NEPAL OIL CORPORATION, KATHMANDU, NEPAL

CONSTRUCTION OF POKHARA AVIATION FUEL STATION (AFS) AT

POKHARA
REGIONAL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, POKHARA, GANDAKI
PRADESH, NEPAL
Contract no: NCB/WORKS/NOC/POKHARA-04/2077-78

A report on
Structural analysis and design
Of
UNDERGROUND HOLDING TANK
FOR OWS

Prepared By:
Religare-Samanantar-BNH JV
(Aug, 2024)
Contents
List of Figures.........................................................................................................................................2
List of Tables..........................................................................................................................................2
List of Abbreviations and Symbols.................................................................................................3
Introduction...........................................................................................................................................4
Material properties:..............................................................................................................................4
Concrete............................................................................................................................................4
Steel reinforcement...........................................................................................................................4
RCC shearwall....................................................................................................................................4
Soil.....................................................................................................................................................5
Structural analysis and modelling procedures.......................................................................................5
Loads.................................................................................................................................................5
Fluid pressure................................................................................................................................5
Seismic design parameters....................................................................................................................5
Equivalent static method...................................................................................................................6
Soil pressure Load..............................................................................................................................6
Load Combinations:...........................................................................................................................7
Structural response:..............................................................................................................................8
Foundation check..............................................................................................................................8
ETABS design output.............................................................................................................................9
Crack width check................................................................................................................................11

List of Figures
Figure 1: 3D view of the OWS tank......................................................................................................4
Figure 2: horizontal base shear coefficient curves.................................................................................5

List of Tables
Table 1: Reduction factors adopted for cracked section analyses..........................................................4
Table 2: Base reactions of seismic load cases.......................................................................................8

2
List of Abbreviations and Symbols

A g = Gross areas of concrete.

Acc = Core area of concrete.
A st = Area of reinforcement
C d ( T ) = Horizontal base shear coefficient.
C h ( T )=¿ Spectral shape factor
E = Modulus of elasticity
f ck = Characteristic compressive strength of concrete
f y = Characteristic yield strength of concrete
H = Height of the structure
I = Importance factor
k = Constant or coefficient or factor
K v =¿vertical subgrade modulus ( K v ¿ equals
Ld = Development length
M u = Ultimate moment
M ulim = Limiting Moment of resistance
M ux = Design moment about xx axis
M uy = Design moment about yy axis
Pb = Axial load corresponding to the condition of maximum compressive strain
Pu = Design axial load for limit state design (factored load)
p = percentage of reinforcement
R = Response reduction factor
Ru=¿Ductility factor
T = Empirical fundamental amplified time period
T1 = Empirical fundamental time period of the structure
V u = Shear force due to factored loads
x u = depth of neutral axis
x u ,lim ¿ ¿ = Limiting value of depth of neutral axis
Z = Seismic zoning factor
α =¿ Spectral shape factor
τ v = Nominal shear
τ bd = Design bond stress
τ c = Shear stress in concrete
τ c, max = Maximum shear stress in concrete with shear reinforcement
Ω s=¿Over-strength factor under serviceability conditions
Ωu =¿Over-strength factor
µ = Poisson’s Ratio
γ = Weight per unit volume
ρ = Density

3
Introduction
This report outlines the general methods implemented to analyze and design of underground
tank for OWS (Figure 1). The RCC structure is 3.1 m in height.

Figure 1: 3D view of the OWS tank

Material properties:
The material specifications of the structural components of the buildings follow IS 875 (Part
1) [2] and are as follows.

Concrete
Concrete of M25 (with E=25000 MPa, μ=0.2, and γ =25 kN/m3) has been adopted for grade
all structural components. The sections are assumed as cracked with following reductions to
moments of inertia.

Table 1: Reduction factors adopted for cracked section analyses

Element I 11 and I 22 A g1 and A g2

Wall 0.5 Ec (cracked) 0.40 Ec

Steel reinforcement
HYSD bars of grade Fe500 [11] (with E=200000 MPa, μ=0.3, and ρ=7850 kg/m3) has
been adopted for the structure.

RCC shearwall
250 mm thick walls are used as per design.

4
Soil
This work takes an SBC of 175 kPa. Soil type is taken as type “C” according to NBC Clause
4.1.3. The vertical subgrade modulus ( K v ¿ equals
K v =40 × FS × SBC =40 ×3 × 175=21000 kN/m3

Structural analysis and modelling procedures

A full three-dimensional finite element model is created in ETABS. Beams and columns are
modelled as frame elements whereas floor slabs and staircases are modelled as shell
elements. All reinforced concrete elements are modelled as cracked sections using pertinent
reduction factors (see Table 1). The base consists of combination of combined and isolated
footings, supported by area springs of K v =21000 kN/m3.
Loads
Surcharge load
Dynamic active soil pressure
Soil pressure at rest
Fluid pressure
Static active soil pressure
Static rest soil pressure

Figure 2: horizontal base shear coefficient curves

Note:Along earthquake direction other than applied wall, soil at rest is considered

Seismic design parameters

The seismic load at ultimate limit and serviceability limit states are adopted as per NBC
105:2020 [1]. Two methods, i.e. (a) equivalent static method, and (b) response spectrum
method, are implemented in the analyses. The structure is of moment resisting frame
configuration. Specific parameters adopted for the structure are:
Seismic zoning factor: 0.3 for Pokhara
Importance factor: 1
Soil type: C
Over-strength factor (Ωu ): 1.3
Over-strength factor under serviceability conditions (Ω s): 1.15
Ductility factor ( Ru): 3

5
Equivalent static method
Height of the structure, H=3.25 m ( including foundation base )

Empirical fundamental time period of the structure,

3
3/ 4
T 1=k t H 4 =0.05 ×3.25 =0.1196 seconds
Empirical fundamental amplified time period:
T =1.25 ×T 1=0.1495 seconds
Since T lies below T c =1second, the spectral shape factor is thus:
C h ( T )=α=2.5
The horizontal base shear coefficient at ultimate state is then
C (T ) ZI 2.5× 0.3 ×1
Cd (T )= h = =0.192
R μ Ωu 3 ×1.3
Calculation for exponent (K):
Time Period(T) K
<0.5 1

Figure 08: horizontal base shear coefficient curves

Soil pressure Load

The active earth pressure and soil pressure at rest is applied using non uniform shell load
pattern in etabs.The additional surcharge load has been applied using boussinesq’s theory.

Height of Wall 3.1 m

Unit Weight of Soil 18 KN/cu.m.
Vertical Seismic coefficient(Av) 0.192
Horizontal Seismic coefficient(Ah) 0.192
Angle of Internal Friction(Φ) 30 degrees

6
 0.524 radians
Angle between earth surface and vertical(α) 0 degrees
0 radians
Angle of friction between wall and earthfill(δ) 20 degrees
0.349 radians
λ 0.16 0.233
Coefficient of Active Earth Pressure(Ca) 0.497 0.399 (22.1.1, page 12)
Usuable value for Ca 0.497
Total Active Earth Pressure(Pa) 42.98 KN/m (22.1.1, page 12)
Coefficient of Static Active Earth Pressure 0.33 (22.1.1.2, page 13)
Static Active Earth Pressure 28.54 KN/m (22.1.1.2, page 13)
Point of Load Application 1.033 m above base (22.1.1.2, page 13)
Dynamic Active Earth pressure 14.44 kN/m
Point of Application 1.55 m
Surcharge load 20 kN/m2

Load Combinations:
Load combinations at limit state as per NBC 105:2020 are as follows:
1.2 DL+1.5≪¿
DL+ 0.3≪± E Q x , y
DL+ 0.3≪± E QS x , y
DL ± EQx / y ± Psoil
DL ± EQx / y ± Poil

where,
DL: dead load (self-weight + super-imposed dead load),
LL: live load,
EQ: earthquake load (equivalent static),
R: earthquake load (response spectrum),
EQS: serviceability earthquake load (equivalent static),
RS: serviceability earthquake load (response spectrum),

7
WL: wind load acting on the structure.
Note that the subscripts x and y denote the direction of applied forces. The earthquake loads
are applied under both serviceability and ultimate conditions.

Structural response:
This work performs linear static analyses of the Recovery tank. Table 2 presents pertinent
base reactions for the seismic loads for OWS Tank. (See. Figure 1).

Table 2: Base reactions of seismic load cases

Output Case My
Case Type Step Type FX FY Mx
kN kN kN-m kN-m
Step By -67.5831 219.6452
eqy LinStatic 0
Step
Step By -67.5831 219.6452
eqx LinStatic 0 0
Step

Foundation check
The thickness of footing is 300mm.
Soil pressure check

Serviceability condition (40 kN/m2 ie <soil bearing capacity)

8
 Top flexural reinforcement at base ( 747.54 mm2/m )

Bottom flexural reinforcement at base ( 576 mm2/m )

ETABS design output

Horizontal reinforcement
factored moment (M11) = 48.943 kNm-m
factored shear(V13) = 68.642 kN/m

design of reinforcement:

9
steel grade,fy = 500 Mpa
concrete grade,fck = 25 Mpa
total depth of slab/wall,D = 250 mm
clear cover = 35 mm
effective depth,dh = 205 mm
width = 1000 mm
factored moment at face of horizontal stem = 48.943 kN-m

calculation of area of steel

Ast = 548.8422 mm2
dia = 12 mm
spacing = 150 mm
area of bar = 113.04 mm2
Ast provided = 753.6 mm2

shear reinforcement check

longitudinal steel area = 753.6 mm2

member width = mm2
member depth = 205 mm
steel% = 0.36761
Tuc = 0.410283 Mpa
member shear capacity = 84.108 kN
design force due to shear rebar = -15.466 kN
spacing = 150 mm
dia = 12 mm
area of bar = 113.04 mm2

Vus = 134.4046 kN
ok

Vertical rebar
factored moment (M22) = 34.799 kNm-m
factored shear(V23) = 40 kN/m

design of reinforcement:
steel grade,fy = 500 Mpa
concrete grade,fck = 25 Mpa
total depth of slab/wall,D = 250 mm
clear cover = 35 mm
effective depth,dh = 205
width = 1000 mm
factored moment at face of vertical
stem = 34.799 kN-m

10
check for depth
M=0.36fck*b*x(d-0.42x)
required depth = 250 mm

calculation of area of steel

390.232
Ast = 7 mm2
dia = 12 mm
spacing = 150 mm
area of bar = 113.04 mm2
Ast provided = 753.6 mm2

shear reinforcement check

longitudinal steel area = 753.6 mm2

member width = mm2
member depth = 205 mm
steel% = 0.36761
0.41028
Tuc = 3 Mpa
member shear capacity = 84.108 kN
design force due to shear rebar = -44.133 kN
spacing = 150 mm
dia = 12 mm
area of bar = 113.04 mm2

134.404
Vus = 6 kN
ok

Crack width check

width of the wall, b= 1000 mm
Depth of the wall, D= 250 mm
Area of steel in tension zone= 753.6 mm2
Clear cover= 35 mm
Effective cover at tension zone= 36 mm
Area of steel in compression
zone= 753.6 mm2
Modulus of elasticity for steel= 2x10^5 N/mm2
Effective Depth=d 214 mm

11
For crack width(Wcr) as per IS 456: 2000, Annex F,

acr= sqrt((S/2)^2+(dc)^2)-db/2

S= Spacing of reinforcement
S= 150 mm
dc= Effective Cover
dc= 36 mm
db= Dia of main reinforcement
db= 12 mm
acr= 148.260

Calculation for Depth of Neutral Axis, X

We have,
(b*X) *X/2+(m-1)*Asc * (X-dc) = mAst*(d-X)
where,
modular ratio= Es/Ec= Constant used for strain
m= compatibility
As per IS:456-2000,
Ec= modulus of Elasticity of Concrete.
Ec=5000 (fck)^0.5/(1+ϴ) (For Long Term)
Where, ϴ= Creep Coeficient
Considering long term Creep, ϴ=1.1), IS456-2000,Cl.6.2.5.1

m= (2x10^5)/(500/(1+1.1)*(25)^0.5
m= 20.8
From Eq.1,
1000*X^2/ 2+(8-1)*753.6*(X-36)=20.8* 753.6*(214-x)
On Solving,

X= 63.4 mm

Calculation for ϵm

ϵm= ϵ1- b(h-x)(a-x)/(3 Es (d-x))

ϵ1= Strain at level based on cracked section analysis

(strain at concrete at the level of steel)
ϵs= (fc/Ec)-My / (Icr x Ec)
ϵs= Strain in longitudinal steel.

Here,
Icr= Moment of inertia for cracked section

12
Icr= (b x X^3) / 3 + m. Ast(d-x)^2+ (m-1) Asc x (X-d')^2

Icr= 451660922.9 mm4

and ,
y= Distance from NA to the tensile steel location
d-X
150.6 mm

Considering long term creep, ϵs= fc/Ec

ϵs= M x Y/(Icr x Єc)

M= 35 KN-m

ϵs=
0.0012137
due to direct strain
ϵd= 0.0005

ϵ1= ϵs x (a-x)/(d-x)+ϵd

ϵ1=
0.0015

ϵm= ϵ1- b(h-x)(a-x)/(3 Es (d-x))

0.0015038-1000x(250-63.4)(250-63.4)/(3X200000X(214-63.4))

6.81E+1
0.000992 0

Crack width, Wcr= 3 acr ϵm

1+2(acr-Cmin)
(h-x)

Wcr= 0.16163 mm

13
As crack width, Wcr=0.162mm is less than 0.2mm, Hence safe.

14
References
[1] NBC 105 (2020): Nepal national building code
[2] IS:875 (Part 1) – (1987) Code of practice for design loads (other than earthquake)
for buildings and structures, part 1, dead loads – unit weight of building materials
and stored materials (second revision)
[3] IS:875 (Part 2) – (1987) Code of practice for design loads (other than earthquake)
for buildings and structures, part 2 imposed load (second revision)
[4] IS 456:2000 Code of practice for plain and reinforced concrete (fourth revision)
[5] Bowles, J. E. (1988). Foundation analysis and design.
[6] Murthy, V. N. S. (2002). Geotechnical engineering: principles and practices of soil
mechanics and foundation engineering. CRC press.
[7] IS 1893 (Part 1) – (2016) Criteria for earthquake resistant design, part 1, general
provisions and buildings
[8] IS 1893 (Part 2) – (2014) Criteria for earthquake resistant design, part 2, liquid
retaining tanks
[9] IS 1893 (Part 3) – (2014) Criteria for earthquake resistant design, part 2, bridges
and retaining walls
[10] SP 7 – (2005) National building code of India
[11] IS 1786 – (2008) High strength deformed steel bars and wires for concrete
reinforcement
[12] Subramanian, N. (2013). Design of reinforced concrete structures. Oxford
University Press.
[13] IS SP 16 – (1980) Design Aids for Reinforced Concrete.

15