See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/265844986

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF DESIGN OF RECTANGULAR WATER TANKS WITH

REFERENCE TO IS 3370

Conference Paper · March 2012

CITATIONS READS

0 3,214

1 author:

Bharat Bhushan Jindal

Shri Mata Vaishno Devi University
42 PUBLICATIONS   76 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Geopolymer Concrete View project

Development and design of geopolymer concrete View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Bharat Bhushan Jindal on 20 September 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 COMPARATIVE STUDY OF DESIGN OF RECTANGULAR WATER
TANKS WITH REFERENCE TO IS 3370
Bharat Bhushan Jindal1*, Ajay Goyal2 and Devinder Sharma3
1,2,3
Department of Civil Engg., Baddi University of Emerging Sciences and Technology,
Makhnumajra, Baddi, District Solan, H.P.-173205, India
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Abstract
Indian Standards has recently revised IS 3370 code of
practice for the design of liquid retaining structures. This
recently revised edition incorporated limit state design
method. IS 3370 -1965 version didn’t include the limit state
design method on the pre assumption that liquid retaining
structures should be crack free. However, this edition of
Indian Standards adopts limit state method mainly
considering two aspects. Firstly, it limits the stresses in steel
so that concrete is not over stressed and in the second aspect
it limits the cracking width.
In this study a rectangular water tank of storage capacity of
2500 kl was designed as per IS 3370 -2009 which included
these aspects as well as working stress method. The tank was
chosen as per the guidelines laid down in IS 3370-2009
edition. Water tank was designed as per the working stress
methods of both versions of IS 3370 as well as limit state
design method of IS 3370-2009. The results were then
compared.
It was found that the size of members as well as steel
requirement decreased significantly in limit state of
serviceability design method. However, the requirement of
area of steel increased in the limit state of deemed to satisfy
condition.
Keywords: water tank, limit state design method, IS 3370.
1. Introduction
Liquid storage tanks are commonly used in industries for
storing chemicals, petroleum products, etc. and for
storing water in public water distribution systems.
A reinforced concrete tank is a very useful structure for
the storage of water, sewage sedimentation and for other
similar purposes. Generally three kind of water tanks-
resting on ground, underground tanks and elevated tanks
are in use. The tanks resting on ground like clear water
reservoirs, settling tanks, aeration tanks etc. are supported
on the ground directly. The walls of these tanks are
subjected to pressure and the base is subjected to weight
of liquid and upward soil pressure. The tanks may be
covered on top.
From design point of view, the tanks may be classified as
per their shape as rectangular tanks, circular tanks, over-
head service reservoir (OHSR), and Intz type tank i.e.
OHSR for large capacity. Rectangular tanks are provided
for smaller to moderate capacity. For small capacities,
circular tanks prove uneconomical as the formwork for
*
Author for correspondence; E-Mail: bbjal1972@hotmail.com, Tel. +91 98 05782318
circular tanks is very costly. The rectangular tanks should
be preferably square in plan from point of view of
economy. It is desirable that longer side should not be
greater than twice the smaller side.
Three methods of design have been adopted so far i.e.
working stress method, ultimate load method and limit
state method. However, ultimate load method has become
obsolete these days.
Limit state design method, though semi-empirical
approach, has been found to be the best for the design of
reinforced concrete structures over the elastic theory of
design where the level of stresses in concrete and steel are
limited so that stress-deformations are taken to be linear.
There are two limit states- limit state of collapse and limit
state of serviceability which includes deflection and
cracking. The structure is first designed under limit state
of collapse and then checked under serviceability.
Because of its superiority over other two methods,
IS 456- 2000 has been thoroughly updated in its fourth
revision in 2000 taking into consideration the rapid
development in the field of concrete technology and
incorporating important aspects like durability etc.
This standard has put greater emphasis to limit state
method of design by presenting it in a full section
(section 5), while the working stress method has been
given in Annex B of the same standard.
Accordingly, structures or structural elements shall
normally be designed by limit state method.
A structure designed with limit state method when fail
occurs, the failure will be in plastic stage and not in
elastic stage. Therefore, the cracking and cracking width
can be significant at the failure stage.
Design Methods for Water Tanks
Working stress method of design, though was accepted in
the earlier times, has several limitations. However, in
situations where limit state method cannot be
conveniently applied, working stress method can be
employed as an alternative. It is expected that in the near
future the working stress method will be completely
replaced by the limit state method. The designer is free to
adopt any of these methods as per cl. 18.2 of IS 456-2000
is still left to the designer.
The liquid retaining structure should have limited
cracking width, this was the main reason why working
___________________________________________________________________________

stress method is used and the Indian Standard 3. Limit state design method with crack width
IS: 3370 -1965 did not adopt the limit state design calculations and check in accordance with IS 3370 -2009.
method even after adoption by IS: 456 – 1978 in other 4. Limit state design method deemed to satisfy (limiting
RCC structures. However, IS 3370 adopted limit state steel stresses) in accordance with IS 3370 -2009.
design method in 2009 with the following advantages -
limit state design method considers the materials 3. Results & Discussions
according to their properties , treats load according to
their nature , the structures also fails mostly under limit The design parameters and the section designed
state and not in elastic state and limit state method also component wise has been detailed here as under.
checks for serviceability. However, the calculations which are well established
which has not discussed here.
IS 3370-2009 adopts limit state design method with
precautions. It adopts the criteria for limiting crack width Rectangular Water Tank
when the structures are designed by considering ultimate
limit state and restricts the stresses to 130 MPa in steel as Roof Slab
per clause 4.4.3.1 so that cracking width is not exceeded
this is considered to be deemed to be satisfy condition. Maximum bending moment = 65.25 × 10 6 kNm
This precaution ensures cracking width to be less than 0.2
mm i.e. fit for liquid storage. This also specifies clearly Working Stress Limit state design
how a liquid storage structure differs with other structures Roof Slab Method method
in which upper limit for crack width is 0.3 mm as per IS 3370- IS 3370- Crack Deemed
clause 35.3.2 in IS:456-2000 . 1965 2009 Theory to satisfy
Thickness 250 250 154 154
A thorough study of both the versions of IS 3370 reveals mm
the following four methods of designs: Area of
Not Not
1. Working stress method in accordance IS 3370 -1965. steel, 1260 1260
2 Applicable Applicable
2. Working stress method in accordance IS 3370 -2009. mm
3. Designing by Ultimate Limit State and then checking
cracking width by limit state of serviceability as per Columns
guideline laid down in IS 3370 -2009.
4. Limit state design method by limiting steel stresses in Total load = 270 kN
accordance with IS 3370-2009 and checking cracking
width under serviceability. Working Stress Limit state design
Columns Method method
IS 3370- IS 3370- Crack Deemed
2. Objectives Of Study 1965 2009 Theory to satisfy
Area of
To analyze the design methods of liquid retaining Cross 122500 122500 40000 40000
structures suggested by IS 3370 both versions so that a Section
2
conclusion can be made as to which method is more mm
reliable and economical for a designer. Area of
To do the comparative study of provisions in IS 3370 - steel 980 980 1206 2387
mm2
1965 and IS 3370 -2009, a ground level water tank was
chosen for moderate capacity. One rectangular tank was
taken in this study. M30 grade of concrete and Fe-415
grade of tor steel was used conforming to the stresses Base Slab
specified in IS 3370 and IS 456.
Maximum bending moment = 75.30 kNm
Higher grade of steel was not selected, as in liquid
retaining structures permissible stresses in steel are Base Working Stress Limit state design
independent of grade of steel as per clause 4.5.3.2 of Method method
Slab IS 3370- IS 3370- Crack Deemed to
IS 3370 (Part 2 ) 2009. Grade of concrete has been taken 1965 2009 Theory satisfy
as M30, as minimum grade of concrete for RCC Thickness 230 230 230 230
structures is M30 as per IS 3370 (Part1 ) 2009. mm
Steel 2790 3220 1950 4137
As per discussion above, the water tank was designed by mm2
the following four design methods.
1. Working stress method in accordance with IS 3370 -
1965.
2. Working stress method in accordance with
IS 3370 -2009.
 ___________________________________________________________________________

Vertical Wall However, the steel requirement is higher in deemed to

satisfy condition in comparison to cracking width check
Bending Moment at base = 91.16 kNm/m method due to the limiting of steel stresses to 130 MPa
Axial Force at base = 55 kN/m earlier it was 140 MPa.

Vertical
Working Stress Limit State Design 4. Conclusions
Method Method
Wall
IS 3370- IS 3370- Crack Deemed Based on the results and discussions following
1965 2009 Theory to satisfy conclusions are arrived at:
Wall 1. As per working stress method design of IS 3370 -1965
thickness 520 520 230 230 and IS 3370 -2009, size of members remained same .
at bottom
mm However, the requirement of area of steel slightly
Wall increased in IS 3370 -2009 as the allowable stresses in
thickness steel were lower.
at mid 190 190 180 180 2. As per limit state of collapse design method and
height deemed to satisfy criteria of IS 3370 -2009 the size of
mm members remained same.
Steel at However, the requirement of area of steel increased in IS
base 1300 1925 1570 3900
3370 -2009 in deemed to satisfy criteria in comparison to
mm2
Steel at serviceability as the allowable stresses in steel were
mid height 4185 4830 904 4830 lower.
mm2 3. The size of members decreased for limit state design
method by IS: 3370 -2009 in comparison to working
stress design methods of both IS : 3370 -1965 and IS
Comparison of working stress method as per IS 3370- 3370 -2009 .
1965 & IS 3370-2009 However, steel requirement increased considerably for
limit state design method in comparison to working stress
The size of members remained same in both the cases. methods of both IS 3370 -1965 and IS 3370 -2009 .
Steel required has slightly increased while designing by 4. It was found that the provisions of reinforcement
IS : 3370-2009 provisions. through the surface zones in IS 3370 -2009 provides
economical and more effective reinforcement.
Comparison of limit state design methods as per IS However, it was also felt that IS 3370-2009 should have
3370-2009 provided direct tensile stress and compressive stress
under bending and limit state.
Size of members remained same in both the limit state of
collapse as well as deemed to satisfy conditions. References
Steel requirement increased in case of deemed to satisfy
condition due to the limiting of steel stresses to 130 MPa [1] Syal I. C., Goel A.K.,2010. Reinforced Concrete
earlier it was 140 MPa. Structures,4th Revised Edition, S.Chand & Co., New Delhi.

Comparison of working stress method and limit state [2] Robert D. Anchor, 1992. Design of Liquid Retaining
design method of IS 3370 both versions Concrete Structures, 2nd edition, British Library

The size of members decreased for limit state design
method by IS 3370 -2009 in comparison to working stress
design methods of both IS 3370 (1965 ) and IS 3370 -
2009 .
However, steel requirement increased considerably for
limit state design method in comaprison to working stress
methods of both IS 3370 (1965 ) and IS 3370 -2009 .
Comparison of limit state design methods of IS 3370
The size of members remained same in both design
methods of limit state method.
[3] IS 3370 ( Part I-IV )- 2009, Concrete Structures for the
Storage of Liquids – Code of Practice, Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi.
[4] IS 3370 ( Part II )- 1965, Code of Practice for Concrete
Structures for the Storage of Liquids, Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi.
[5] IS 456 -2000, Plain and Reinforced Concrete - Code of
Practice , Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.

View publication stats