Thread Content
This post was last edited by zhangjuhua on 2016-11-26 at 13:00. I have a container of type 1, with a height of 6000 and a diameter of 2400; it uses non-standard Type B support brackets, and the center distance between these brackets is larger than that specified in the standards. It is used for storing gas at room temperature. Do I need to conduct seismic force calculations as well as hydrostatic pressure tests? It isn’t a tower-type structure, nor does it have a skirt base; so SW6 probably doesn’t apply here. Should I use the methods outlined in Appendix JB4712.4? I’ve seen such software available online. There are usually no problems when filling it with air, but during hydrostatic pressure testing, the weight increases by seven or eight times. Should I still use the methods from the appendix in that case? It’s very likely it won’t pass that way
The last edit to this post was made by zhangjuhua on 2016-11-26 at 13:37. There are two scenarios: during normal operation, the working weight and additional loads need to be taken into account; for wind and seismic effects, the examples in the appendix should be used. In the case of water pressure, wind, seismic effects, and additional weights are not considered, only the weight of the water flow needs to be taken into account. Is that acceptable?
Seismic loads can be disregarded in hydrostatic testing. If the hydrostatic test is conducted indoors, wind loads can also be ignored.
Also, your neck height ratio is very small; wind and seismic loads have no significant impact. Even when subjected to verification checks, it will pass, not to mention the fact that it’s a normal-pressure container filled with air.
It’s just the water pressure for a moment; it’s not likely that there will be an earthquake and strong winds at the same time, is it?
The tower’s verification calculations can be referred to, taking a wind bending moment of 0.3 times into account.