Title:
Predicting Behavior of Condeep Storage Cells Using Classical Theory of Shells
Author(s):
Amr I. I. Helmy and Michael P. Collins
Publication:
Structural Journal
Volume:
114
Issue:
6
Appears on pages(s):
1457-1469
Keywords:
Classical Theory of Shells; Compatibility Analysis Method; Condeep; gravity-based structure; Modified Compression Field Theory; offshore structures; reinforced concrete; shear strength
DOI:
10.14359/51700914
Date:
11/1/2017
Abstract:
A theoretical approach, based on the Classical Theory of Shells modified to account for the nonlinear behavior of reinforced concrete, is presented to calculate the deformation and internal forces in storage cells under axisymmetrical loads. An analysis method based on the compatibility conditions within the structure is presented that accounts for the material nonlinear behavior by tracking the bending moment-curvature response using the secant stiffness modulus of elasticity. The program LNADS (Linear and Non-linear Analysis of Domes and Shells) is developed based on the compatibility approach and is geared toward a flexural failure. The deformation results of this analysis were in good agreement with the experimental observations during a pressure test on a 1:13 scale model of a Condeep storage cell. The internal forces, predicted by LNADS, were used to check against imminent shear failure using the Modified Compression Field Theory, suggesting a flexural shear failure at the top of the cell wall at 423 ft (129 m) head of seawater. The program LNADS had fairly predicted the actual failure load of the 1:13 scale model. The compatibility analysis method can provide accurate predictions for the deformation and internal forces at critical sections in a storage cell, and can provide the design engineer with a quick alternative to global nonlinear finite element analysis of storage cells subjected to axisymmetric loading.
Related References:
1. Jakobsen, B., and Rosendahl, F., “The Sleipner Platform Accident,” Structural Engineering International, V. 4, No. 3, 1994, pp. 190-193. doi: 10.2749/101686694780601971
2. Collins, M. P.; Vecchio, F. J.; Selby, R. G.; and Gupta, P. R., “The Failure of an Offshore Platform,” Concrete International, V. 19, No. 8, Aug. 1997, pp. 29-35.
3. Gausel, E.; Gjørven, A.; and Sjursen, A., “MARBET Model Statfjord A,” FCB Report 76-12, Cement and Concrete Research Institute, Norwegian Institute of Technology, University of Trondheim, Trondheim, Norway, 1977, 126 pp.
4. Koltuniuk, R. M., “Investigating the Influence of High Water Pressure on Cracked Surfaces of Offshore Concrete Structures, MASc thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada, 1990.
5. Helmy, A., “Behaviour of Reinforced Concrete Cylinders Subjected to External Hydrostatic Loading,” MASc thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada, 1993, 169 pp.
6. Helmy, A. I. I., and Collins, M. P., “Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Cylindrical Shells Subjected to External Hydrostatic Water Pressure,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 113, No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 2016, pp. 1031-1042. doi: 10.14359/51689025
7. Helmy, A., “Behaviour of Offshore Reinforced Concrete Structures under Hydrostatic Pressure, PhD thesis, Department of Civil Engineering. University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada, 1998, 217 pp.
8. Helmy, A. I. I., and Collins, M. P., “Behavior of Storage Cells in Condeep Structure under Hydrostatic Pressure,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 113, No. 4, July-Aug. 2016, pp. 839-850. doi: 10.14359/51688824
9. Kuchma, D. A.; Tamas, J.; and Collins, M. P., “Strength of Upper-Dome Cell-Wall Connection of Concrete Offshore Structures,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 96, No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 1999, pp. 683-692.
10. Tamas, J., “The Effects of Reinforcement Detailing on the Strength of the Dome-Cell Wall Connection in Offshore Concrete Platforms,” MASc thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada, 1995, 174 pp.
11. Helmy, A., and Collins, M. P., “Predicting the Behavior of Storage Cells in Early Condeep Structures,” Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, V. 43, No. 7, 2016, pp. 643-656. doi: 10.1139/cjce-2015-0355
12. Flügge, W., Stresses in Shells, first edition, Springer Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 1960, 499 pp.
13. Timoshenko, S. P., Theory of Plates and Shells, first edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1940, 492 pp.
14. Kreyszig, E., Advanced Engineering Mathematics, fourth edition, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1979, 939 pp.
15. Chorlton, F., Ordinary Differential and Difference Equations, D. Van Nostrand, London, UK, 1965, 484 pp.
16. Clayton, N., “Fluid-Pressure Testing of Concrete Cylinders,” Magazine of Concrete Research (London), V. 30, No. 102, 1978, pp. 26-30. doi: 10.1680/macr.1978.30.102.26
17. Clayton, N., “Strain of Concrete Cylinders Subjected to Fluid Pressure,” ACI Journal Proceedings, V. 77, No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 1980, pp. 332-339.
18. Vecchio, F. J., and Collins, M. P., “The Modified Compression-Field Theory for Reinforced Concrete Elements Subjected to Shear,” ACI Journal Proceedings, V. 83, No. 2, Mar.-Apr. 1986, pp. 219-231.
19. Collins, M. P., and Mitchell, D., Prestressed Concrete Basics, first edition, Canadian Prestressed Concrete Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 1987, 614 pp.
20. Collins, M. P., and Mitchell, D., Prestressed Concrete Structures, first edition, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1991, 766 pp.
21. Felber, A. J., “Response: A Program to Determine the Load-Deformation Response of Reinforced Concrete Sections,” MASc thesis. Department of Civil Engineering. University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada, 1990.
22. Adebar, P., and Collins, M. P., “Shear Strength of Members without Transverse Reinforcement,” Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, V. 23, No. 1, 1996, pp. 30-41. doi: 10.1139/l96-004
23. Collins, M. P.; Bentz, E. C.; and Vecchio, F. J., “Simplified Modified Compression Field Theory for Calculating Shear Strength of Reinforced Concrete Elements,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 103, No. 4, July-Aug. 2006, pp. 614-624.