2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2021.106673
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Earthquake-induced nonlinear sloshing response of above-ground steel tanks with damped or undamped floating roof

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To facilitate vulnerability assessments of ASTs, several fragility models have been developed for ASTs that can estimate the probability of AST failure for given hazard conditions. There have been studies on AST performance during seismic hazards at the individual tank level [12][13][14][15][16][17] and at the regional level for a portfolio of tanks [18,19]. These studies mainly deal with tank responses to the sloshing of tank content and failure due to the buckling of tank shells and/or the failure of anchor chairs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To facilitate vulnerability assessments of ASTs, several fragility models have been developed for ASTs that can estimate the probability of AST failure for given hazard conditions. There have been studies on AST performance during seismic hazards at the individual tank level [12][13][14][15][16][17] and at the regional level for a portfolio of tanks [18,19]. These studies mainly deal with tank responses to the sloshing of tank content and failure due to the buckling of tank shells and/or the failure of anchor chairs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nowadays, accurate solution to 3D problems is interesting (Sun et al, 2021). New methods of SPH modeling of challenging fluid–structure interaction (Sun et al, 2021), flexible structures based on the continuum-based shell element (Han et al, 2021), etc., are developed (Bellezi et al, 2022; Cui et al, 2022; Hernandez-Hernandez et al, 2021; Kalliontzis, 2022; Liu et al, 2022a; Ma et al, 2022; Ozsarac et al, 2021; Suthar and Jangid, 2021; Xiao et al, 2022). Some of them need a one-way chase of solid motion because of fast loading such as earthquake-induced motions (Hernandez-Hernandez et al, 2021; Ozsarac et al, 2021) and some of them need optimization of FSI coupling constraints (Nakayama and Washizu, 1981).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…New methods of SPH modeling of challenging fluid–structure interaction (Sun et al, 2021), flexible structures based on the continuum-based shell element (Han et al, 2021), etc., are developed (Bellezi et al, 2022; Cui et al, 2022; Hernandez-Hernandez et al, 2021; Kalliontzis, 2022; Liu et al, 2022a; Ma et al, 2022; Ozsarac et al, 2021; Suthar and Jangid, 2021; Xiao et al, 2022). Some of them need a one-way chase of solid motion because of fast loading such as earthquake-induced motions (Hernandez-Hernandez et al, 2021; Ozsarac et al, 2021) and some of them need optimization of FSI coupling constraints (Nakayama and Washizu, 1981). Lattice Boltzmann method (LBM) (Xiao et al, 2022), SPH methods (Cui et al, 2022), ALE formulation (Kalliontzis, 2022), and high-order partitioned fluid–structure interaction framework (Liu et al, 2022b) also showed their efficiencies on FSI calculations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the research using the distributed mass model [19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27], the finite element method is generally used to establish the model of the liquid storage tank for liquid-structure coupling analysis. e tank wall is always regarded as the structure element, and the liquid is regarded as the fluid element.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%