Hindawi Publishing Corporation

Science and Technology of Nuclear Installations

Volume 2016, Article ID 1613989, 8 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/1613989

Research Article
A Calculation Method for the Sloshing Impact Pressure Imposed
on the Roof of a Passive Water Storage Tank of AP1000

Daogang Lu,1,2 Xiaojia Zeng,1,2 Junjie Dang,3 and Yu Liu1,2

1
School of Nuclear Science and Engineering, North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, China
2
Beijing Key Laboratory of Passive Safety Technology for Nuclear Energy, North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, China
3
China Nuclear Power Engineering Co., Ltd., Beijing 100840, China

Correspondence should be addressed to Xiaojia Zeng; [email protected]

Received 18 January 2016; Revised 6 April 2016; Accepted 19 May 2016

Academic Editor: Iztok Tiselj

Copyright © 2016 Daogang Lu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License,
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

There is a large water storage tank installed at the top of containment of AP1000, which can supply the passive cooling. In the
extreme condition, sloshing of the free surface in the tank may impact on the roof under long-period earthquake. For the safety
assessment of structure, it is necessary to calculate the impact pressure caused by water sloshing. Since the behavior of sloshing
impacted on the roof is involved into a strong nonlinear phenomenon, it is a little difficult to calculate such pressure by theoretical
or numerical method currently. But it is applicable to calculate the height of sloshing in a tank without roof. In the present paper,
a simplified method was proposed to calculate the impact pressure using the sloshing wave height, in which we first marked the
position of the height of roof, then produced sloshing in the tank without roof and recorded the maximum wave height, and
finally regarded approximately the difference between maximum wave height and roof height as the impact pressure head. We also
designed an experiment to verify this method. The experimental result showed that this method overpredicted the impact pressure
with a certain error of no more than 35%. By the experiment, we conclude that this method is conservative and applicable for the
engineering design.

1. Introduction the linear behavior of cylindrical tanks. Choun and Yun

[3] used the velocity potential and the linear water wave
As the ultimate heat sink of AP1000 reactor, passive cooling theory to decompose the surface wave into multiple forms.
system (PCS) is the key equipment to ensure the safety of There are some complex methods to solve the nonlinear
nuclear power plant. The large water storage tank, installed sloshing problems. Li et al. [4] used an improved material
at the top of the containment of AP1000, can supply plenty point method (MPM) to predict the liquid impact force by a
of water for the passive cooling. In the extreme condition, contact algorithm. Liquid sloshing experiments in a partially
sloshing of the free surface in the tank may impact on the roof watered square tank were proposed to validate the results of
and jeopardize structural integrity under long-period earth- simulation. Eswaran et al. [5] proposed a numerical method
quake. For the safety assessment of structure, it is necessary based on volume of fluid (VOF) techniques with arbitrary-
to calculate the impact pressure caused by water sloshing. Lagrangian-Eulerian (ALE) formulation to analyze baffled
Since the behavior of sloshing impacted on the roof is and unbaffled tanks with a nonlinear sloshing behavior.
involved into a strongly nonlinear phenomenon, calculations However, these researches are usually valid for simple cases
of the impact pressure with theoretical or numerical method with linear or weakly nonlinear liquid sloshing dynamics.
currently are of difficulties. Ibrahim [1] focused on a 2D tank But it is applicable to calculate the height of sloshing
with simple geometry to solve the linear sloshing problems in a tank without roof. Fujita et al. [6] utilized the velocity
using analytical methods. A numerical model using finite potential theory to analyze the liquid sloshing in the annular
element technique was presented by Pal et al. [2] to study region of more intricate coaxial circular cylinders. Formulas
2 Science and Technology of Nuclear Installations

Static water surface L i i+1 y

hmax
L

h
In-vessel lid
A A

r
R
A−A
Figure 1: Schematic of sloshing.

about the maximum wave height (𝜂max ) at shell wall and the the position of the height of roof, the solid wide line showed
maximum pressure (𝑝max ) at the free surface were obtained. in Figure 1, then produced sloshing in the tank without roof
More interestingly, the correlation between maximum wave and recorded the maximum wave height which can be shown
height and maximum pressure was 𝑝max = 𝜌𝑔𝜂max from as the oblique line in Figure 1, and finally regarded approxi-
equation (34) in their research. Virella et al. [7] used the finite mately the difference between maximum wave height and
element package ABAQUS to investigate the free surface roof height as the impact pressure head. In this way, the
wave amplitude and pressure distribution of tank wall by both impact pressure can be calculated by the following equation:
linear wave theory and nonlinear wave theory models. Nayak
and Biswal [8] used the Galerkin-weighted-residual based 𝑃 = 𝜌𝑔 (ℎmax − ℎ) , (1)
finite element method (FEM) to solve Laplace equation with
nonlinear boundary conditions. The wave height of nonlinear where 𝑃 is the maximum impact pressure, 𝜌 is the density
sloshing was verified to be accurate. of water, 𝑔 is the acceleration due to gravity, ℎmax is the
Besides, the impact pressure is an important parameter in maximum wave height, and ℎ is the distance between the
the assessment of safety of engineering design. Researchers static water surface and the roof.
had conducted large-scale experiments to investigate impact Besides, the impact force of water in a tank at any time is
pressure [9–12]. given by the following equation:
As is mentioned above, the available studies mostly
focused on the sloshing characteristics of rectangular tanks 𝑠2
with simple geometry. However, considering the special 𝐹𝑤 = ∬ 𝑃𝑑𝑠, (2)
𝑠1
structure of PCCWST, which is a coaxial circular cylinder
tank with an inclined bottom, it is difficult in obtaining
where 𝐹𝑤 is impact force, 𝑃 is the impact pressure, and 𝑠1 ,
analytical expressions for the prediction of the natural modes
𝑠2 , respectively, mean the lower and upper boundary of tank
and the liquid motion. Moreover, numerical and analytical
roof.
methods to precisely describe the sloshing impact pressure
By utilizing the maximum sloshing wave height, the
are complicated because of the significant nonlinearity phe-
maximum impact pressure, which appeared near the outer
nomena. In the present paper, a simplified method was
wall, can be calculated by (1).
proposed to calculate the impact pressure using the sloshing
The impact area is divided into 𝑛 parts and the impact
wave height. Moreover, an experiment was designed to verify
pressures in each part can be obtained by linear interpolation.
this method.
The 𝑖th pressure is given by the following equation:

2. Calculation Method 𝑖
𝑝𝑖 = 𝜌𝑔 (ℎmax − ℎ) . (3)
𝑛
Sloshing of the water surface in the tank may impact on the
roof under long-period earthquake and the prediction of the According to Figure 1, 𝐿, which is related to the impact
impact pressure is necessary. Due to the apparent nonlinear area, can be calculated by
behavior caused by complicated sloshing phenomena, a sim-
plified method was proposed to calculate the impact pressure 𝐿 ℎmax − ℎ
= . (4)
using the sloshing wave height, in which we first marked 𝑅 ℎmax
Science and Technology of Nuclear Installations 3

Table 1: Scaling factors for sloshing experiments.

Parameter Scaling ratio

Length: 𝐿 [m] 𝐶𝑙
Gravity: 𝑔 [m/s2 ] 1
Velocity: 𝑉 [m/s] 𝐶𝑙 1/2
Frequency: 𝑓 [Hz] 𝐶𝑙 −1/2
Time: 𝑡 [s] 𝐶𝑙 1/2
Kinematic viscosity: ] [m2 /s] 𝐶𝑙 3/2
Pressure: 𝑃 [Pa] 𝐶𝜌 𝐶𝑙 Figure 2: Experimental setup.
Wave height: 𝐻 [m] 𝐶𝑙

mounted on the supporting configuration by 4 connecting

The total impact force can be written as
rods with knurled caps. The whole experimental tank was
𝑛−1 √𝑅2 −𝑦2 𝑅−𝐿+(𝑖+1)(𝐿/𝑛) glued to a square shell which was screwed in 28 threaded
𝑝𝑖 + 𝑝𝑖+1
𝐹𝑡 = ∑ ∫ 𝑑𝑥 ∫ 𝑑𝑦 holes on the shaking table.
𝑖=0 −√𝑅2 −𝑦2 𝑅−𝐿+𝑖(𝐿/𝑛) 2 (5) The experimental setup included a computer, a laser dis-
placement sensor, 3 pressure sensors, an acceleration sensor, a
𝑖 = 0, 1, 2, 3, . . . , 𝑛 − 1.
data acquisition tool, a set of commercial acquisition software
Substituting (3) and (4) to (5), we can get the total impact COINV DASP, and some wires. The layouts and numbers of
force. sensors are illustrated in Figure 3.

3. Experiment 3.3. Experimental Procedure and Results. Tabulating in

Table 2, a total of 6 experiment cases involving 4 different
In order to verify the calculation method, an experiment was filling depths were carried out on the experimental setup
designed. with two configurations, first without internal components
(a supporting configuration and an in-vessel roof) and then
3.1. Scaling Model. Since the passive storage tank of AP1000 with internal components. For each case, sloshing exper-
is large, experiment with the large size of tank is difficult. In iments under multiple excitation amplitudes were carried
order to keep the similar properties of fluid, a scaling model is out and several kinds of transient sloshing responses like
proposed. For the case of the present experiment, some main sloshing wave height and slosh-induced impact pressure were
governing dimensionless numbers that should be respected recorded by data acquisition system. Measurements of the
are as follows [6, 13]. wave height are presented in Section 3.3.2, in cases without
Froude number: Fr = 𝑉2 /𝑔𝐿; Reynolds number: Re = internal components. Impact pressure of sloshing is discussed
𝑉𝐿/]; Strouhal number: St = 𝑓𝐿/𝑉; Euler number: Eu = in Section 3.3.3 in cases with internals.
𝑃/𝜌𝑉2 ; Bond number: Bo = 𝜌𝑔𝐿2 /𝜎.
With the analysis, the Froude number, Strouhal number, 3.3.1. Natural Frequency of Sloshing in First Mode. Liquid
Euler number, and Bond number are respected and the Re motion inside a tank in periodic movement is dominated by
number is relaxed when ignoring viscosity effects. The scaling the liquid filling ratio, the amplitude and frequency of the
factors for the different parameters in sloshing experiments tank motion, and the geometry of the tank. Considering the
are summarized in Table 1 and these expressions are called complex geometry of the experimental tank, the fundamental
the modified linear scaling method. natural frequency of liquid was measured through sweep
frequency response analysis (SFRA) experiment. The tank
3.2. Experimental Equipment. According to the similarity was partially filled with water, which was mixed with gouache
criteria, an experimental model (Figure 2) of PCCWST was paint and covered by pearl cotton on the surface. It was
built with the scale of 1 : 40. The experimental tank was aimed to make the laser displacement sensor work normally
mainly cylindrical (0.122 m internal radius) with an inclined by detecting object with surface that exhibited a diffuse
bottom and the vessel was made of acrylic sheet to observe reflection. From the research of Lu et al. [14], the influence of
the sloshing phenomena clearly. The tank was considered water level on natural frequency of sloshing water was quite
to be rigid due to the 15 mm thickness of outer wall. This small. Hence, the subtle variations of natural frequency with
assumption was made to simplify the study of sloshing. In different filling depths can be ignored. The tank was filled up
order to measure the maximum sloshing wave height, the to a water level of 217 mm, which was based on the length
length scaling for the height of the tank was 3 : 40. A summary scale, for the measuring of liquid frequency. For the purpose
of the main sizes of experimental tank is presented in Figure 3. of looking in detail at the resonance frequency of liquid, a
The internal structures, showed as the red parts in logarithmic sweep with a range of 0.1∼20 Hz was adopted. In
Figure 3, were added suspended from the top cover, which addition, there are two types of control mode for driving the
was fixed on the outer structure. Such internal structures con- shaking table: Acceleration Control (AC) and Displacement
tained a supporting configuration and an in-vessel circle roof Control (DC). At low frequency, about 0.1∼4 Hz, AC is used
4 Science and Technology of Nuclear Installations

Table 2: Experiment sequences.

Case number Filling depth 𝐻 [mm] Distance between static water Excitation amplitude 𝐴 [mm]
surface and in-vessel roof ℎ [mm]
1∗ 217 43 12, 24, 36
2 177 83 12, 24, 36
3 197 63 12, 24, 36
4 237 23 12, 24, 36
∗: 𝐻 and ℎ are based on the length scale.

1
339,33
121,93

11
15
414,65
514,65

664
772

2
A A
3
108

50 4

276,17 A−A
800
Laser displacement sensor
Pressure sensor

Figure 3: Sensor layout.

and the displacement was controlled at the value of 2.0 mm, 3.3.2. Sloshing without the Roof. Due to the fact that the
since the displacement sensor achieved higher accuracy than periods of sloshing water (1/𝑓 = 1/0.75 = 1.33 s) were far
acceleration sensor at low frequency range. However, DC is more longer than the site predominant period (0.34 s), the
invoked in high frequency of 4∼20 Hz and the acceleration resonant three-cycle sine wave (RTCS) was assumed to be the
was set with 0.650 m/s2 . The time history of sloshing dis- input excitation according to the HAF0102 of nuclear safety
placement was transformed into frequency spectrum by a fast guide in China, which is also a widely used evaluation method
Fourier transform (FFT). By this analysis, the fundamental of seismic response in Japan. The load function can be written
natural frequency of the liquid was evaluated to be 0.75 Hz. as 𝑋 = 𝐴 sin(2𝜋𝑓𝑡), where 𝑋 is the displacement of shaking
For an annular region formed by coaxial circular cylinder table, 𝐴 is the amplitude of the sine wave, 𝑓 is the water nat-
tank in periodic motion, the resonant frequencies of the liq- ural frequency, and 𝑡 is the time which lasts for three periods
uid can be calculated from the linear potential theory as [6, 13] of sine waves. In our experiments, the frequency of RTCS was
set as 0.75 Hz. When the frequency of excitation closed to the
2 𝑔 𝐻 natural frequency, the liquid inside the experimental tank can
𝜔𝑚𝑛 = 𝜉 tanh (𝜉𝑚𝑛 )
𝑎 𝑚𝑛 𝑎 (6)
exhibit strong oscillations, thus exerting a greater extent of
sloshing and violent impact loads on the tank.
𝑚 = 0, 1, 2 . . . , ∞, 𝑛 = 1, 2, 3, . . . , ∞, The experimental setup without internals was carried out
for the experiment of seismic response about sloshing wave
where 𝑔 is the gravitational acceleration, 𝑎 is the outer radius height. The sloshing wave height was measured through laser
of the tank, 𝜉𝑚𝑛 are the positive roots related to the ratios displacement sensor which was installed at point 1 near the
of inner radius to outer radius of the tank, and 𝐻 is the still outer tank wall which is showed in Figure 3. The acceleration
filling depth. transducer was installed at the bottom of the tank, in order to
The calculating fundamental natural frequency from (6) monitor the initial and final points of RTCS. Figure 4 reveals
is 0.887 Hz, a little larger than the experimental result. It can the vertical displacement of the wave in case 1 with 24 mm
be explained by the inclined bottom configuration of the tank. amplitude. It can be seen that the crest was almost 2 times
Science and Technology of Nuclear Installations 5

Table 3: The maximum wave height. 2500

Amplitude [mm] Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 2000

12 79.191 65.272 67.103 98.9172
1500

Impact pressure (Pa)

24 227.355 163.953 190.414 264.142
36 316.327 217.348 255.602 355.023
1000

250 500
Wave vertical displacement (mm)

200
0
150
−500
100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
50
Time (s)
0
Figure 5: Time history of impact pressure about case 1 of point 4
−50 with 24 mm amplitude.

−100

12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
2000
Time (s)

Figure 4: The vertical displacement time history of sloshing wave 1500

Impact pressure (Pa)

of case 1 with 24 mm amplitude.

1000
size of the trough, which embodied an apparent feature of
nonlinearity. Table 3 lists the maximum wave heights of 500
case 1 to case 4. Moreover, through the analysis of these
data, for each case, the maximum wave heights increased as
the excitation amplitudes grew and the increasing tendency 0
gradually reduced, which was also a nonlinear behavior.
Point 2 Point 3 Point 4
3.3.3. Sloshing with Roof. At the second part of the experi- Measuring point
ment, experiments with internals were carried out to measure 12 mm
the impact pressure of in-vessel roof. CYY8 dynamic pressure 24 mm
sensors with high frequency response were installed at mea- 36 mm
suring points 2, 3, and 4 on the roof, as showed in Figure 3, to Figure 6: The distribution of impact pressure of case 1 with 24 mm
present the radial pressure distribution. amplitude.
Pressure variations were measured by dynamic piezore-
sistive pressure transducers in cases 1 to 4. Figure 5 illustrates
the impact pressures time history results in case 1 of measur-
ing point 4 with 24 mm amplitude. According to the curve, During the operational process of experiments, there
the maximum impact pressure appeared when it came to the were some errors in experimental data owing to erroneous
third wave of RTCS and then 2 small peaks came after it. These human input and the accuracy of measuring instruments to a
two small peaks can be explained by the inertia effect of water, certain extent. The use of laser displacement sensor, pressure
which made water impact the inner roof despite the end of sensors, and the indigenous vibration of shaking table caused
excitation. In addition, the gap between in-vessel roof and the significant errors in measurements. Besides, there also existed
tank wall would lead to a small portion of water splashing electromagnetic interferences during the operational process
upward to the top surface of cap. Therefore, some negative of shaking table, which adversely affected the accuracy of
values appeared intermittently in the measuring data showed sensors especially pressure sensors, also contributed to the
in Figure 5. errors’ list.
As is shown in Figure 6, impact pressure distributions By computing the area integral of pressure, the experi-
along the radial direction are presented in cases with different mental force data can be derived from the measuring pressure
RTCSs and the same filling depth, 217 mm. The impact data with some conservative assumptions.
pressure of point 2 was the minimum and the impact pressure In our research, as illustrated in Figure 7, the area from
of point 4 was the maximum, which showed that the impact inner wall to outer wall along 𝑦 axis is divided into 3 parts
pressure increases from inner wall to outer wall. and the pressure of each part is assumed to be the measuring
6 Science and Technology of Nuclear Installations

x Table 4: Total impact force from measuring data.

Case no. Filling depth [mm] Amplitude [mm] Impact force [N]
12 11.31001
1 217 mm 24 60.37129
36 91.28681
12 4.370317
2 177 mm 24 25.62775
yi yi+1
y 36 41.8155
12 7.423492
3 197 mm 24 36.49382
36 56.19478
12 23.1682
4 237 mm 24 84.23761
36 117.9033
Figure 7: Schematic of area dividing.

140

value of the sensor which is installed at the corresponding 120

part. Therefore, the impact force in each part can be written
100
as in (7). The total impact force is the sum of that in each part
Impact force (N)

which is showed in (8). Consider the following: 80

√𝑅2 −𝑦2 𝑦𝑖+1 60

𝐹𝑖 = ∫ 𝑑𝑥 ∫ 𝑝𝑖 𝑑𝑦, (7)
−√𝑅2 −𝑦2 𝑦𝑖 40

𝑛 20
𝐹𝑡 = ∑𝐹𝑖 𝑖 = 1, 2, 3, (8)
𝑖=1 0

10 15 20 25 30 35 40
where 𝐹𝑖 and 𝑝𝑖 are the impact force and impact pressure in
each part, 𝑅 is the outer radius of cylinder tank, and 𝐹𝑡 is the Amplitude (mm)
total impact force. Case 1 by experimental force Case 3 by experimental force
In our cases, the total impact forces of different conditions Case 1 by calculated force Case 3 by calculated force
are listed in Table 4. Case 2 by experimental force Case 4 by experimental force
Case 2 by calculated force Case 4 by calculated force

4. Analysis of Experimental Results Figure 8: Comparison of calculated force and experimental force.

In Section 2, we proposed a simplified method to estimate the

impact pressure. So we list the results of simplified method
and measured data. We used the calculated impact pressure can be concluded that the calculation method is reasonable
(CIP) indirectly to represent the results of simplified method. and relatively conservative.
The measured data were called the measured impact pressure According to the simplified calculation equation for
(MIP) directly. The comparison between calculated pressure impact force proposed in Section 2, we obtained the impact
and measured pressure is listed in Table 5. force of simplified method which was called calculated
According to Table 5, CIP are lower than MIP under force here. Showed in Section 3.3.3, the experimental force
small amplitudes of RTCS. A possible reason is the influence data was called experimental force here. Figure 8 compares
of air motion. In our experiment, the water tank cannot be the calculated force and experimental force. The calculated
thoroughly sealed. Therefore, air in the ring cavity can move force is lower than, though generally coinciding with, the
with the vigorous sloshing of water. Air motion is the primary experimental force in smaller wave height cases. However,
influential factor under low level of excitation. However, it calculated force becomes close to the experimental force and
is considered that small excitation has really subtle effect in then exceeds it due to the increase of maximum sloshing wave
engineering practice. As for the higher excitation level, CIP height.
are larger than MIP under medium and high level of excita- By the comparison of calculated results and experimental
tions. With a certain error of no more than 35%, this method results, some future works are left. First, there should be
of impact pressure calculation is considered to be overpredic- some holes on the in-vessel roof to reduce the influence of
tive. Therefore, similar to the results of Lu’s [15] research, it air motion during experimental procedure. Second, longer
Science and Technology of Nuclear Installations 7

Table 5: The comparison between calculated pressure and measured pressure.

Case no. Amplitude [mm] Measured pressure (MIP) [Pa] Calculated pressure (CIP) [Pa] Error (%)
12 500.62 354.6718 −29.1536
1 24 1549.30 1806.679 16.6126
36 2074.05 2678.605 29.14851
12 263.27 0 −100
2 24 913.30 793.3394 −13.1349
36 1243.44 1316.61 5.884514
12 397.514 40.209 −89.8856
3 24 1221.34 1248.657 2.236658
36 1579.48 1887.5 19.50133
12 757.21 743.9886 −1.74607
4 24 1753.86 2363.192 34.74232
36 2445.99 3253.825 33.02691

duration time experiments with more pressure sensors and [3] Y.-S. Choun and C.-B. Yun, “Sloshing analysis of rectangular
displacement sensors are needed to investigate the impact tanks with a submerged structure by using small-amplitude
pressure distribution and computation of impact force. water wave theory,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural
Dynamics, vol. 28, no. 7, pp. 763–783, 1999.

5. Conclusions [4] J. G. Li, Y. Hamamoto, Y. Liu, and X. Zhang, “Sloshing impact

simulation with material point method and its experimental
(1) In order to estimate the impact pressure imposed on validations,” Computers & Fluids, vol. 103, pp. 86–99, 2014.
the roof of water storage tank of AP1000, we proposed [5] M. Eswaran, U. K. Saha, and D. Maity, “Effect of baffles
a simplified method, which regarded approximately on a partially filled cubic tank: numerical simulation and
the difference between maximum wave height and experimental validation,” Computers & Structures, vol. 87, no.
roof height as the impact pressure head. 3-4, pp. 198–205, 2009.

(2) In order to verify the above method, we built a scaled [6] K. Fujita, T. Ito, and K. Okada, “Seismic response of liquid
experimental facility. sloshing in the annular region formed by coaxial circular
cylinders,” Engineering Computations, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 299–306,
(3) Using the experimental facility, we measured the 1985.
maximum sloshing wave height in the case of not [7] J. C. Virella, C. A. Prato, and L. A. Godoy, “Linear and nonlinear
having roof and the impact pressure in the case of 2D finite element analysis of sloshing modes and pressures
having roof. in rectangular tanks subject to horizontal harmonic motions,”
(4) By the above experiment, the simplified method was Journal of Sound and Vibration, vol. 312, no. 3, pp. 442–460,
considered to be conservative with a certain error of 2008.
no more than 35%. [8] S. K. Nayak and K. C. Biswal, “Nonlinear seismic response of a
partially-filled rectangular liquid tank with a submerged block,”
Journal of Sound and Vibration, vol. 368, pp. 148–173, 2016.
Competing Interests
[9] H. Akyildiz and E. Ünal, “Experimental investigation of pres-
The authors declare that they have no competing interests. sure distribution on a rectangular tank due to the liquid
sloshing,” Ocean Engineering, vol. 32, no. 11-12, pp. 1503–1516,
2005.
Acknowledgments
[10] Y. K. Song, K.-A. Chang, Y. Ryu, and S. H. Kwon, “Experimental
The project was sponsored by National Science and Technol- study on flow kinematics and impact pressure in liquid slosh-
ogy Major Project of the Ministry of Science and Technology ing,” Experiments in Fluids, vol. 54, no. 9, article 1592, 2013.
of China (2015ZX06004002-003). [11] A. Souto-Iglesias, G. Bulian, and E. Botia-Vera, “A set of
canonical problems in sloshing. Part 2: influence of tank width
on impact pressure statistics in regular forced angular motion,”
References Ocean Engineering, vol. 105, pp. 136–159, 2015.
[1] R. A. Ibrahim, Liquid Sloshing Dynamics: Theory and Applica- [12] F. Pistani and K. Thiagarajan, “Experimental measurements and
tions, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA, 2005. data analysis of the impact pressures in a sloshing experiment,”
Ocean Engineering, vol. 52, pp. 60–74, 2012.
[2] N. C. Pal, P. K. Sinha, and S. K. Bhattacharyya, “Finite element
coupled slosh analysis of rectangular liquid filled laminated [13] H. N. Abramson, “The dynamic behavior of liquids in moving
composite tanks,” Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites, containers, with applications to space vehicle technology,” Tech.
vol. 18, no. 15, pp. 1375–1407, 1999. Rep. NASA-SP-106, NASA, Washington, DC, USA, 1966.
8 Science and Technology of Nuclear Installations

[14] D. Lu, Y. Liu, and X. Zeng, “Experimental and numerical study

of dynamic response of elevated water tank of AP1000 PCCWST
considering FSI effect,” Annals of Nuclear Energy, vol. 81, pp. 73–
83, 2015.
[15] D. Lu, “Sloshing response of the free surface in the main vessel
of CEFR excited by 3 sine waves,” Chinese Journal of Nuclear
Science and Engineering, vol. 23, pp. 306–310, 2003.