Lid induced sloshing suppression and evaluation of wall stresses in a liquid storage tank including seismic soil‐structure interaction

Abstract

Aboveground liquid storage tanks are often found on weak compressive soil due to their proximity to harbours and rivers. These soil conditions lead to a high probability of significant soil‐structure interaction (SSI) under earthquake loading. In strong earthquakes, the transient partial separation of the tank base from the supporting medium (uplift) and chaotic liquid sloshing often cause damage to the tank wall. This experimental research determines the simultaneous effects of SSI and the restriction of sloshing on the development of hoop and axial stresses in the tank wall. A low‐density polyethylene tank with two different supporting foundation conditions, that is rigid and flexible, was tested using a shake table. A high‐density foam floating lid was utilised as a barrier to the development of sloshing enabling evaluation of the contribution of sloshing to wall stress development. The maximum experimentally determined stresses are compared with those from a nonlinear elastic spring‐mass model. The results reveal that a flexible supporting medium reduces the development of stresses by increasing the occurrence of uplift compared to that when the tank lies on a rigid supporting medium. Furthermore, restricting chaotic sloshing decreases both the maximum stress and uplift. The spring‐mass model predicts the maximum stresses with more accuracy when the tank is on a flexible than on a rigid supporting medium.

Experimental evaluation of the role of slenderness in seismic behaviour of bridges with rockable footing

“…Experimental studies have also been performed to reveal the influence of the rocking footing. Research by Hernandez-Hernandez et al, 21,22 for example, investigated the influence of rocking on the seismic behaviour of water tanks. Their result showed that the flexibility of the support has different influences on the top displacements and accelerations of tanks depending on the slenderness.…”

A risk‐targeted seismic performance assessment of elephant‐foot buckling in walls of unanchored steel storage tanks

“…19,21 The seismic performance of structures depends on the ground motion intensity, as was also observed for storage tanks. 7,12,16,20 It is known that ground motion intensity at the site is, to some extent, affected by the site properties 23 Passeri et al 24 reported that the soil deposit properties affect the site response and the seismic action at the ground surface and thus, for example, at the structure foundation elevation. However, the authors used different ground motion intensity measures (IMs) for seismic hazard study.…”

Study on the Influence of Earthquakes with Different Frequency Content on the Peak Liquid Sloshing Wave Height of Liquid Storage Tank

“…In severe destructive earthquake disasters, liquid storage tanks will not only cause severe direct damage, but also will be highly likely to induce more serious secondary disasters. For example, a large number of oil storage tanks were damaged and caused explosions and fires in the 1994 Niigata earthquake in Japan, a large number of water storage tanks were damaged in the 1976 Tangshan earthquake in China, causing drinking difficulties for residents, and the leakage of nuclear material storage tanks at the Fukushima nuclear power plant in the 2011 earthquake in Japan has now threatened the global ecological environment, etc [2][3][4]. The liquid medium in the storage tank will generate hydrodynamic pressure under the action of seismic force, compared with other solid structures, the damage mechanism of liquid storage tank under seismic force is relatively more complex.…”