + 0.0286(y - 35)

f9 1.0 + 0.007(p- 15)'181

fio 1.0 - 1.0969(u' _ 0.20)0585

81
 Table 5 -7. Maximum Negative Circumferential Moment in Vertical Wall
(Type-t, Type-2)

Mmax = - 9Ifi..fi ..f3..f4..fj..f6..fj..f"af9-fio

.Ii 1.0 + 0.0295(H _ 39.6)°544 ; H" 140'

1.0 + 2.8482(H - 39.6)"°.4'9 ; H > 140'

11 1.0 + 0.0574(D _ 10)186

j, 1.0 - OOI92(a- 4ol012

.f< 1.0 + 0.0068(T,ol' _ 4)"989

./5 1.0 + 0.1531 (Tnntlo", _ 6)°.749

16 1.0 + 0.0125(/'01' _ 6)°.481; ftop s: 9"

1.0189 - 0.0031 ( /top - 9)1413 ; flOp> 9/1
1, 1.0 - 0.0047(d-24)

.18 1.0 + 0.0285(y- 35)

19 1.0 + 0.0069(p _ 15)1168
ho 1.0 - 1.0908(u' _ 0.20)°586 .

ii) Conical hopper

Meridionalforce: Table 5-8 shows the equations for computing maximum

meridional forces.

Hoop force: Table 5-9 show the equations for computing maximum hoop
forces.

Meridional moment: Table 5-10 and Table 5-11 shows the equations for
computing maximum meridional moments.

Circumferential moment: Table 5-12 to Table 5-13 shows the equations for
computing maximum circumferential moments.

82
 Table 5-8. Maximum Positive (Tensile) Merid,ionalForce in Conical
Hopper (Type-I, Type-2)

Fmnx= J 5792fi.fifj.f4fj.f6.f7.f8f9-fio
ii 1.0 + 0.0332(H _ 39.6)°.491; H ~ 230'
1.437; H> 230'
/; 10 + 0, I 677(D - 10)'517
./3 09569 + 000021 {Ia _ 55.01}B45
f. 1.0 + 00059(T,op - 4)
./3 1.0 - 0.0073(lbottorn _ 6)°83
f6 1.0 - 0.0061 (ItoI'_ 6)°9
f, 10 - 2. 7x I 0.4(d _ 24)J549
Is 1.0 + 0.0286(r- 35)
f9 1.0 + 0,0082(p _ 15)]219
flO 1.0 - 1.0918(u'- 0.20)°578

Table 5 -9. Maximum Positive (Tensile) Hoop Force in Conical Hopper

(Type-I, Type-2)

Fmax= 1999.5 fi.fi.fj.f4jf6..f7jiJg.fio.fi,

ii J.O + 0.D316(H - 39.6t51 ; H~ 180'
1.3934 ; H > 180'
/; 1.0 + 0.151984(D _ 10)J581
f3 1.0 - 0.0123(a- 40)°897
j, I. 0 + 0 0064(7;0{' _ 41005
h 1.0 - 001385(7bottorn- 6)°731
fr, 1.0 - 0.0186(1101'- 6)"764
f7 1.0 - 0.0046(lbottorn- 4)0.882
j; 1.0 - 0.0024(d _ 24)'°96
f9 1.0 + 0.02861(r- 35)
flO 1.0 + 0.008(p _ 15)]22.1
iii 10 - LlI56(u'- 020)0566 .

83
 Table 5-10. Maximum Positive Meridional Moment in Conical Hopper
(Type-I, Type-2)

M_ = 82 ft..fj..fj.f4.fj..fr,.j7.fs..f:;'.fJo
.Ii 1.0 + 0.0433(H - 39.6)"385 ; H s: 210'
1313 ; H > 210'
f2 10 + 0.1416(D _ 10)'733
j, 10 - 00282(a _ 40)°91
./4 1.0 - 0.04 I 2(Tbottom- 6)".833 ;Tbottoms: 8.5"
09116; Tbotto11l > 8. 5"
f5 1.0 + O.0848(t,op _ 6) [[6
f6 1.0 + 0.0506(tbuttom _ 4)°.991
I 1.0 ~ 0.032(d _ 24)"634
js 1.0 + 0.0286(y- 35)
f9 1.0 + 0.0061(p- 15)1305
flO LO - 11307(u' _ 0.20)°539

Table 5-11. Maximum Negative Meridional Moment in Conical hopper

(Type-I, Type-2)

Mmax = - 267.6 jj.f]..fj.f4..fj.f6.f7..fS.f:;'.fJo.fj I

Ji LO + 0.0265(H _ 39.6)°684
h 1.0 + 0.0411(D _ 10)'858

13 1.0 - 0.0439(a _ 40)°706

j, LO + 0.0061(1;01' - 4)
is LO + 0.21 67(Tbottom _ 6)°.702
f6 LO + 0.0637(1,o1' _ 6)°515 ; 'top::; 9.5"
L lOS - 0.01 56(t,op - 9.5)'478; 1'01'> 9.5"
f7 LO - 0.0139(lbottum _ 4)°998

18 1.0 - 0.1044(d _ 24)°353 ; d s: 72"

0.5906 ; d > 72"
f9 LO + 0.0286(y- 35) .

flU 10 + 0.0027(p_15)"896; P s: 40°

1.0416 - 9.1xlO"\p- 15f127; p> 40°
.Ii I LO - 0.9078(u' _ 0.20)"6)7

84
Table 5-12. Maximum Positive Circumferential Moment in Conical
Hopper (Type-I, Type-2)

Mnwx = 14.tififjf4fjf6f7f;'
•• .Ii 1.0 + 0.0255(H _ 39.6)°521 ; H s; 180'
5
1.2911 - 1.9xlO- (H - 180.0)'474;H> 180'

12 1.0 + 0.2266(D _ 10)1756

f; 1.0 - 0.0583(a _ 40)°755

.t4 1.0 + 0.1328(1'01' _ 6)'°5'

h 1.0 - 0.0344(d _ 24)°651

.16 1.0 + 0.0284(y- 35)

.
1, 1.0 + 0.0081(p- 15)1238

Is 1.0 - 1.1 034(1" _ 0.20)°544

Table 5-13. Maximum Negative Circumferential Moment in Conical

Hopper (Type-I, Type-2)

Mm= = - 41 1,fi.jjf4.jjf6f7 ..t;'.j~.tjo

1, 1.0 + 0.0266(H _ 396)°757

.Ii 1.0 + 0.0243(D _ 10)'913
f; 1.0 - 0.0386(a _ 40)°637

.t~ 1.0 + 0.4128(1;'ottom _ 6)°703

15 1.036 - 0.0259 (It,op _ 7.5»'68

16 1.0 - 0.0 155 ( Ibotto",- 4 )09'6

.f? 1.0 - 0.1236(d _ 24)°31 ; d S; 66"

0.6062 ; d > 66"

j;' 1.0 + 0.0284(y - 35)

19 1.0 - 3.8x10.4(p_ 15)1716

.lio 1.0 - 0.789(1" _ 020)°712

85
(c) Stress Resultants due to Wind Pressure

Wind load analysis of Type-I and Type-2 differs only slightly. So in this
design rationale only Type-I and Type-3 only discussed. Effect of wind load on
conical hopper is very little and can be ignored for design purpose. Therefore, the
various stress resultants discussed blow are for veltical wall only

Meridional force: Table 5-14 and 5-15 Shows the equations for computing
maximum meridional forces.

Hoop force: Table 5-16 shows the equations for computing maximum hoop
forces.

Meridional moment: Table 5-17 shows the equations for computing

maximum meridional moments.

Circumferential moment: Table 5-18 and Table 5-19 shows the equations
for computing maximum circumferential moments.

Table 5-14. Maximum Positive (Tensile) Meridional Force in Vertical

Wall (Type-I, Type-2)

F m= = 3200//.f2.13.f4.f5

// 1.0 + 0.0973(H _ 396)°.622; H S 160'

10 + 0.0037(H - 39.6)130\ ; H> 160'
238l
/2 0.616 +23xlO-4{ID _ 20Il ; D s 60'

1.460 + 0.0187(D _ 60)°686 ; D> 60'

/3 1.0 - 0.075(1;up- 4)".68\

14 1.0 - 0.0365(.hmom _ 6)".948

15 10 + 0 1087(q - 92)

86
Table 5 -15. Maximum Negative (Compressive) Meridional Force in
Vertical Wall (Type-t, Type-2)

F max= - 6525 fi./i.fj.f4.fj

fl 10 + 0.14(H - 39.6)"418 ; H ,; 110'

1.0 + 7.8xl0.6 (H - 396)23"3 ; H > 110'

f2 0.3078 + 00632{\D - 30[}om

I. 0 - 0 . 14(T top _ 4)"601
J2
f4 1.0 _ 00507(1hottom _ 6)°855

f5 1.0 + 0.1087(q - 9.2)

Table 5 -t6. Maximum Positive (Tensile) Hoop Force in Vertical

Wall (Type-I, Type-2)

Mmax = 230 fi.f;.fj.f4.fj

fl 1.0 + 0.1287(H - 39.6)°'°' ; H,; 110'

1.0 + 0.0105(H - 39.6)1300 ; H> 110'

.il 0.9296 - 0.0064{\lJ - 601} 1.199

.

f, 1.0 - 0.1 I83(1;op _ 4)°.690

f4 1.0 - 0.1962(1hottom _ 6)°.798

f5 1.0 + 0.1082(q - 92)

Table 5-t 7. Maximum Positive Meridional Moment in Vertical

Wall (Type-t, Type-2)

Mmax = 173.fI.i; . fj.f4

fl 1.0 + 0.0363(H _ 396)°.489

/2 0.7503 + 0.0163(ID - 201}1.118

f3 1.0 _ 0.0455(1;op _ 4)°745

f, 1.0 + 0.1 084(q - 9.2)

87
Table 5-18. Maximum Positive Circumferential moment in Vertical
Wall (Type-I, Type-2)

Mmax = 155.!J.f2.jj..f4..fj

/, 1.0 + 00464(H _ 396)"947 ; Hs \40'

4.285 + 0.0376(H _ 140)°452; H> 140'

/2 1.0+0.148\ (D_IO)I251; D S 50'

\ 1.5375 -2.4xl0-<CD - 50)2426; J) > 50'

f, 10; T top S 6'

1.0 + 0.0552(T,op- 6) 0.973 ; T lop > 6'

/4 0.8652 + 0.0079{ITbottom - 9.5\}2148

/5 10 + 0 I085(q - 922)

Table 5-19. Maximum Negative Circumferential moment in Vertical

Wall (Type-I, Type-2)

Mmax = - 102fi..fi.jj..f4.fj

/, 1.0 + 0.2336(H _ 39.6)°604 ; Hs 160'

5.18 ; H> 160'

/2 12.397 - 2.2xlO-6{ID - 501)'-31

f, 1.0; Tlop S 6'

1.0 + 0.0534(1;op _ 6)°995 ; 1~op > 6'

/4 0.8663 + 0.0071 (llbottom- 9.51}2"8

/5 1.0 +0.1 085(q - 922)

(B) Type-3

(a) Stress Resultants due to self weight

i) Vertical Wall
Meridional jhrce: Maximum meridional force occurs at the bottom of the
vertical wall and this value can be obtained using Eq. 5-1.

88
 Hoop Force: Table 5-20 shows the equations for computing maximum
hoop forces.

Table 5-20. Maximum Negative (Compressive) Hoop Force in Vertical

Wall (Type-3)

F max = - 890 ji.f2.fj.f4.fj

fl 1.0 + 0.0126(H _ 39.6)°990

f2 1.0 + 0.0099(D - 10)°918

f, 10 + 8.3xI0.4(a _ 40)1452

f4 10 + 0.0737(7~op- 4/°

f5 1.0 + 0.0797(1'bollom _ 6)°.996

ii) Conical Hopper

Meridional Force: Eq. 5-2 can be used for the computation of maximum
meridional force in the conical hopper

Hoop force: Table 5-21 shows the equations for computing maximum hoop
forces.

Table 5-21. Maximum Positive (Tensile) Hoop Force in Conical Hopper

(Type-3)

Fmax = 168 fi.f2.fj.f4.fj

fi 1.0 +0.2711(D _ 10)1126

.il 1.0 + 8x 10.7( a _40)338

.13 1.0 + 0.0898(1'01' _ 6)°867

f. 1.0 + 0.0213(loollom _ 4)1039

f5 1.0 - 0.287(d - 24)°11

89
(b) Stress Resultants due to Material Pressure

i) Vertical Wall:
Meridiana/force: Meridional force is always compressive and maximum
meridional forces can be obtained ii-om the following equations:
(5-7)

Symbols have the same meanings as those ofEq. 5-3.

Maximum meridional force in vertical wall below pressure zone can be

taken equal to that of pressure zone.

Hoop force: Maximum tensile hoop force in vertical wall in pressure zone
due to stored material pressure is given by:

(5-8)

where Pd.max = Cd-k.qmax

Cd = Over pressure factor (Table 2.2)
k and qn"" are same as that ofEq. 5-4 and Eq. 5-5.

Table 5-22 and Table 5-23 gives the equations for computing maximum
positive and negative hoop force in vertical wall below pressure zone.

Meridional moment: Table 5-24 and Table 5-25 gives the equations for
maximum meridional moment in vertical wall due to material pressure load.

Table 5-22. Maximum Positive (Tensile) Hoop Force in Vertical Wall

Below Pressure Zone (Type-3)

Fmax = 712 Ji.f2.Jj'./4.fj

/1 1.0 + 0.0499(H - 39.6)°61'

/2 1.0 + 0.1519(D - 10)1329

./3 1.0 + 00286(y- 35)

/4 1.0 _1.82xl0.4 (p- 15lo15

/5 1.0 - 1.0907(fl' - 0.20)°707

90
Table 5-23. Maximum Negative (Compressive) Hoop Force in Vertical
Wall Below Pressure Zone (Type-3)

I Fm= = - 3055 fi.fi.fj.fj.fj

Ii 1.0 + 0.0281(H _ 396)llU5

744
.h 1.0 + 01783(D - IOt

j, 1.0 + 00284(y - 35)

14 10 _ 0.0040(p _ 15)1252

.f; 1.0 + 0.8143(et' _ 0.20)0703

Table 5-24. Maximum Positive Meridional Moment in Vertical Wall in

Pressure Zone (Type-3)

Mm= = 30.5 fi.fi.fj.fj.f5.f6.f7

I, 1.0 + 0.0666(H _ 39.6)U559

12 1.0 + 0.1802(D _ 10)1292

13 . 1.0 + 0.0305(7~up _ 4)'003

14 1.0 + 0.128(Tbullom _ 6)0.952

15 1.0 + 00285(y- 35)

16 1.0 _ 1.06210.4(p- IS) 2.165

17 1.0 - 1.1123(/1'- 0.20)°704

Table 5-25. Maximum Negative Meridional Moment in Vertical Wall

Below Pressure Zone (Type-3)

MmQx = - 45.5fi.fi.fj.jj.jj.j6

I, 1.0 + 0.0 134(H _ 39.6)1169

12 1.0 + 0.1773(D _ 10)°822
j, 1.0 + 0.1813(7601l0m _ 6)0994
14 1.0 + 0.0285(y- 35)

Is 1.0 - 0.004(p _ 15)1254

16 1.0 + 6.6257(p' _ 020)208 ; p' " 0.4

1.0 + 0.5591(p' _ 0.20)°649 ; p' > 0.4

91
 ii) Conical hopper
Aferidional force: Table 5-26 shows the equations for computing
maximum meridional forces.

Hoop force: Table 5-27 shows the equations for computing maximum hoop
forces.

Meridional moment: Table 5-28 and Table 5-29 show the equations for
computing maximum meridional moments.

Circumferential moment: Table 5-30 shows the equations for computing

maximum circumferential moments.

Table 5-26. Maximum Positive (Tensile) Meridional Force in Conical

Hopper (Type-3)

Fmax = 341.5 fi.j2..f3..f4..fj..fr,./j..fid;

II 1.0 + 0.0379(H _ 39.6)°501 ; H:<:: 230'
1.5257 ; H> 230'

I2 1.0 + 0.6539(D - 10)1556

f, 1.0 _ 0.0038(a _ 40)°929; a:<:: 65°

0.9244 ; a > 65°

J4 1.0 _ 4.9xlO-4(1tup- 6)2507

1 .0 -0.0013 ( Ibollom-4)1022
.is
I6 1.0 - 0.0022(d _ 24)1223

/7 10 + 0.0286(y- 35)

Is 1.0 + 0.01193(p_15)1242

I9 1.0 - 1.1 032(fl , _ 020)°585

92
Table 5-27. Maximum Positive (Tensile) Hoop Force in Conical Hopper
(Type-3)

F m= = 9556 jj.f2.jj.!+.f5.f6.fdS.f9
j; 10 + O.0394(H _ 39.6)°501 ; H s; 210'
1.517; H> 210'

h 10 + 03162(D _ 10)1.654

13 1.0 - 0.0054(a _40)1.099

I. 10042 - 49xlO.4{1t,op _ 7.01}2.954

15 10 - 0.005(fbott'Om_ 4)1.02

16 1.0 - 0.0212(d _ 24)°773

17 10 + 0.0286(y- 35)

18 10 + 0.0 12(p _ 15)1.238

19 10 - 1.1233Cu' - 0.20)°572

. Table 5-28. Maximum Positive Meridional Moment in Conical Hopper

(Type-3)

Mm= = 55.3 ij.f2.fjj4.j5.f6.fds.f;

j; 10 + 0.0428(H _ 39.6)°468 ; H s; 210'
1474 ; H> 210'

12 10 + o 2268(D - loi2117
13 0.7508 - O.OOII{la- 5001}1791

I. 1.0 + 0.2698(1,'01' _ 6)0.77

i, I .0 + 0.0154 ( fbottom- 4 )0986

16 1.0 - 0.1803(d _ 24)°408 ; d s; 72"

0.1251; d> 72".

17 10 + 0.0286(y- 35)

.Ii 1.0 + 0.0 119(p _ 15)1.241

19 10 - 1.l041(,u' - 0.20)°583

93
Table 5-29. Maximum Negative Meridional Moment in Conical Hopper
(Type-3)

Mmax = - 602 fifi ..f3I-I.fj.f6.f7.f's.f;

// 10 + 0.0471(H _ 39.6)°467 ; H ,,; 210'

15178 ; H> 210'

/1 10 + O.OIOI(D _ 10)2153
1.0 - 0.0383(a _ 40)°.814 ; a ,,; 70°
/3
0.3897 ; a > 70°

14 10 + 0.1421(ttop _ 6)°.683

15 1.0 + 0.1 153(tbottorn_ 4)1.193

519
16 10 - 0.1 087(d - 24t ; d,,; 84"

0.09 ; d> 84"

17 1.0 + 00287(y- 35)

j,; 10 + 0.0124(p _ 15)1229

19 1.0 - U408(p' _ 0.20)°561

Table 5-30. Maximum Positive Circumferential Moment in Conical

Hopper (Type-3)

Mmax = 903.5 /J2.fj.f4.fj.f6f7.f's

1/ 10 + 0.0492(H _ 39.6)°434 ; H,,; 210'

1.4575 ; H > 210'

/2 1.0 + 62x I 0.4(D - 10)2491

f, 10 - 0.0844(a _ 40)°488

j4 1.0 + 0.297(ttop _ 6)°.95

15 10 - 0 I S67(d _ 24)°404 ; d,,; 84"

0.0238 ; d> 84"

/6 10 + 0.0285(y- 35)

/7 1.0 + 0.0118(p _ 15)1242

.f8 10 - U06(p' _ 0.20)°582

94
(c) Stress Resultants due to Wind Pressure

Meridional force: Table 5-31 and Table 5-32 show the equations for
computing maximum meridional forces.

Hoop force: Table 5-33 shows the equations for computing maximum hoop
forces.

Meridional moment: Table 5-34 to Table 5-35 show the equations for
computing maximum meridional moments.

Circumferential moment: Table 5-36 and Table 5-37 show the equations for
computing maximum circumferential moments.

Table 5-31. Maximum Positive (Tensile) Meridional Force in Vertical

Wall (Type-3)

Fmax= 5900fifdj.j4.tj
I I
fl 1.0 + 0.0043(H - 39.6)1085 ; H os; 160'
1.0 + 3.4x I 0.4(H _ 39.6)1623; H > 160'

.12 0.635 + 9.0xI0.4 {ID - 201}1849; D OS; 70'

.

1.0 + 5.9xI0''(D _ IO)1I93 ; J) > 70'

f; 10 _ 0.0383(T,op _ 4)°752

f, 1.0 - 0.0405(1botlom _ 6)°891

is 1.0 + 0.1087(q - 9.22)

95
Table 5-32. Maximum Negative(Compressive) Meridional Force in
Vertical Wall (Type-3)

Fmnx = 9600fJd3.j~.j5

./J 1.0; H<;, 140'

10+3.86xI0.3(H_140.0)1245;H> 140'

f2 0.2688 + 00l33{ID _ 301}1204

f; 1.0 - 0.0755(Ttop- 4)°541

j, 1.0 - 0.0398(7/'ottom - 6)°.748 ; Tbottom <;, II"

0.866 ; Tbottom > 11"

f; 10 + 0 1086(q - 9.2)

Table 5-33. Maximum Positive (Tensile) Hoop Force in Vertical

Wall (Type-3)

Fmnx = 1260 ./J..fi..fj.j~.j5

fl 1.0 + 6.64x I 0.3 (H - 39.6)°9'7; H <;, 160'

10 + 3.5xI0-4 (H - 39.6)1609; H > 160'

j2 0.6649 + 5x 10.5 ID _ 2012733; D <;, 60'

0.6649 + 0.0425{ID - 201}oS49;D > 60'

f3 1.0 - 0.0355(7;op _ 4)°762

f4 I o -0.041 1(7'hottom- 6 )0895

f5 10 + 0.1085 (q - 9.22)

96
Table 5-34. Maximum Positive Meridional Moment in Vertical
Wall (Type-3)

Mm= = 23411.fi.jjldj

II 1.0 + 4.2xlO-\H _ 39.6)1362 ; H,s; 180'

1.0 + 1.8x 10-4 (H - 396)1534 ; H > 180'

12 1.0 + o 0283 (ID-301} 1087

13 1.0 - 0.01 82 (Ttop _ 4)°.868

14 1.0 + 0.1658(7bottorn _ 6)°936

15 1.0 + 0.1084(q - 9.22)

Table 5-35. Maximum Negative Meridional Moment in Vertical

Wall (Type-3)

Mm= = - 33611.ji.jj.f4.fj

j, 1.0 - 0.0 116(H _ 39.6)°637

12 0.459 + 1.24xlO-3{ID _ 201} 1904

13 1.0 - 0.0406(7;op _ 4)°854

14 1.0 + 0.1532(Tbottorn _ 6)°809

Is 1.0 + 0.1 089(q - 92)

Table 5-36. Maximum Positive Circumferential moment in Vertical

Wall (Type-3)

Mm•x = 29.4jj.h.fj.j4.jj

II 1.0 + 0.0935(H - 39.6)°496 ; H ,s; 160'

1.94 ; H > 160'

12 1.0 + 1.4059(D _ 10)°626

13 0.9734 + 0.0085 (ITIOp-5.51} 1886
.f, 0.9061 + 0.0068(17bottom-91} 1417
15 1.0 + 01087(q - 9.2)

97
Table 5-37. Maximum Negative Circumferential moment in Vertical
Wall (Type-3)

Mmax = - 29.Mi..fj.fdj

fi 1.0 + 0.0923(H _ 396)°496 ; H::: 140'

1.92; H > 140'

.il 1.0 + 1.4778(D _ 10)°636 ; D ::: 60'

1.0+29.777(D-IO)"0", ; 1) > 60'

/3 0.9732 + 874xl0.3(17;"p _ 5.51}!.'6'

/4 0.9069 + 4.96xlO.3 (17/,ottom - 9.01}3.o78;7/'0"om ::: 11'

0.935 ; Thottom > 11'

/5 1.0 + 01086 (q - 9.2)

5.3.2 Variation of Stress Resultants in Vertical Direction

The variations of various stress resultants in vertical direction are shown in

the Fig. 5-1 to Fig. 5-21. Only those fimctions (stress resultants) are considered
which vary considerably in the vertical direction. The value of a function at any
vertical level may now be easily obtained using its maximmn value calculated from
the previous section.

98
 .f}
t

10

20

30

40
1::
~
Ql
a. 50
.f:
<:!.
•••
60

70

80

90

100
a 20 40 60 80 100 120

FIF max in percent

Fig. 5-1 Positive (tensile) Meridional Force in conical hopper due to self
weight (Type-1, Type-2).
 o
"- ...-
10
t'~'::'::,:",
,.'f(
"~"-.. .... "" .•...
:~.~.~.~
~""
'.
~ ....
.. ~,, ' ....
20
~.
'.. ... '
'.
f- ",

f-
~ \
30 I"'- /// ...
/
.'
.,'
,/,'
V - ..... :X~<
,,
,
, I

, ,,
/.
40 /
1:: / ,

~
'" . 50
a
D=
/
/.'
50' ,.....
40','
,,
,
,
'ao')
I
.5 l,' ,,
~
f- 1..- ,,
f- l.: , ~,
••• I .... ,
' .... ,,
f-
60
,,
/

70
I ..•.
I: ,,
I.:'
, ,
, , •

/
/
'.: ,

/
I....
"
I.... "
I,', ,,
80

f-
...
'j
,.:

. ,
.: ,,
I, ,,
I

~ 1/ ,
90
Ii ,•
II ••
. /
100 , , ,;,-' ,
,•
, , ,
-40 -20 o 20 40 60 80 100 120
F/Fmax in percent

Fig. 5-2 Hoop Force in conical hopper due to self weight

(Type-1 ,Type-2).
 100

90

80

70

60
1::
~
Ql
C. 50
.s

40

30

20

10

o
o 20 40 60 80 100 120
F/Fmax in percent

Fig. 5-3 Meridional Force in vertical wall due to stored material pressure
(Type-1, Type-2).
 100
~
~'.,
90
L
~
~
.

r% ';". ,
\ ....l'
,'.
.... ,
~
L
~
~
\ \ .... \
\ .... \
.
', '. \
'.
80
~
L
~
L
"',; ",

,,~
1\
H 80'
H = 140
H =180'
~ H = 240
70

"\.,1
1::
(J)

e
60
\ ", ",
..•.

,
,,
,
",
\
\

(J)
a. \' \\',
.S 50 ,,
\'"\
~ ' '.
:c L ',. .
>: ,,
.....\
40
\\'
.
\\ '
1\ ',\',:. \
30

20
\' '1"-: \

"''.1
"

.
~
10 .
.--k. ,
.. ~.':'".;::.r.:".:--:-.:-.:-.:-.:".:".:"
-.~-.~.r..
,.,.~.:::B.
o
-100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 100 125
FIF max in percent

Fig. 5-4 Hoop Force in vertical wall due to stored material pressure
(Type-1, Type-2).
 o

10

20

30

'E 40
CD
e
CD
a.
.S 50
<:!.
'"
60

70

80

90

100
o 20 40 60 80 100 120
FIF max in percent

Fig. 5-5 Positive (tensile) Meridional Force in conical due to stored

material pressure (Type-1, Type-2).
 o -- .....

10

20

/. ..-',

30
/
/.,'
,,'
", ,
/.'

D -- 50' / /,,' ....." "

/ .... 0:::'
,,' ,
40 / ....
/.... ,
/.... "
.....,"'30'
/' ,I

/.: ,
I." '
I": "
.' ,"
1/
I.: ,
60 I.' ,
/ .... ,.
... ,,
....I.: '
"
70 /:' ,
I ....
"
I "
I "
80 ,..•...'"
...
.:,'

I: '"
~....
90

100
-20 o 20 40 60 80 100 120

F{F max in percent

Fig. 5-6 Hoop Force in conical hopper due to stored material pressure
(Type-1, Type-2).
 100

90

,,
,
80 '

70 .,,,
.
••
60 .•
••

.•
••
1:
~ 50
•.
'"a.
J:
J:
):'
40
...
•
..
30
.. D = 50'

o = 30/~'•.•
20
D = 20'

10

o
o 20 40 60 80 100 120
F/Fmax in percent

Fig. 5-7 Positive (tensile) Meridional Force in vertical due to wind

pressure (Type-1, Type-2).
 100

90

80
\ ..
•.
\
\
•
70 •
I'.
\ '.
\ '.
\ '.
60

"E 50 ,,
~ ,,
~ ,,
CD
C. ,,
c ,
.- 40 ,,
,
~ ,,
,,
30 ,,
,
" ,,
D= 20' "
20 " "' ,
D = 30' " ,
"' "' , ,,
,
"'
10 ,,
,,
, , ,,
"' ,.•.
"
20 40 60 80 100 120
F/Fmax in percent

Fig. 5-8 Negative (compressive) Meridional Force in vertical wall due to

wind pressure (Type-1. Type-2).
 100
e- o
e- ,
o
e- o
e- o
0
90

80

70
0
0

0
••
60 . •
'
•• I

• •
'E .. 0
0
0

~ f- .. 0

•
~ 50
e- ..
..
. 0

.S f- . 0

..
o
c 0

~
>- 40 .'
0
0 /
..
/
, 0

D = 50'
...
30 ,,

,.
. ,D = 30'
.' ... ~= 20'
20
.....
,,
,
.,,
,
/
.' .' ../
.. .'.' ,
,, "
.,,
'

10 ......' , ,,
~
t .........
:.,"
~
o .'
e-:;.~
f<;';",

o 20 40 60 80 100 120
M/Mmax in percent

Fig. 5-9 Positive Circumferential Moment in vertical wall due to wind

pressure (Type-1, Type-2)
 100
~
:1
:1
90
:\
.

80

70 " ,,
J ,'
I •
I :
•
60
I •
I •
I :
I
•••
'E I
,•
I
~ ,
~ 50 ,,
I ,
'"
C- / ,,
,
.S
I40
/
/

,
, /
>:- ,,

/
- I
-
,-
I
, .,,
...
D = 40' I ,
l- I
30
l- I , 'D = 30'
l- I '
{=20'
l-
l- /'
I,' •• >" /
•.•. .
I'
20 I'
I-
I-
.'
"
/
•...-.'..-. /
I' .'
I- / ~,'
I- "",
10
/
~
//
~
o
o 20 40 60 80 100 120
M/Mmax in percent

Fig. 5-10 Negative Circumferential Moment in vertical wall due to wind

pressure (Type-1, Type-2)
 o

10

20

30

-c:
~
~
40

Ql
C-
o!: 50
.•.•.
...J

'"
60

70

80

90

100
o 40 60 80 100 120
FIF max in percent

Fig. 5-11 Positive (tensile) Meridional Force in conical hopper due to self
weight (Type-3).
 o -- .:.•:::..:..:. .._..... --- .. -
':,:,,:,"-,:,':.:..;. ..:.~
...

10

20

30
D = 50' / .....;10. •• ••
I . ,"""''''30'
1 ..... 20'
40 ,
,.... ,
E .' ,
~
Ql
,. ,"
I: ,
.•..
I:' ,
c.. 50
I:

,:.... "
I
.S
,/,
<:!.
•••
60
...
:
I: ,

70
1/,
'"
f.:" "
...•

80 ...:
(.:
:
'/
Ij -'
"
90
If :
'/ "
: .
':" :
100
o
..
IJ :
20 40 60 80 100 120

FIF max in percent

Fig. 5-12 Hoop Force in conical hopper due to self weight (Type-3)
 100

90
f\
80 \
70
\ I\.

60 \
1:
~
2i 50
\ J\.
.0::
I
~ 40 ~
'\
30
"'.
.~

20
"\

10
"".
~
1: o
~
~
(])

Co 50
c .

.t::.
">.
100 .
o 20 40 60 80 100 120
FIF';'ax in percent

Fig. 5-13 Meridional Force in vertical wall due to stored material

pressure (Type-3).
 100
~•.......•.
'
~.~.~~~.~.
.....
..
" .
90
H = 80'
H = 140'
H = 180'
H = 240'
80

70
\
\
\
\
60
\ .. '" \
"E ,,
Q)
u '. ... \
! 50
'. ...•. \
'..• •.. \ \
.!: "

'. •... \
'. .•... \
40 .• ",

30

20

10

o
o 25 50 75 100 125
F/F max in percent

Fig. 5-14 Hoop Force in vertical wall in pressure zone due to stored
material pressure (Type-3).
 o 0-
~

10
.

v
/
20 .

-
.
30

-'" 40
C
<.l
~
50
'"
C-

."
.c
>:. 60

70
0-
f-
l- .
80

.\. /.y
I- H 80'
H = 140'
f- H = 180'
cH=240'- --, \ \ ,/,'
,,'
/}
,,

1'7
90

1°C!y5 - -' -,50

J.............-\::::,..
. ,
'
.'
.' ,,

,25 0 25 50 75
F/F max in percent

Fig. 5-15 Hoop Force in vertical wall below pressure zone due to
stored material pressure (Type-3).

(F max = maximum positive hoop force in pressure zone)

 o

10

20

30

60

70

80

90

100
o 20 40 60 80 100 120
F/Fmax in percent

Fig. 5-16 Positive (tensile) Meridional Force in conical hopper due to

stored material pressure (Type-3).
 o

10

20
.,. ....
,.' ,,'
./
./
30
0=50' / ....~~•••••••
/ "
t.'
.. .
., 30'
."
-c::
~
40 I'"..

Ql
a.
.5; 50
<:!. / ...•. ,"
••• I I"
.:
. ,,"
60
... ,
I .. .
I:' ,"
:'

70
I ..
I .. ,
.. ,

.....
,"
.,
I

...,"
/...
....•
80
,"
,.... '
....
,.... ,
. .,
90 ..
, ,"
.. •
I..

...•..
,•.•. "
I: ,
I. ... "
100
o 20 40 60 80 100 120
FIF max in percent

Fig. 5-17 Hoop Force in conical hopper due to stored material

pressure (Type-3).
 100

90

80

70

60

-c:
Q)
()
~ 50
,Ql
C-
.5
,
-->-
I
,
40

D = 50'
,
30
,.•..,. ....
.••.
'
",

D = 40'
•.•.' .....
.. ..•.~.•.•..~
......•.
20
'........•...
" •...•...•..•.
D = 3~~~
...•~ .
10
....":::" .

20 40 60 80 100
F/Fmax in percent

Fig. 5-18 Positive (tensile) Meridional Force in vertical wall due to wind
pressure (Type-3).
 100

90

•
.
..
80 \",
,": "
,\:
\
" \
70 :. \,
.. .
•

..
60
...
-
\ •...
\ •...
c \ .•...
~ \ .... ........
Q) 50 \ '.
c. ......0=50'
.S
,
\
\
\
......•..•..
..
,
~40
..
>-
D = 20'
30
, ...... D = 40'
D = 30'
" .
", .
'.
20
,..•••. ,.'
.

10
': .....
..•••. ",
...•
•.•... .
...•.. .:..:,..:.;...

20 40 60 80 100 120
F/Fmax in percent

Fig. 5-19 Negative(compressive) Meridional Force in vertical wall due to

wind pressure (Type-3).
 100 ,, I,
,~
•• E
••
90 ,,
•
•
.

80

'/
70 i.

i'
/," ,•
.

,•
/,
,..", ••.
-
60

c
CD
e =
....
i,
, ,•,••
i/

~ 50
,,•
Ie /
.f: Ie D = 50'",-
.. ,
,
, t-
.'
/
,
~
t- .' /
/
,
,,
>- 40 Ie
/
,,
t- D = 40'- .' / ,,
t- .' .;
,,,
t- ..
'
.; ,,,
30 ,
c- .'.; .; ,,
,
Ie .;
= 30'
........•. : '" ,,
,,
,,
,'D

./
~20'
20 .' .- .,.....
....
.'
.'

1/ '",,"
'"
.;

,
,, "
/'
.... / ~

::---
10 .'';
.•.•~.•
....;;;.~
'" ':.--
.$'.. .•.•

,
20 40 60 80 100 120
M/Mmax in percent

Fig. 5-20 Positive Circumferential Moment in vertical wall due to wind

pressure (Type-3)
 100
v~
., \.
~
,~ ,
90 ,
•
•,
,
80

j/
:/
70
i'
,
/, • •
,
....
1/

,•
•.•J
60
, ,,,
....
....
1 ,

-
c
Q)
()
~
50
...
......
••• J
1
1

,
,,
,,
,,
/
Q) ..
a. 0=50: .... / ,,
~
.£: ,,
, .. /
.
- ,
/
40
J:
, ... .
,
,.
/
>- 0=40' t-- / ,
.. ..
...
/

/
30 ,
~ /
,,
~ ........
",/
,, '0 = 30'
~
~ .......
<. ..
.••
.••
,.
., .••.••
~20'
20 ... ..- ..
.. .••
.••
..
,
~--- V
;~ .. .
......
.••
,
,
,,
~

?;; e----
10 ,,'/

//'
...
o ,
o 20 40 60 80 100 120
M/Mmax in percent

Fig. 5-21 Negative Circumferential Moment in vertical wall due to wind

pressure (Type-3)
5.4 COMPARISON OF RESULTS OBTAINED FROM PROPOSED
DESIGN RATIONALE WITH THOSE OF FINITE ELEMENT
ANALYSIS

To show the acceptability of the proposed design rationale, results from the
suggested equations are compared with those of Finite Element analysis. For this
purpose five examples are considered arbitrarily within the scope of the equations.
Various parameters for silo analysis used in these examples are shown in the
Table 5-38.

. Table 5 -38. Data (parameters) for Five Example

EX. NO. H D a T"" T ••••• ••• ••••••• 1 P I" d q

FT. FT. DEGREE INCH INCH INCH INCH LEIIT' DEGREE INCH LBIIT'

1 100 30 60 5 10 8 5 60 30 0.40 48 36.86

2 130 30 60 6 11 9 7 50 35 0.50 42 50.18

3 130 25 55 7 9 9 6 80 40 0.45 36 25.60

4 180 35 65 7 . 12 11 4 70 30 0.50 54 57.60

5 160 40 60 6 9 10 5 65 25 0.60 60 43.26

Table 5-39 to Table 5-47 show the comparison of maximum values of stress
resultants for various loading conditions and for various Types of silos. The
agreement between the two sets of results are remarkably satisfactory and the
variations of the results obtained from proposed equations are within acceptable
limit in comparison to those of Finite Element analysis.

99
Table 5-39. Maximum Forces and Moments due to Self Weight
(Type-I, Type-2)

VERTICAL WALL CONICAL HOPPER

EXAMPLE MERIDIONAL FORCE HOOP FORCE MERIDIONAL FORCE HOOP FORCE

NO, FlNITE PROPOSED F1NITE PROPOSED FlNITE PROPOSED F1NITE PROPOSED

ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION

I -10168 10375 -2014 -2018 1320 1224 595 613

2 -14605 14812 -2525 -2489 1582 1485 678 705

3 -13565 13843 -2245 -2240 1110 1074 591.0 620

4 -22440 22531 -3355 -3475 2188 2032 743 728

5 -16377 16313 -3455 -3600 2117 1962 1002 1009

Table 5-40. Maximum Forces and Moments due to Stored Material

Pressure in Vertical Wall (Type-I, Type-2)

EX SIGN MERIDIONAL FORCE HOOP FORCE MERIDIONAL MOMENT CIRCUMFERENTIAL MOMENT

NO, F1NITE PROPOSED F1NITE PROPOSED F1NITE PROPOSED F1NITE PROPOSED

ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION

I +ve 0,0 0,0 25243 26291 1685 1675 254 -

.

-ve 27329 27458 12668 13136 8503 8515 1673 1678

2 +ve 0,0 0,0 19255 19792 1483 1446 212 -

-ve 32717 32888 10921 11087 6761 6957 1332 1372

3 +ve 0,0 0,0 25492 23588 1704 1616 267 -

-ve 41142 41688 18747 18256 9018 8703 1765 1710

4 +ve 0,0 0,0 39563 40095 3057 3005 406 -

-ve 83013 83204 15913 15100 10679 10878 2139 2175

5 +ve 0,0 0,0 41215 41439 2739 2449 456 -

-ve 81341 81008 24868 21299 12269 10457 2433 2089

100
Table 5-41. Maximum Forces and Moments due to Stored Material
Pressure in Conical Hopper (Type-t, Type-2)

EX. SIGN MERIDIONAL FORCE HOOP FORCE MERIDIONAL MOMENT CIRCUMFERENTIAL MOMENT

NO. FINITE PROPOSED FINITE PROPOSED FINITE PROPOSED FINITE PROPOSED

ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION

1 +ve 36116 35750 37675 37466 1457 1413 349 353

1 -ve 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4004 3964 720 716

2 +ve 2m7 27049 28700 27849 1346 1287 323 3ll

2 -ve 0.0 0.0 00 0.0 3540 3468 630 616

3 +ve 36998 35373 40227 38840 2047 1862 546 494

3 -ve 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4262 3922 643 595

4 +ve 53018 51196 50975 48366 2091 1953 476 513

4 -ve 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6610 7103 1199 1266

5 +ve 50910 42431 53008 43565 2392 1901 589 414

5 -ve 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6676 6565 1178 1196

Table 5-42. Maximum Forces and Moments due to Wind Load in Vertical
Wall (Type-t, Type-2)

EX. SIGN MERIDIONAL FORCE HOOP FORCE MERIDIONAL MOMENT CIRCUMFERENTIAL MOMENT

NO. FINITE PROPOSED FINITE PROPOSED FINITE PROPOSED FINITE PROPOSED

ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION

1 +ve 16827 15452 602 824 807 808 1363 1274

-ve 11396 11508 810 - 564 - 1597 1651

2 +ve 22106 22309 627 760 942 1114 2371 2353

-ve 11525 8618 1117 - 610 - 2765 2763

3 +ve 9773 10944 534 560 412 486 936 912

-ve 4084 6949 548 - 230 - 1090 1446

4 +ve 33692 33910 948 909 1226 1482 3887 4108

-ve 15192 18592 1589 - 895 - 4529 4076

5 +ve 25449 31253 1689 2035 1308 1254 1704 3193

-ve 17826 18076 1437 - 960 - 2002 2681

101
Table 5-43. Maximum Forces and Moments Due to Self Weight (Type-3)

VERTICAL WALL CONICAL HOPPER

MERlDIONAL FORCE HOOP FORCE MERIDIONAL FORCE HOOP FORCE

EX. PRESSURE ZONE BELOW PRESSURE ZONE

NO. FINITE PROPOSED FINITE PROPOSED FINITE PROPOSED FINITE PROPOSED FINITE PROPOSED
ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION

I -9344 '9531 -13619 -13843 -2702 -2678 1236 1186 1083 1076

2 -13726 -13911 -18497 -18744 -3662 -3660 1499 1462 1122 1216

3 -13284 -13535 -16504 -16844 -3260 -3277 1040 1015 903 912

4 -21275 -21346 -28073 -28231 -5542 -5574 2071 2040 1352 1554

5 -15734 -15643 -20660 -20625 -4089 -4031 1967 1954 1320 1761

Table 5-44. Maximum Forces and Moments due to Stored Material

Pressure in Vertical Wall in Pressure Zone (Type-3)

EX. SIGN MERlDIONAL FORCE HOOP FORCE MERlDIONAL MOMENT CIRCUMFERENTIAL MOMENT

NO. FINITE PROPOSED FINITE PROPOSED FINITE PROPOSED FINITE PROPOSED

ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION

I +ve 0.0 0.0 24755 25315 793 787 88 -

-ve 27891 28162 0.0 0.0 56 - 86 -
2 +ve 0.0 0.0 18739 18985 690 631 57 -
-ve 33191 33731 0.0 0.0 40 - 91 -
3 +ve 0.0 0.0 22519 22656 728 680 57 -
-ve 41835 42757 0.0 0.0 55 - 108 -
4 +ve 0.0 0.0 38678 38710 1555 1473 128 -
-ve 83699 85338 0.0 0.0 128 - 223 -
5 +ve 0.0 0.0 39945 39813 1235 1032 153 -
-ve 81983 83086 0.0 0.0 56 - 120 -

102
Table 5-45. Maximum Forces and Moments due to Stored Material
Pressure in Vertical Wall below Pressure Zone (Type-3)

EX SIGN MERIDIONAL FORCE HOOP FORCE. MERIDIONAL MOMENT CIRCUMFERENTIAL MOMENT

NO. FINITE PROPOSED FINITE PROPOSED FINITE PROPOSED FINITE PROPOSED

ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION

1 +ve 00 0.0 11516 11324 254 - 330 -

-ve 27954 28162 5527 5577 1170 1174 234 -
2 +ve 0.0 0,0 8886 8297 334 - 42 -
-ve 33263 33731 6560 6576 1494 1423 299 -
3 +ve 0,0 0.0 10607 10027 351 - 45 -
-ve 41922 42757 8251 8363 1506 1444 301 -
4 +ve 0.0 0.0 17949 17936 925 - 120 -
-ve 83873 85338 16500 16329 4000 3901 801 -
5 +ve 0.0 0.0 18199 16363 703 - 110 -
-ve 82144 83086 16221 16020 2996 2851 600 -

Table 5-46. Maximum Forces and Moments due to Stored Material

Pressure in Conical Hopper (Type-3)

EX SIGN MERIDIONAL FORCE HOOP FORCE MERIDIONAL MOMENT CIRCUMFERENTIAL MOMENT

NO. FINITE PROPOSED FINITE PROPOSED FINITE PROPOSED FINITE PROPOSED

ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION

I +ve 33816 33892 46342 46817 4754 5485 1284 1162

-ve 0,0 - 0.0 - 260 242 190 -

2 +ve 27151 27063 36718 37750 4926 5905 1394 1230

-ve 0.0 - 0.0 - 286 294 7 -

3 +ve 37307 36247 52709 53141 7243 7983 2315 2363

-ve 0.0 - 0.0 - 456 430 6.53 -

4 +ve 47914 45m 59372 60641 7987 8820 2191 1695

-ve 0,0 - 0.0 - 272 279 8 -

5 +ve 46263 38034 59593 50963 5776 6990 1679 1133

-ve 0.0 - 0.0 - 289 260 6.0 -

103
Table 5-47. Maximum Forces and Moments due to Wind Load in Vertical
Wall (Type-3)

EX. SIGN MERIDIONAL FORCE HOOP FORCE MERIDIONAL MOMENT CIRCUMFEREl'.'TIAL MOMENT

NO. FINITE PROPOSED FINITE PROPOSED FINITE PROPOSED FINITE PROPOSED

ELEMENT EQliATION ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION ELEMENT EQUATION

1 +ye 18741 18704 3809 3982 1730 1641 1731 1831

-ye 10056 8477 2039 - 886 894 2020 1926

2 +ye 26318 27414 5360 5772 2590 2568 2552 2757

-ye 11234 10854 2273 - 1086 1181 2972 2978

3 +ye 12426 13694 2534 2995 944 1257 924 1193

-ye 5283 7564 1053 - 344 445 1076 1252

4 +ye 42460 42279 8639 8592 4129 4133 4032 3836

-ye 17575 22379 3520 - 1549 1536 4694 4019

5 +ye 32605 35582 6634 7315 2572 2688 2855 3146

-ye 21535 20405 4365 - 1632 1262 3334 3205

***

104
 CHAPTER 6

CONCLUSIONS

6.1 GENERAL

Findings regarding the silo behaviour under different loading conditions

are based on the extensive analysis of different types of silos having a wide
range of parametric variations, using "Axisymmetric thick shell Finite Element
program". A single circular silo has been taken as the prototype. So the fIndings
are basically valid for singular circular silos.

The original program was a general one for the analysis of any type of
axisymmetric shell with axisymmetric or non-axisymmetric loading. Since the
original program required a large number of data for a complex structure like silo,
modifications have been made to simplify data input. Modification have also been
made to obtain the design functions (stress resultants) from the output of the
program directly.

For the detail investigation of silo behaviour under vanous loading

conditions, thirteen parameters were selected for study. For each parameter a
number of different data sets varying over a wide range were used for the analysis
of silo to investigate the influence of the respective parameters on various stress
resultants. In this parametric study over one thousand solutions have been made
for silos having wide range of various parameters. On the basis of this extensive
study a design rationale has been suggested in the previous Chapter.

The computer program developed in this study can analyse various types of
silos following a number of choice of the user. As for example, either WSD or
USD method of analysis can be followed. One can analyse a silo in FPS or SI unit.
Method of stored material pressure computation can also be selected for analysis.
 A separate computer program has also been developed for the analysis of
ring beam which can deal with ring beam of any type of silos. The forces and
moments required for both ring beam design and column design can be obtained
directly using this program.

6.2 FINDINGS FROM THE INVESTIGATION

From this study the actual behaviour of silo under various loading
conditions has become obvious. Conventional method of analysis can not
incorporate all of the possible loadings because of its analytical limitations. As
a result it can not predict a number of forces and moments which should be
considered in the silo design. But the versatile Finite Element method can fmd
out all the required stress resultants easily. Conclusions drawn from the results
of this study are summarised below with regard to the various loading
conditions:

(a) Self weight and stored material pressure.

i) Meridional force and hoop force in the vertical wall:

Conventional method of analysis is in close agreement with the Finite
Element method of analysis of vertical wall for meridional force and
hoop force due to self weight and stored material pressure. The two
methods, however, differ widely near the ring beam. Conventional
method can not predict any negative hoop force in the vertical wall. But
from Finite Element analysis it is found that considerable amount of
negative hoop force develops at the bottom of vertical wall. This must be
due to the restraint provided by the ring beam at the bottom of vertical
wall.

Maximum meridional force always occurs at the bottom of vertical wall

due to stored material pressure and self weight. Maximum tensile hoop
force develops at a small distance apart from the bottom of vertical wall.
For design purposes maximum tensile hoop force due to stored material
pressure can be assumed to be maximum at the bottom of vertical wall,
but the section should be checked for the maximum negative hoop force.

ii) Meridional moment in the vertical wall:

Due to stored material pressure cOlisiderable negative and' positive

meridional moments occur at the bottom of vertical wall for all types of

106
 silos. This is also due to the partial fixity provided by the thickened ring
beam and is only obtainable from Finite Element analysis.

iii) Meridional force and Hoop force in the conical hopper:

Conventional method predicts maximum meridional force and hoop

force due to material pressure at the top of hopper. This is true for the
meridional force but hoop force is not maximum at the top of hopper in
none of the three types of silos. The hoop force due to stored material
pressure is maximum at a distance of 10% to 25% of the total length of
hopper from the junction of ring beam and hopper. This distance varies
depending on the types of silos and diameter of silos. This should be
taken into consideration during silo design.

iv) Meridional moment in the conical hopper:

Considerable amount of both positive and negative meridional moment

develop in conical hopper due to stored material pressure in Type-l and
Type-2. Maximum negative meridional moment occurs at the top of
hopper and maximum positive values occur at a distance of 12% to 15%
of the overall length of the conical hopper wall from top of hopper. But
in Type-3 positive meridional moment of considerable amount occurs at
the junction of ring beam and hopper (hopper top). In this case
maximum negative meridional moment is insignificant.

(b) Wind Load

i) Meridional force in the vertical wall:

Finite Element analysis shows that wind load produces considerable

amount of both tensile and compressive meridional forces in vertical
wall. Maximum tensile meridional force always occurs at e = 0° for all
the height of the vertical wall on a horizontal section. Negative
meridional force is maximum at e = 180° for most part of the vertical
wall except near the ring beam. Near the ring beam negative meridional
force is maximum between e = 105° to 120° on a horizontal section. On
a vertical section both positive and negative meridional force increases
with increasing rate as the distance from the top of vertical wall
increases and both become maximum at the bottom of vertical wall.

107

..-
t
 ii) Circumferential moment in the vertical wall:

Significant amount of Circumferential moment of both posItIve and

negative signs develop in vertical wall due to wind load. Maximum
positive and negative circumferential moments occur near the top of
vertical wall. Conventional method of analysis is completely unable to
predict any circumferential moment in the vertical wall.

(c) Temperature effect

Both meridional and circumferential moments develop due to

temperatIIre difference between inside and outside of silo. The
conventional method can not consider the effect of ring beam at the
bottom. Near the ring beam both the circumferential moment and
meridional moment may be as high as 1.5 times of the value predicted
by the conventional method.

6.3 THE DESIGN RATIONALE

Based on the investigation on different types of silos by Finite Element

method a simple and straightforward way of analysis and design has been
presented in Chapter 5. The proposed design guide is applicable for silos having a
wide range of various parameters. For usual dimensions of silos the proposed
equations provide the values of various stress resultants which is in close agreement
with the Finite Element results.

Using the equations in the suggested design rationale one cail easily find
out the maximum value of a force or moment. The magnitude of the same function
at any vertical level can then be found using the appropriate design curves. There is
no need of an elaborate structIIral analysis. This will relieve a designer from the
rigorous calculation required even in the conventional method. Besides, the
proposed rationale provides a number of important forces and moments which can
not be predicted by conventional method at all.

In this study equations and a set of design curves have been suggested for
the determination of meridional and circumferential moments due to temperature
difference between inside and outside of silo. Using this equation and curves a
designer can find out the meridional and circumferential moments either in the
vertical wall or in the conical hopper wall. Effect of restraint provided by the ring
beam of greater thickness has been taken into consideration in this procedure.

108

..
6.4 SCOPE FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

In this study single circular silo is considered for analysis. Effect of various
loading conditions on this type of silo are investigated in details. On the basis of
this investigation a design guideline has been fonnulated. However, more remains
to be done in future in this field. Some indications of future study are given below:

i) Only circular silo is considered in this research. But there may be silos of
other shapes including rectangular silos, polygonal silos etc. So further work
may be done for rectangular or polygonal silos.

ii) The behaviour of a single silo and that of a group may be different.
Behaviour of silos connected in group of any shape may be investigated in
future.

iii) Nonnally silos are supported by vertical wall. But for other types of silos'
the vertical wall and conical hopper may be supported separately (Type-3).
In this study For Type-l and Type-2 the support is considered at the
junction of vertical wall and conical hopper. Here,' only vertical
displacement is considered to be zero and horizontal displacement of ring
beam is not restrained. But the colunm or wall must provide some restraint,
in horizontal direction. This may be considered in the future study.

iv) Roofs of silos may be rested on the top of vertical wall in different manner.
It may allow free horizontal displacement of the top of vertical wall or it
may' be anchored to the vertical wall by dowel bars so that the horizontal .
displacement of vertical wall at top may be fully or partially restrained. In
this study it is considered that top roof do not affect the horizontal
displacement of vertical wall at top. So there is a scope of study for other
types of joirtts between roof and vertical wall. .

v) Conical hopper may be of concrete or steel. In this study silos with concrete
conical hopper are investigated in details. In the computer program an
option is included to analysis a silo with steel hopper, but detail
investigation has not been carried out. Thus there remains a scope of further
study.

vi) The computer program developed in this research can analyse a silo using
either Janssen's method of pressure computation or Reimbert's method of
pressure computation due to stored material. Detailed study is carried out

109
 using Janssen's method of pressure computation. Effect of material pressure
on the overall behaviour of silo using Reimbelt's method may be
investigated in future.

vii) Study on full-scale operating silos canied outby Blight G. E. in his research
on "Pressures exerted by materials stored in silos" has shown that the
simple Janssen arching theory provides a good estimate of the hOlizontal
pressure with depth in cylindtical silo if used in conjunction with realistic
material parameters. For more realistic results, there remains a scope for
further study of actual data from full-scale operating silos.

viii) In this study wind load is assumed to be unifonnly distributed vertically.

Investigations may be earned out using wind pressure varying in vertical
direction.

ix) Types offoundation may affect the behaviour of silo. Also types of silo may
dictate the nature of foundation. So effect of foundation may be included in
future study.

***

1.10
 REFERENCES

1. ACI Committee 318, "Building Code Requinnents for Reinforced

Concrete (ACI 318-83), " American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1983.

2. ACI Committee 313, "Recommended Practice for Design and Construction

of Concrete Bins, Silos, and Bunkers for Storing Granular Materials, ACI
Standard 313-77 and Commentary," American Concrete Institute, Detroit,
revised 1983, 38 pp.

3. Ahmad, S. "Curved Finite Elements in the Analysis of Solid, Shell and

Plate Structures," PhD. Thesis, Unviersity of College of Swansea, 1969.

4. Ahmad, S., Irons, B. M., and Zienkiewicz, O. c., "Curved Thick Shell
and Membrane Elements with Particular Reference to Axisymmetric
Problems," Proc. 2nd Conf on Matrix Methods in Structural Mechanics,
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, October, 1968.

5. Ahmad, S., "Axi-Symmetric Thick Shell Element Program (Non-

Symmetric Loading) - Listing," Computer Program Report, No. 22,
University of Wales, Swansea, 1969.

6. Airy, W., "The Pressure of Grain ," Minutes of Proceedings, Institution of

Civil Engineers, London, V. 131, 1897, pp. 347-358.

7. Alauddin, Md., "Finite Element Analysis ofAxi-Symmetric Structures with

Special Reference to Silo," B. Sc. Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering,
BUET, September, 1992.

8. Bransby, P.L., Blair-Fish, P.M. and James, R.G., "An Investigation of

the Flow of Granular Materials," Powder Techno/., Vol.8, 1973, pp.197-
206.

9. "Circular Concrete Tanks wuthout Prestressing," Publication ST-57,

Structural Bureau, Portland Cement Association, Chicago.
10. Clague, K. and Wright, H., "Pressures in Bunkders," American Society of
Mechanical Engineers. Material Handling Division. Paper No. 73-MH-4,
1973.

II. Colijn, H., and Peschl, I. A. S. Z., "Non-symmetrical Bin Flow Problems,"
Bulk Solids Handling Journal. V. 3, 1981, Trans Tech Publication,
Clausthal-Zellerfeld, West Gennany.

12. Cowin, S.c. and Sundaram, V., "The Effect of Material Compressibility on
Static Bin Pressures," Powder Technol., Vol. 25, 1980, pp. 225-227.

13. Finitel, Mark., Hand Book of Concrete Engineering. Vand Nostrand

Reinhold Co., New York, 2nd Edition, 1985

14. Gray, W.S., and Manning, G.P., Concrete Water Towers. Bunkers, Silos
and other Elevated Structures, Concrete Publication Ltd. London, Fourth
Edition, 1964.

15. Huda, N. Md., "Optimum Design of Intze Tanks and Supporting Towers
Using Finite Elements," M Sc. Thesis, BUET, July 1984.

16. Irons, B., and Ahmad, S., Techniques of Finite Elements. Ellis Horwood
Ltd., John Wiley & Sons, 1980.

17. Janssen, H. A., "Versuche uber Getreidedruck in Silozellen," Z. Ver. dt.

lng., Vol. 39,31 Aug. 1895, pp. 1045-1049.

18. Jenike, A.W. and Johanson,J.R., "Bin Loads," 1. Struct. Div. Am. Soc.
Civ. Eng., Vo1.94,No. ST4,ApriI1968, pp. 1011-1041.

19. Jenike, A. W., "Gravity Flow of Bulk Solids," Bulletin lO8. University of
Utah, Engineering Experiment Station Salt Lake City.

20. Jenike, A.W., "Storage and flow of solids," Bul!. Utah Eng. expo Stn. No.
123, 1964.

21. Jenike, A.W; Johanson, J.R., and Carson, J.W., "Bin Loads part 2,3 and
4," Publication No. 72-MH-l,2,3, American Society of Mechanical
Engineers. New York 1972.
22. Johanson, J.R. "Stress and Velocity Fields in the Gravity Flow of Bulk
Solids," J. Appl. Mech., Series E, Vol. 86, Sept. 1964, pp. 499-506.

23. Johanson, J. R., "Methods of Calculating Rate of Discharge from Hoppers

and Bins," Trans. Am. 1nst. Min Metall. Eng., Vol. 232, March 1965, pp.
69-80.

24. Ketchum, M. S., The Design of Walls, Bins, and Grain Elevators,
McGraw-Hili, New York, 1909.

25. Khan, M. Amanat, "A Design Rationale for Free Standing Stair Slab
Based on Finite Element Analysis," M Sc. Thesis, Dept. of Civil
Engineering, BUET, Sep. 1993.

26. Lipnitski, M. E. and Abramovitsch, Sh.P., Zhelezobetonnie Bunkera i

Silosi (Reinforced Concrete Bunkers and Silos), Izdatelstvo Literaturi Po
Stroitelstvu, Leningrad, 1967.

27. Peschl, I. A. S. Z., "Powder Testing Techniques and their Application on

.Solving Industrial Problems, " Presented at International Conference of
Bulk Solids Storage, Handling and Flow, Stratford upon-Avon, England,
Nov. 16-18, 1976.

28. Peschl, I. A. S. Z., "Design of Industrial Bulk Powder Handling Facilities,"

Presented at International Conference of Bulk Solids Storage, Handling and
Flow, Stratford upon-Avon, England, Nov. 16-18, 1976.

29. Peschl, I. A. S. Z. "Beitrag zur Sicheren Berechnung der Silos," Die Muhle,
Oct. 1973 (Germany)

30. Pieper, K, and Wagner, K, "Der Einfluss Verschiedener Auslaufarten auf

die Seitendrucke in Silozellen," Alifbereitungs-Technik, No. 10, Oct. 1968,
pp. 542-546.

31. Pieper, K, and Stamon, K, "Lesten in Niedrigen Silos' Technicle",

Universitat Braunschweig, Germany, Mar. 1981.
32. Reimbert, M. and Reimbert, A., Si/os-Traite Theorique et Pratique,
Editions Eyrollees, Paris, 1956.

33. Reimbert, Marcel, and Reimbert, Andre, "Pressions et Surpressions de

Vidange des Silos" (unpublished)

34. Reimbert, Marcel, and Reibert, Andre, Silos- Theory and Practice, Trans
Tech Publications, 1st. edition, 1976, Clausthal, Germany.

35. Roberts, I., "Pressure of Stored Grain," Engineering, Lond., Vol. 34, Oct.
27, 1882, p. 399.

36. Safarian, Sargis S., and Harris, E. e., Design and Construction of Silos
and Bunkers, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New york, 1985.

37. Safarian, Sargis, "Design Pressure of Granular Materials in Silos," ACI

Journal, proceedings, V. 66, NO.8, Aug. 1969, pp. 647-655.

38. Safarian, Sargis S., and Harris Ernest e., "Determination of Minimum
wall Thickness and Temperature Steel in Conventionally Reinforced
Circular Concrete Silos," ACI Journal, Proceedings. Vol. 67, NO.7, July
1970, pp. 539-547.

39. "Ukazania Po Proectirovaniu Silosov Dlia Siputshich Materialov"

(Instructions for Design of Silos for Granular Materials), Soviet Code CN-
302-65, Gosstroy, Moscow, USSR, 1965.

40. Walker, D.M., "An Approximate Theory for Pressures and Arching in
Hoppers,"Chem. Eng. Sci., Vol. 21, 1966, pp. 975-997.

41. Walters, J. K., "A Theoretical Analysis of Stresses in Axially-Symmetric

Hoppers and Bunkers," Chem. Eng. Sci., Vol. 28, 1973, pp. 779-789.

42. Williams, J.e., The Rate of Discharge of Coarse Granular Materials from
Conical Mass Flow Hoppers, School of Powder Technology, University of
Bradford, 1974.

43. Zienkiewicz , O. e., The Finite Element Method, McGraw-Hill Book

Company Ltd., 1977.
 APPENDIX

RING BEAM DESIGN

A-l-l INTRODUCTION

Conical hoppers of either reinforced concrete or metal sometimes supported

at their upper edges by closed circular members or ring-beams. Reinforced
concrete ring-beams are used for both metal and concrete hoppers. The ring-beam
may rest on a thickened lower wall or on an independent circular wall. In either
case, analysis is simple, as the ring-beam is subject only to axial compression and
vertical-plane bending moment.

Analysis is more difficult when the ring-beam is supported on columns,

(Type-lor Type-3) a common situation more or less dictated by requirements for
openings in the lower silo walls, clearance for equipment below the hopper, and so
on.

A-1-2 THEORY AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURE

Fig. A-l-l shows a typical case, in which a steel conical hopper is

supported by a ring-beam of pentagonal cross section, which is supported, in tum,
by equally spaced columns. These columns are assumed to be eccentric to the ring-
beam centroid, as shown by Fig. A-1-2. Eccentricity as shown, with the column
shifted toward the inside of the ring, is considered positive.

Fig. A-1-3a shows the total Forces and Moments acting on the frame.
These are:
(a) An uniformly distributed Torsional MomentM, per unit length of the
ring beam.
(b) An uniformly distributed Horizontal Force Fxper unit length of ring
beam.
 A

Pion obove hopper

Silo 'inside dio,

Section A

Fig. A-l-l Concrete ring beam columns supporting a conical steel hopper.
 r3

Fy
b2 Outline of
y

...:...'..:.-_ . ....:...._._'~.::..:... .....:....::

. , .' '.:
.:. ," ...
! .
equivalent
rectangle

.: .',::. ", '.'

.... ;::." .
". '"' N
. . .,.
'. '. .' o
'.
. ," . .
.. "

. . .' . . . . . .
-
.
.. ' ..... '. ",' '".

reol.
x R I rr
b I r,
r = b + r, I
~I
I:
b,
Silo inside radius = r5
~ ••

Fig. A-I-2 Ring beam cross section showing total forces acting on beam.
 (a) Basic frame

( inside) (outside)
L

(c) Column free body,

MA showing loads applied
by ring-beam.

Column <l Ring - beam centroid

(b) Free body for segment

of ring-beam, showing
forces' applied by column.

Fig. A-1-3 Force system acting on ring beam and columns.

 (c) An uniformly distributed Vertical Force Fy per unit length of ring-
beam.
The cross-sectional area of ring-beam (Fig. A-I-2) is:

(A-I-I)

The coordinates of the centroid of the pentagon from the origin 0 (Fig. A-1-2) are:

- a]b]' /2 - (a,b, /2)(b] - b2 /3)

x = ---~--~---~ (A-1-2)
A,

(A-I-3)

The height a and width b of the equivalent rectangle are

a=2y (A-I-4)

(A-I-5)

Fig. A-I-4 shows details of various types ofloadings by which a ring beam
may be subjected. Using these loadings Fx• Fy and M, of Fig. A-I-2 can be
computed as follows:

F., = Fm cos a - Fp + Fa cosa (A-I-6)

Fy = Fmsina + Fv + Fq + Fasina + Fg (A-I-?)

M, = Fme" + Faes + Mv + AiJ, + Fq (h/2 - x)

- Fp (aj - al2 - y) - r~v (A-I-8)

where Fa = Va ~a/ + b,'

Fq = q bj
Fp = Pba2
Fg = self weight per unit length of ring beam.
Fv = meridional force in the vertical wall at the bottom
Mv = meridional moment in the vertical wall at the bottom
(For Type-3 both Fv andMv are zero)

A-2
..• .
..r' l.. -~
~
 X

a, Centroid~

b,
"8-
a.
en"

qb = Vertical pressure at the top of ring beam

Pb = Lateral pressure at the top of ring beam
q a = Normal pressure on the inclined surface
Va = Friction per unit area

p~ = Pb

Fig. A-1-4 Ring beam cross-section with various loadings

 I':" = meridional force in the conical hopper at the junction of hopper and
ring beam
Mil = meridional moment in conical hopper at the junction of hopper
and ring beam

All forces and moments described above are for unit length of ring beam and the
directions shown are positive.
Fig. A-I-3(b,c) shows free bodies for a portion of ring-beam (extending to
the centers of adjacent spaces between columns) and for the column, respectively.

The following derivation is for even numbers of equally spaced columns

with equal eccentricities and with lower ends fixed.

With the above limitations, any axis through opposite columns or through
centers of opposite spaces between columns is a symmetry axis. There are but two
redundants - column shear, HA, and top column moment, MA. The two equations
required are merely statements that column and ring-beam have: (1) equal radial
displacements at point A; and (2) equal rotations atA.

Radial displacements (positive inward) of the ring-beam at point A are:

L'l.\ (due to force Fx) = Fxr 2/ArEr )

(A-I-9)

~2 (due to force HA) = Har 3KI(2Erfry) (A-I-lO)

(Values of K2 for even numbers of support points from 4 to 12 are shown by Table
A-I-I. fry is moment of inertia of the ring-beam about its vertical axis).

Rotations of the ring-beam at point A (positive if counterclockwise on Fig.

A-I-3b) are:

81 (due to applied uniformly distributed torque M, )

= 12 Mtr/E,a 3 In(rlr[J (A-I-l1)

82 (due to moments M: applied to the ring-beam by the column)

(A-I-12)

(A-I-B)

Factors C2 and C3 are shown by Table A-I-2 and Table A-I-3. Each factor
depends on the number of columns and on the ratio of vertical bending-to-torsional

A-3
stiffness, as defined by A = Er Irx /G K. Table A-I-4 gives value of torsion factor K
for rectangular cross sections.

Table A-I-I. Numerical Coefficients K2

Number of supports K2

4 .012159

6 .003364

8 .001387

10 .000701

12 .000404

Table A-I-2. Values of Factor C2

NUMBER OF EQUALITY SPACED COLUMNS

A 4 6 8 10 12

1.0 0.785 1.047 1.341 1.645 1.954

1.1 0.800 1.056 1.347 1.650 1.959

1.2 0.814 1.065 1.354 1.656 1.963

1.3 0.828 1.074 1.361 1.661 1.967

1.4 0.842 0.091 1.367 1.666 1.972

1.5 0.857 1.092 1.374 1.671 1.976

1.6 0.871 1.102 1.381 1.677 1.98\

1.7 0.885 1.111 1.388 1.682 1.985

A~ E ,l~/GK, in which K = torsion constant from Table A-I-4

B;, ~ C2 r M'/E,l~

A-4
Table A-1-3. Values of Factor C3

NUMBER OF EQUALITY SPACED COLUMNS

A. 4 6 8 10 12

1.0 .0191 .00353 .00117 .000496 .0002417

l.l .0200 .00371 .00122 .000510 .0002509

1.2 .0210 .00389 .00128 .000524 .0002604

1.3 .0219 .00407 .00134 .000538 .0002693

1.4 .0229 .00425 .00139 .000553 .0002785

1.5 .0238 .00442 .00145 .000567 .0002877

1.6 .0248 .00460 .00151 .000581 .0002969

1.7 .0257 .00478 .00156 .000595 .0003061

A.=E,I~/GK
83 = C3Fyr3/E,lrx

MomentM' = MA - Rec (A-I-14)

Displacements of the fixed-end column are:

3

/:; (outward - radial) = H A L ] + [M A L' ] (A-I-I5)

, [ 3EooJ '01 2 EooJ,o'

B,(clockwise on Fig. A -1- 3b) = [ HA ~' ] + [MA L ] (A-I-I6)

2 E col col E coJ col

For compatibility, /:;, + /:;2 + !:i.e = 0, or:

(A-I-17)

(A-I-I8)

Eq.A-I-17 and Eq.A-I-I8 may be solved for column shear HA and top-of-column
momentMA. If the column concrete and ring-beam concrete have the same elastic
modulus, however, the above equations reduce to:

A-5

,.
 f:R'
--+ H --+-- [r 3
K, . L ] +MAL' - 0
3

(A-1-19)
A, A 21 ry 31 col 2/'01

and

12M
__ r -+-~-----+
~,~. C3Fyr' - C,rRe, HAL'
--+ M [Cor
--- +-L] =0 (A-1-20)
a'ln(rz / r,) I~ 2/'01 A I~ 1'01

Thrust, Shear, Torque, and Bending Moment in Ring-Beam. For design,

values of these quantities are required at various locations. Table A-1-5 and
Table A-1-6 show equations for vertical bending moment and torque at various
angular positions from the columns.

Table A-I-4. Torsional Properties of Rectangular Cross Sections.

Section Torsional Con. Torsional Section Points of Maximum Shear Values of Coefficients

stant in' (em)' Modulus in' (em)' Stresses Ib/in' (kg/em') cr,j3,15
(;
m~h/a cr 13 15

Middle of long sides 1.0 0.140 0.208 1.00

Tmux = T / Zt 1.5 0.294 0.346 0.859

D a
K ~0l1 4 Z, ~ fJa' Middle of shot sides

At comer,
= aXTmax

At all points on long side

T~ 0
2.0

3.0

4.0

6.0
0.457 0.493 0.795

0.790 0.801 0.753

1.123 1.150 0.745

1.789 1.789 0.743

h K ~ a'(m - 0.63)/3 Z, ~ a'(m - 0.63)/ except corners, Tm<U" = T / Zt 8.0 2.456 2.456 0.742
~
a Middle of sort sides, T ~O.74 XTmw 10.0 3.123 3.123 0.742

Table A-I-5. Equations for Vertical Bending Moment at Angle e from

Support (+ = Compression top)

. No. of supports Equation

4 M ~ M'(V, sinO + 0.500 cosfJ) - Fyr 2(1 - 0.7854 sinO- 0.7854 cosfJ) + M,r

6 M ~ M'(V, sinO + 0.866 cosfJ) - Fyr 2(1 - 0.5236 sinO- 0.9069 cosfJ) + M,r

8 M ~ M'(V, sinO + 1.207 cosO) - Fyf '(1- 0.3927 sinO- 0.9481 cosfJ) + M,r

10 M ~ M'(V, sinO + 1.539 cosfJ) - Fyr 2(1 - 0.3142 sinO- 0.9669 cosO) + M,r

12 M ~ M'(V, sinO + 1.866 cosfJ) - Fyr 2(1 - 0.2618 sinO- 0.9770 cosfJ) + ivl,r

A-6
Table A-1-6. Equations for Torque at Angle e from Support.

No. of supports Equation

4 M ~ M'(!;' cosB- 0.500 sinlJ) + Fyr '(B- 0.7854 cosB + 0.7854 cosB- 0.7854)
.
6 M ~ M'(,!: cosB- 0.866 sinlJ) + Fyr '(0_ 0.9069 sinO + 0.5236 cosB- 0.5236)

8 M ~ AI'!,!: cosO-1.207 sinlJ) + Fyr '(B- 0.9481 sinO + 0.3927 cos 0- 0.3927)

10 M ~ M'!,!: cosO-1.539 sinlJ) + Fyr 2(0 - 0.9669 sinB + 0.3142 cosO - 0.3142)

12 M ~ M(!;' 'oosO-1.866 sinlJ) + Fyr 2(B_ 0.9770 sinO + 0.2618 cosO- 0.2618)

Table A-1-7. Summary of Axial Force (Thrust), Shear Force and

Horizontal Bending moment in Ring-Beam

NO. OF LOCATION COMPRESSIVE SHEAR HORIZONTAL

SUPPORTS THRUST VERTICAL HORIZONTAL BENDING MOMENT

4 Support Fxr 0.7854 Fy r HAI2 - 0.1366 HA r

Midspan Fxr 0.0 0.0 0.0705 HAr

6 Support F~r 0.5236 r-;'r HAI2 - 0.4550 HA r

Midspan Fxr 0.0 0.0 0.0451 HAr

8 Support }"'xr 0.3927 Fyr HAI2 - 0.773 HA r

Midspan Fxr 0.0 0.0 0.0333 HAr

10 Support Fxr 0.3I42Fyr HAI2 - 1.0920 HA r

M,'d
span Fxr 0.0 0.0 0.0265 HAr

12 Support Fx"r 0.2618 r-;'r HAI2 - 1.4100 HA r

Midspan Fxr 0.0 0.0 0.0220 HAr

A-1-3 RESULTS OF ANALYSIS OF THE RING BEAM OF

PROTOTYPE SILO (ART. 3.1.3)

A FORTRAN program is written following the above method of analysis, as

mentioned earlier, and the prototype of art. 3. 1.3 is analysed. In this case the
input data and the output results are the following (Fig. A-I-2):

A-7
(i) Input Data:

Geometric Dimensions:
aJ = 3.5 ft.
h = 2.54 ft.
b] = 1.54 ft.
al = 2.5 ft.
a = 55.0 deg.
r3 = 14.0 ft.
L = 20.0 ft.
Ical = 3.0 ft4
eco/ = -0.5 ft.

Applied Forces and Moments:

Fx = 31.56. kip/ft.
Fy = 69.48 kip/ft.
M, = 55.20 kip-ft/ft

(ii) Results of analysis (Computer output):

Values of various forces and moments at critical locations required for

ring beam and column design are presented in Table A-I-8. Variations of
vertical bending moment and torsional moments in the ring beam in
circumferential direction are shown in Fig. A-I-5 to Fig. A-I-8. In this figures
"8" is the angle subtended by two adjacent column at the centre.

A-8
 -500

==, _ _
.. .. . .. .. .. _
.. ..
I
-450 .._ ..
c.
,,-,,-,,-"-"-," "-"-',-,
-..
:i:
-- - - - - - -- - - -- -- -
::- -400
:2
o
-; -350
......... ........... ....... ....... ..... .. .. .......... ....
::> ....... ........ ......... ... .. .. .....
"0 .... ....... ....... ..... ..
'E -300

---------
'"
E ..- - - -- ---. ---- .'- --- ..
o
:2 -250 ...- .... -- -- - - - .-- - - -- '- -, ,
~.-
...• _- .
-- .---
,
", -,

---- ~
Cl
c
'6 .200
c
"/ '-......
'"
ID
-150
o 20 40 60 80 100
Angular Distance from support in % of 0
No. of Column - 4 No. of Column - 6 No, of Column - 8 No. of Column - 10 No, of Column - 12

(a) Due to M'

2000

==
C. 1000
:i:
,.,
LL.

-'"
0

::>
"0
0

;.,'

-3000
o 20 40 60 80 100
Angular Distance from support in % of 0
No. of Column - 4 No. of Column - 6 No. of Column. 8 No. of Column - 10 No. of Column - 12

(b) Due to Fy

Fig. A-1-5 Vertical bending moment in ring beam

 200

150

100

, 50
:::;:
-o
Q)
::J
"0
o
C -50
o
.~
~ -100

-150

-200
o 20 40 60; 80 100
Angular Distance from support in % of e
No. of Column - 4 No. of Column - 6 No. of Column - 8 No. of Column - 10 No. of Column - 12

(al Due to M'

600

400

<I='
Q. 200
:i: -~- -~----'. - - .
,c-
-0
Q)
::J
"0
O
"';':
..'~'~
.~~7:':-::::::~"
..'::=::::=::.~.""
--- ..-.. ... _- _- .-.-.- . .
c -200
.en0~
0
t- -400

-600
o 20 40 60 80 100
Angular Distance from support in % of e
No, of Column - 4 No, of Column - 6 No. of Column - 8 No. of Column - 10 No. of Column - 12
.-"-"-

(b) Due to Fy

Fig. A-1-6 Torsion in ring beam

I
--'-~-'
 2400

<l:'
1800
Q.
:s2
~ 1200 -_.- ..-.--------.-.
:;: --- -..-.

::..t
..-'..
Q)

--
(ij
"0 600
.
;. ::.:;;.;::~:::~:--:--:-:.-::-::-I:::--:.--:.-..- ..- ..- ..- ..-:.:::.E-:.::::.-=.:::.:::.:::.;"::; ';::.
0
Q)
:!/fJI".e.
.~".;
.,_ .. -" .. _ .. _ .. -.. . --.,,~
". ~ ...•
:l _.;:.",.~~:~:/ J ------------ --------------< ---------- '\ .•...•.•
~~~.::~.~:~
..
-
"tl a ~
1::
Q)

E •. ", .... ...•.•...•

o -600
:2
Cl
c
'6
c -1200
Q)
III
(ij
u
t -1800
~ .

-2400 a 20 40 60 80 100
Angular Distance from support in % of e
CIN~o~.~o~f~CO=,u-m-nc-.
74---;N~o-.-of~CO=I~u=m=n~-~6O-;N7o=.=o7f~CO=lu=m~n=.-8:-cN~o~.-o~f~CO=,u=m=nC-.
7,O:-cN~o~.=o~f~C~o~lu~m=nC-.
='2"

Fig. A-1-7 Vertical bending moment in ring beam due to total effect

I""""
 400

300
-=
a.
:;;:
~ 200
13
Q)
:;::
Q)

--
n;
0
100

.' ..
...... -------._--- ...
~~1"~-~--"--"-:;;-:;;-=':=:'::.:.':-::::=:':~.':':':~:~:~:~:'"
.
- .'.'
' ......•..
0
Q) 0
:J ...•...•.. .'
"0 ..':.~".~. :~;;;:.;;;:.;;;:;:J;;;:::~:;.".-".-".-~-=-. .. _---- _---- -----
,.'

E
m -100
.0
Cl
C
.C
.s -200
c
0
.iii
<5 -300
I-

-400 100
0 20 40 60 80
Angular Distance from support in % of a
I No. of Column - 4 No. of Column - 6 No. of Column - 8 No. of Column - 10 No. of Column. 121

Fig. A-l-B Torsion in ring beam due to total effect

.
I~ •.

I;~\
Table A-1-8. Forces and Moments in Ring Beam and Column.

Forces and Moments for Column Design Forces and Moments for Ring Beam Design

Number Vertical Horizonta Moment Moment Hoop Hoop Maximum Maximum Maximum

of Axial force at at Top at Bottom Force Stress Bending Bending Torsion

Column Force Top MA MB Moment Moment

R HA (Positive) (Negative)

(kip) (kip) (kip-ft/fl) (kip-ft/fl) (kip) (kip/fl') (kip-ft/fl) (kip-ft/fl) (kip-ft/fl)

4 1541.49 77.53 -1127.63 540.07 -438.94 -60.99 2026.59 -2339.71 346.31

6 1027.66 53.34 -776.93 370.54 -438.94 -60.99 1148.83 -730.80 -131.55

8 770.75 44.00 -642.20 304.20 -438.94 -60.99 789.72 -250.82 -128.49

10 616.60 37.95 -555.39 260.99 -438.94 -60.99 595.41 -64.31 -123.54

12 513.83 33.51 -491.64 229.22 -438.94 -60.99 470.80 0.00 117.36

-0-
- -

A-9