Warning: Make sure you scan the downloaded attachment with updated antivirus tools before opening them. They may contain viruses.
Use online scanners here and here to upload downloaded attachment to check for safety.
Joined: 26 Jan 2003
|Posted: Thu Aug 19, 2004 6:03 pm Post subject: supported on shaft as per proposed draft
We had a workshop at Ahmedabad for the proposed GSDMA Codes which had
discussed in detail the behaviour of overhead liquid storage tanks. I am
sorry you missed it. I think it was announced on SEFI.
However you may find the background study literature that went into the
writing of this proposed code on seismic design of such tanks of much use.
If I am not mistaken, it is available on nicee website www.nicee.org. If you
do not find it there, I will mail it to you from Mumbai. It will answer most
of the doubts and misconceptions you (and many of us) have with regard to
seismic design of overhead water tanks.
----- Original Message -----
Message From <email@example.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2004 6:52 PM
Subject: Fw: Considerably high seismic demands of ESRs
supported on shaft as per proposed draft
[quote]Dear Dr. Jaiswal,
As evident to all.. Let me make my view point clear.
Any structure can be expected and is accepted to be
designed for a reasonable horizontal earthquake force
that can be expressed in some percentage of its mass.
All seismic codes (for all structures)use
fundamentally,this same philosophy for arriving at
suitable seismic coefficient..
This coefficient.. I think is dependent on three
We have for most ductile building, max value of this
coefficient as 13.5 % for R=5;I=1.5;Z=0.36 and Sa/g =
2.5... As per proposed draft for shaft supported tank,
we get Ah equal to 45 % of seismic mass... i.e. 3.33
times higher percentage of seismic mass..as compared
to the former one.
So.. in nutshell, u can make a code saying that dont
construct shaft supported tanks.. which have shown
years of performance.
May we expect the similar level of R values for
chimneys too.. in the future code ???
I do not know whether at the time of deciding R values
for buildings, the commitee had considered them to be
relative to other standards or relative to some other
I design a tank supported on 4 columns or on 6 or 8
columns for same capacity.
Will all have same redundancy..?? No...
Still we have same R value for all tanks supported on
framed staging..any comments??
May I request Dr. S.K.Jain & Dr. C.V.R. Murty to
explain the basis
and procedure that was used to determine R values
for buildings that are used currently as per
IS 1893 (Part - I): 2002..
Were they really inspired from IBC/ACI/FEMA ???
--- firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
Posted via Email
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum