0 Suka0 Tidak suka

0 tayangan11 halamanPFA

Oct 23, 2019

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT atau baca online dari Scribd

PFA

© All Rights Reserved

0 tayangan

PFA

© All Rights Reserved

- The New Guide to Stability Design Criteria for Metal Structures
- Brazier Loads
- 3433029733_p121_129
- 3D Non Prismatic Beam Colum
- Bi-Axial PM Interaction
- Mechanics Solutions to the Buckling of Flange Elements
- Ahmed 1996
- 1-s2.0-0020768382900865-main
- Stability Analysis of Single-layer Elliptical Parabolid Latticed Shells With Semi-rigid Joints
- Aashbylectures
- question
- IR-07-01.pdf
- References
- GBT Theoretical Background
- Article 2010
- Copy of 12-inch SteelSMF.xls
- Large-deflection and Post-buckling Behavior of Slender Beam-columns with Non-linear End-restraints.pdf
- The Stability of a Facetted Glass Shell Structure
- Resistance of Members to Flexural Buckling
- 2005_LRFD_to_1999_LRFD

Anda di halaman 1dari 11

LAYER WIND TUNNEL EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES ON GROUP OF

TOWERS

1

Civil Engineering Group, Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd., Mumbai.

ABSTRACT

Wind loading is extremely important in cooling tower design for several reasons. First of all, the amount of

reinforcement, beyond a prescribed minimum level, is often controlled by the net difference between the tension

due to wind loading and compression due to dead load. Second, the quasistatic velocity pressure on the shell wall

is sensitive to the vertical variation of the wind and circumferential variation of the wind around the tower. There

are also additional wind effects such as internal suction, dynamic amplification, and group configuration. The

wind load variation along height and around circumference is specified in the codes like IS 11504 and BS 4485

with a restriction on height of the tower not greater than 120m. Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited has

proposed to set up NPP at Kakrapar, where sill diameter of NDCT is expected to be as large as 120 m and the

height is expected of the order of 165m. It is proposed to setup two numbers of NDCT for each 700 MWe

capacity. As the tower forms part of tower group and its height is greater than 120 m, aero-elastic model testing

in an atmospheric boundary layer wind tunnel studies has been carried out. It is found from the experimental

studies that there is change in the wind load distribution compared to given the codes. The paper discusses the

structural analysis and design of tall NDCT based on the boundary layer wind tunnel experimental studies. The

paper also discusses the difference in the outcome of structural analysis and design based on the aero-elastic

model testing and approach given in BS 4485 part-IV.

Keywords: Cooling tower, Wind loading, Reinforced concrete shells, Bucking, Amplification factors

Introduction

To meet the growing electricity demand, a number of nuclear power plant (NPP) of

high capacity have been planned and are under construction in India by Nuclear Power

Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL). With the increase in capacity of power plant it

becomes necessary to increase both the height and diameter of cooling towers. It is proposed

to setup two numbers of NDCT for each 700 MWe capacity NPP project, where sill diameter

of NDCT is expected to be as large as 120 m and the height is expected of the order of 165m.

In this, just a linear extrapolation from normal sizes of 120m to a height 165m is not possible,

because the overall dimension like height and diameter are increased non-proportionally in

comparison with shell thickness and reinforcement. Thus the dynamic behavior changes in an

unfavorable way, leading to more bending action in the shell. Cooling tower is largest thin

shell structures of NPP which is highly sensitive to dynamic wind actions and their response

varies randomly in time and space. At such large dimension, rational assessment of wind

loading condition & structural response along with shape of tower is of much importance for

the state of stress (structural safety), for the elastic stability (overall stiffness) and for the

vibration properties (dynamic load amplification) of the structural response, for the initiation

of concrete cracking (durability) compared to smaller towers [Dieter Busch et al., Reinhard

Harte et al., Wilfried Kratzig et al., Ulrich Montag et al. (2002)]. The optimization procedure

including the derived most optimum shape for the tall NDCT which is being proposed to be

constructed at Kakrapara is discussed in detail by Girish Patil, Nema, M.K., Arvind

Shrivastava, Verma U. S. P. (2007). This work has been carried out based on the guidelines

Proc. of the 8th Asia-Pacific Conference on Wind Engineering – Nagesh R. Iyer, Prem Krishna, S. Selvi Rajan and P. Harikrishna (eds)

Copyright c 2013 APCWE-VIII. All rights reserved. Published by Research Publishing, Singapore. ISBN: 978-981-07-8011-1

doi:10.3850/978-981-07-8012-8 P10 353

Proc. of the 8th Asia-Paciﬁc Conference on Wind Engineering (APCWE-VIII)

given in BS-4485 Part IV for wind loading, interference effects, amplification factors etc. It is

also recommended in the work that as the tower forms part of tower group and its height is

greater than 120 m, aero-elastic model testing in an atmospheric boundary layer wind tunnel

should be studied in detail to determine the stresses in the shell and final design should be

based on the wind tunnel studies. For rational assessment of wind loads and evaluation of

structural responses codal analytical methods can be used which are based on more

sophisticated calculations using the theory of random vibration and are applicable in principle

to isolated towers. Other method based on wind tunnel studies [Cermak Jack E. et al. (2003)]

to find out the wind loading and its associated effects which are accepted internationally as

the most desirable design tool because it considers the project specific factors like the

aerodynamic effect of the actual shape of the structure, influence of adjacent building and

topography, detailed wind directionality effects, aero elastic interaction between structural

motion and airflow etc. Therefore the wind tunnel studies become a requirement before

finalizing the structural design of large NDCT. The paper discusses the structural analysis and

design of tall NDCT based on the boundary layer wind tunnel experimental studies conducted

using BLWT facility at CSIR-SERC [Selvi Rajan, et al. (2010 a&b)]. The paper also

discusses the difference in the outcome of structural analysis and design based on the aero-

elastic model testing and approach given in BS 4485 part-IV.

Wind Load

The natural wind induces fluctuating loads. Their effects may be split into static,

quasi-static and resonant components. For practical application it is common to introduce

equivalent static loads. Their intensity and distribution are determined in such a way that they

cover the peaks of all relevant stresses and strains in the structure with an adequate level of

reliability [Dieter Busch et al., Reinhard Harte et al., Hans- Jurgen Niemann et al. (1998)].

For cooling towers, BS code has adopted the concept of the gust wind pressure which is based

on theory of random vibration. Cooling towers for NPP in India up to height of 120m

designed with this concept, have not experience any noticeable damage in the past. It is clear,

however, that a certain amount of ambiguity is introduced when the complicated random

process is represented by a static equivalent load. Moreover, the concept applies in principal

to isolated towers. When the wind flow is altered by adjacent high building or tower, the

mean and fluctuating loads will be less severely affected. With new dimension of the present

project it is therefore necessary to inspect wind load in detail. With the above in view, series

of wind tunnel tests are performed and the recommended mean external and total pressure

coefficient for isolated cooling tower are given Table 1 [Selvi Rajan, et al. (2010 a)].

Table 1: Recommended external and total pressure Table 2: Fourier Coefficient corresponding to

coefficient for isolated cooling tower IS 11504/ BS4485 and wind tunnel studies

Total Pressure IS 11504 /BS Wind Tunnel

Angle Mean External

Coefficient including n 4485 Studies

(deg.) (Cp)

internal coefficient (Cpș) Fn Fn

0 1 1.4 0 -0.00071 -0.09842

15 0.921 1.321 1 0.24611 0.33656

30 0.313 0.713 2 0.62296 0.92032

45 -0.538 -0.138 3 0.48833 0.39278

60 -1.157 -0.757 4 0.10756 -0.06683

75 -1.437 -1.037 5 -0.09579 0.01449

90 -1.503 -1.103 6 -0.01142 0.01117

105 -1.227 -0.827 7 0.04551 -0.06577

120 -0.63 -0.23 8 -0.02283

135 -0.374 0.026 9 0.00622

150 -0.334 0.066 10 -0.01499

165 -0.345 0.055 11 -0.01429

180 -0.34 0.06

354

Proc. of the 8th Asia-Paciﬁc Conference on Wind Engineering (APCWE-VIII)

The wind pressure acting at any point on the shell surface is computed as

q (z, ș) = q (z) Cpș (1+g) (1)

Where, q (z) = effective velocity pressure at a height z above the ground level

Cpș = coefficient for circumferential distribution of wind pressure

1+g = gust response factor

g = peak factor

The obtained circumferential pressure coefficient from wind tunnel studies are

represented in a Fourier cosine series of the form

Cpș = An cos (nș) (2)

The comparison of the Fourier coefficient for IS code, BS code along with

recommended circumferential coefficient of the wind tunnel studies are given Table 2.The

circumferential distribution of the wind pressure is shown in Fig. 1. The key regions which

can be compared between pressure distribution obtained from wind tunnel studies and IS/BS

code are as given below:

1. At windward meridian, ș=0o, pressure coefficient are same for both the case.

2. Side Suction: a) Starting of side suction at ș=42.5o is same for both the case.

b) Maximum side suction: at ș=70o , Cp (70)= -0.927 for IS/BS case

at ș=90o, Cp (90)=-1.103 from wind tunnel studies

c) End of side suction : at ș=112.5o for IS/BS case

at ș=132.5o from wind tunnel studies

Fig. 1 Circumferential pressure distribution (including internal suction) around shell cross section

It appears from Fig.2 that, n=0 mode represent uniform expansion and contraction of

the circumference; n=1 corresponds to beam like bending and higher mode i.e. n > 1 are

related to shell undulating deformations. The relatively large fourier coefficient associated

with n=2, 3, 4 indicate that a significant portion of the loading is causing shell deformation. It

appears from Table 2 and Fig. 2 for n=0 that the contribution of expansion and contraction of

the circumference is more corresponding to wind tunnel studies. It can also observed that the

contribution of beam like bending will be more corresponding to wind tunnel studies. From

the above, it can be concluded that wind tunnel pressure distribution would cause more axial

tension or compression and bending of cooling tower shell compared to codal approach. It is

also concluded from the Fig. 2 that fourier coefficient are more or less same for higher modes,

hence it is expected that the factor of safety against bucking will be same for both the case.

Dynamic Amplification

The dynamic amplification of the effective velocity pressure is represented by the

parameter g in equation (1) which is corresponding to resonant part of the response of the

structure. Value of this response component is dependent upon the dynamic characteristics of

the tower. The variation of the gust factor w.r.t height corresponding to recommendation

given in IS 875, BS: 4485 and wind tunnel studies are shown in Fig.3. BS-4485(1996) has

355

Proc. of the 8th Asia-Paciﬁc Conference on Wind Engineering (APCWE-VIII)

introduced a methodology to account for fluctuating stresses in the shell, which are caused

due to dynamic response of cooling tower. Such dynamic behaviour is taken into account

indirectly by determining the wind load enhancement factor (ĳG). This factor is used to

enhance the mean hourly wind stress resultants. Based on wind tunnel studies, it is suggested

that tower design stress resultant for isolated tower can be obtained from by multiplying a

gust factor of 2 to analytical stress resultant. As per wind tunnel studies, a gust factor of 2 is

suggested to be applied uniformly throughout the height of the tower whereas based on the

procedure given in BS: 4485, gust factor is varying throughout the height of the tower. From

Fig.3, it appears that the gust factor as per BS: 4485 is around 2.2 for height in between 15 m

to 130 m when the coefficient CD and CG related to dynamic correction factor and group

correction factor is equal to 1.There are local regions at the bottom and top of the cooling

tower, where gust factor as per BS code is comparatively high due to low mean stress

resultant. As per IS: 875 (Part 3), gust factor is coming out be 1.45.

Fig. 2 Harmonic Component of Pressure coefficient Fig. 3 Gust factor variation as per IS 875, BS4485

and wind tunnel studies

Fig. 4 Gust factor variation as per BS4485 and Fig. 5 Wind Tunnel Test for interference studies[Selvi

wind tunnel studies Rajan, et al. (2010 a)]

Interference Effect

In realistic situation, the tower is part of a dense arrangement of large surrounding

power plant buildings some of them are comparable about half the size with the cooling

tower. At kakrapara NPP project, it is proposed to construct two tall cooling towers for each

700 MWe unit and therefore total four for the twin unit plant; hence it is essential to consider

356

Proc. of the 8th Asia-Paciﬁc Conference on Wind Engineering (APCWE-VIII)

group effect in the design. The field of the flow-induced pressures changes more or less

considerably according to the specific arrangement, with regard both to the averaged static

and the buffeting forces. It has become usual to term this influence as interference effect. The

available cooling tower codes contain simplified rules to account for interference. A rule of

distance is given in most of the codes if the distance to adjacent building or tower is smaller

than some specified minimum value. The IS code recommends allowance to be provided for

load intensification due to turbulence induced in the incident wind by adjacent cooling towers

in a group or of the structures of the significant dimension in the vicinity but value to be

adopted are not specified. French code [H. J Niemann et al., H.D.Kopper et al. (1998)] include

magnification factor to be applied to the wind pressure. For a centre to center distance of three

times the tower base diameter, the factor is 1, for a distance of 2 it is 1.15.For closer spacing,

special advice is required. The British code applies interference factors to the wind induced

stresses. An interesting feature is that the factors are different over the shell height and

individual values are given for the quasi-static and the resonant contribution to the stresses.

The factors are specified for the certain building arrangement considering the effect of the

distance. As per BS: 4485 classification for correction to consider effect of adjacent structure,

cooling towers of kakrapara NPP falls under class 3. From Fig.4, it appears that the wind

amplification factor taking into account correction for adjacent structures as per BS: 4485 is

around 2.8 for height in between 15 m to 130 m.

To assess the group specific interference effect wind tunnel test were conducted to

investigate the effect of interference, for different angles of wind incidence ranging from 00 to

3600 in intervals of 300.The testing arrangement of the model with other interfering structures

for a typical wind angle is shown in Fig.5.The analysis clearly indicates that the effect of

interference manifest itself in discrete changes in the values of pressure at certain azimuth

angles corresponding to a given angle of wind incidence. This, in effect leads to a change in

the magnitude of force coefficient at various level. In the wind tunnel studies, interference

factor is defined as the ratio of the measured peak resultant force or mean resultant force on

the test cooling tower model under interference condition to the corresponding peak resultant

force or mean resultant force on the same tower under isolated condition. Precisely speaking,

the internal towers were found to have more effect of interference than the outer tower which

appears to be logical. Based on the wind tunnel studies for kakrapara NPP site interference

factor of 1.5 is judiciously evolved. Hence gust factor as per wind tunnel studies after

considering the effect of interference factor is coming out to be 3 (wind amplification factor

= 2 (gust factor) × 1.5 (interference factor)) compared to 2.8 obtained from the BS: 4485.

General

On the basis of thermal duty condition, thermal demand, tower characteristics,

following pre-designed overall dimension are considered.

Height of shell (hs) : 154.15 m

Base diameter of shell (2rL) : 116 m

Throat diameter of shell (2rT) : 70 m

Column height : 12m (10m clear Air opening height=hc)

Following possible variables are used to obtain the optimum shape of the cooling tower.

1. Height of throat (hT)

2. Column configuration

3. Angle made by hyperbola at the base and top (ȕL)

4. Thickness profile

The opening height of 10 m is selected considering the friction loss and consequent

increase in tower height and it is basically a thermal design parameter. It has been observed

357

Proc. of the 8th Asia-Paciﬁc Conference on Wind Engineering (APCWE-VIII)

that with the increase in the height of throat the fundamental frequency of cooling tower

reduces; hence calculation has been done for minimum required throat height. In the present

study, 44 numbers of “V” columns are provided. Different models based on angle made by

bottom hyperbola are considered, typically NDCT_14, NDCT_16, NDCT_18, NDCT_20 and

NDCT_21.76. The numeric nomenclature of the model name gives angle made by hyperbola

at the base. Thickness profile along the shell height is finalized based on the buckling criteria

as shown in Fig.8. Based on the earlier studies, Model NDCT_18 is found out to be most

optimum shape for a given preliminary dimension on the basis of structural safety and

economy and the same is adopted for the present study.

As discussed in the previous section, a wind tunnel study has been carried out for

KAPP site to determine the pressure distribution along the height and around the

circumference on the cooling tower. In this, aero-elastic model study is also carried out to

determine the dynamic behavior of the tower in the presence of wind. Based on the

experimental studies three well defined procedure for design are outlined which are as

discussed below:

Procedure I: Determine the velocity profile corresponding to Table 33 of IS 875 Part III

considering basic wind speed for kakrapara site at 10 m height as 44 m/sec with probability

factor of 1.07 and pressure coefficients as given in Table 1. It is recommended to use gust

factor of 2 and interference factor of 1.5 to be multiplied to analytical stress resultant

corresponding to 0.6 Vz2 × Cp.

Procedure II: In this procedure, it is recommended to use velocity profile corresponding to

category II class A structure with probability factor of 1.07 and pressure coefficient as given

in Table 1. As the velocity profile is determined based on the peak gust velocity averaged

over short time interval of 3 sec, no additional enhancement to gust factor is required. In this

procedure, interference factor of 1.5 is recommend to obtain design wind load stress resultant.

Procedure III: This procedure recommends design of tower based on the experimental design

stress resultant. Design based on this procedure is not discussed in this paper.

Finite Element Model of tall NDCT is shown in Fig. 6. Shell behavior is modeled with

the help of four nodded plate elements while 3 dimensional beam elements are used for

modeling the circular diagonal supporting columns in STAAD-Pro software. At the top of

shell “U” shape ring beam is provided to stiffen the shell. The orientation of diagonal columns

are calculated such that at the junction of shell and diagonal column the slope of shell and

column remain same to avoid undue moment induced due to kink at the junction. Bottom

support of column is considered to be fixed on the top of annular raft.

Design loads

Self weight and wind pressure are the primary loadings considered for designing the

cooling tower. The density of Reinforced Concrete Shell is assumed to be 25kN/m3 for the

purpose of calculation of self weight. Basic wind velocity is considered as 44 m/sec at 10 m

height and mean hourly wind velocity at 10m height above the ground is calculated as per

table 33 of IS 875-Part 3.

Vm10 =1.07 x 0.67 x 1 x 44=31.54m/sec

The mean wind velocity (Vmz) and gust wind velocity (Vgz) at height z are calculated

as per BS 6399 (1997). The wind pressure is calculated as p=0.613* Cpș *(Vmz)2 Where, Cpș is

the pressure coefficient distribution around the shell circumference. The velocity profile for

mean wind and gust wind speed as per BS: 4485 are shown in Fig.7. Fig.7 also shows velocity

profile as per procedure I and procedure II of wind tunnel studies. It appears from Fig.7 that

velocity profile of mean wind almost matches with the velocity profile corresponding

358

Proc. of the 8th Asia-Paciﬁc Conference on Wind Engineering (APCWE-VIII)

procedure I. Velocity profile of gust wind does not matches with the gust velocity profile of

BS-4485 corresponding to procedure II.

Fig. 6 Finite Element Model of Tall NDCT Fig. 7 Velocity Profile for Mean and Gust Wind Speed

Buckling Resistance

Stress state of the cooling tower shell is non-axis symmetric under wind loading, [refer

Fig.1] therefore, the combined stress state under dead load and wind load is also non- axis

symmetric with biaxial stress state changing along the height and circumference. Hence it is

required to vary wall thickness over the height, taking the buckling resistance into account to

developing meridian shape of the tower. The final buckling configuration depends mainly on

the restraints of cooling tower shell and on the distribution of wind loading along the

circumference. To derive optimum shape for safety and economy, it is prerequisite that the

resistance of cooling tower against buckling shall be provided uniformly over the height of

the tower. With the increasing size of the tower, the natural frequency drops more rapidly,

therefore, it has become necessary to investigate method to improve the buckling stability and

vibration properties of cooling tower.

Fig. 8 Thickness Profile along the height of Fig. 9 Local buckling pattern as per BS code and wind tunnel

tower and details of U ring beam at the top studies

Design codes differs considerably in criteria for buckling safety, requiring either the

“snap through approach”, the local or “buckling stress states” (BSS) approach, or global

approach. The snap through criteria was first proposed by Der and Fidler at al. in 1968. Based

on result of wind tunnel tests, this approach prescribes design for a critical wind buckling

pressure, which is a function of shell geometry and material strength. The Der and Fidler

formula is incorporated in the British, Indian and German codes. The BSS approach

developed by Mungan et al. [2005] is based on the hypothesis that buckling starts locally and

is primarily dependant on the strength of shell material as well as the presence of geometric

imperfections. It is also incorporated in German and British code. On the other hand, the

global buckling criterion requires a full nonlinear analysis of the shell, and is the preferred

approach in USA.

359

Proc. of the 8th Asia-Paciﬁc Conference on Wind Engineering (APCWE-VIII)

Buckling safety of cooling tower is investigated by local and snap through buckling

criteria. In the present study, for the given basic tower dimension, 236 mm (considering

modulus of elasticity equal to 31.62×1006 KN/mm2) is the minimum thickness to obtain factor

of safety against snap through buckling equal to 5. Local buckling pattern as per BS

methodology for BS 4485 and wind tunnel based wind load is shown in Fig. 9 wherein

thickness of 275 mm is required for buckling safety factor equal to 5.

The dead load analysis results in Fig. 10 indicate that the shell is under compression in

both directions, except for a small circumferential tension near the top. This is a very

desirable feature of this geometrical form. To compare the results based on the Wind tunnel

studies and as per BS-4485, design stress resultant are obtained considering the effect of wind

amplification and interference effects.

Fig.10 Circumferential and meridional forces under Fig.11 Design Circumferential forces along the height

dead weight of the tower at windward direction

In Fig. 11 through Fig. 17, the results of an analysis for quasi-static wind load are

shown for circumferential and meridional direction. It appears that that large tensions in both

the meridional and circumferential direction are present for both the case i.e. as per codal

approach & wind tunnel studies. In Fig.12 through Fig. 13, results of variation of

circumferential forces are shown around the circumference of the cooling tower at height

equal to 30m and near to the top of the shell. In Fig. 15 through Fig. 17, results of variation of

meridional forces are shown around the circumference of the cooling tower at near to the

bottom & top of shell and at throat level. The regions of tension extent a considerable distance

along the circumferential from the windward meridian and the magnitude of the forces is

strongly dependent on the distribution selected.

Fig.12 Design Circumferential forces around the Fig.13 Design Circumferential forces around the

circumference (at height 30) circumference (near to the top of shell)

360

Proc. of the 8th Asia-Paciﬁc Conference on Wind Engineering (APCWE-VIII)

It is found that for region of tension near the windward direction & compression near

the side suction portion corresponding to wind tunnel studies is extended to a considerable

distance compared to BS4485.It is also found that the design stress resultant corresponding to

design process based on the wind tunnel studies i.e. Procedure I & II are more compared to

design stress resultant obtained based on the codal procedure of BS: 4485.

Fig.14 Design meridional forces along the height of Fig.15 Design Meridional forces around the

the tower at windward direction circumference (at height 30)

Table 3: Comparison of Global Reaction Forces and Moments

Fx (KN) Fy (KN) Fz (KN)

WT WT WT WT WT WT

Description

BS:4485 Studies Studies BS:4485 Studies Studies BS:4485 Studies Studies

( I) (II) (I) (II) ( I) (II)

Maximum

2224 2767 2636 5854 7128 6783 2257 2749 2626

Tension

Maximum

-733 -1089 -1042 -5988 -7282 -6908 -2257 -2749 -2626

Compression

WT WT WT WT WT WT

Description

BS:4485 Studies Studies BS:4485 Studies Studies BS:4485 Studies Studies

( I) (II) (I) (II) ( I) (II)

Summation 0 0 0 0 0 0 -9749 -13591 -13026

Maximum

525 699 730 187 257 265 223 308 294

Tension

Maximum

-525 -699 -730 -187 -257 -265 -692 -916 -955

Compression

Note: For global direction refer to Fig.6

Fig.16 Design Meridional forces around the Fig.17 Design Circumferential forces around the

circumference (at throat level) circumference (near to the top of shell)

361

Proc. of the 8th Asia-Paciﬁc Conference on Wind Engineering (APCWE-VIII)

Limit state of strength

1.0 DL + 1.5 ĳF Wk

1.4 DL + 1.5 ĳF Wk

Where, DL-Characteristic Dead Load, Wk-Hourly Mean Wind Load

ĭF – Load Amplification factor evaluated at a height above the base shell equal

to the distance of between adjacent shell support nodes

Note: Description Amplification Factor

1. As per BS:4485 ĳF =2.75

2. WT (Procedure I) ĳF =g × IF = 2 × 1.5 = 3.0

3. WT (Procedure II) ĳF =IF = 1.5 = 1.5

Table 3 gives the comparison of the support global reaction forces and moments for both the

cases i.e. as per BS 4485 and procedure I & II of wind tunnel studies. It is found out that there

is noticeable change in the reaction forces and moments as per wind tunnel devised procedure

compared to codal approach. With this view, design of columns has been carried out

considering the load combination given in the Table 4. It is found that maximum

reinforcement requirement has been increased from 2.78 % as per BS:4485 to 3.82 % as per

wind tunnel studies.

Conclusion

From the present study following conclusions can be made,

• In general, codal methods are helpful for preliminary design and for simple situation, but

provide conservative wind loads in most cases, but it is not always true. In fact, the code

recommends wind tunnel testing for complex problems. If the tower forms the part of the

tower group and its height is greater than 120,code recommends aero-elastic model testing

in an atmospheric boundary layer wind tunnel to determine the stresses in the shell.

• In the present case, it is found that codal analytical provisions gives lesser wind load

effects on tall cooling tower compared to wind tunnel studies. It is found that regions of

tension extent a considerable distance along the circumferential from the windward

meridian and the magnitude of the forces is strongly dependent on the distribution selected.

• There is difference in the support reaction and moment corresponding to wind tunnel

testing compared to codal provision. This may call for change in the size of the column or

increase in the reinforcement.

• Wind tunnel tests account for structure geometry ,surrounding details and this leads to

accurate estimation of wind load. In addition to accurate results for wind amplification,

interference etc. wind tunnel studies confirm the structural safety, economy and durability.

• Need is felt to revise the structural design based on IS:11504 so that the latest development

around the globe can be adequately represented in the code.

References

BS 4485 (1996), “British standard for water cooling towers, Part 4, Code of practice for structural design and

construction” ,British Standard Institution.

BS 6399 (1997), “British standard for Loading for Building, Part 2, Code of practice for wind loads”, British

Standard Institution.

Cermak Jack E., (2003), “Wind-tunnel development and trend in application to civil engineering,” Journal of

Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 91, 355-370, 2003.

362

Proc. of the 8th Asia-Paciﬁc Conference on Wind Engineering (APCWE-VIII)

Der T.J., Fidler R., (1968), “Model study of the buckling behavior of hyperbolic shells”, Proceeding of Institute

of civil Engineering, 41:105-18,

Dieter Busch, Reinhard Harte, Wilfried Kratzig, Ulrich Montag (2002), “ New natural draft cooling tower of 200

m of height,” Engineering Structures, 24, 1509-1521, 2002.

Dieter Busch, Reinhard Harte, Hans- Jurgen Niemann (1998), “ Study of a proposed 200 m natural draught

cooling tower at power plant Frimmersdorf/Germany,” Engineering Stuructures, Vol. 20, pp. 920- 927, 1998.

Girish Patil, Nema, M.K., Arvind Shrivastava, Verma U. S. P. (2007) , "Assessment of dynamic wind effect and

optimization of shell for tall NDCT using BS-4485 code approach," Proceedings of the Fourth National

Conference on Wind Engineering , SERC Chennai, India, October 30th to November 1st, 2007.

H. J Niemann, H.D.Kopper (1998), “Influence of adjacent building on wind effects on cooling towers,”

Engineering structures, Vol. 20, pp. 874-880, 1998.

IS 875 (1987), “Indian standard code of practice for design loads (other than earthquake) for building and

structures, Part 3, Wind loads”, Indian Standard Institution.

IS 11504 (1985), “Indian standard-Criteria for structural design of reinforcement concrete natural draught

cooling towers”, Indian Standard Institution.

Mohan Babu, Khasim Khan, Neme M.K, N.Raghavan (2004), “A comparative study of wind dynamic effects on

NDCTs as per various international standards”, International Symposium on Natural Draught Cooling Towers,

2004.

Mungan I., (2005), “Buckling stress state of hyperboloidal shells”, ASCE Journal of structural Engineering, 102

(ST10), 2005.

Selvi Rajan, S., Arunachalam, S., Ramesh Babu, G., Harikrishna, P., Abraham, A., Chitra Ganapathi, S., Sankar,

S. and Nagesh R. Iyer, (2010), “Wind tunnel experimental investigations on natural draught cooling towers

including interference effects – Pressure measurements”, Project No. S-1, SSP 075 41, March 2010.

Selvi Rajan, S., Arunachalam, S., Ramesh Babu, G., Harikrishna, P., Abraham, A., Chitra Ganapathi, S., Sankar,

S. and Nagesh R. Iyer, (2010), “Aero-elastic test on model of a natural draught cooling tower using boundary

layer wind tunnel”, Project No. S-2, SSP 075 41, June 2010.

363

- The New Guide to Stability Design Criteria for Metal StructuresDiunggah olehBilly Bob
- Brazier LoadsDiunggah olehManoj Manoharan
- 3433029733_p121_129Diunggah olehAli Alomy
- 3D Non Prismatic Beam ColumDiunggah olehBanu Dwi Handono
- Bi-Axial PM InteractionDiunggah olehSTRUCTURE -STRUCTURE
- Mechanics Solutions to the Buckling of Flange ElementsDiunggah olehMorganRendall
- Ahmed 1996Diunggah olehLeonardoMadeira11
- 1-s2.0-0020768382900865-mainDiunggah olehRavi Khandelwal
- Stability Analysis of Single-layer Elliptical Parabolid Latticed Shells With Semi-rigid JointsDiunggah olehponshhh
- AashbylecturesDiunggah olehpetronashscribdid
- questionDiunggah olehkarthik
- IR-07-01.pdfDiunggah olehfmboy700
- ReferencesDiunggah olehyesuppu56
- GBT Theoretical BackgroundDiunggah olehshivaji09
- Article 2010Diunggah olehszalaija
- Copy of 12-inch SteelSMF.xlsDiunggah olehAnonymous r4EQgc
- Large-deflection and Post-buckling Behavior of Slender Beam-columns with Non-linear End-restraints.pdfDiunggah olehstormstone
- The Stability of a Facetted Glass Shell StructureDiunggah olehqatarstructz30
- Resistance of Members to Flexural BucklingDiunggah olehAnonymous iS33V5
- 2005_LRFD_to_1999_LRFDDiunggah olehesenengin
- CollectionDiunggah olehvarmaprasad
- Mat Chapter 36Diunggah olehhemant_durgawale
- Stability Analysis and Design for Full First Order AnalysisDiunggah olehyatin
- An Initial Study into the use of Concrete Filled Steel Tubes for Bridge Piers and Foundation Connections.pdfDiunggah olehTDN
- Ch11Diunggah olehLeonardoMadeira11
- pec-fire-antonio-2010Diunggah olehXiaoyong Mao
- ec3modelling-170412103115.pdfDiunggah olehvtalex
- Arch BridgesDiunggah olehAshutoshAparaj
- NasaDiunggah olehabhivag123
- 7189-85-3.pdfDiunggah olehChris Powell-Williams

- Construction PlanningDiunggah olehBIRANCHI
- Civil PlanningDiunggah olehBIRANCHI
- Excavation Planning.xlsxDiunggah olehBIRANCHI
- 161ovaDiunggah olehBIRANCHI
- ABC_5EdDiunggah olehJuan Diego Garcia Esquen
- Tribology.xlsxDiunggah olehBIRANCHI
- Triad Vibration Data.xlsxDiunggah olehBIRANCHI
- Metal Engineering Final.xlsxDiunggah olehBIRANCHI
- Power Plant Data.xlsxDiunggah olehBIRANCHI
- Unbilled_Transactions.pdfDiunggah olehBIRANCHI
- EIL-RFQDiunggah olehBIRANCHI
- Steam Blowing DtaDiunggah olehBIRANCHI
- ArtifactDiunggah olehwadmataw
- Notification SAIL Rourkela Steel Plant Jr Manager Operator Cum Technician PostsDiunggah olehSantosh Kumar
- Mission TypeDiunggah olehBIRANCHI
- Tertiary Quad Failure1Diunggah olehBIRANCHI
- Methodology of Erection.xlsxDiunggah olehBIRANCHI
- Primary Quad FailureDiunggah olehBIRANCHI
- Tertiary Quad FailureDiunggah olehBIRANCHI
- Circular ModeyDiunggah olehBIRANCHI
- 15Diunggah olehBIRANCHI
- 20409Diunggah olehBIRANCHI
- Diunggah olehBIRANCHI
- Typing ModeDiunggah olehBIRANCHI
- Mode Failure1Diunggah olehBIRANCHI
- Advt 012019Diunggah olehAjay
- Electrical Machinery by Dr. P S BimbhraDiunggah olehNikhil
- mpdfDiunggah olehBIRANCHI

- CFX-FSI_14.5_WS05_T-Junction_1WayDiunggah olehManoel Freire
- Dental Adhesion OHIODiunggah olehMarcela Gabriela
- t26270enDiunggah olehprihartono_dias
- Me6301 Engineering Thermodynamics - Uq - May June 2016Diunggah olehBIBIN CHIDAMBARANATHAN
- A New Model for Static Load Ratings of Surface Induction Hardened BearingsDiunggah olehmans2014
- cbr TestDiunggah olehCondro darmo
- Mild Steel Hollow Section _ Square, Rectangular, Circular _ Metal Supplies™Diunggah olehmosesobeti
- Fatigue Crack Growth SolutionDiunggah olehVancy Nguyen
- Building Boards- Ply Wood Particle Boards, Block Boards, Acoustic BoardDiunggah olehshibani10
- Example 4Diunggah olehTagel Markos
- A 803Diunggah olehParashuram Chauhan
- Erico - Seismic supportDiunggah olehMBM
- ferrocement structural applications.pdfDiunggah olehjayanth
- Scope and LimitationDiunggah olehDianne Bernadeth Cos-agon
- PipeRackloadcalculation.docxDiunggah olehsrivastava1984rahul
- Observation _ 12.05.2017Diunggah olehSivaram Anbalagan
- Cathodic Protection of Steel in Concrete Using Magnesium Alloy AnodeDiunggah olehFa Hedaiat
- Structural Buckling of ColumnsDiunggah olehRicky Ta
- Sika Skim Coat Pds EnDiunggah olehizzatazwanzailan
- Nfpa 221 - Standard For Fire Walls, Fire Barrier Walls (Nfpa, 2000) Ww.pdfDiunggah olehTimothy Hancock
- Casar Steel Wire Ropes LetterDiunggah olehRebecca Hartman
- Near Net ShapeDiunggah olehPablo Diego Didoné
- LPS-15Diunggah olehHansika Rajapaksha
- CrackingDiunggah olehJuan Pablo González Carballo
- Changes to Structural Revit ModelDiunggah olehRohit Singh
- GRDSLAB(1)Diunggah olehcharlesheil
- 02 Chapter 2Diunggah olehជិននី លីហ៊ាង
- Refrigeration Moran Shapiro Solution ManualDiunggah olehNovaCastillo
- SCM 71, 80, 100Diunggah olehNguyen Anh Hung
- 04 PPP TTE API 570 Piping InspnDiunggah olehvb_pol@yahoo

## Lebih dari sekadar dokumen.

Temukan segala yang ditawarkan Scribd, termasuk buku dan buku audio dari penerbit-penerbit terkemuka.

Batalkan kapan saja.