Analysis and Design of Vertical Vessel Foundation
Analysis and Design of Vertical Vessel Foundation
Analysis and Design of Vertical Vessel Foundation
FOUNDATION
A thesis
Submitted by
M.S.SRIKANTH (109CE0462)
BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY
in
CIVIL ENGINEERING
1
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that this report entitled, “Analysis and design of ve rtical vessel foundation”
fulfillment of the requirement for the award of Bachelor of Technology Degree in Civil
To the best of my knowledge, the matter embodied in this report has not been submitted to any
2
ACKNOWLWDGEMENT
We would like to give our deepest appreciation and gratitude to Prof. Pradip Sarkar, for his
invaluable guidance, constructive criticism and encouragement during the course of this project.
Grateful acknowledgement is made to all the staff and faculty members of Civil Engineering
Department, National Institute of Technology, Rourkela for their encouragement. I would also
like to extend my sincere thanks to my M.Tech senior Mr. K.Venkateswara Rao for his help. In
spite of numerous citations above, the author accepts full responsibility for the content that
follows.
3
ABSTRACT
Vertical vessels are massive structures used in oil industries which store oil and different fluids.
Due to the massiveness of the structure and pedestal considerations, an octagonal foundation is
designed in place of a simple rectangular footing. The design includes analyzing of loads from
superstructure, design of base plate and foundation bolt, design of pedestal and footing. The
design of pile is not considered in the present study. The main objective of the study is to
evaluate the manual method of design procedure. The same footing is modeled in different
commercial finite element software. Performance of the designed foundation as obtained from
the finite element analysis is then compared with that obtained from manual calculations.
Maximum moment obtained from the software for the given support forces are found to be
higher than those calculated manually according to Process Industry Practices guideline.
Therefore, the design process outlined in PIP underestimates the bending moment demand as per
the present study. However the present study is based on one typical case study. There is a
provision for repeating this study taking into consideration a large number of foundations with
4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CERTIFICATE 2
ACKNOWLWDGEMENT 3
ABSTRACT 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS 5
LIST OF TABLES 9
LIST OF FIGURES 10
NOTATIONS 11
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background 13
1.2 Objectives 13
2.1 General 15
5
2.2.4 Eccentric loads 16
4.1 General 25
4.2.1 Superstructure 26
4.8 Reinforcement 33
5.1 General 35
6
5.2 FE analysis based on STAAD Pro 36
5.4 Design 40
6.1 General 42
6.2.1 Pedestal 42
6.2.3 Footing 43
6.4 Discussions 44
7.1 Summary 45
7.2 Conclusions 45
REFERENCES46
7
LIST OF TABLES
8
LIST OF FIGURES
9
NOTATIONS
h ef Depth of embedment
SR Stability Ratio
I Moment of Inertia
T Tension
k Slenderness ratio
nd Number of dowels
11
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
Vertical vessels find their application usually in oil and gas industries. They contain a number of
trays which are designed for mixing between a rising gas and a falling liquid. The vessel is
similar to a horizontal drum that comprises of two dished heads, one at the top and one at the
bottom. It is supported by a skirt which is welded to the bottom head. Skirt is a cylindrical steel
shell which rests on the reinforced concrete foundation.
It is due to the massive structure and large capacities of the vessels for which octagonal
foundations are preferred. The monopoles are also designed with octagonal foundations
underneath. The design includes analyzing of loads from superstructure, design of base plate and
foundation bolt, design of pedestal and footing. The design of pile is kept outside the scope of
the study.
1.2 OBJECTIVES
Prior to defining the specific objectives of the present study, a detailed literature review was
taken up. This is discussed in detail in the next chapter. The main objectives of the present study
have been presented as follows.
1. Analyze and Design vertical vessel foundation using manual calculation available in
literature.
Chapter 1 has presented the background, objective and scope of the present study.
Chapter 2 starts with a description of various load cases and different design considerations to be
taken into account for foundation design.
Chapter 4 discusses the manual calculation of design of anchor bolts, pedestal and the footing
using the available literatures.
Chapter 5 shows the design results of the octagonal footing by manual calculation and with the
help of finite element software.
Finally chapter 6 presents summary, significant conclusions from this study and future scope of
research in the area.
13
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 GENERAL
In this section a general study on the different type of loads and load combinations is carried out
using the STE03350 - Vertical Vessel Foundation Design guide and various other literatures
available. The most relevant literature available on the study of different load cases has been
reviewed and presented in this Chapter.
Different loads are taken into account while analyzing the superstructure i.e. the various vertical
loads, the horizontal wind loads and the eccentric loads.
Structure dead load- It is the sum of weights of the pedestal, footing and the overburden
soil.
Erection dead load- It is the fabricated weight of the vessel taken from the certified vessel
drawing.
Empty dead load- It is the load coming from the trays, insulations, piping, attachments
taken from the drawings.
Test dead load- It is the load coming from the empty weight of the vessel and that of the
test fluid (usually water) required for hydrostatic test.
Operating dead load- It is the weight of the empty vessel plus the weight of the operating
fluid during service conditions.
Wind load- It is the wind pressure acting on the surface of the vessel, piping and other
attachments of the vessel.
14
Seismic load- The horizontal earthquake load is applied 100 % in one direction and 30 %
on the orthogonal direction.
Live loads are taken into account as per STE03350 - Vertical Vessel Foundation Design
guidelines. Live loads would not typically control the design of the foundation.
Eccentric vessel loads must be taken into account which is caused by large pipes and boilers.
15
CHAPTER 3
Calculation of static wind load is based on IS 875 Part 3: 1987 considering the vessel as general
structure with mean probable design life of 50 years.
and considering vessel site to be located on sea coast terrain, category 1 is considered for the
wind load calculation.
Since the vessel is 21.6m high, the size class structure is considered as class B.
V max = 20 km/hr
= 6.556 m/s
Wind load on the vessel will be increased due to the presence of platform, ladder and other
fittings (5 % increase in the wind load)
For computing wind loads and design of the chimney, the total height of the vessel is divided
into 3 parts.
= 0.243×10 kN
16
Moment due to the wind force at the base and part1
M1 = (h-20)dh
= 19.5 kNm
Bending stress at the extreme fiber of the shell at 30m level fmo1 = 1.05 M1 / Z 1
= 18 Mpa
P 2a =
= 11.23 kN
P 2 = 11.23 + 2.43
= 13.66 kN
Moment due to the wind force at the base of part-2 (at 16m)
M 2a = d×(h-12)×dh
= 20.31 kNm
17
M 2b = d×(h-12)×dh
= 45.2 kNm
M 2 = 65.55 kNm
f mo2 = 1.05 M 2 / Z 2
= 137.65 KN/ m2
Part 3 ( 0m-12m)
d = 1.3m
P a=
= 2.55 kN
P b=
= 12.5 kN
= 28.7 kN
18
Moment due to the wind force at the base of the part 3,
Ma= d×(h-0)×dh
= 47.9 kNm
Mb= d×(h-0)×dh
= 180 kNm
Mc= d×(h-0)×dh
= 28.13 kNm
M d= d×(h-0)×dh
= 90.62 kNm
M 3 = 346.65 kNm
Z = 0.5 m3 ( at level of 0m )
= 72.8 MPa
19
3.2 SEISMIC LOAD ANALYSIS
=0.281
= 0.264×10 MPa
2
Denominator = dh
= h2 dh
2
= dh
=31.48KN
=62.9MPa
Increase of 33.33% in allowable stress is allowable stress is allowed for Earthquake load
2
= .Vb.(h-12).dh)/Denominator
=412.4MPa
= 100.569MPa
Increase of 33.33% in allowable stress is allowable stress is allowed for Earthquake load
2
= .Vb.(h-0).dh)/Denominator
2
= .Vb.(h-0).dh)/Denominator
= 812.53 KN-m
=5.254×10 MPa
Increase of 33.33% in allowable stress is allowable stress is allowed for Earthquake load=
Fundamental period of vibration for this chimney is calculated as per IS 1893 Part 4 to check the
vessel design against dynamic load.
21
= 0.163×10 m2
= 0.45m
= 46.96
= 84.52
= 25.6 KN
= 153.94 KN
= 2.72 s
= 3.68×10-1 Hz
= 2.3897 m/s
= 43.68 m/s
22
Velocity range for resonance :
As critical velocity doesn’t lie within this range of resonance limit,the vessel need not be
checked for the resonance.
23
CHAPTER 4
MANUAL CALCULATION
4.1 GENERAL
Using the available literature, the foundation is analyzed and designed manually. The
assumptions, procedure and logic have been discussed in this Chapter.
Modulus of elasticity of the material of the material of structural shell: Es = 2×105 MPa
Assume Imposed load and wt. of Platform, access ladder = 20% of the self- weight of the
chimney shell
24
4.2.1 SUPERSTRUCTURE DATA
THICKNESS 0.4 m
HEIGHT 21.6m
MATERIAL STEEL
WIND LOAD 48 KN
Diameter of bolt = 45 mm
ACI 318 requires anchors that will be torqued should have a minimum edge distance of 6d 0
= 6×45
= 0.27m
= 1.7 + 0.24
= 1.94m
Concrete pedestal supporting the vertical vessel shall be sized according to the following:
d1 = BCD + 7 in
25
d2 = BCD + 8d0
d1 and d2 come out to be 2.12m and 2.3m. We have assumed the dimension of pedestal to be
2.48m which satisfies both the conditions being greater than d 1 and d2 .
= 12×0.045
= 0.54m
Let us assume h ef as 1m
According to ACI 318, min. embedment depth above ground level h proj-ped = 0.3m
= 204 KN
= 866.8 KN
= 1.6×866.8
= 1386.88 kNm
Assuming no of dowels n d = 40
= 0.248×10 – 6in
26
= 2.32m
= 210 + 204
= 414 KN
= 5.046×10 KN
Therefore the area reqd for each of the dowels As reqd = F u /α× f ys
= 135.10 mm2
As provided = π×162 /4
= 201.062 mm2
= π×2.32 / 40
= 0.182m
The pedestal shall have a reinforcing grid of 16mm diameter @ 180 mm c/c each way to prevent
potential concrete cracking.
Provide tie 12mm tie set (2 tie per set) @ 300 mm c/c
Considering the bolts are of ductile steel, strength reduction factor for the anchor = 0.75 (for
tension)
As Indian code doesn’t have specific requirement for design of anchor bolts, ACI 318:2005 is
followed for the anchor bolt design.
= 305.362 KN
BCD = 1.94m
Let number of bolts required (support moment increased by 50 % from stability consideration)
be n b
= 9.52
Footing having least dimension across sides that is equal to greater than 2m shall be octagonal in
shape. Assuming a trial depth of the footing h foot = 0.4m
= 790 + 48 ×(1.6+0.4)
= 886 kNm
= 2.6 [886/150]1/3
= 4.7 m
= 2.982×10 m2
= 298.2 KN
= 578.448 KN
Total weight of vessel, pedestal, soil and footing W = P base + W soil + W ped + W foot
= 1290.648 KN
= 1.2 m
= 12 KN / m2
Total upward force on the footing due to water P water = 12×A foot
= 357.84 kN
29
Fig 1: Plan of pedestal and foundation (ref. STE03350 - Vertical Vessel Foundation Design
Guide)
= 1290.648 – 357.84
= 932.808 kN
= 886 / 932.808
= 9.49×10-1 m
= 6 / 2×0.949
30
4.6 CALCULATION OF SECTION MODULUS OF OCTAGONAL FOUNDATION
Section modulus is given by Z = I / y where ‘I’ is the moment of inertia about the centroidal axis
and ‘y’ is the distance of extreme fiber from the neutral axis.
whereas for the case of octagonal foundation, calculation of Z becomes very difficult. We take
the help of ratio of stability vs e/D for indirectly arriving at the section modulus.
Fig 2. Graph for calculation of L diag of octagonal footing. ref. STE03350 - Vertical Vessel
Foundation Design Guide
= 0.158
31
Corresponding from chart L diag = 2.5
= 2.5×932 / 29.82
4.8 REINFORCEMENT
M u = 1.6 M foot
= 1.6×886
= 1417.6 kNm
P u = 0.9 W
= 0.9×1290.65
= 1161.58 kN
= 1.22 m
e u / d foot = 1.22 / 6
= 0.203
From STE03350 - Vertical Vessel Foundation Designguide fig-b , foundation pressure for
octagonal base (table 2)
L = 4.503
= 0.4935×6
= 2.96 m
= 6 – 2.96
32
= 3.04 m
= 4.503×1161.58 / 29.82
= 1.75×10-1 MPa
= (5.092)1/2
= 2.26 m
Projection of the footing edge to the pedestal face b proj = (d foot – b eq)/ 2
= 1.87 m
Pressure at the face of the equivalent square pedestal f ped_face = f u (X comp – b proj)/ X comp
= 6.8×10-2 MPa
M u footing = [f ped_face×b foot ×b proj 2 / 2] + [0.5×(f u – f ped_face)b proj × b foot ×2/3 b proj ]
= 118.89 + 124.73
= 243.73 kNm
= 340 mm
= 2.11 MPa
f ck = 20 MPa
Area reqd for tensile reinforcement = 0.5 fck / fys [ 1 – (1- 4.6 Mu / f ck b foot d foot 2 )1/2 ]
= 2312.95 mm2
= 135.82 mm
33
Providing 8 Y20 bars @ 130 mm c/c each way at the bottom of the footing
Pressure at a distance ‘d’ from the face of the equivalent square pedestal:
F beam_shear = F u (Xcomp-bproj+dfoot_eff)/Xcomp
=.087MPa
Shear force at a distance ‘d’ from the face of the equivalent square pedestal for 1m width.
=200.43 kN
=.59 MPa
= 1.4×1290.48/ 29.82
= 0.0605 MPa
Shear stress at a distance d/2 from the face of the equivalent square pedestal for width,
= 1695.476 kN
Shear stress τ punch = V u_punch / {4(b eq + d foot eff )×d foot eff }
= 0.093 MPa
= 1.11 MPa
34
CHAPTER 5
5.1 GENERAL
Finite Element (FE) analysis is carried out on the foundation designed based on manual method
to evaluate the validity of the manual calculation method outlined in PIP design guideline.
STAAD-Pro and STAAD foundation are used for reinforcement design whereas PLAXIS is used
to check the soil stability. This chapter presents the results obtained from the FE analysis.
The tables below show all modelling parameters and material properties for design in STAAD
Pro.
36
5.2.2 STAAD GENERATED MESH OF PEDESTAL AND FOOTING
37
5.2.3 LOAD CASES DETAILS
38
Table 5 Node Reaction Summary
39
Fig.6 Modeling in STAAD Foundation
5.4 DESIGN
The following files depict the design of pedestal and footing in STAAD Foundation.
Pedestal Design
40
Footing Design
41
CHAPTER 6
6.1 GENERAL
In the present chapter the design results are presented which is an outcome from the manual
calculation done in the previous chapter. This chapter presents the results and discussions of the
study.
6.2.1 PEDESTAL
SIZE 2.48m
LENGTH OF EACH SIDE 1.03m
LENGTH OF DIAMETER 2.68m
DEPTH BELOW GROUND LEVEL 1.3m
PROJ. ABOVE GROUND LEVEL 0.3m
AREA 5.09m2
GRADE 4.6
DIAMETER 45mm
YIELD CAPACITY 400 MPa
TENSILE STRENGTH 240 MPa
42
6.2.3 FOOTING
Table 8: Footing data for the vertical vessel
SIZE 6m
LENGTH OF EACH SIDE 2.485m
LENGTH OF DIAMETER 6.5m
HEIGHT 0.4m
AREA 29.82m2
The analysis of the foundation is carried out using plaxis software to check whether the soil
underneath is failing under shear or not. In our case no shear failure of soil is seen.
IDENTIFICATION SAND
MATERIAL MODEL MOHR-COULOMB
MOIST UNIT WEIGHT 18 KN/m3
COHESION 0.2 KN/m2
ANGLE OF INTERNAL FRICTION 30ο
POISSION’S RATIO 0.35
44
CHAPTER 7
7.1 SUMMARY
The objective of the present report is identified as to evaluate the manual method of design
procedure as given in Process Industry Practices for vessel foundation. To achieve this analysis
case study of a typical vertical vessel superstructure is carried out considering wind and seismic
loads. Then the foundation of the vessel is designed with the base forces using the manual
method given in Process Industry Practices. This includes design for the anchor bolts, pedestal
and footing. The footing is checked for one-way and punching shear, stability and soil bearing.
The same foundation modeled in different commercial finite element software (STAAD-Pro,
STAAD-Foundation and Plaxis) and analyzed. Performance of the designed foundation as
obtained from the finite element analysis is then compared with that obtained from manual
calculations.
7.2 CONCLUSIONS
1) Maximum bending moment obtained from the FE software for the given support
forces are found to be higher than those calculated manually according to Process
Industry Practices guideline. Therefore, the design process outlined in PIP
underestimates the bending moment demand as per the present study. This may be
due to the modeling of soil stiffness in the FE software.
1) The present study is based on one typical case study. There is a provision for
repeating this study considering a large number of foundations with varying
parameters to arrive at a more comprehensive conclusion.
45
REFERENCES
46