5.0 Support for vertical vessels
t
(A) Tall Cylindrical Process Columns
\
t
• Supported on cylindrical or conical shells (ski s)
• The support skirts are directly welded to the v ssel bottoms head or shell
• The skirt base is stiffened by a continuous sti ening ring, which consists of top and bottom annulus plates with intermediate verti al stiffeners, to reduce localized bending stresses.
• They are designed as cantilever beams
(B) Small and medium sized vertical v ssels
• Supported on legs or lugs (brackets)
• Provision of good access to the bottom dished end and any nozzles located there
• Minimum thermal stresses arising from shell upport temperature gradient
Minimum diameter = 6" Maximum HID = 5" Maximum LID = 2"
Number of legs:
N 
= 3 for D < 3' 6" 
N 
= 4 (or more) for D > 3' 6" 
Maximum operating temperature = 650 ^{0} p
~7
,
,
'D
,
,
,
H
1
5.1
Leg Supports
• Supported on uniformly spaced leg supports
• Four legs are usually used
• Legs are normally fabricated from equal leg gle and T section shapes. They are welded to the cylindrical shell wall, often usi g a reinforcing pad.
• Some manufacturers prefer to use supports m de from pipe that is then welded to the dished end.
I
I
I
I
''''r''''
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
' ' ' ' i' '  ' ''
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
 .r ·  . .  . .
I
I
I
Two possible ways of welding the angled beam and Ibeam to the vessel. The choice is between "easy to weld" and "offering more flexural rigidity". Besides coldformed beams , sometimes a round pipe may be used as leg column, which has equal strength in all direction and has a high bending rigidity.
2
Loads on the vessel
1. The wind load (P _{w} ) is horizontal and acts at t e centroid of the projected exposed surface
2. The earthquake load (P _{e} ) acts horizontally on he center of gravity of the vessel
3. Piping or other equipment loads are not consi ered
Stress Analysis (to determine design di ensions)
• Supportleg columns
• Base plate
• Legtoshell weld size
• Legtoplate weld size
• Stresses in the vessel shell at supports
• Size of anchor bolts
SupportLeg Columns
In the case of 4leg support
Overturning moment (M _{D} ) at the base is about the diametral axis AA
Vertical reaction (due to dead load) = W I N
Vertical reaction (R) due to turning moment = Mg/D,
MD
~
(Db = Base diameter)
J~( ~
In the case of 3leg support
D
b
D b '
3
MD =R(+sm30)= RD b
224
=>
General expression:
.
R '"",,',
"
,
" , 120 ^{0}
 . ~
I
I
I
/i
I
::
b
R
1
7)1
3
Maximum load on the leeward side (compreSSioj side) is:
Co = Wo + 4Mb
N
C =W
T
o _{N}
ND b
(Operating condition)
(Test condition, no win loading)
Maximum axial load on the windward side (upli
Wo
_{T}
4Mb
=+ (operating condi ion)
o 
N 
ND _{b} 
T 
=_W e + 4Mb 

o 
N 
ND _{b} 
(empty)
The eccentric loads P1 and P _{2} at the column top are:
11 = ~ + ~
11 = W ^{T}
N
(operating condition)
(test condition)
Wo + 4M a
N ND
P2 =  We + 4 M a
D2 
1 
N ND
Lateral load (F) per column
(
operatmg con dition) rtion
.
(empty)
It is derived based on equal deflection at the top edge of the leg support .
• 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

· 

· 

· 

•· 

· 

· 

=> 
•· 
· 
For 4column leg support , IIi = 2Ix + 2I y
Column Stress ( designed in accordance with any structural codes)
4
Base plate
C
C ompresslOn stress = 
.
ab
B
d
· 11(d / 2)·( a/ 2)
.
ba~/12
en mg stress =
11(d/2)
=
2
ba 16
Compressive stress must be always greater than _{e} _{b}_{e}_{n}_{d}_{i}_{n}_{g} _{s}_{t}_{r}_{e}_{s}_{s}_{.}
1<
^{d}
Weld Size
)1
Shear stress = PI 1 (2L _{1} + h)
Bending moment on the weld joint
= C (d/2) + F (L/4)
Size of Anchor bolt
S
a
·A _{b} = ( ^{4}^{M} b
NDb
 WJ
N
1<
d
a
)1
b
h
^{L}^{I}^{r}^{:}^{:}^{:}^{}^{l}^{L}^{I} I g e;~ e tr y I
Anchor bolts are designed to resist the uplift force .
If W > 4M b, no uplift exists and the minimum bolt size % to 1 inch. Db
5
5.2
Bracket Supports (or Support Lug)
For vessels with small to medium diameters « 1 ft.) and heighttodiameter ratio 2.5
When the bracket or leg support is attached to th cylindrical shell, a longitudinal moment arises. In each case the vessel wall is su ject to the extemallongitudinal moment of 'Fd' where 'F' is the maximum react" on at the support and 'd' is the distance from the centerline of the support to the shell outside surface.
The stresses in the shell induced by the Bracket can be found by the local load method.
^{V}^{e}^{s}^{s}^{e}^{l}
Wall
Forces and stresses on the bracket
_{h}
: Top bar
I
~~I  ~~
_{F}
a
T
Vplate
Base plate
ta
Gusset

(
F/2 _{(}
^{b}
d
)
)
(d
^{~}
R
_{)}
( 
) 

F 
. d = R . d sin a 
R= 
F 

2 
2sina 
I
6
Maximum compressive stress (Sg) on the gusset ( r egarded as an eccentrically loaded plated)
I
s =
R
g (bsina).t g
+ 6Re
£t.t _{g}
where the force eccentricity,
I 

I 

i 

I 

I 

I 

e = (d  b)sina 
! 
2
Force and stress on the Top Bar
The top bar is assumed to be a simplysupported earn with uniformly distributed load Fd / ha
Maximum moment occurs at the midspan
M
m
ax
= ( Fd ) .~=Fda
ha
8
"
d
Ben mg stress =
6M
f
a
. C
8h
2
(2":::;c:::;8t _{a} )
7
6.0
Saddle Supported Cylindrical Vess Is
The code design of saddlesupported horizontal L.P. Zick (1951, The Welding Journal Research beam and ring analysis so that the mathematical results he had available.
ylindrical vessel follows the work of upplement) who used a modified odel agrees with the experimental
Most recent work has indicated that Zick's appr ch gives reasonable agreement only when a flexible saddle support is employed. Wh n the saddle is rigid the simple Zick's analysis significantly underestimate the peak str s in the vessel by a factor as much as
50%. 

6.1 
General considerations 
( a) 
Saddle supports should be located to cause minimum stress in shell and without additional reinforcement 
(b) 
Most vessels are supported on two saddle supports. The saddles have an embracing angle between 120 and 150 degrees. Any relative settlement of the supports does not change the support reactions, therefore, the stresses in the shell remain quite the same. 
(c) 
In the case of very long vessel that rested on more than two supports, the support reactions are calculated based on continuous beam theory and increased by 20 to 50% as a safety factor for relative support settlements. 
(d) 
The support reactions are highly concentrated and they induce highly localized stresses at the support regions. To reduce highly localized stresses, the saddle must be designed to provide flexibility at the supportshell junctions. Extended plates or wear plates may be used to provide a gradual transition of structural rigidity between the support and the vessel's shell. 
(e) 
One of the saddles should be designed at the base to provide free horizontal movement, thereby avoiding restraint due to thermal expansion. 
8
The Mathematical Model
4
.:
+
I
I
I
I
I Rorr
I
I
I
.  .  . . . . .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . ~ .  .  .  .  .

I
I
I
,
I
,
,
I
^{A} 

< 

~ 

^{<}^{,} 

WR2/4 2Hw / 3 

~ 
~ / 8 

A 
<
<
)
)1
Q
w
L
L
I
Shear force diagram
Q
 
 
' 

 

A 

< 
) 

, 

' 

^{2} 

3H / 8 . 

Q 
1<
A
)
>
H
~
.
~j
^{H}^{w} ^{/} ^{3} )WR2/4
~
Bending moment diagram
9
Points to note:
(1) 
The support reaction is Q  the total weigh is 2Q 

(2) 
The dished head is replaced by equivalent 
ylindrical segment of length 2H J 3. 

The weight of dished end is therefore = 2 w / 3, acting at a distance 3H J 8 from end of parallel 

(3) 
The total length is = L + 4H J 3 

(4) 
The uniform load has a intensity w = 2Q/( +4H/3) 

(5) 
The hydrostatic pressure that acts normal t the dished end creates a couple given by WR2/4 

6.2 
Longitudinal bending stresses in the she I 

(a) 
The bending moment at the midspan 
' 
2
M} =Hw
3
(3H
+
82
L)
wR2
wL L
+()+Q(A)
4
24
L
2
= QL [1+ 2(R ^{2}  H2)/ L2 _ 4A]
4
=K{~L)
1+(4H I 3L)
L
Bending stress at the midspan:
The above expression assumes that the full vessel section is available in resisting bending stresses and the cross section remains circular. For very thin vessels it is found that the cross section does not remain circular especially so during filling with liquid. Nevertheless, the expression gives satisfactory design dimensions for vessels with D/t ratio up to 1250.
(b) The bending moment at the saddlesupport
M2 =:": S+A
2
(3H
)
2
wR
+42
wA ^{2}
= QA[I 1 AI L + (R ^{2}  H ^{2} )/(2AL)] 1 + (4H /3L)
10
The top por t i o n of s h e l l a b ove the sa dd le s upp or t w ou l d f eform under l oa d and i s deemed ineffecti v e in r es i s tin g l o n g itudin a l mom e nt. So th e moment of iner t i a t t hi s cros s sect ion is r e duc e d to th a t o f a rin g with it s t o p po r ti o n rem ove d.
Th e
effecti ve a rc i s ass umed t o be :
2 i 1 = 2(8/2 + ~ 1 )
I
yJ:<J 0o ::
t, NA
 ~+~C_ ~ Eff ecti v e portion
The po s ition of th e n e utral ax i s , N. A . a nd th e se cond m o ment of area I a bout this a x i s c a n be found .
rsini1
_ 

y = 
C 
_{l} = r 
~
sini1
( ~

3 .
I = r t i 1 + sm i 1 co s i 1  2
[
s m.
2 A]
D .
~
J
c os A ,
Longitudinal bending stre s ses a t th e hi g he s t a nd l owes t point of the effec tive cross sec ti o n a r e:
. M )
SI =
I
·C )

Allowable stress limits
(
(
Highe s t point  tension)
L o w e s t point  compr ess ion )
The tensile stress combined with the press ure stress (pr/2t) should not e x ceed the allowable tensile stress for the shell material.
11
6.3
Shear stresses in the plane of the saddle
[
The distribution and magnitude of the shear stres s es in the shell in the plane of the saddle depend a great deal on ho w the shell is reinforced.
!
!
The 
inner 
shear 
force, 
_{T}_{h}_{e} 
_{o}_{u}_{t}_{e}_{r} 
_{s}_{h}_{e}_{a}_{r} 
_{f}_{o}_{r}_{c}_{e}_{,} 
V
=Q w ( A +
2 H)= ~(L2A )
3 f + 4H 1 3
i
v = w(A + 2 H) = 2Q( i + 2H 1 3)
3
L
4H / 3
Note: the inner shear force is greater then outer shear force when
Q(L  2A)
=
 :' ~ <
L+4H 1 3
2Q(A + 2H 1 3)
L+4H 1 3
or
L
> 4A +4H13
(A) Shell is stiffened by a ring at support region
If the shell is made rigid , the whole section is effective in resisting loadinduced shear stresses.
The shear flow (shear force per unit arc length) is:
v
.
d,
qo = SIlly
nr
(~ is measured from the top of the cross section)
The maximum stress flow is when ~ =90 degree.
= >
Max. shear stress = qo = Q [ L  2 A ]
t nrt L + 4 H 1 3
(B) Shell not stiffened by ring
When the shell is free to deform above the saddle , it is considered that the shear stress acts on a reduced cross section. The upper portion of the shell is considered ineffective.
The effective portion is assumed to be:
12
2~ = 2(e / 2 + jJ /20) =  19 (
20
J(  
())
2
i
I
As a result, the shears in the effective portion will be increased by a factor:
Factor C = qo(unstiffened shell) = r sin ^{2} ¢d¢ =
The
The
,
shear
shear
qo(stiffenedshell)
fsin 2 ¢d¢
flow , qo = C
"qo
stress, S2 = 
(
Vsin~)
nr
t
= c 
(Vsin¢)
srt
J(
J(a+sinacosa
The maximum shear is now at the tip of the saddle, i.e. ~ = a
(C) Shell stiffened by heads (A <Rl2)
If the saddle is close to the end closure the shell is stiffened on the side of the head. It is assumed that the shell above the horn (tip of saddle) is stiffened by the end closure. The shear distribution in this upper region is therefore similar to that for a stiffened region.
For the upper portion (0:::; ~:::; a):
_{S}_{h}_{e}_{a}_{r} _{s}_{t}_{r}_{e}_{s}_{s} _{=} _{~}_{s}_{i}_{n}
nrt
_{~}
13
For the lower portion  in the saddle region, (a::;! ~::; n) , the shear distribution can be found by summing the shears to one side of the saddle. The sum of vertical shear force for the upper portion is equal to the sum of vertic r l shear force in the lower portion.
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I 

I 

J 
 

I 

I 
Shear force near the en r closure
~rr 1
~
,
,

The vertical shear force,
V = 21iL(sin~)t(sin~)rd~ = Q (a  sinacosa)
o tirt
n
The shear flow is assumed to be the same as that for the unstiffened shell, that is:
The
The
shear
shear
flow , qo = c(Vsin~) nr
= ~.
Q (a  sin o.cosc.Isin e nr n
stress, S =  qo
= 
Q
a  smacosa
.
.
t tcrt n  a + smacosa
. sin ~
The maximum shear occurs at ~ = a
Allowable stress limits:
I
The tangential stress should not exceed 0.8 of the allowable tensile stress.
14
6.4
Ring compression in the shell over the saddle
Assuming that the surface of the shell and saddle are in frictionless contact without attachment. Ring compression is caused by shear forces.
The
ring compression in the region a :s; ¢ :s; J[
The shear flow is:
. d.(
v
q3 = smlf'
Jrr
1[
.
J[  a + smacosa
)
The total shear force at any point on the shell arc above that point.
¢
Total shear force = fq3rd¢ =
Q(cos¢  cosa)
.
a J[  a + smacosa
The contact pressure between the saddle and shell would induce a tangential compression force similar to the above. That is:
Tangential compression force due to saddle force = Q( cos¢  cos fJ) J[  fJ + sin j3 cos j3
Therefore , the maximum tangential force is = _
Q(1 + cos fJ) J[  fJ + sin f3 cos f3
The contact pressure can be de d uced from the tangential force:
Contact pressure =
1 Q(cos d.  cos /3)
= ' ''If'
~'
r J[  fJ + sin fJ cos fJ
The maximum contact
pressure occurs at ¢ = 7r
Max. contact force (at ¢ = 7r )
 
1

.
Q(l + cosb)
  =  '''
r n  0 + sinbcosf
15
The width of shell that resists this force was considered by Zick to be '5t' on each side plus the width of the saddle, i.e. width = b +  .
In a followup
paper, he suggested width = b + 1.16Jrl
I
The tangential stress can be calculated , S5 = shea ~ force / width
The stress S5 is important when concrete saddle Jused. It should be checked for large diameter vessel.
I
Recent experimental and theoretical work on sad les welded to the vessel have found that this tangential stress is very small, about 111 of that predicted by Zick's approach. However, for the saddle not welded to he shell, the Zick's approach gives the correct order of stresses.
The ring compression may be reduced by attaching a wea plate somewhat larger than the saddle surface area directly over the saddle.
Allowable stress limits
The compressive stress S5 should not exceed 1 / 2 of S , and is not additive to the pressure stress. If wear plate is used, the combined thickness of wear plate and the shell can be used to calculate S5, provided the wear plate extends r / I 0 inch beyond the horn.
Despite the limitations of Zick's approach it does provide a workable design method that has been used extensively over many years. However, the very high circumferential stresses known to exist at the saddle horn region when the vessel is supported on a rigid saddle at not predicted adequately by the analysis. Although these peak stresses do exist, they are very local to the saddle horn and are unlikely to cause plastic collapse of the support. However, their existence does cause concern when the vessel is subject to high cyclic stressing.
16
Local stresses in shell due to loads on attachment
I
Types of attachments: Nozzles, supporting lugs, i lifting brackets, etc.
!
Main concerns  High concentrated stresses at tHe attachment due to combined internal pressure and external loads applied through the attachment can be a source of failure if proper reinforcement is not supplied.
!
Design consideration:
i
• Opening in vessel shell must be reinforced or operating pressure
• Reinforcement is usually a rectangular or s uare pad welded to the shell
• Overreinforcement may create 'hard spot' on the vessel and induce large secondary stresses
• Reinforcement material should be close to he opening for effectiveness, of which 2/3 of the required material should b. within a distance d/4 from the opening, where d is the diameter of the opening.
• Sharp junctions should be avoided; fillets should be incorporated to reduce the magnitudes of stresses at the junctions.
"The best arrangement is the socalled balanced r e inforcement , which consi s t s of about 3540 % of the area on the inside and about 6065% on the outside. On man y designs , however , it is difficult to place reinforcement on the inside. Balanced reinforcement is often used at manway and inspection opening where no nozzle is attached"
Area Replacement for Nozzles
This method formed the basic design method in many design codes. The origin of the area replacement idea is not entirely clear. Simply expressed one replaces the area cut away by the cross section of the hole in the shell and relocates it around the hole close to the cutout. Notice it is an area replacement rather than a volume replacement.
The disposition of the replaced area is important. To be effective it needs to be close to the edge of the opening where the stress field is increased. The extent of the reinforcement is preferably equal the dieout distance of the peak stresses at the edge of the opening. That is why in some codes the extent of reinforcement is expressed as a function of Jrl, the characteristic length parameter for the dieout distance of the discontinuity stress. In any case one simply obeys the rules as stipulated and no explanation is given. It should be noted that the distance for reinforcement is generally quite shout.
17
Cylindrical vessel with local loads on a rectangular attachment
Assumptions:
• Attachments are rectangular or square w th two edges parallel to the circular profile
• The radial force produces uniform press re over the attachment area
• The moment loading produces a triangul r pressure distribution
External loads
(a) 
Radialload, P 
(b) 
Longitudinal moment , ML 
(c) 
Tangential (or circumferential) moment, 
(d) 
Torque, T 
(e) 
Shears V _{L} , V _{t} 
The shear stress in shell due to the torque Tis:
Maximum shear due to V _{L} or V _{t} is:
v
r'=_t_
Jrrot
r ri,
T
 2Jrr _{o} t  2Jrr;t
V
or  r,=_L_
Jrrj
The shear stresses rand t' are usually small enough to be disregarded.
Parameters for cylindrical shell:
Shell parameter: y = R I t or R I(t + t p)
Square attachment; ~ = cl R where 'c' is the halflength of the loaded area Cylindrical attachment: ~ = O.875ro / R Rectangular attachment: it can be converted into equivalent square loaded area. For small side ratios with a I b ::;1.5 , the equivalent c = Jab /2
General expression for stress in the shell
Circumferential (tangential) stress:
Longitudinal (axial) stress:
18
i
For different loadings, the circumferential and t l he longitudinal stresses are expressed
in different parametric
forms as follows:
I
(1) Radial load , P
0. =(;'XcP~;)y + 6;.]
=C _{p} (P l t ^{2} )
=
C ~ (P I t ^{2} )
(outward force)
(inward force)
i
(2)
Circumferential (tangential) moment, M,
u, {Nep
6Mep}
O"ep = t2 R~
(M _{t} I R2~)'Y + (M{ I R~)
= C _{t} (M _{t} 1(2 R2B )
(3)
Longitudinal moment , M L
&
Design considerations
(a) 
lfthe maximum stress at the attachment is too high, the shell must be reinforced by a reinforcing pad or the thickness of the reinforcing pad required for internal pressure must be increased. The width of the pad is such that stresses at the edges of the pad are below the allowable stress. 
(b) 
If two local loads are too close to eac h another, i.e. within the stress dieout distance, then their influence on each other must be considered. 
Note: The anal ys is presented above for loc a l loads applied on c y lindrical shell is too simplistic. More
detailed and accur a te anal y ses for different types of attachments are available in the literature and recommended b y d e sign codes, specific a lly for loads on the nozzle , and openings. For example , the Welding Research Council Bulletins 107 & 297 (WRC 107 & 297).
19
Design by analysis
Essentially Design by Analysis is based on the dea that if a proper stress analysis can be conducted then a better, less conservative, a sessment of the design can be made compared to the usual approach of Design by le. The philosophy was originated in the 1960's in the US. The motivation was drive by the sophisticated design work in the nuclear industry. There were many design £ atures that were not covered directly by the existing Design by Rule methods.
In the early years, all design by analysis ideas
analysis and in particular the analysis of discon inuity effects including thermal discontinuities.
ere developed based on thin shell
It was suggested that different types of stress h d different degrees of importance and this led to the idea of categorization of stress. T e stresses are cast in the form of 'stress intensities' to reflect the Tresca yield cri eria and then compared with specified stress limits that are set at different levels for the different stress categories. This methodology was first incorporated in ASME PV code Section III and Section VIII Division 2 in 1968 and later into BS 5500 as Appendix A. Many countries have now adopted the same basic approach.
Multiaxial Stress States
In real world, all stresses are threedimensional. It is the simplifying assumptions that reduce the 3D stresses into 2D and ID. Yielding in the presence of multiaxial stress states is not governed by the individual component but by some combination of all the stress components. The two commonly used yield criteria are the VonMises criterion and the Tresca criterion.
Von Mises criterion (distortion energy theory) states that yielding will take place when;
Tresca criterion (maximum shear stress theory);
= +0" 
y
/2
20
Although it is generally agreed that the Mises criterion is better for common pressure
steel , ASME chose
Analysis procedure. T he reas on is that Tresca is the more conser v ati v e
to a ppl y. The later i s longer true now since computer can perform compl e x
calculations a t ease .
to use the Tresca criterion as a framework
for the Design b y
and it i s easier
In order to avoid the unfamiliar (and unnecessary) operation of dividing both
calculated and yield stress by two , a new term called 'stress intensity' was defined.
T he stress differences of the principal stresses are as follow s :
The STRESS INTENSITY, S is the maximum absolute value of the stress difference.
That is:
So the Tresca criterion reduces to:
S=(J' _{y}
Throughout Design by Analysis procedure stress intensities are to be used.
Stress Categories
Certain t y pe s of s tre ss es a re more important than others and that thes e should be assigned to different categories with different levels of importance having different
s tre ss limits . ASME chooses the follo w in g cat e gori es :
(A) 
Primary Stress 

(i) 
General Primary Membrane Stress , Pm 

(ii 
) 
Local Primar y Membrane Stress, P _{L} 

(iii) 
Primary Bending Stress, P, 

(B) 
Secondary Stress , Q 

(C) 
Peak Stress , F 
Primary stress is a stress de v el o ped by t h e imposed loading that is necessary to satisfy the law of equilibrium between external and internal forces and moments. The basic characteristic of a prima r y s tress is that it is not selflimiting.
Not e : A s tress e d reg ion may by considered a s 'loc a l' if t he di s tan ce ov e r which th e str e ss in t ensit y
excee d 1.1 Sm does not exten d i n th e m e r i dion a l dire ctio n m ore t h a n 1.OJRt . Lo c al p rim ary
m e mbran e sourc es must b e 2.5J Rt apart. E xamples o f pr i mar y membran e sou r ces a re n oz zl e and
s upp o rt.
21
Secondary stress is stress developed by the selfconstraint of a structure. It must satisfy an imposed strain pattern rather than being in equilibrium with an external load. The secondary stress is selflimiting, its may cause local yielding and minor distortion resulting from discontinuity condition or thermal expansion.
Peak stress is the highest stress in the region under consideration. The basic
characteristic 
of a peak stress is that it causes no significant distortion and is 
objectionable 
mostly as a possible source of fatigue failure. 
Failure modes
1. Excessive elastic deformation incl ding elastic instability
2. Excessive plastic deformation
3. Brittle fracture
4. Stress rupture and creep deformati n
5. Plastic instability  incremental co lapse
6. High strain  low cycle fatigue
7. Stress corrosion
8. Corrosion fatigue
In setting the stress limits, however, attention is concentrated in 3 areas. They are:
( a) Avoidance of gross distortion or bursting, Pill' P _{L} and P,
(b) A voidance
(c ) Avoidance
of ratcheting, P _{L} + P, of fatigue, P+ Q
Relationship between stress limits to the various categories
Stress Intensity
General primary membrane, Pm
Allowable Stress
_{S}_{m}
_{E}_{q}_{u}_{i}_{v}_{a}_{l}_{e}_{n}_{t} _{Y}_{i}_{e}_{l}_{d}
_{2}_{S}
3
y
Local primary membrane, P _{L} 
_{1}_{.}_{5} _{S}_{m} 
_{S}_{y} 

Primary 
membrane + bending, 
_{1}_{.}_{5} _{S}_{m} 
_{S}_{y} 
(Pm + P _{b} ) or (P _{L} + P _{b} )
Primary + secondary
(P _{L} + P, + Q) or (Pm + P, + Q)
Fatigue,
_{(}_{P} _{L} _{+} _{P} _{b} _{+} _{Q} _{+} _{F}_{)} _{o}_{r} _{(}_{P}_{m} _{+} _{P} _{b} _{+} _{Q} _{+} _{F}_{)}
_{3}_{S} _{m}
2S _{a} (allowable fatigue stress range)
_{2}_{S} _{y}

The above limits are not always applicable; there are a number of special cases. In the case of nuclear vessels the service loadings are classified into normal, upset, emergency and faulted conditions. This is formalized in ASME with kfactors applied to the limits. For example, for earthquake loading, k = 1.2, for hydraulic test k =1.25, etc.
22
For attachments and supports the limits are:
The membrane stress intensity :S 1.2 Sm (0.8 S y ) Membrane + bending stress intensity s Sm (1.33 S y )
For nozzles and openings:
I
Membrane + bending stress intensity s i .25 S m (1.5 S y )
Some cautionary words are necessary for the u wary. The manner in which the symbolism is used can lead to confusion. For e ample a stress limit on some combination of stress categories denoted as CPL + P, + Q) needs to be clearly understood. It is the stress intensity evaluated om the principal stresses after the stresses for each category have been added tog ther in the appropriate way. It should not be interpreted as the combination of stress ~ ntensity from each category.
I
In summary: ONLY add stresses, DO NOT add stress intensities.
A trivial example of the wrong way of summing the stresses in given below:
Stresses 
_{P}_{m} 
Q 
_{P}_{m}_{+}_{Q} 

S 
x = 
S] 
10 
25 
35 

S 
y = 
S 2 
10 
5 
5 

S 
z = S3 
2 
0 
2 

The maximum 
stress 
intensity 
for 
P m = 12 
The maximum
The maximum stress intensity for (Pm + Q) = 37 (from [Pm + Q] column)
It is wrong to add stress intensities of Pm and Q, that would give (12 + 30) = 42
stress intensity for Q = 30
When we add stresses, of course, they need to be in the same directions and at the appropriate locations for the identified combination of loads. The approach is to evaluate all the stresses for the different types of loading. These should be assigned to categories as necessary. Then the stresses in the various categories should be summed and finally the stress intensities calculated for the particular combination of categories required.
23
FE Analysis for Pressure Vessel Desig
The Design by Analysis is closely rooted in thi shell discontinuity analyses. When
F E (finite element) method is used, some diffi ulties in stress categorization occur.
The FE gives accurate stress information for c mplex geometries. These stresses may vary nonlinearly through the thickness. For ass ssment purposes it is necessary to linearize the stress distribution and separate membrane and ben d ing effects. In a simple case the procedure would be straightforward and membrane, bending and peak elements of the stress could be identifies. Unfo unately things are not always so simple. Firstly the Linearization procedure is it elf subject to a number of uncertainties. Secondly the bending componen in general may include primary bending as well as secondary bending.
In practice it tends to assume the membrane str ss intensity as primary and the bending stress intensity as secondary (which m y not be conservative). In critical situation the designer may wish to impose his dwn conservatism at this point.
Until today no entirely satisfactory s olution has been found for the stress linearization. However, alterative methods may be forthcoming that would bypass the categorization problem or at least simplify its interpretation. The Standards allow the design to be based on limit load analysis with a suitable factor where the factor has to be the same as the main shell (i.e. 1.5). Design may proc e ed directly with a factor on load without detailed consideration of the stresses. The approach seems promising if it can be extended to complex loading situations it could provide a relatively simple alternative to the current classification route.
ASME identifies 8 modes of failure "which confront the pressure vessel designer." The evaluation of failure modes requires the computation of membrane and bending stresses and their classification into certain categories  primary, secondary and peak  to which different design allowable stresses applied.
The original techniques for evaluating the stress limits were based on shell theory by which membrane and bending stresses are determined directly  so there is no much confusion in the classification of stresses.
With the advent of finite element (FE) techniques, the transition from the stress distribution to the failure mode requires a different path.
The results of axisymmetric or 3D solid FE analysis are not immediately in a form suitable for the extraction of shell type membrane and bending stresses. Difficulties are associated with linearization procedure used to obtain membrane and bending stresses.
24
Unless we are dealing with well established ca es, as listed or referenced in codes, there has always been a problem w ith the cate orization of stresses into primary and secondary.
The problems of assessing primary and second ry stress failure modes and th e ir relationship to stress results from a xisy mmetri and 3D geometries were first addresses by Hechmer and Hollinger in 1986.
" 3 D s tre s s criteria  a w eak link in v e ssel d es i g n a nd a
l ys i s " , P V P Vo1.109 , A S y mposium on
A S ME C ode s a nd Rec e nt Ad v anc e s in PVP and Val ve Technolog y including a S ur v e y of
Operational Resea r ch Methods in E ngineering, July 19 6, ASM E, N e w Y or k, NY.
Three approaches for determining the membra e and bending stresses were discussed:
(i) 
stressatapoint 
(ii) 
stressalongaline , and 
(iii) 
stressonaplane. 
A quantitati v e comparison of the three approaches was presented in:
3D s tre ss cri ter ia  a pplication of Cod e rules , "PVP Vo1.120 , D e sign and A n aly si s of Piping, Pressure Vess els , and C omponents, Jul y 1987 , A SM E, N ew Yo r k , NY.
The study shows that the 3 approaches can gi v e substantially diff erent results. The most complex of the three approaches is stressonaplane. The definition of the plane for 3D geometries is subjecti v e and the resultant stresses and conclusions are merely engineering judgement.
Some issues:
It should be emphasized that these issues actually arise from the n ature of the Code
rules , rather from any deficiency in the finite element solution.
In 2D axisymmetric analyses , the bending stress can be calculated using component
normal and / or shear stresses or principal stresses. The distinction is that for a gi ve n set of geometric reference axes, component stress directions remain constant with
location and load application whereas principal stress directions vary with location and load application. This distinction is important when considering the pros and cons of using component ver s us principal stresses.
Which stresses are consistent with bending theory? Code implies that bending is applicable only to normal stress components, because the Code links bending to
bending moments. Mathematically, one can calculate linearized shear stresses and call
it a bending stress. However , it is difficult to conceptualize a bending moment for any shear stress in the realm of traditional engineering mechanics.
25
F or 3D geometries, the issue is evaluation of s I esses along lines versus on planes. The code implies evaluation along a line. H0 1 ever, the code does not preclude the use of planes.
Two PVRC grants were established to investigate and document the need to update the ASME B&PV and Piping Code criteria and re~uirements for relating 3D stress distributions to failure criteria. The findings ar 1 presented in the following paper.
J. , L. Hechmer and G.L. Hollinger, 3D Stress Criteria , J vPVol. 2102 , Codes and Standards and
Applications for Design and Analysis of Pre s sure vess ~ l and Piping Components, ASME 1991.
Recommendations
I
• The stresses for Pm can and should be calculated by simple equilibrium equations. The same is true for P _{b} if P m is small (for example, the plate structures). Stresses for Pm need only be evaluated in basic structural elements. Designer should apply his ingenuity to calculate equilibrium stresses, not to extract stresses from a general FE model.
• It is appropriate to calculate P _{L} stresses in the vicinity of all discontinuities. There are discontinuities where P _{L} stress exists, but need not be evaluated. Because code rule reinforcing rules ensure that PL limit is met.
o 
Nozzleshell junctions 
o 
Formed heads to shells 
o 
Cones to shells 
o 
Tapered cylinders to shells 
• Linearization algorithm calculates the net force distribution on the cross section. The average net force can be calculated from the total net force. The average net force is then subtracted from the net force distribution that is used to calculate the bending moment. The bending moment is computed relative to the neutral axis.
• Calculate (P _{L} + Pb) and (P + Q) in the basic structural elements (and not in the transition elements). The reason is that plastic collapse and gross strain concentration will not occur in the stiff transition elements. They will occur in the more flexible shell element.
If a fatigue analysis is to be performed within a transition elements due to high stress concentration, it may be appropriate to consider the (P + Q) in the adjacent structural elements.
• F or assessing the
membrane stress limits (P m + Pb), all the stress components (3
normal + 3 shear components) should be included. The average principal stresses
must be computed from the average stress components through the thickness and NOT from average principal stresses. That is: compute the average stress
components first then compute the principal stresses.
26
_{4}_{4}
Page 2 of24
Conventional bolts are usually made to the specific project requirements by steel fabricators or they may be purchased in standard sizes (diameters and lengths) from steel suppliers. The availability and cost of conventional bolts are generally based on demand and fabrication requirements. The types of conventional anchor bolts most often used are discussed below.
Headed Bolts. Square or hexheaded ASTM A 307 bolts are frequently used as anchor bolts due to their wide availability and relatively low cost (see Figure 1). Higher strength bolts , such as ASTM A 325 bolts , are available and can be used, but are more expensive. A washer placed against the bolt head is often used with the intention of increasing the bearing area and thus increasing the anchor strength. However, the actual strength increase obtained by adding a washer is small, if any, and under certain conditions (small edge distances), may actually decrease the tensile strength.
(::])
A) HEXHEAD
Headed Bolts
FIG. 1
Bent Bar Anchors. Bent bar anchors , frequently used in masonry construction , are usually made in "J" or "L" shapes (see Fig. 2). Even though the "J" and "L" shapes are the more popular, a variety of shapes (see Fig. 3) is available since there currently is no standard governing the geometric properties of bent bar anchors . These anchors are usually made from ASTM A 36 bar stock and are shopthreaded.
http://www.bia.org/BIA/technotes/t44.htm
3115/2008
44
Page 3 of24
T
o
v
~
.,_,,/_~ 1h TO 1% D
~ ,_~
~
A) Bl" BOLT
B) "J" BOLT
"L" and "J" Bent Bar Anchors
FIG.2
A) EYE BOLT
S) "U" BOLT
C) ACUTE BEND '~" BOLT
http://www .bia. org/BIA/technotes/t44 .htm
~
~IaI~0
_I T
311512008
44
Page 40f24
Other Bent Bar Anchors
FIG. 3
Plate Anchors. Plate anchors are usually made by welding a square of circular steel plate perpendicular to the axis of a steel bar that is threaded on the opposite end (see Fig . 4) . There are no standards governing the dimensions (length , width or diameter) of the plate . The American Insti tute of Steel Construction does limit the fillet weld size based on the plate thickness (see Table 1) . Both the plate and bar are usually made from ASTM A 36 stee l .
~~\ ~
~)
~'
A) CIRCUlA R P L A T E ANC H OR
" ' Im
B) SQUARE PLATE ANCHOR
Plate Anchors
FIG. 4
Through Bolts. As the name implies , through bolts extend completely through the thickness of the masonry and are composed of a threaded rod or bar with a bearing plate located on the surface opposite the attachment ( see F i g . 5 ) . In the ear l y 1900's , through bolts we r e used i n loadbea ri ng maso nr y structures to tie f l oor and w a ll systems together . Often deco r ative cast bearing plates were used since th r ough bolts were visible on the e x te r io r masonry su r faces (see Fig . 6 ). Today , through bo l ts are primarily used in industr ial construction where aesthetics are not a principal concern , or in retrofitting existi ng structures . Th r ough bolt rods are usually made from ASTM A 307 threaded rod o r threaded ASTM A 36 bar stock . Bearing plates are typically made from ASTM A 36 steel plate .
h ttp: / / WWVl l . bi a .o rg / BI Ntec hn o t es/ t44.htm
311512008
44
Pag e 5 of2 4
Through Bolt
FIG. 5
Decorative Through Bolt Bearing Plate
FIG . 6
http: // www.b ia. org /B I A/ techn ote s/t44.htm
3115/2008
44
Pa g e 60f24
,
   
* A m er i c a n
Proprietary Anchor Bolts


I n s ti t ut e o f St e e l C o n struc ti o n
  
 



. 
 
Proprietary anchors are available through a number of manufacturers under numerous brand names . Altho u g h the style and physical appearance of the anchors differ between manufac t urers , the basic theories behind the anchors are very similar . For this reason , proprietary anchors can be d i vided i nto two gener ic categories : expansiontype anchors and adhesive or chemicaltype anchors.
Expansion Anchors. Two different types of expans i on anchors a r e genera l ly recommended by their manufacturers for use in brick masonry: the wedge anchor and the sleeve anchor (see Fig 7 ). These anchors d e velop their strength by means of expansion i nto the base mate r ial. Wedge an c ho rs dev e lop t h eir hold by means of a wedge or wedges tha t a r e forced into the base mater i al w he n the bolt is tig h tened . The
w edges create large point bearing stresses within the hole ; the r efo r e , this anchor requires a solid base
material to develop its full capacity. For this reason, voids formed by brick cores and partially filled mortar joints in some brick masonry may make the construction unsuitable for wedge anchor installation .
A) WEDGE A.NCHOR
B) SLEEVE ANCHOR
Proprietary Expansion Anchors
http: / / www .bia. o rg / B IA / t e chnot es/ t44. ht m
3 / 15 /2 008
44
Page 7 o f 24
FIG. 7
Sleeve anchors develop their strength by the expansion of a cylindrical metal sleeve or shield into the base material as the bolt is tightened. The expansion of the sleeve along the length of the anchor provides a larger bearing surface than the wedge anchor , and is less affected by irregularities and voids in the base material than is the wedge anchor . For this reason , s l eeve t nChors a r e recommended by the i r manufacturers for use in brick masonry more often than we ge anchors .
Dropin and selfdrilling anchors (see Fig. 8) are two other t. pes of expansion anchors available , but are typically not recommended by their manufacturers for use i i masonry. The reason for this is due to the embedment and setting characteristics of the two anchors. Both anchors are produced to allow shallow embedment depths and are expanded or set by an impact setting tool. The combination of shallow embedment and high stresses imparted by the expansion tend to cause cracking or splitting in masonry . Depending on the extent of cracking or spl i tting, the anchor could exper i ence a reduction in loadcarrying capacity or undergo complete fai l ure during installation .
A)SELFORIL ll NG ANCHOR
B) DROP4N ANCHOR.
Other Proprietary Expansion Anchors
FIG. 8
There are several considerations that should be e x amined when contemplating the use of e x pansiontype anchors in brick masonry. These are : 1) Expansion anchors should not be used to resist vibratory loads. Vibratory loads tend to loosen expansion anchors. 2) Specific torques are required to set expansion anchors . Excessive torque can reduce anchor strength or may lead to failure as excess i ve torque is applied . 3) Expansion anchors require solid , hard embedment material to develop their maximum capacities . Some b r ick construction may not prov i de a good embedment material due to voids formed by br i ck cores and par ti ally filled mortar j oints.
Adhesive Anchors. Two basic types of adhesive anch o rs are cur r ently available. The major difference between the two is that one anchor is manufactured as a premixed , selfcontained system, whereas the second type requires measurement and mixing of the epoxy materials at the time of installation . The more popular selfcontained types use a double glass vial system (see Fig 9) to c ontain the epoxy . The outer vial
contains a resin and the inner vial contains a hardener and aggregate The glass vial is placed in a pre
dr i lled hole and a threaded rod o r bar is driven i n to t h e hol e with a r otary ha m me r dr i l l , breakin g t he vial s
http : / / www.bi a .org/BI A /tcchn o t e s/t44 . htm
3115 /2 008
_{4}_{4}
Pa g e 13 o f 24
In hollow brick construction , the units are laid so that the cells are aligned and provide continuous channels for reinforcing steel placement and for grouting. Depending on the design , every cell or intermittent cells may be reinforced and grouted (see Technical Notes 41 Revised ) . The anchor embedment detail will depend on the reinforcing pattern used in the cons t ruc t i on . Figure 15 shows typical embedment detai l s for convent i onal anchors embedded be t ween re i nforcing cel l s . The anchor should be solidly surrounded vertically and horizontally by grout for a minimum distance of tw i ce the embedment depth (1b) (Figs . 14 and 15) for full tension cone development. The tens i on cone theory is discussed in following sections. This may require that some cells be partially grouted. A wire mesh screen can be placed in the bed joint across cells that are to be partially grouted to restrict the grout flow beyond a certain point. Figure 16 shows typical embedment details for conventional anchors embedded in reinforced cells . In this detail , the anchor may be tied with wire to the reinforcing to secure the anchor during the grouting process Again , the anchor should be solidly surrounded by grout to a minimum d i s t ance of tWi f e the actua l anchor em b edment depth , both vertically and horizontally .
I
i
f
_{P} _{;} _{;} _{"}_{L}_{"} _{s}_{o}_{c}_{r}
s, ",I " SOLT
CI HEA.OED ; BOLT
DMIN .
IF ; : : ::~ ~·*
I;>
O)Pl A 15 ANCHOR
Conventional Anchors in Reinforced Hollow Brick
FIG.15
http: // www.b ia. org/BIA/techn o tes/t44.htm
3/15 / 2008
44
P age 14 o f 2 4
0 ) P~JE P . f l c HOR
Conventional Anchors in Partially Grouted Hollow Brick
FIG.16
Two typ i cal embedment details for conventi onally embedded anchor bolts installed in composite b r ick and concrete block construction are shown i n Fig. 17. As shown , anc ho r bolts may be placed in the collar joint between the brick and block wythes or placed into cells in the concrete block wythe and grouted into place.
In deta i ls similar to Fig . 17 ( a ) , the an c hor bolt type and dia m eter ma y be controlled by the width of the collar
jo i n t. Colla r j oin ts shou ld b e a mi n i mum of 1 i n . ( 2 5 mm) w i de whe n f i n e gr o ut is u sed , o r a m i ni mum of 2 i n.
( 50 m m ) wide when coa r se grout is used ( see T e c hni cal N o te s 7 A Revised ) . W he n t h e c o l l ar joi n t
dimension is in the 1 in . ( 25 mm ) range , it may be c ome diffi c ult to position a nchor bolts in the collar joint and ma i ntain the recommended clear distance between the masonry and the an c hor ( Fig . 17) . The practice of using soaps to accommodate anchors larger than the collar joint is not recommended because the reduction in the brick masonry thickness around the ancho r could lead t o s trength reductions . If the anchor
d 
i mens i ons re q ui r ed are larger than the co ll ar j oint, a det a i l s i m i l a r t o tha t shown in Fig 17( b ) shou ld be 
c 
onsidered . 
ht tp: // www . b i a.org / B I A I te c lm ot es/ t 44.h tm
3115/2008
44
Page 15 of24
GROUT
STOP
B) ANCHOR IN BLOCK WYTHE
Conventional Anchors in Composite Brick/Block Masonry
FIG. 17
Through bolts are typically installed after construction and grouting by drilling through the completed masonry work. When through bolts are to be installed after construction in reinforced brick masonry, care should be taken during installation to avoid cutting or damaging reinforcement while drilling the through bolt holes. Reinforcing bar locations can be identified by specially tooled joints or other marks made during construction.
Proprietary Anchors
Proprietary expansion and adhesive anchors typically require special installation procedures and equipment. The manufacturer shou l d be contacted to determine the appropr i ate anchor for a part i cular application , the correct i nstallation p r ocedu r e and if any special installation equipment is required. Improper application and instal l ation of p r opr i etar y a ncho r s m a y lead to l ess than sat i sfactory structural performance .
Typica l proprietar y anchor details are shown i n F i g . 18 . It i s suggested that proprieta r y anchors be embedded in head joints when facing or building b r ick are used. This reduces the possibility of placing anchors in brick cores that occur within the thickness of the brick and adjacent to the bed joint su r faces . Anchors set i n grouted ho l low brick should be placed i n ho l es drilled in the bed joints so that they intersect grouted cells , or should be placed in holes drilled through the faces of the units into the grouted cells . As with conventional anchors , proprietary anchors shou l d be solidly surrounded vertically and horizontally by grout for a minimum distance of twice their embedment depth.
http: // www. bi a . org / B I A / t e chnote s / t44.htm
3115/2008
44
ANCHOR BOLT DESIGN
]
n
J u
^{"}^{/}
u
'~It::ll>
f
' (
' V
11
IJ
Page 16 o f 24
r
l
A ) GROUTE D OO LL ~ R , JO INT C O NSTR UC nO N
'b
J
~
_{!}
~
.,
II ~;;J
~
II
.
'v
II
_{l}
[
Typical Proprietary Anchor Details
FIG.18
Anchor bolts are used as a means of tying structural elements together in construction and therefore, provide continuity in the overall structure . In virtually all applications, anchor bolts are required to resist a combination of tension and shear loads acting simultaneously due to combinations of imposed dead loads, live loads, wind loads , seismic loads , thermal loads and impact loads. For this reason , and also to insure safety , anchor bolt details should receive the same design considerations as would any other structural connection . However , due to a lack of available research and design guides , anchor bolt designs are based largely on past e x perience with very little engineering backup . This situation may lead to conservative , uneconomical designs at one e x treme , or n o nconservative designs at the other.
Recently , howeve r , rese a r c h investigat i n g th e stre n gth of co n ventional and propr i etary anchors in masonr y has been com p l e t ed . Repor t s have been issued tha t evaluate anchor performance and sugges t equations to pred i ct ultimate anc h or st r e n gths. B y co m b i ning the research findings with design p r actices curr ent ly used in concrete des i gn , eq u ations fo r a l lo w able te n sion , shear and combined tension/shear loads for plate ancho r s , headed bolts and bent bar anchors a r e under consideration for adop t ion i n the proposed " Bui l ding Code Requirements for Masonry Structures " ( ACIIASCE 530). These equations are outlined below .
Tension
The tensile capacity of an anchor is governed either by the strength of the masonry or by the strength of the anchor material. For example, if the embedded depth of an anchor is small relative to its diameter, a tension cone failure of the mas o nry is likely to occur . H o wever, if the embedded depth of the anchor is large relativ e to its diamete r, failure of the anchor material is l i kely. For these reasons, the allowable tensile load is based
h
ttp: // www .bi a . o r g / BI A / t ec hn o te s / t44 . htm
3 1 1 5 / 2 008
44
Page 11 of24
a
~~st°MIN.
B) . ~ •• BOLT
~~ . ~~ ~
D MIN.
~
~
o
C) HEADEOBOLT
OJ THROUGH BOLT
V:;"Cr~.rrr;!;~:},", rr~"TT""
Conventional Anchors in Grouted Collar Joints
FIG.12
Typical embedment details of conventional anchors in multiwythe brick construct i on are shown in Fig. 13. A brick , or portion of a brick, is left out of the inner wythe to form a cell for the embedded anchor (Fig . 14) . After the anchor is placed , the cell i s filled with morta r or grout prior to placement of the ne x t course.
http://V'lTWW.bia.org/BIA/teclmotes/t44.htm
311512008
44
Pa ge 1 0 of 24
a
T he manufacturer
should al w ays b e consu l ted
~ ''']
.J W
~
V)
Z
W
^{~}
50
        
w h en adhe s i v e
ancho r s
a r e to b e u sed i n ar ea s w h er e contact w it h chem i ca l s
"
~ rl
5
0
' 1 """1 t
_rr.rl 'I T , '1''' rf "  .",, ,,,
100
r
" T f ""f · T ' " f ~ r" 1 'I,I
1 5 0
T
E M P E R A T U RE ,
'F
i
" T,'I"'"'''TI "'"""!
2 00
2 5G
i s l i k e ly .
Effect of Temperature on U l timate Tensile Capacity
INSTALLATION DETAILS
Conventional Anchor Bolts
FIG . 11
Typical embedment details for each type of conventional anchor used in grouted collar joint construction are shown in Fig_ 12_ The conventional embedded anchors (headed bolts, bent bar and plate anchors) are usually placed at the intersection of a head joint and bed joint. By using this location , the brick units
adjacent to the a n c hor can be c h ipped o r cut to accept the anchor without altering the joint thickn e ss .
http: // www. bi a_o r g / BI A / te c hn o t es / t44
. htm
3 1 15 / 2 008
44
P ag e 1 2 of2 4
B ) '~" BOLI
Q
.1
f"
D) PLATE ANCHOR
E) 1HROUGH sOLT··
Conventional Anchors in MultiWythe Brick Masonry
FIG.13
A) FUll BRICK OMITTED
_{B}_{)} _{B}_{R}_{I}_{C}_{K} _{C}_{U}_{P}_{P}_{E}_{D}
Plan View of Grout Cell in MultiWythe Brick Masonry
FIG . 14
h ttp : // www .b ia .o rg / BI A / t ec hnot esI t 44 . h tm
3 / 1 5 / 2 0 0 8
44
Pa ge 9 of24
RES I N
H ARD!
EN E R
MIX
PLACE
SiteMixed Adhesive Anchor
FIG. '10
There are special r equirements
adhesive
and lim it ations . that shoul d be cons i de r ed whe n c ontemplating
They are: 1) Specia l ly
designed
the u se of
may
anchors in brick mason r y.
mixing and/or setting equipment
be required 
2) Dust and debris must be removed from the predrilled 
holes to insure proper bond between 

the adhesive 
and base material. 3) The adhesive mixture tends to fill small voids and irregularities 
in the 

base material. 
4) Large voids (due to brick cores , intentional air spaces and partially filled joints) may cause 
reductions in anchor capacities . This is especially true with the selfcontained
adhesive anchors since a
l 
i mited volume of epo x y is ava i lable to fill the vo i ds and provide a bond to the ancho r. 
5 ) The adhesive 
bond 

st r ength is reduced at eleva t ed t empe r atures 
and may also be adversely affected by some chemica l s 
( see 
Table 2 and Fig. 11 ) .
http: // www.bi a.o rg/BI A/ technote s /t44.htm
31 15/2008
_{4}_{4}
Page 8 of24
and mixing the adhesive components. The other type of adhesive anchor requires that the epoxy components be handmeasured and mixed before the epoxy is placed into a predrilled hole. A threaded rod or bar is then set into the epoxy mixture, as shown in Fig. 10. Adhesive epoxies usually vary slightly between manufacturers, but the steel rods or bars are typically ASTM A 307 or ASTM A 325 threaded rod, or ASTM A 36 shopthreaded bar.
A) EPOXY CAPSULE
a) THREADED ROD
C)INSTALLED ANCHOR
SelfContained Adhesive Anchor
FIG.9
http://www.bia.org/BIA/technotes/t44.htm
^{3}^{1}^{1}^{5}^{/}^{2}^{0}^{0}^{8}
44
Page 22 of24
Allowable
TABLE 4
Shear on Anchor Bolts  lrcrn use
1985 Edition"
(a) ,A.LLOV\,I,ABLE SHE.A,R C)~\J.A.f",JCHOF.'BOLTS ^{1} FOR CLAY .A.f",JD
COf\JCF.'ETE t"llASOf\JRY
Tot<lI 
Allowable 

Diameter 
Elllbedmenf 
Shear ^{3} 
(inches) 
(inches) 
fibs} 
1/4 
4 
270 

:3/8 
4 
41D 

1(2 
_{4} 
550 

5/B 
^{4}^{,} 
~~I 

 
3/4
7/8
11 fa
r
~I
f3
^{"}^{7}
I
^{0}
u
1100
1500
1850 ^{4}
2250 ^{4}
'P',n anchor bo~ is eI bolt that h;",,, eI right elngle extension of elt leelst three dierneters.
,f!., standard machine bo~ i:::oacceptable.
"Of the total required embedment, a minimum of five bolt diameters must be
perpendicular to the masonrv surface.
110reduction
in value" required for uninspected mesonrv.
",f!.,pplicable for unit:; ha"iing a net area strength of 2500 psi or more.
(b) ,A.LLOVVABLE ~:HE.A.R IJr\j EiOLn:; FOR D
MA,Sm',JF~Y EXCEF'T Ur'"JBURf\JED cu~.,,( U~',JlTS
1F'1F.~ICALLY DE::::IC;r\JED
_{S}_{o}_{l}_{i}_{d} 
Grouted 

_{D}_{i}_{a}_{m}_{e}_{t}_{e}_{r} 
_{E}_{m}_{b}_{e}_{d}_{m}_{e}_{n}_{t}_{'} 
Masonry 
Masonry 
_{B}_{o}_{l}_{t} 
(inches) 
(Shear in 
(Shear in 
(inches) 
Pounds! 
Pounds) 
112 
4 
350 
550 
5/8 
4 
500 
750 
_{3}_{/}_{4} 
_{5} 
750 
1100 
_{n}_{a} 
f3 
1000 
1500 
_{7} 
_{1}_{2}_{5}_{0} 
11350 ^{2} 

11/8 
e 
1500 
2250 ^{2} 
',f!.,nadditional 2 inches of embedment shall be provided for anchor bolts located
in the top of columns: for buildinqs located in Seis:mic Zones: ~,los:.2, 3, and 4.
2Pennitted onl'i with not less than 2500 pounds per sq in. units
* Reproduced from the Uniform Building Code, 1985 Edition, Copyright 1985 with permission of the publisher, The International Conference of Building Officials."
http://www .bia. org/BIA/technotes/t44
.htrn
3115/2008
44
Page 17 o f 24
on the smaller of the two loads calculated for the masonry and ancho r material. Thus , the allowab l e load in tension is the lesser of:
(Eq.l
)
or
( Eq. 2)
where: T A = Allowable tensile load , Ib ,
A p = Projected a r ea of the mason r y tension
composit e construction , whe n th e masonry con e intersects diffe r ent materials , fm should be based on the wea k er mater i al ), psi ,
cone , in 2 , fm = Masonry prism compression strength (In
A B = Anchor gross crosssectional area , in 2,
fy = Anchor steel yield strength, psi.
The value of A p in Eq . 1 is the area of a circle formed by a failure surface (masonry cone) assumed to radiate at an angle of 45 ° ( see Fig. 19 ) from the anchor base . When an anchor is embedded close to a fr e e edge , as shown i n Fig 20 , a full masonry cone cannot be developed and the area A p must be reduced so as not to overestimate the masonry capa c ity . Thus , the area A p , in Eq . 1 w i ll be the lesser of:
or
where: Ap = Projected area of the masonry tension cone, in.2 ,
1b = Effective embedded ancho r length , in.,
1be = Distance to a free edge , in .
htt p : // www . bi a. o r g l B l A / te c hn otes / t 44 .htm
(Eq 3)
( Eq. 4)
3115/2008
44
P age 18 of 24
Full Masonry Tension Cone
.
' ~ "
G ' , _{~}
"~~
FIG. 19
A) P ROJ E C T ED CO N E
http: // www.bi a . o rg/BI A/t echn otes /t44 .htm
3 / 15/20 0 8
44
Page 19 of24
Reduced Masonry Tension Cone
FIG.20a
B) PROJECTED AREA
Reduced Masonry Tension Cone
FIG . 20b
The effective anchor embedded length (1 b) is the length of embedment measured perpendicular from the surface of the masonry to the plate or head for plate anchors or headed bolts. The effective embedded length of bent bar bolts (1 b) is the length of embedment measured perpendicular from the surface of the masonry to the bearing surface of the bent end minus one bolt diameter . Where the projected areas of adjacent anchors overlap , Ap of each bolt is reduced by onehalf of the overlap area. Also, any portion of the projected cone falling across an opening in the masonry (i.e., holes for pipes or conduits) should be deducted from the value of Ap calculated in Eqs . 3 or 4 .
Shear
The al l owable shear l oad is based on the same logic as t h e allowable tension load . That i s , the anchor capacity i s governed by either the masonry strength or the anchor material strength . The distance between an anchor and a free masonry edge has an effect on the masonry shear capacity . Calculations have shown that for edge distances less than twelve times the anchor diameter , the masonry shear strength controls the anchor capacit y. (C . I ations based on masonry with f'm = 1000 psi and anchor steel yield strength with f .
= 60 ksi. Therefore , where the
edge
IS ance
u
or exceeds 12 anc or diameters. the allowable shear
lOad is the lesser of:

' i
'i A.  ",01 ~J rn'
 . ",rJ41~f' A
_{'}_{8}
(Eq 5)
h t tp : // w vl / w .bia.or g / BI A / t ec
hnote s / t44 . htm
3 / 15 / 2008
44
Page 20 of24
or
where: VA = Allowable shear load , lb.
(Eq. G)
When anchors are located less than 12 anchor diameters fro! a free edge, the allowable shear load is determined by linear interpolation from a value of VA obtained in Eq. 5 at an edge distance of 12 anchor diameters to an assumed value of zero at an edge distance 0 1 in. (25 mm). This takes into consideration the reduction in the masonry shear capacity due to the edge d,istance.
Combined Tension and Shear
Allowable combinations of tensile and shear loads are based on a linear interaction equation between the allowable pure tension and pure shear loads calcu l ated in Eqs. 1 , 2 , 5 and 6 . Anchors subjected to combinat i ons of tens i on and shear are designed to satisfy the following equation :
T / TA + V / VA ~ 1.0 (Eq . 7 )
where : T = Applied tensile load, lb
V = Applied shear load, lb.
Proprietary Anchor Bolts
The allowable load equations previously presented are intended for use with plate anchors , headed bolts and bent bar anchors and have been proposed to the ACII ASCE 530 Committee on Masonry Structures. However , when the allowables from these equations are compared to test results for prop r ietary anchors , they appear to produce acceptable safety factors .
Allowable Loads. Average factors of safety are 4 . 0 for tensile tests and 5 . 0 for shear tests on proprietary anchors . The combined tension/shear interaction equation produced an average safety factor of 7 . 0 when compared to test results on proprietary anchors . Therefore , based on comparison to test results , the allowable load equations proposed in this T ec hni ca l Note s are suggested for use in the design of proprietary anchors i n brick masonry . The embedment depth used to calculate the allowable load values should be equal to the embedded depth of the proprietary anchor.
Edge Distance. Edge distance is of particular concern when expansion anchors are used in brick masonry, due to lateral expansion forces produced when the anchors are tightened. These forces are often large enough to cause cracking or spelling of the brick when edge distances become small. To date, no research has been conducted in this area. Therefore, due to the lack of information , it is suggested that a minimum edge distance of 12 in . (300 mm) be maintained when expansion anchors are installed in brick masonry.
http: // ww w.bi a. or g / BI A / t e chnotes/ t44.htm
3 / 15 / 2008
44
Pa ge 21 0[ 24
Through Bolts
There are no known published reports available addressing the strength characteristics of through bolts in brick masonry. However, based on the conservatism in the allowables for bent bar anchors and proprietary anchors, the allowable load equations should provide acceptable allowable load values for through bolts used in brick masonry. The embedment depth used to calculate the allowable load values should be taken as equal to the actual thickness of the masonry.
Current Codes and Standards
i
At the present time , one model code and one design standard conta i n provisions for anchor bolt design in
brick masonry. The BIA Standard, Building Code Requirements for En g in e ered Bri c k Masonry, and the
Uniform Building Code cover design allowables and embedment depths for anchors loaded in shear. There are no provisions for axial tensile loads or combined tension/shear loads in these documents. Tables 3 and 4 show the allowable shear loads and minimum embedment depths from the two documents. The values in Table 4(a ) are based on rational analysis and in Table 4 ( b ) on empirical analysis . As can be seen , the tables are very similar and are generally more conservative than the a l lowable shear loads obtained from Eqs . 5 and 6 f or the same embedme n t depths ( Tab l e 5 ) .
! x l ! L : J
• From Build in g C od e R e q ui r e m e nts for E ng i n e e r e d B rick M a sonr y , B rick
I nst i tut e o f A me r i ca , A u g ust 19 6 9 .
' In de t e r mi ni n g th e s tre s ses o n bri ck m a s o n r y , th e e ccen tri cit y d u e t o l o a d e d
b 
o l t s and a n c ho r s s h al l be c o n s i d e r ed . 
2 
8 0 l ts and anc h o r s s ha ll be solidly e mb ed ded in mort ar o r g r o ut 
3 
N o en g i n e e rin g o r a r c h i t e c t u ra l i n spect i o n of c ons t ru c t i on a n d w o r k m a n s h i p . 
C on s t r u c t ion an d wo r km ansh i p insp e cted by e n g inee r , a r c hi t ect o r comp e t ent rep resent a t iv e . 4 
h tt p : // w ww. hi a . or g / B I N tec h not es/ t4 4 .htm
3 / 15 / 2 00 8
44
Pa ge 23 of24
' Ameri c an Concr et e I nsti tu te / Amer ic a n Socie t y Of C iv il E ng in eers Co mm it t ee 5 3 0 o n Mas o nr y S tr uc tur es .
SUMMARY
1 A ss uming fm = 2, 000 psi
A S T M A 36 ste e l f y = 36 k si
Edg e Di stan c e = 12 Bolt Dia meter s
This Technical Notes is the first in a series on brick masonry anchors , fasteners and ties , It covers anchor bolt types , detailing and allowable loads for anchor bolts in brick masonry . Other Techni ca l N o te s in this series will address b r ick masonry fasteners and ties.
The information and suggestions contained in this Techni c al Notes are based on the available data and the
e x perience of the technical staff of the Brick Institute of America. The information and recommendations
contained herein should be used along with g o od technical judgment and an u n derstanding of the prope r ties of br i ck masonry . Fin a l decisions on the use of the i nformat i o n discussed in th i s Te c hni ca l N o t es
a r e n ot wi th i n the p ur vi ew o f the Bri ck Institut e o f A m e ri ca a n d mu st r est w ith the p roj e c t designe r , o w ner or
bo th
REFERENCES
1. M a nual o f S te el C o n s truct i on , 8th Ed i t i on, Ameri c an Institute of Steel Construction, Inc . , Chicago , Illinois, 1980.
2 . Whitlock , A.R. and Brown, R.H., Strength of Anchor Bolts in Masonry, NSF Award No, PRF
78060 95 , " Cy c lic Response o f Maso nry A nc hor Bo l ts " , Aug u st 1 98 3,
http: // www .bi a. o rg/BI A/ techno t e s /t
44 . htm
31 15/2008
44
Page 24 of24
3. Brown , R.H . and Dalrymple , GA, Perform a nc e of Retrofit Embedments in Brick Masonry, NSF
Award No . CEE8217638 ,
Eng i neering)",
Report No.1 ,
"Static and Cyclic Behavior of Masonry Retrofit Embedments (Earthquake April 1985 .
4. Hatziniko l as ,
Construction" , Alberta Masonry Institute , Edmonton , Alberta , Canada , October 1983.
M . ; Lee , R.; Longworth ,
J . and Warwaruk ,
J., "DrilledIn Inserts in Masonry
5. Building Code Requirements for Engin ee r e d Brick Masonry , Brick Institute of America , McLean ,
Virginia , August 1969 .
6. Uniform Building Code , International Conference of Building Officials , Whittier , California , 1985 .
7. Techni c al Notes on Brick Construction 17 Revised,
Institute of America, McLean, Virginia, October 1981.
8. Technical Notes on Brick Construction 41 Revised,
Institute of America, McLean, Virginia, 1983.
"Reinforced
Brick Masonry,
Part I of IV" , Brick
"Hollow Brick MasonryIntroduction",
Brick
9. Specification for the Design and Construction of LoadBearing Concrete Masonry , National
Concrete Masonry Association ,
McLean, Virginia, April 1971.
10. The BOCA Basi c /National Building Code , 9th Edition , Building Officials and Code Administrators ,
International , Country
Club Hills, Illinois , 1984.
11 . Standard Build i ng Code , Southern Bu i lding Code Congress , International , Inc
Alabama , 1985 .
Birmingham ,
12. Techni ca l Not es on Brick Construction 7A Revised, "Water Resistance of Brick Masonry
Materials ,
Part 1\ of III" , Brick Inst i tute of America,
http: // www.bia.or g I BIA / t e chnotes/ t44 . htm
Reston , Virginia , 1985.
311512008
ATSAB anchor bolts are preassembled anchor bolts that have been designed for use with the ATS system. They are available in 18", 24" and 36" lengths and match the strength and material grade of the corresponding StrongRod connecting rods. The heavy hex nuts are pressed onto the bolt to keep them in place.
Material: Standard (Model ABJ  ASTM A307, Grade A High strength (Model AB_H)  ASTM A449 or ASTM A193, Grade B7 Higher strength (Model AB H150)  ASTM A434, Class BD or ASTM A354, Claks BD

i
Finish: None 
i 
Naming Scheme: 
16
ATSAB5Hx24
ATS =::J
T L L e ngth
Anchor
Bolt
Diamet e r and Grade
* Unit s i n Va " Increments ( E x: 9 = 'f a" or 1 %" )
Anchor Bolt
Bolt Diameter
Model No. 
 
(in) 
_{A}_{T}_{S}_{}_{A}_{B}_{5} 
S/s 

ATSAB7 
1's 

_{A}_{T}_{S}_{}_{A}_{B}_{9} 
_{1}_{%} 

ATSAB5H 
s/s 

_{A}_{T}_{S}_{}_{A}_{B}_{7}_{H} 
_{'}_{I}_{s} 

ATSAS9H 
1 1 /8 

ATSAB9H150 
_{1}_{%} 

ATSAB10H150 
1% 
Plate Washer Size (in)
3fsx l ' h xlY,
3fs x 2v x2.'A
3/8 x 2 3 iA x 2%
3
/ S xl 'h
3,4, X 2'.4
x 1'/2
x 2V.
3/ax2:v x2%
_{'}_{h}_{x}_{3}_{x}_{3}
_{1} _{x}_{3} _{'}_{h} _{x}_{3}_{'}_{h}
_{i}_{.}
^{.}
_{.}
^{'}^{.}^{'}
.
.
_{1}_{,}
_{(}_{i}_{n}_{)}
1v.
PiA
1'.4
_{1}_{'}_{h}
j3iA
_{1}_{'}_{/}_{8}
_{2}_{'}_{h}
_{C}_{o}_{m}_{p}_{o}_{n}_{e}_{n}_{t} _{C}_{o}_{l}_{o}_{r}
Cod'e
_{r}
_{B}_{l}_{u}_{e}
3reen·,>
_{O}_{r}_{a}_{n}_{g}_{e}
^{.}^{•}
Blue
_{G}_{r}_{e}_{e}_{n}
Orange
_{O}_{r}_{a}_{n}_{g}_{e}
Purple
1. Anchor rods are available in 18",24" and 36" lengths.
2. Standard Anchor bolts are based on minimum Fu = 60,000 psi and Fy = 43,000 psi.
3. High strenqtn anchor bolts are based on minimum Fu = 120,000 psi and Fy = 92,000 psi.
4. H150 anchor bolts are based on minimum Fu = 150,000 psi and Fy = 130,000 psi.
ANCHOR BOLT LOCATIONS Anrnor bolts shall be specified by the Designer.
12x4or12x6=4'fl
1
2
2
1
1
1
4x8or 1 
 3x6
 2x4
 3x4
 4x6
  4x10 or 1  6xl0 = 1 2 Y;
 3x4
or
1
=
5 'h"
= 6'
= 8'
= 8'h"
or
2 
2x6
or
or
2  3x6 1  6x6
6 x 8 = 10 Y,
Corner Installation
1  2x4 
or 1  2x6 
= 
4 V i 

1  3x4 
or 1  3x6 
= 5 W 

2  2x4 
or 2  2x6 
= 6' 

2  3x4 or 2 ' 3x6 = 8' 

1  4x6 
or 
1 
 
6x6 = 8 Y , 

1  4x8 or 1  6x8 = lOW 

1  4x10 or 1 . 6x10 = 1 2 ' 1. 

 
4Yi'  
1  2x4 
or 
1  2x6 

 
5 W 
 
1  3x4 
or 
1  3x6 

 
6"  
2  2x4 
or 2 . 2x6 

8"  
2  3x4 
or 2 . 3x6 

 8 Y i  
1  4x6 
or 
1  6x6 

_ 10 W 
14x8orl6x8 

12 Y4 _ 
1  4xl0 or 1  6x10 

^{~} 
^{C}^{O}^{M}^{P}^{R}^{E}^{S}^{S}^{I}^{O}^{N} 

MEMBERS 
MidWall Installation
ATSAB
Anchor Boll
~ 
COMPRESSION 
/ 
MEMBERS 
PerpendicularToWall
Installation
ATS: Anchor Bolts
_{P}_{a}_{g}_{e} _{4} _{o}_{f} _{4}
Anchor Rod
f . 'odel No.
ATS·A85
ATS·,l"B7H
ATS,4B9H
ATS·ABBH15G
1. IBC calculations are based on ACI 3113,Appendix D
2. For UBC and IBC wind design, embedment de, is based on the design strength of the anchor per AISC. Embedment and edge distances are calculated in order to attain a ductile steel failure mode.
3. For IBC seismic design, concrete strength is reduced by a factor of 0.75 per ACI 318, Section D.3.3.3. Steel strength is based on AISC calculations and does not include an 0.75 reduction factor. Embedment and edge distances meet the ductile requirements of ACI 318, Section D.3.3.4.
4. For UBC design anchor design for 2500 psi minimum concrete assumes no special inspection and a multiplier of 2.0 on the concrete per section 1923.3.2. For 3000 psi and 4500 psi concrete, special inspection is assumed and a multiplier of 1.3 is applied.
5. Plate washers have been designed for plate bending.
6. Alternate anchor bolt solutions may be provided by the Designer.
7. Foundation dimensions are for anchorage only. The Designer is responsible for the foundation size and reinforcement for all load conditions.
ReLated Catalog Pages (PDFs ) :
CATS07 (AnchorTiedQwn$ys i em) , page
16 (173k)
Printed March 15, 2008 from http://www.strongtie.com/products/ats/connectors/anchorbolts.html©
"" top
Order frE?",_cat§Log~by mail
2008 Simpson StrongTie®
http://www.strongtie.com/products/ats/connectors/anchorbolts.html
3/15/2008
ATS: Anchor Bolts
_{P}_{a}_{g}_{e} _{3} _{o}_{f} _{4}
•
Anchor Rod
Model Nu.
• See footnotes below
Wind and Seismic Design 97 USC without Supplementary Reinforcing:
Anchor Rod
Model No.
ATSABS
ATSAB7
ATS'/\B9
Jl,TSAB5H
.w.TSAB7H
I\TSAB9H
ATS·AB9H1 SO
• See footnotes below
Seismic Design All IBC Codes:
Anchor Rod
IWodel No.
A,TSAB5H
ATSAB7H
• • See footnoles below
Wind Design All IBC Codes:
http://www.strongtie.com/products/ats/connectors/anchorbolts.html
3/15/2008
15 
Vessel On Beams Ver2.24 

17 
Sample Vessel 8 < Vessel 

19 
Vessel Dimensions 
(Inch and Lbs): 
20 
130.000 < H, height 
21 80.000 < L, center of gravity
22 26.500 < Is, leg free length
23 42.000 < Do, shell outside diameter
24 44.500 < ds, leg pitch diameter
25 
0.750 < t, shell corroded thickness 

26 
0.250 
< ws  leg weld size 

27 
13.500 
< 
Iw  length of leg to shell weld 
28 
16.000 
< 
Iwf  length of weld on foot 
29 
12,300 < W, Weight Ibs 

30 
353.9 < Pr, Pressure 

32 
Site Specific Seismic Information per NBC95: 
35 1.000 < I, occupation importance factor
44 0.400 < v, zonal velocity ratio
45 6.000 < Za, accelerationrelated seismic zone
46 5.000 < Zv, velocityrelated seismic zone
47 1.300 < Foundation Factor (F)
52 Leg Supports:
53 
Angles 4" x 5/8" < Structural Description 

54 
4 < n, number of legs 

55 
6.660 < lx, for one leg 

56 
6.660 < 
Iy, for one leg 

57 
1.200 < fFactor, Least radius of Gyration 

58 
4.610 < A, Leg Cross Sectional Area 

59 
4.000 < 2cx, Beam Depth 

60 
4.000 < 2cy, Beam Width 

61 
0.800 < K1, Leg Anchor Factor 

63 
Material Properties: 

64 
17,100 < maximum leg bending stress (Sb) 

65 
16,200 < maximum 
shell stress (Sa) 

67 
Attachment Dimensions: 
68 5.657 < 2C1, Width of rectangular loading
69
13.500 < 2C2, Length of rectangular loading
_{2}_{7}_{}_{A}_{p}_{r}_{}_{0}_{7}
www.pveng.com
~
_{P}_{a}_{g}_{e} _{2}_{2} _{o}_{f} _{2}_{5}
NBC95
Fv
+_ Fh \iiiJ Fh
Fv
c.g.
o
.u
AI
ds
:\.


RECTANGULAR
CL
ATTACHMENT
71 Static Deflection E = 30,000,000 bc = 12.0
73
72
74
y = (2*W*ls"3)/(bc*n*E*(lx
leg boundary condition based on fixed or loose leg + Iy»
75
(2*12300*26.5"3)/(12*4*30000000*(6.66
+ 6.66»
77
78
79
Period of Vibration
g =
T = 2*pi*sqrt(y/g)
386
=2 * 3.14 * sqrt(0.02/386)
y = 
0.024 
T = 
0.049 
84 Base Shear
103
104
105
106
107
U = 0.6
R = r=4
I
:::::;:,
4.2001< Seismic Response Factor (S)
= 0.4*4.2*1*1.3*12300/ = (26863.2/4)*0.6 .
Ve = v*S*I*F*W
V = (Ve/R)*U
Ve = 26863
V = 14029
f3
x
v
115 Sample Vessel 8 Vessel On Beams
117 Horizontal Seismic Force at Top of Vessel
118 Ftmax = 0.25*V
119 Ftp = 0.07 * T * V
120 Ft = if (T < 0.7, 0, min(O.07*T*V,
122 Horizontal Seismic Force at cg
= 0.25 * 4029
= 0.07 * 0.049 * 4029
Ftmax))
27Apr07
Page 23 of 25
Ftmax = 1007
Ftp = 13.94
Ft= 1L
:
9
123
125
126
128
129
Fh = V  Ft 
= 4029  0 
Fh 
= 14,029 
Vertical force at cg 

Fv = W 
Fv 
= 112,300 

Overturning Moment at Base 

Mb=L*Fh+H*Ft 
= 80 * 4029 + 130 * 0 
Mb 
= 322,358 
131 Overturning Moment at Bottom Tangent Line
132
"0
134
135
137
_{1}_{3}_{8}
140
_{1}_{4}_{1}
_{1}_{4}_{2}
144
_{1}_{4}_{5}
Mt = (Lls)*Fh + (Hls)*Ft 
= (80  26.5) * 4029 + (130  26.5) * 0 
Mt = 215,577 

Maximum eccentric load 

f1 
= 
Fv/n 
+ 4*Mto/(n*Do) 
= 
12300/4 
+ 4*215577/(4 
* 42) 
f1 = 8,208 

Axial Load 

_{f}_{2} 
_{=} 
_{F}_{v}_{/}_{n} _{+} _{4}_{*}_{M}_{b}_{/}_{(}_{n}_{*}_{d}_{s}_{)} 
= 12300/4 + 4*322358/(4 * 44.5) 

Lebih dari sekadar dokumen.
Temukan segala yang ditawarkan Scribd, termasuk buku dan buku audio dari penerbitpenerbit terkemuka.
Batalkan kapan saja.