SW6 column calculation
Thread Content
In the calculation conditions, the hydrostatic pressure of the liquid column must be entered for the upper head, but it is not required for the lower head. It’s the exact opposite of the regular one. Please discuss what the real intention is. This post was last edited by Lan Meng on 2009-3-9 08:50.]
The lower head requires hydrostatic pressure by default, while the upper head is optional; I’m not sure if this is correct
The upper head does not need to have the hydrostatic pressure of the liquid column taken into account. Moreover, the hydrostatic pressure of the liquid column can be considered in segments.
This issue indeed arose in the SW-6 calculations. Given that it is a bug, should we enter this static pressure at all? If so, should it be entered as the static pressure of the liquid column in the lower head? This post was last edited by guaizilv on 2009-3-8 20:49]
Container design is based on the pressure at the top, so the upper head cannot be subjected to any pressure other than the designed pressure.
Original poster, both of your end caps are upper end caps. Which one requires the input of the hydrostatic pressure of the liquid column, and which one does not? Based on personal speculation, it should be the upper end cap that does not require such an input, as it is not subject to this force; on the other hand, the lower end cap does need this value to be entered. If it’s the opposite, then it’s confusing.
When using SW6-1998 for calculations, I encountered this issue: when calculating the upper head, the software requires the input of the hydrostatic pressure of the liquid column, but this parameter is not required when calculating the lower head.
Comrade Kobayashi, that’s right: lol. It was a bug in SW6; it seems to have been fixed now. I haven’t used the SW6 tower calculator in a long time
Is the question wrong? Why is it always the top head?
So what software do you use to calculate towers now?
I haven’t worked on standard tower structures in a long time. So SW6 is rarely used to calculate towers
Thank you to all the poster above for their participation and answers
This problem has arisen again in the new version of SW6-2011, with the 30-meter tall tower. The hydrostatic pressure of the liquid column is also not taken into account in the calculation results for the lower head. Is that the case for everyone?
Yeah, what will happen if the upper head data isn’t entered? Is it a problem if no attachment data is provided? It’s my first time working on a tower device, and I didn’t enter any attachment data during the calculations. Could someone please help me? Urgently needed!
This is a vulnerability in SW6. The upper head does not require consideration of the hydrostatic pressure of the liquid column, but it is necessary to take that into account for the lower head; I’m not sure how to address this.
I’m not sure if you’ve noticed, but the pressure on the lower head is the same as that of the first section of the cylinder; the hydrostatic pressure due to liquid filling has been taken into account. In contrast, the upper head is not subject to such hydrostatic pressure, so it can be entered manually or left unentered.