JOURNAL OF CURRENT RESEARCH IN SCIENCE (ISSN 2322-5009)

CODEN (USA): JCRSDJ

2014, Vol. 2, No. 5, pp: 664-672
Available at www.jcrs010.com
ORIGINAL ARTICLE

MECHANICAL BEHAVIOR INVESTIGATION FOR AN ATMOSPHERIC STORAGE

TANK ACCORDING TO API 650 UNDER LOADS USING FEM

Alireza Naddaf Oskouei, Ehsan Nazari Naghani

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Imam Hossein Comprehensive University, Tehran, Iran

ABSTRACT: This paper analyzes the mechanical behavior of an atmospheric storage tank under loads
(dead load, weight of fluid, wind and earthquake) that has been designed according to standard analytical
equations of API 650. After defining analytical equations results, we study the tank behavior by numerical
analysis of finite element software ABAQUS. Finally, comparing these two results, after defining critical
displacement and buckling points we recommend some solution to increase the buckling strength of tank
cylindrical shell that will conclude to increase its shelf life. The results show that values of hoop
membrane stress in tank shell obtained by numerical method is proportional to those obtained by design
analytical equations of standard and they fluctuate in a parallel way. Moreover the values of hoop
membrane stress obtained by numerical method are 9% less than analytical method. The studies on
stability of the tank, represents that installing boxlike stiffening rings in tank shell causes an improvement
of 72% in buckling strength of tank shell.
KEYWORDS: Atmospheric storage tank, Cylindrical shells, Finite Element, Buckling strength, API 650

INTRODUCTION 650 and numerical analysis software gained via

In order to design structures safely, their software ABAQUS would be useful In offering
behavior analysis in a variety of loading is solutions to increase the shelf life of the tanks.
considerably important. The first step to analyze For the first time in 1916 in the United States of
the behavior of structure faced with different America "tank Manufacturers Association"
loads is the stress analysis that can be which later renamed to the "Steel Tank
performed in different methods of theoretical, Institute" (STI) started standardizing and
numerical and experimental. regularizing equations for the large quantities of
Atmospheric storage tank is one of the most petroleum storage with high degree of
important structures widely used in many flammability. In1922, the Underwriter
industries, especially in oil, gas and Laboratories (UL) by developing their safety
petrochemical industries. The standard used in standards published the first standard entitled
the design of these tanks is API 650. The design "Above Ground Steel Tanks for Flammable and
equations used in the standard is based on some Combustible Liquid”. American petroleum
simplifier assumptions. They state in templates Institute (API) was established in 1919 with the
of stress analysis method which can be used only publication of API 650 they started providing
for classic loading and geometries. While the standards criteria and requirements for
results of the surveying geometric shapes and materials, design, fabrication and installation for
the actual loading using numerical methods such vertical tanks, cylindrical, above ground, open
as finite element method can conclude to more roof, enclosed and welded steel tanks in a spread
accurate, realistic and reliable result. Of course variety of dimensions and capacity for different
in experimental stress analysis, there is not storage (Long and Garner, 1961).
numerical errors which is usual in there Housner, (1954) examined the effects of the
numerical methods and structures are studied earthquake on atmospheric storage tanks.
under real conditions. Because of various factors McGrath, (1963) began to investigate the
such as not take in account thorough parameters stability of the tanks shell designed according to
affecting on the strength and stability of the the standard API 650 against the load of wind.
structure due to the different uncertainties in Novozhilov, (1964); Vlasov, (1964) and Dupuis
design equations defined in the standard API et al.,(1970) providing strain-displacement
650 so these tanks face to failure and equations studied on numerical analysis for
deformation. for these reasons studying and deep and shallow shells based on thin shell
comparing their mechanical behavior using the theory in classical mechanics. Grafton and
results of theoretical equations in standard API Strome, (1963) were pioneer to obtain finite

Corresponding Author: Ehsan Nazari Naghani, Department of Mechanical Engineerng, Imam Hossein
Comprehensive University, Tehran, Iran. E-mail: enazari478@yahoo.com
Mechanical Behavior Investigation For An… 665
element for axisymmetric shells with symmetric 516-70 and A 283-C for the shell, A 283-C for the
loading that their finite elements composed of a floor, A 516-70 used for annular plates and A
ring of frustum cone. Eslami and Alizadeh, 283-C is chosen for the roof.
(1994) in the analysis of spherical shells under
the asymmetric loads employed a mixed finite 3.2. Design Of Bottom And Annular Plates
element model. Shakeri et al., (1993) using finite According to standard API 650, minimum
element method analyzed cone shells elasticity thickness tank floor plates without corrosion
under the impact loading. Rahgozar et al., (2005) allowance is 6 mm and a minimum nominal
examined the static analysis on rotating thin width of rectangular plates and Sketch Plates
shell based on finite element method. Irani and (floor plates that are connected to the annular
Fathi, (2001) analyzed the free vibration of plate) is 1800 mm. A schematic image of the
shells via the finite element method, and in that plates layout is shown in Figure 1.
study they used a special Lagrangian curved
finite element.
In this paper, we compare the mechanical
behavior of a floating roof atmospheric storage
tank using the results of the theoretical
equations of standard API 650 and numerical
analysis gained from software ABAQUS. Finally,
we provide some recommendations to increase
the tank shell buckling strength and it shelf life.

THE TYPES OF TANKS WITH DIFFERENT

OPERATION PRESSURE
In viewpoint of operation pressure or internal Figure 1: A schematic layout of the tank floor
pressure, tanks are classified into three major plates.
groups. First tanks, known as atmospheric
storage tanks are utilized in an operation In the standards, steels based on the increase in
pressure or internal pressure of less than 18 kPa toughness are classified in eight groups. If the
and standard API 650 is used to design them first Course of tank shell using allowance stress
(API 650, 2010). The second group, is called the of the material of five groups IV, IVA, V and VI is
low-pressure storage tanks have an internal selected, then the annular plates material of the
pressure of 18 kPa <P <100 kPa and standard tank (Here A 516-70 of the Group IV ) will be the
API 620 is used in their design (API 620, 2012). same. Whenever allowable stress in hydrostatic
The third category, known as pressurized test condition (St) on the first course of shell is
vessels, their operation pressure or internal less than 210 MPa and thickness of first course
pressure is P> 100 kPa and the design standard was in the interval 32 <t ≤ 40 mm, then the
of the tanks is ASME Sec VIII (ASME Sec VIII, minimum thickness of the annular plates will be
2013). 11 mm. The minimum width of annular plates is
600 mm and should not be less than the value
TANK DESIGN obtained from Eq. (1):
According to API 650 standard definitions,
215 𝑡𝑏
process and geometric properties of the tank 𝑊𝐴𝑃 = ) 1(
(𝐻𝐺)0.5
assumed to be as follows:

3.1. Design Assumptions Where tb is thickness of annular plates, H is

The tank assumed to be an external floating roof maximum design liquid level and G is specific
(EFR), Double deck and containing a gravity of the stored fluid in terms of millimeter,
hydrocarbon condensate and is considered with meter and gram per cubic centimeter
a density of 0.735 gr/cm3, having a diameter of respectively. So the annular plates width is
72 m, height 18.5 m and the design temperature considered 1400 mm.
of 85 °c. The wind speed at a height of 10 m
above ground level assumed 34.7 m/s, the 3.3. Design Of Shell Plates
maximum design liquid level 16.67 m, corrosion The minimum acceptable width in standard API
allowance for shell, floor and roof plates of the 650 for tank shell plates is 1800 mm. If the tank
tank 0 mm, the seismic zoom 4 and importance diameter is greater than 60 m, the minimum
factor for seismic use group considered 1.25. shell plate thickness should be considered 10
The material specification of plates according to mm. since by increasing height of the shell, the
mechanical properties in standard ASTM, type A hydrostatic pressure of the fluid decreases, thus
thickness of any tank shell courses must not be
666 Naddaf Oskouei and Nazari Naghani, 2014
less than its upper courses. Generally there are in terms of millimeters. In Eq. (6) the value of x
two methods to design thickness of tank shell that is actually the distance between variable
plates. In the first that is called 1-foot method, design points from the bottom of each course
required thicknesses in the design point (0.3 m can be obtained by using the least value of Eq.
higher than bottom of the each shell course) are (7):
calculated. This method is applied for tanks with
diameters less than 60 m. The second method 𝑥1 = 0.61(𝑟𝑡𝑢 )0.5 + 320𝐶𝐻
called variable-design-point is used to design 𝑥2 = 1000𝐶𝐻 ) 7(
𝑥3 = 1.22(𝑟𝑡𝑢 )0.5
tanks with diameters larger than 60 m. This is a
trial and error approach and the solution closes Where C and K are:
to a converge number. Thickness obtained in
this approach is less than 1-foot method. This 𝐾 0.5 (𝐾 − 1)
method obtains lower thicknesses in different 𝐶=[ ]
(1 + 𝐾 0.5 )
courses, thereby reduces the weight of the tank. 𝑡𝐿 ) 8(
𝐾=
The more notability of applying this method is 𝑡𝑢
its capability to design tanks with larger Where tL and tu are thickness of the lower and
diameter when we are faced with limitation of upper courses in the joint location in terms of
plate thickness (Carluccio, 2007). Using variable- millimeter respectively. Regarding design
design-point method, the first shell thicknesses assumptions, size and material of tank shell
t1d and t1t in the design condition and hydrostatic plates are obtained from Table 1.
test conditions is respectively obtained in terms
of millimeter from the following equations: Table 1: Size and material of tank shell plates.
THK Height Course Weight
No. Material
(mm) (mm) (kg)
0.0696𝐷 𝐻𝐺 4.9𝐻𝐺𝐷 1 36.64 A 516-70 2433 158488.21
𝑡1𝑑 = (1.06 −
𝐻
√ )(
𝑆𝑑 𝑆𝑑
) + 𝐶𝐴 ) 2( 2 32.97 A 516-70 2433 142613.43
3 27.81 A 516-70 2433 120293.59
0.0696𝐷 𝐻 4.9𝐻𝐷 4 21.79 A 516-70 2433 94253.76
𝑡1𝑡 = (1.06 −
𝐻
√ )(
𝑆𝑡 𝑆𝑡
) ) 3( 5 15.98 A 516-70 2433 69122.31
6 11.43 A 516-70 2433 49441.05
7 10 A 283-C 1901 33797.26
Where D is tank diameter, CA is corrosion 8 10 A 283-C 1901 33797.26
allowance in terms of meter and millimeter
respectively. Also Sd and St are maximum 3.4. Floating Roof
allowable stress of shell plates used in the tank According to requirements of API 650 floating
for respectively design and hydrostatic test roof of the tank is considered a double deck with
conditions in terms of MPa. Thickness of courses a thickness of 5 mm for plates of the top and
has to be greater than designed thickness for the bottom deck, diameter 71.6 m, height 0.715 m in
shell (td) plus corrosion allowance and shell the adjacent inner shells and it has seven rings
thickness in hydrostatic test mode (tt). To with the same length of the openings. Between
calculate the shell thickness in upper courses for every two rings some compartment are located
design and hydrostatic test conditions, with to enclose the air for roof flotation. To control
calculation the ratio of A in Eq. (4) for lower deformation and to tighten the ring plates in
course, thickness of upper course (t2) can be every compartment 5 radial trusses joint them
calculated according to the Eq. (5) and Eq. (6): in the equal intervals. in each trusses two UNP
ℎ1 80 as longitudinal parts in its top and down is
𝐴=
(𝑟𝑡1 )0.5
) 4( used as well as two angle beams with
dimensions 50 mm× 50 mm × 5mm with equal
𝑖𝑓 𝐴 ≤ 1.375 → 𝑡2 = 𝑡1 openings from each other as vertical parts are
𝑖𝑓 𝐴 ≥ 2.625 → 𝑡2 = 𝑡2𝑎 = 𝑀𝑎𝑥(𝑡𝑑𝑥 , 𝑡𝑡𝑥 )
applied. Considering above circumstances, mass
𝑖𝑓 1.375 < 𝐴 < 2.625 → 𝑡2 = ) 5(
ℎ1 of the roof is estimated about 417647 kg.
𝑡2𝑎 + (𝑡1 − 𝑡2𝑎 )[2.1 − ]
1.25(𝑟𝑡1 )0.5
3.5. Design For Resist Against Wind Load
𝑥 The maximum height of the tank shell that does
4.9𝐷 (𝐻 − )𝐺
𝑡𝑑𝑥 = 1000 + 𝐶𝐴
𝑆𝑑 not need to be reinforced can be calculated from
𝑥 ) 6( the following equation:
4.9𝐷(𝐻 − )
𝑡𝑡𝑥 = 1000
𝑆𝑡
𝑡 3 190 2
𝐻1 = 9.47𝑡√( ) ( ) ) 9(
Where h1 is lower course height, r is radius of 𝐷 𝑉
the tank and t1 is actual course thickness
without corrosion allowance that all of them are
Mechanical Behavior Investigation For An… 667
The above equation is defined based on the (𝑀𝐷𝐿 + 𝑀𝐹 )
𝑀𝑤 + 0.4𝑀𝑃𝑖 <
dynamic pressure of the wind at height z(m), 2
which the first time by McGrath, (1963) was
Where Mw is overturning moment caused by
introduced and in standard ASCE1 7 has also
vertical and horizontal wind pressure, MPi is
been discussed. According to him, the pressure
internal pressure moment, MDL is dead load
is expressed in Eq. (10):
moment and MF is fluid moment that all of them
𝑃 = 0.00256𝐾𝑧 𝐾𝑧𝑡 𝐾𝑑 𝑉 2 𝐼𝐺 = 1.48 kPa are calculated in around of the joint between
)10(
shell and floor in terms of Newton-meter.
According to the design assumptions, these both
By adding a pressure of 0.24 kPa to exert drag
conditions were satisfied by the tank and it is
effects and vaccum (external pressure) inside
considered as a self-anchored tank.
the tanks respectively closed and open top,
McGrath considered total wind dynamic
3.6. Seismic Design Of Storage Tank
pressure to be 1.72 kPa. In the above equation
Based on the Housner theory, behavior of the
𝐾𝑧 is velocity pressure exposure coefficient of
product liquid inside a vertical cylindrical tank
wind in height of z, 𝐾𝑧𝑡 topographic factor, 𝐾𝑑
when the tank is disposed to an earthquake is
wind directionally factor, V design wind speed
divided into two parts (Long and Garner, 1961).
(for a 3-sec gust) in height of 10 m of ground
That part of the liquid located in the lower part
level in terms of km per hour, I importance
of the tank as a solid object with the tank moves,
factor and G is the wind impact factor.
displaces and accelerates. It is called impulsive
Importance factor is calculated for buildings or
section. The natural period of vibration
other structures, taking into account the degree
associated with this component is a function of
of risk to human life and damage to property.
the size and stiffness of the tank itself and is
After calculating H1, transformed shell height is
usually to be found in the 0.1 s to 0.4 s range.
determined. This height is calculated using Eq.
The other part of the liquid located in the upper
(11) that actual width of each shell course
part of the tank freely moves to form Slosh. This
turned to transposed width with a thickness
part is known as convective section. This section
equal to thickness of the top course.
has a longer natural response rather than the
impulsive section and depending on the size of
𝑡𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚 5
𝑊𝑡𝑟 = 𝑊√( ) )11( the tank usually within 5 s to 10 s is formed. In
𝑡𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙
Housner model that is shown in Figure 2, the
impulsive component is rigidly linked to the
That Wtr and W respectively are transposed tank walls, while the convective component is
width and actual width of each shell course, attached by weak springs.
tuniform thickness of the last course, tactual
thickness of the course that is set to transposed
its width and all are in millimeter. If
𝑊𝑡𝑟𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 > 𝐻1 an intermediate wind girder is
necessary that should be located in middle of
transposed tank shell height. For the tank,
according to table 1, an intermediate wind
girder is necessary in a distance of 5.91 m from
the highest point of the shell that the minimum
required section modulus Z(cm3) is obtained
from below equation:

𝐷2 𝐻 𝑉 2
)12( Figure 2: Modeling of convective and impulsive
𝑍= ( )
17 190 section with the weight of roof and shell.

To control the tank stability against overturning, Accordance with API 650, Ti and Tc, the natural
according to the standard requirements of API period of the impulsive and convective sections
650,whenever the tank satisfy two conditions of are respectively obtained from the following
Eq. (13) it does not need to use the anchor bolts equation:
to anchorage it.
𝑇𝑖 = 0.128 𝑠𝑒𝑐
𝑀𝐷𝐿 𝑇𝑐 = 1.8𝐾𝑠 √𝐷
0.6 𝑀𝑤 + 𝑀𝑃𝑖 < )13(
1.5 0.578 )14(
𝐾𝑠 =
√tanh (3.68𝐻 )
𝐷
2 American Society of Civil Engineers
668 Naddaf Oskouei and Nazari Naghani, 2014
Then Wi and Wc which are weight of impulsive Total hoop stress in shell caused by seismic
and convective liquid (in Newton) for the short movement for the short tanks is calculated via
𝐷
tanks that ≥ 1.33 from the following equation this equation:
𝐻
can be calculated:
𝑁ℎ ± √𝑁𝑖 2 + 𝑁𝑐 2 + (𝐴𝑣 𝑁ℎ )2
𝜎𝑇 = 𝜎ℎ ± 𝜎𝑠 = )19(
𝐷 𝑡
tanh (0.866 )
𝑊𝑖 = [ 𝐻 ]𝑊
𝐷 𝑝
0.866 )15( Where:
𝐻
𝐷 3.67𝐻
𝑊𝑐 = 0.23 tanh( ) 𝑊𝑝 𝑁ℎ = 4.9(𝐻 − 0.3)𝐷𝐺
𝐻 𝐷
𝑌 𝑌 2 𝐷
𝑁𝑖 = 8.48 𝐴𝑖 𝐺𝐷𝐻 [ − 0.5 ( ) ] tanh (0.866 )
Where Wp is total weight of liquid storage. Xi and 𝐻 𝐻 𝐻
3.68(𝐻 − 𝑌) )20(
Xc are distance between the bottom of shell and 1.85𝐴𝑐 𝐺𝐷2 cosh (
𝐷
)
the center of lateral seismic force respectively 𝑁𝐶 =
3.68𝐻
cosh ( )
for impulsive and convective sections that for 𝐷
short tanks is obtained from follow equation in
terms of meter: That 𝜎ℎ is product hydrostatic hoop stress in the
shell and 𝜎𝑠 is hoop stress in the shell due to
𝑋𝑖 = 0.375𝐻 impulsive and convective forces of the stored
3.6𝐻 liquid and both are in terms of MPa. Nh is
cosh ( )−1 )16(
𝐷
𝑋𝑐 = [1 −
3.67𝐻 3.67𝐻
]𝐻 product hydrostatic membrane force, Ni and Nc
sinh ( )
𝐷 𝐷 are hydrodynamic hoop membrane forces in the
shell due to respectively convective and
Total design base shear V is also can be gained impulsive sections and both are in terms of
by Eq. (17) in which Vi is design base shear Newton per millimeter. Y is the distance of fluid
related to impulsive section due to weight of the surface to the analysis point and 𝐴𝑣 is vertical
tank and its liquid storage. Vc is design base earthquake acceleration coefficient defined as
shear related to convective section due to 0.23.
sloshing weight.
FINITE ELEMENTS TO ANALYZE SHELLS OF
𝑉 = √𝑉𝑖 2 + 𝑉𝑐 2 REVOLUTION UNDER NON-AXISYMMETRICAL
𝑉𝑖 = 𝐴𝑖 (𝑊𝑠 + 𝑊𝑟 + 𝑊𝑓 + 𝑊𝑖 ) )17( LOADIND
𝑉𝑐 = 𝐴𝑐 𝑊𝑐
Curved surfaces or shells that have practical and
Where 𝑊𝑠 is the weight of the fixed roof, 𝑊𝑓 is industrial aspects are known as thin shells if
the weight of the floor and both are in terms of ratio of thickness to radius of curvature r is
Newton. 𝐴𝑖 and 𝐴𝑐 are seismic factor for equal or less than 1/20. For thin shells that are
impulsive and convective sections that for this important from a practical point of view, this
tank are respectively 0.33 and 0.02. Overturning ratio may be 1/100 or smaller (Ugural,1981). In
moment that is imposed to bottom of shell many cases it appears that the shells of
surrounding is: revolution are located under Non
axisymmetrical loading. For example, wind or
𝑀𝑟𝑤 = √[𝐴𝑖 (𝑊𝑖 𝑋𝑖 + 𝑊𝑠 𝑋𝑠 + 𝑊𝑟 𝑋𝑟 )]2 + [𝐴𝑐 (𝑊𝑐 𝑋𝐶 )]2 )18( earthquake effects on chimneys and
atmospheric storage tanks produce loads that do
Where 𝑋𝑠 and 𝑋𝑟 are height of gravity center of not have axial symmetry. However any desired
shell and roof from the floor in terms of meter. loading on a revolving object can be decomposed
The parameters defined in Eqs. (15) to (18) for in two symmetric and asymmetric loading with
the tank is shown in Figure 3. respect to the plane of symmetry which is
included axis of rotation (Plane through the axis
of symmetry). Symmetric loads analysis or
Fourier decomposition (Sokolnikoff and
Redheffer, 1966) to m harmonic terms will
result in:
𝑚

𝑏𝑟 = ∑ 𝑏𝑟𝑗 cos 𝑗𝜃
𝑗=0
𝑚

𝑏𝑧 = ∑ 𝑏𝑧𝑗 cos 𝑗𝜃 )21(

𝑗=0
𝑚

𝑏𝜃 = ∑ 𝑏𝜃𝑗 sin 𝑗𝜃
Figure 3: Seismic moment and force diagram. 𝑗=0
Mechanical Behavior Investigation For An… 669
Where 𝑏𝑟𝑗 , 𝑏𝑧𝑗 and 𝑏𝜃𝑗 are function of only z and For the analysis it is necessary to define global
j. when 𝑗 = 0 then 𝑏𝜃 = 0 and Eq. (21) will be in displacement derivative of Eq. (22) with respect
axisymmetrical loading mode. Otherwise, it to local coordinates. So:
means 𝑗 = 1,2, … , 𝑚 Eq. (21) will be in Non-
axisymmetrical loading mode that respected to 𝑓𝑖,𝜉 𝑐𝑗 0 0 −𝑓𝑖,𝜉 𝜂𝑠𝑖 𝑐𝑗 0
𝑢,𝜉
0 0 0 −𝑓𝑖 𝑠𝑖 𝑐𝑗 0
the plane passing on z is symmetric. 𝑢,𝜂 𝑢𝑖
𝑢,𝜃 −𝑗𝑓𝑖 𝑠𝑗 0 0 𝑗𝑓𝑖 𝜂𝑠𝑖 𝑠𝑗 0 𝑣
Figs. 4-a, 4-b and 4-c are showing the first 𝑖
𝑣,𝜉 3 0 𝑓𝑖,𝜉 𝑐𝑗 0 𝑓𝑖,𝜉 𝜂𝑐𝑖 𝑐𝑗 0 𝑤𝑖
harmonic loads term along the r, z and θ. If the 𝑣,𝜂 = ∑ 0 𝑡𝑖
0 0 0 𝑓𝑖 𝑐𝑖 𝑐𝑗
𝛼 )24(
loading was anti-symmetric with respect to the 𝑣,𝜃 𝑖=1 0 −𝑗𝑓𝑖 𝑠𝑗 0 −𝑗𝑓𝑖 𝜂𝑐𝑖 𝑠𝑗 0 2 𝑖
symmetry plane, position of cos 𝑗𝜃 and sin 𝑗𝜃 in 𝑤,𝜉
0 0 𝑓𝑖,𝜉 𝑠𝑗 0 𝑓𝑖,𝜉 𝜂𝑠𝑗
𝑡𝑖
Eq.(21) has to be replaced. 𝑤,𝜂 [ 2 𝛽𝑖 ]𝑗
0 0 0 0 𝑓𝑖 𝑠𝑗
[𝑤,𝜃 ]𝑗
[0 0 𝑗𝑓𝑖 𝑐𝑗 0 𝑗𝑓𝑖 𝜂𝑐𝑗 ]

The following abbreviations are used in the

coefficients matrix:

𝑠𝑖 = sin 𝛾𝑖 𝑠𝑗 = sin 𝑗𝜃
𝑐𝑖 = cos 𝛾𝑖 𝑐𝑗 = cos 𝑗𝜃 )25(

By defining Jacobian matrix in Eq. (26) and using

its inverse, derivatives of global displacement
with respect to global coordinate is obtained as
below:
𝑟,𝜉 𝑧,𝜉 0
𝑱 = [𝑟,𝜂 𝑧,𝜂 0] )26(
Figure 4: Loading without axial symmetry: (a) 0 0 1
𝑏𝑟1 cos𝜃 (b) 𝑏𝑧1 cos𝜃 (c) 𝑏𝜃1 sin𝜃
𝑢,𝑟 𝑱−𝟏 𝑶 𝑶 𝑢,𝜉
𝑢,𝑧
𝑱−𝟏
𝑢
𝑶 ] [ …,𝜂 ]
)27(
Response of a shell of revolution to the harmonic […]=[𝑶
load series is a harmonic series of global 𝑤,𝜃 𝑶 𝑶 𝑱−𝟏 𝑤,𝜃
displacement. For the shell finite element
(Figure 5-a), the displacements are defined as For loads without axial symmetry on revolution
follows: finite element (Figure 5-a), 6 types of non-zero
displacements and strains are considered that
𝑢 𝒎 cos 𝑗𝜃 0 0 form equation of strain-displacement:
[𝑣 ] = ∑ [ 0 cos 𝑗𝜃 0 ] 𝑢,𝑟
𝑤 𝒋=𝟏 0 0 sin 𝑗𝜃 𝑣,𝑧
)22( 𝜖𝑟
3 𝑢𝑖 3 1
𝑡𝑖 − sin 𝛾𝑖 0 𝛼𝑖 𝜖𝑧 (𝑢 + 𝑤,𝜃 )
× {∑ 𝑓𝑖 [ 𝑣𝑖 ] + ∑ 𝑓𝑖 𝜂 [ cos 𝛾𝑖 0] [𝛽 ] } 𝜖𝜃 𝑟
𝑤𝑖 𝑗 𝑖=1 2 𝑖 𝑗 𝝐𝒋 = 𝛾 = 𝑢,𝑧 + 𝑣,𝑟 )28(
𝑖=1 0 1 𝑟𝑧
𝛾𝑧𝜃 𝑣,𝜃
𝑤,𝑧 +
[𝛾𝑟𝜃 ]𝒋 𝑟
𝜉(1 − 𝜉) 𝜉(1 + 𝜉) 𝑢,𝜃 𝑤
𝑓1 = − 𝑓2 = 1 − 𝜉 2 𝑓3 = )23( + 𝑤 − ]
2 2 [𝑟 ,𝑟
𝑟 𝒋
Where 𝑓𝑖 is the chosen shape functions for the Using Eq. (27) and Eq. (28), i th part of the
shell finite element and 𝛽𝑖 is a small rotate axial matrix B, the matrix strain-displacement of finite
x′(Figure 5-a). As before, if the loading was anti- element for the j th harmonic response can be
symmetric with respect to the symmetry plane, written as Eq. (29):
the function position of cos 𝑗𝜃 and sin 𝑗𝜃 has to
𝑎𝑖 𝑐𝑗 0 0 −𝑑𝑖 𝑠𝑖 𝑐𝑗 0
be replaced. 0 𝑏𝑖 𝑐𝑗 0 𝑒𝑖 𝑠𝑖 𝑐𝑗 0
𝑓𝑖 𝑐𝑗 𝑗𝑓𝑖 𝑐𝑗 1 1
0 − (𝑓𝑖 𝜂𝑠𝑖 𝑐𝑗 𝑡𝑖 ) 𝑗𝑓 𝜂𝑐 𝑡
𝑟 𝑟 2𝑟 2𝑟 𝑖 𝑗 𝑖
(𝑩𝒊 )𝒋 = 𝑏𝑖 𝑐𝑗 𝑎𝑖 𝑐𝑗 0 (𝑑𝑖 𝑐𝑖 − 𝑒𝑖 𝑠𝑖 )𝑐𝑗 0 )29(
𝑗𝑓𝑖 𝑠𝑗 1 1
0 − 𝑏𝑖 𝑠𝑗 − (𝑗𝑓𝑖 𝜂𝑐𝑖 𝑠𝑗 𝑡𝑖 ) (𝑒 𝑠 𝑡 )
𝑟 2𝑟 2 𝑖 𝑗 𝑖
𝑗𝑓𝑖 𝑠𝑗 𝑓𝑖 1 𝑓𝑖 𝜂 𝑠𝑗 𝑡𝑖
(𝑗𝑓 𝜂𝑠 𝑠 𝑡 ) (𝑑𝑖 − )
[− 𝑟
0 (𝑎𝑖 − ) 𝑠𝑗
𝑟 2𝑟 𝑖 𝑖 𝑗 𝑖 𝑟 2 ]

Where 𝑖 = 1,2,3 and 𝑗 = 0,1,2, … , 𝑚 and:

−1 )𝑡
(𝑎𝑖 𝜂 + 𝑗12
−1
𝑓𝑖 𝑖
𝑎𝑖 = 𝐽11 𝑓𝑖,𝜉 𝑑𝑖 =
2 )30(
−1 )𝑡
(𝑏𝑖 𝜂 + 𝑗22 𝑓𝑖 𝑖
Figure 5: (a) Hoop finite element (b) Nodal −1
𝑏𝑖 = 𝐽21 𝑓𝑖,𝜉 𝑒𝑖 =
2
rotation
670 Naddaf Oskouei and Nazari Naghani, 2014
So the finite element stiffness matrix Kj can be COMPARING SOFTWARE NUMERICAL
formulated as below: RESULTS WITH THE STANDARD ANALYTICAL
RESULTS
1 1
𝑲𝑗 = 𝑘𝜋 ∫ ∫ 𝑩𝑇𝒋 𝑬𝑩𝒋 |𝑱|𝑟𝑑𝜉𝑑𝜂 The results obtained from the finite element
−1 −1
)31( model and the standard API 650 is shown in
Table 2 and Figure 6. Because maximum
wherein 𝑘 = 2 for 𝑗 = 0 and 𝑘 = 1 for 𝑗 = deflection and stress occur in the sixth shell
1,2, … 𝑚. In addition, equivalent nodal loads for course (Figure 7 and 8), therefore, the numerical
each harmonic series of asymmetric body forces results of software ABAQUS support the API 650
are in the form of following equation: argument about selecting location for an
embedded stiffening ring.
1 1
𝒑𝑗 = 𝑘𝜋 ∫ ∫ 𝒇𝑇 𝒃𝒋 |𝑱|𝑟𝑑𝜉𝑑𝜂 (𝑗 = 0,1,2, … , 𝑚) Table 2: Results of API 650 Standard and
−1 −1 )32( ABAQUS software for global hoop stresses, σT.
S11(MPa)-
Course 𝜎𝑇 (+) 𝜎𝑇 (−)
Where: Mesh
No. (MPa) (MPa)
Size=2
1 0 0 0 0 1 159.43 73.46 127.6
𝒇𝒊 = [0 1 0 0 0] 𝑓𝑖 (𝑖 = 1,2,3) 2 170.98 77.03 133.1
0 0 1 0 0 )33( 3 175.88 72.77 145.2
4 188.48 70.97 154.1
5 205.33 69.49 188.5
And body forces (per unit of volume and 6 211.03 62.78 193.4
constant in thickness) is equal to: 7 150.03 36.77 114.7
8 76.45 11.76 55.0
𝒃𝒋 = {𝑏𝑟𝑗 , 𝑏𝑧𝑗 , 𝑏𝜃𝑗 } )34(

Furthermore, the equivalent nodal loads due to

initial strain can be expressed as Eq. (35):
1 1
𝒑0𝑗 = 𝑘𝜋 ∫ ∫ 𝑩𝑇𝒋 𝑻𝑇𝝐 𝑬′𝝐′0𝑗 |𝑱|𝑟𝑑𝜉𝑑𝜂 (𝑗 = 0,1,2, … , 𝑚) )35(
−1 −1
𝝐′0𝑗 = {𝜖𝑥′0 , 𝜖𝑦′0 , 𝜖𝑧′0 , 𝛾𝑥′𝑦′0 , 𝛾𝑦′𝑧′0 , 𝛾𝑥′𝑧′0 } )36(

Finally, the stress values for each harmonic

response are as follows, that is the exact
equations of stress-strain: Figure 6: Comparison of stresses provided in
standard API 650 and software ABAQUS.
𝝈𝑗′ = 𝑬′ (𝑻𝝐 𝑩𝒋 𝒒𝒋 − 𝝐′ 𝟎𝒋 ) (𝑗 = 0,1,2, … , 𝑚) )37(

These stresses are along the local coordinates.

Finite elements for a revolution shell have
consistent mass matrix to vibrate with axial
symmetry and without axial symmetry
accordance with Eq. (38):

𝑴𝑗 = ∫
2𝜋
∫ 𝜌𝒇𝑻 𝒇 cos 2 𝑗𝜃 𝑟 𝑑𝜃 𝑑𝐴 (𝑗 = 0,1,2, … , 𝑚) )38(
0 𝐴
By integrating the above equation with respect
to θ we have: Figure 7: Contour of hoop stresses in the tank
shell (magnification 100).
)39(
𝑴𝑗 = 𝑘𝜋 ∫ 𝜌𝒇𝑻 𝒇𝑟𝑑𝐴
𝐴

Wherein 𝑘 = 2 for 𝑗 = 0 and 𝑘 = 1 for 𝑗 =

0,1,2, … , 𝑚. Note that replacing cos 𝑗𝜃 with sin 𝑗𝜃
in Eq. (38) cannot change the result.
Taking advantage of numerical analysis was due
to better understanding and interpreting, in
addition comparing the results obtained from
the standard theory and the computer software
used here is engineering software ABAQUS that
Figure 8: Contour of horizontal displacement in
is based on finite element analysis.
the tank shell (magnification 100).
Mechanical Behavior Investigation For An… 671
Unlike API 650 prediction, the results of CONCLUSION
numerical software (Figure 8) indicate the Comparing the results of the API 650 standard
occurrence of a buckling of 21.7 mm in the analytical equations and numerical solution of
height of 2.445 m from the shell bottom finite element software ABAQUS that is shown in
(between the first and second courses). Table 2, shows that values of hoop membrane
Naturally, this buckling will seriously damage stress in tank shell courses that gained via
the tank piping system. To avoid the buckling, numerical method is proportioned to those
embedded stiffening rings on the tank shell in gained via design analytical equation of standard
several patterns can lead to a reduction in the and they fluctuate in a parallel way (Figure 6). In
amount of displacement in mentioned location. additional, the amount of hoop membrane stress
Installing a stiffening with T-section and gained via numerical method is 9% less than
dimensions of 0.5 m× 0.2 m× 0.01 m (larger side analytical way. The studies on stability of the
or web of T is perpendicular to the shell) at a tank represents that installing a boxlike
height of 2.445 m from the bottom of the tank stiffening ring in tank shell can conclude to an
can result in reducing the amount of deflection improvement of 72% in buckling strength in the
up to 19.4 mm (Figure 9). tank shell.

REFERENCES
API STD 620. Recommended rules for design and
construction of large, welded, low-pressure
storage tanks. Washington, DC, USA:
American petroleum institute 2012.
API STD 650. Welded tanks for oil storage.
Washington, DC, USA: American petroleum
institute 2010.
ASME STD Sec VIII. Rules for construction of
Figure 9: Using stiffening with T-section pressure vessels. New York. American society
(magnification 100). of mechanical engineers 2013.
Using a band of 1m × 0.04 m and boxlike Carluccio AD. Structural characterisation and
stiffening ring with dimensions 1 m × 0.5 m× seismic evaluation of steel equipments in
0.05 m (larger side is perpendicular to the shell) industrial plants. University of Naples
at the mentioned height, can reduce the rate of “Federico II” 2007;pp:106-110.
deflection respectively up to 13.15 mm and 6 Dupuis G, Goel J. A curved finite element for thin
mm that is shown in Figures 10 and 11. elastic shells. International journal of
structure 1970;6(11):1413-1428.
Eslami MR, Alizadeh, SH. Mixed galerkin finite
element analysis of non-axisymmetrically
loaded spherical shells. Scienta Iranica
1994;1(2):101-109.
Grafton PE, Strome DR. Analysis of
axisymmetrical shells by the direct stiffness
method. AIAA Journal 1963;1(10):2342-
2347.
Housner GW. Earthquake pressure on fluid
containers. A report on research conducted
Figure 10: Using band to reduce the deflection under contract with the office of naval
(magnification 100). research. California institute of technology.
Earthquake research laboratory 1954.
Irani F, Fathi KA. Free vibration analysis of shells
via FEM. International journal of engineering
sciences, Iran University of Science and
Technology 2001;12(2):111-125. [In
Persian]
Long B, Garner B. Guide to storage tank and
equipment. Professional engineering
publishing 1961;pp:263-274.
McGrath RV. Stability of API standard 650 tank
shells. Proceeding of the American Petroleum
Figure 11: Using boxlike stiffening ring to Institute,Section III- Refining, American
reduce the deflection (magnification 100).
672 Naddaf Oskouei and Nazari Naghani, 2014
Petroleum Institute, New York 1963;43:458-
469.
Novozhilov VV. Thin shell theory. Noordhoff Ltd.
Netherlands 1964.
Rahgozar R, Sohi SG, Javanmardi M. Static
analysis of thin shells of revolution via FEM.
Second conference on thin shell structures.
Kerman, Shahid Bahonar Univercity
2005;pp:227-242. [In Persian]
Shakeri M, Eslami MR, Babayi R. Elastic analysis
of conical shells under impact load.
International congress on computation
methods in engineering, Shiraz University
1993;pp:27-33.
Sokolnikoff IS, Redheffer RM. Mathematics of
physics and modern engineering. McGraw-
Hill, New York, 1966.
Ugural AC. Stresses in plates and shells. McGraw-
Hill, New York 1981;pp:199.
Vlasov VZ. General theory of shells and its
applications in engineering. NASA TTF-99
1964.