Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Tall Chimneys by Snmanohar PDF
Tall Chimneys by Snmanohar PDF
2OtF Ede ay 204208 es WyFOUNDATIONS 91 2 ors wre wet - 08-0 OEO-ve = sco Wee Os ule EO- 8 MU WLE-o = a0 (er -wersuueyy so-w- | s9-0 | vote w-s- | 0x0 a: 1a- 4 1 os ae isi [omer- Sr) Ee he 2} se: 7st -2- | o5-0 ; MED SHE) = Sh EE te eae a: St st sz-e- | sro Qvor 3NI1 ont Tava Ting sro movy, OL bax 5909 = by 4ib I LE pez Fo o2 1 t84 TALL cHImNeys . ro Ma | Ma >| Cu (by | Fig, 6.6 64 Shells of Revolution In order to economise on foundation Sent a chimney shatt is often enarged in. the form of | & shell of revolution, Such 4 shell often takes the form of a one-sheet hyperboloid ora cone | Of revolution. The former is an efte, anhalt sites i has good buckling strensth cen | regemonth stress transition atthe shattteay interface and also permits the use ef straight reinforcement, For ovaluating stresses in shel of revo tion first, rine forces are eleuated considering the shell as simply supported Hs bottom edge will undereo displacement and Feamion Which then have 1 be neutralise) $1 edge Fores and moments since the edge cy fed to the raft. Supcrimposing tne ts due (© membrane forces on those ereated by edge Toads, final design forces and moments ane obtained (@) Membrane Forces & conical shell and a one-sheot yperhotoid are analysed for the following nine load conditions: 1. Seleweight 2 Axial distributed toad at the waist circle 3. Moment at the waist circle Shear at the waist circle Horizontal pressure +) Nertical pressure} linearly varying with height Normal pressure Moment applied at the base Shear applied at the base @ Truncated Cone A conical shell and its element are shown in f ig. 6.7. The membrane eq ad do ANOS © 9 op Pes© form of tora cone vgth, crea- of straight calculated ment and he edge is ed byedge nine toad (66) : Nem =pe-s-cot p Such a shells analysed for the nine load cases listed above and the detailed analytical pro- cedite for evaluating stresses under three of the load cases is given a Appendix C. The method of analysis for other load cases is similar and hence not Feproduced, but the results for all cases are tabulated in Table 6.19, i) Hyperbotoia A one-sheet hyperboloid and its element under membrane forces are shown in Fig. 6.8. The equations for shell geometry and membrane forces are: 22, ae 67 from which and sin p= Boca[PF 96 TALL CHIMNEYS, Tams 6.19 TRUNCATED CONE ED CONE POSITIVE VALUES _ARi 1 Ng. 0nd Ng: When tensile 2 Nig When acting in increasing direction of @ 3A, © When tongent rotates outward ot support 4 6 When inword ~9S oSd cotd ; Shear <0 oto Et End 2 22 Pere g 97-142, anak cove) ° | BSF cos? = Ps m8 Mer EP OS +e 2 wo (4682 Wee sin gp (6S) - 20) £ovd pes, singS for cases 3&4 Detlections and Rotations 2 fore unreat but mey be used “for eesign’ ene O° reters to values ct support Sheor = 0 ~S(S~5.) sin2o cose AL sin ® costo (9-20-225) 2, 2 ECE Se) sintep FoR SS: FoR S58 Nett bs (2865329 Se 8?) cos Linearly Varying Vertical Ne yNg & Shear 3 Pressure’ Ng = ~kS(S-S.) cos'o 3 Shears 0 cot cos9 59 9, 2 0, = Raat. S34 4.25124 “Sees e e a: E Boot (19+3 = 13-25,)] ET (Ng 0-2 Ng) Moments -And Shears eM cog sin( AL +y) 2 2 N2- V2 ane, 2 sin( +? ~ 2 )eorg Me = an OM sina a pe rs) = is 0-20Ms 292 22 ° EY sin? S War? Et G20? x * + C-sin( P — FOR @_lineariy Varying Normal Pressure ¢_Nermal Pressure _| FOR S$ = Se: Nya Ng @ Shear =o S> Se Ng = “ASO (287 95, 52a 5.9) “= KS(S28,) cos@ 3 Shear: 0 bcos cotd (163 263 ASEM (160-951? - 5,9) = ~kR eds 6LEt (-5:6024 5-4 512+ 0-252)98 TALL CHIMNEYS Waist Circle (@:%) Fo. 6.8 1 forces yields, dNe dC ay? Noprcosp Ne dNy ty Ney ries’ ~ Neves 1 NN Nw Ne Doo (68)
=P ohne ‘o* Tame be =P oh i aa Mon TeTaEES 5 hers 0 ae % = Shr On ate P R; <%, 2 = avery, (02+ &) e828 7M [Q) Moment “M’ at Waist Circle oF . eT) é © "o° Se 5 No =~ Matighe, core : | ers Sr fie sino “a B =t aM j,) iW (mi @ ie Ma 32 fb * * EEC O7Ny” My) 383 ZN |@ Shear "P™ At waist circle g : “Pb ese Ta Pp e ra sing 1 a7 ; ~P.ab sing cos 0 z Kors os fim te ~pe Shear = “LEE singon, 100 TALL CHIMNeYS Pressure hive. sing BL (5 ~ 47) i, ter cases,FOUNDATIONS 101 Fig. 6.9 hs above equations are applicable to a hypetboloid and si shell will have the form given below. k “« pe Be ['206-m)-e-£e%-0a m9] Values of Neand Np (or Ns) as obtained from membrane analysis are substituted in the above equations to yield the edge displacement and rotation Relevant expressions for each load cise for a conical shell are given in Table 6.19. In the ance ofa hyperboloid, these Sapressions are cumbersome and hence are presented in Table 6.20 with tte help of coeflici- ERG indus cle, These coefficients have been evaluated for a range of shell-geometry parame: ‘ers and their values presented in Tables 6.21 to 6.25 for ready use in design office, 8 (©) Fage Loading For a shell subjected to symmetrical edge forces location is given by the equation, Qr= Cre sin (Yb y) (6.10) nd moments (Fig. 6.10), shear foree at any where Fora cone (he above equations will be 1,30 =CreMsin (M+) and dey = 00=C1 sin (M+y) Viboae be oh RNR102 TALL chimneys, TABLE 621 Vaters oF ComricteNts fafa jy PO ww ewe eg 2°16 go" Ria 15 12 1079 367 1899 40 v0 47 —a.a9p HAH BOGE aauRs eos 1g R46 1493 190 2616 ust 0.2! “os 287 8.0773 0.0582 0.0370 b.0239 Tp ESB 1854 2346 3.245 0109 —aans ons ests 0.0651 0.0870 0.9129 o.usi7 Te 2ale 2376 2.951 3.908 0.27 —ossy cane leet 88572 0.0120 9099 O19) Ty 29H 2468 3419 5.312 nas nar aan lus HOSIS OOS LOE Holes Ty Rat 227 ase 479 0397 Carn any fe HOI 0.038% Gorse oardd 19 203 3289 2775 $215 0652 cosy funy ue OHS OURS OU29 Lares bo zane 227 403 305 “ons ous ig ft 8.0405 0.0308 0.0228 Gratsd 2 284 3454 4.357 G06 —-o3nt “ton Dy T1316 8.0380 0.0290 0.025 KoLaS 32 29% 3.67 4.630 6391 Lost Ova 1 “LYK 0.0358 COME 00302 OOLIe 23 3286 Sam 4499 6983 Coos Li OER 17 901M 0.0260 voI92 golaD 3a 3428 4085 5.09 T4038 Lor “hay LFS Fest 90822 047 WoIsd meaty Fo 2596 4206 3399 rary te ie OL? 1629 Hose M486 MaNIs atone 25 3361 4479 S60 TIM 00217 re 4s 32S 2812 269 02010 -o2018 “ors mores ace OM 0.877 0.683 9 0.0199 16 3052 3.173 3.273 3.350 —0.2084 —o.1926 —o.1804 1780 1.396 1.091 o.86¢ 5 oles i 17 3.495 3864 3.978 4065 —o.1974 “o.ted0 0.1737 2417 1674 1323. 1.061 5 o0173 | 184439 4596 4725 4.823 0.1875 Lotto ~oie 2478 1.972 Ls 1.273 ) ores 19 S194 5.370 S.518 5.625 —0.1787 0.1685 0.1607 2.862 2.289 11837 1.500 5 aise 20 $989 6.186 6347 6470 —0.1706 —oI6I6 —oIS46 3.268 2626 2118 1.740 5 oo1ds ! 31 G826 70H 7.222 7388 —o.4162 “oss! colaas 3.696 2.981 2.415 1.995 > 0013s 22 2703 7946 6.140 8.290 9.156) —o.149 —o.tasd 4146 3.354 2729 2.264 » 00132 24 ony Oats QUO! 2265 oso 0144 “ose “ose goi9 sank oD. 2546 3 00126 25 waar eset (49 1028 ots —oise 0.1333 ots Sta aie 3252 2842 5 00120 25 1088 1089 ILI 134 —o1389 —o4s2 —o.l268 Moss Sane EHS 3.762 3151 ) oons a | + 160 | | Ria | J Osis oan C202 OATTL 0.498 0.385 0.295 0.227 0.4050 04969 —a-ers7 812 1.72 UY O3ue Gua? O27E 02258 0729 0.880 o46t 0372 Soar Woswe eet? 274 1S gang QR 028i 0.2615 0.990 0.904 0.655 058 —oatis asses Woe m2 Le Oa9en gt 23137 02988 1.279 1.053 0.872 0.78 oar Wos3e0 oes 218 3037 re gens 23008 9.3380 0.215 1.595 1.526 1.119 0981 —o@al —o52e Loe, BS 3sI6 La gary RAIN 0.3882 03427 1936 1.623 L374 1.199 —0.4293 Losi Does 234 4008 18 04210 0.2951 0.3781 0.3605 2/302 1.656 1443-04110 —0.4983 —o.6365 S65 sat ry gaunay QARSE O.2895 0.3756 2.602 2282 1.958 1716 “o3%2 Loata? —oNies a8 5129 34 0482 04198 04017 0.3885 3.106 2644 2.278 2.006 —0.385) —o4erl osu 133. 5727 24 04320 0.4125 0.3996 3.542 3.026 2618 246 —03726 ~o4si7 Los77O OL 6355 22 vasv7 4214 0.4092 4.002 3.429 2.976 2.639 —0,3603 0.4367 U3879 Si 7014 23 0.661 0.4294 0.4176 4.485 2852 2.352 2981 0.3484 04224 —osI95 385 7.708 2a oar OA364 04249 4.990 4.295 3.787 Ja4y —03370 ~04086 0.3219 OM sa 25 OATIS 0457S 04826 O4NI4 5.518 4.758 4.159 3.714 “03262 “oayss Losos Lea 839 9173 — eee = ss108 TALL cHIMNEYS Tame 6.25 VALENS OF Corba dis hein W808 a aye gan Oar RS OHS 0.258 OAM O41 062 OK —a gy 0.218 -a27% ~o.e7 OR O34 Ona OSH OSI wat ast Te O86 OS assy Ost ots S30) Bste— 203 ost om Lo Lue Bee =O ~0972 1384, ose rag? 0957 Lass on ow Lite Tay 22s LIM =1a38 “3/00 fos RF 131 aes ost ame 15) pgp 2? 1S 1965 toe tan EMS 253 0a Loss ihe tag oh? 2.000 tap 2a REC 29m oem ue iy um WE 250% Pode aan 260 362 o96s Lim Lay dons Te Ross 2585 =m 2.002 2.427 3.100 4.319 t.001 1.218 1 sen ROH 480 2046 264 3.683 S062 Los Hist | son 1200 5.450 220 27 3.286 4.200 Sais tose Lew 4930 Sx 23° 3.096 3.759 4705 Gore tase t S09 Fh tang FE 2500 4200 S29 2851 To aay ee 208 810 Ls 25 382 4.157 606 Ras tis tasy 2 TG 9S E59 Values of constants Cy and y are determined trom dee conditions. For the case when an ede | shear oF ede montent is ating on I! expressions fir masimut ede dey moments ina shell, tion, shell, ete. have been deter. mined and ate listed in Tables 6.19 and 6.20, {niially, the edge displacement and rota, tion is obtained using membrn Values of corrective ede fore alysis and moments 10 be applied are the obtained such. thar these edge movements are nullified. ‘The complete procedure for one typical land case Fig. 6.10 is given in Example 6.2 in See. 6.3, 65 Mlustrative Examples Examen 6.1 Seopa wat alt (Fis. 6.114) supports an anal load ot Sonn EN and a bendin Sine’ EN-m from a chimney shell Ths sol one bechey ees lato the maxinun sol pressure under the abo and ev; supported tHe fal at its junction with the shart, Niece anprted on piles as shown in Fig. 6.11h. In boat oge and in the latter case népect the weight af the south acy roment of 's sheawn in the fisure, Cate Hluate the maximum radial ie iy moment if the raft is raft nerlest the sell-welght of the so,FOUNDATIONS 105 54.000 kN ’ é ww 8-0m (2) an edge | a shell, ection, n deter- | nd 6.20. W rota that 4. The i vad case rent of ro, Cale radial sralt is I he raft (b) + FiggatLem mace “108 TALL CHIMNeYS Solution 42 56 80 end? og Bm oF m07 @ Annutar Rafi Soil pressure due to axial toad (Eq. (6.2)}, . pa M000 PSU oot) 9-7 RNG . Maximum soit pressure duc o moment Eq, (A.1)] j 580004 x 81-048) = 480 KN/sg.m Edge pressure duc to earth surcharge (Table 6.8), gs 025-1 ~2.8 RN go Total 464.9 kN - Hence, maximum soil pressure is 464.9 kNJsu.m Moment at junction with shaft will be Afes (ie, Meat f=) Me, Dat {0 axial load (Table 6.3)= ~ 4.598 «319.7 <8" 10-2= —940'S kNem/m Due fo moment (Table 6.5)= ~ 4.027 <148.0)<8°« 10-2 ~ 4814 bt myn Pueto buckill (Fable 6.7) 15.625. 85 1g s 0.6 kNemym Bending moment at rafi/shaft junction is ~ 1321.6 kN anion r (i) Annutar Pile Cop By Moment of inertia of pile eroup (7.52424 stews! 18 eos! 30 beox? $4 peaye 2 1 (10) 5.0510) +3. Pealeos? 1S? Leos” $4 pf tr © 127285 m he js $4000, S800 4 " Maximum load on a ite (Fy 6.5) y= 5404 ‘ppras) 77 MALS AN at Similarly, maximum toads on the piles in other rings will he & PA=IOSTAKN, — py=99K4KN and py ©9394 KN There are 20 piles in the outer ring and maximum losud Pee unit circumfeventiat tently for So. the outer ring, M118%20 ao) g kai Png! TAILS KN, sin Similarly, Pre SBS Nim, Py=63S6KN mand Pe 404.) kNim From Fig. (6,5b), 1 O7x8 = 2067.6 KN/in R= [AT1.9 %7.5)4(534.3 % 6.3) (635.65 5.0) ) 404.103.7))22')} ) Uh for FOUNDATIONS 107 ‘The pile cap is now considered as a full raft simply supported at ing loads ~ Pi, ~ Pa, ~ Ps and ~ P4 at the respective radii tn the charts and tables for ring londs on a circular plate, Ba is defited as the radius at which the sing load is applied. Hence for load Pi, P= 7.5/8.00.94 and from Chart 6.2 con _ficient for Afr} -a is ~ 5.6% 10°2 at f= 0.7 as well as at f= 04, Rest of the calculations are tabulated below: 1.0 and loaded with Ring Load Load Location (9) M,x 10a (at f=0.1) Mx 10a at faba) ey "HSGNNS =426084Sexa7L9 Saaee +170%584.3 =49083 —4:17.0%534.3 = 4.9083 HBSX638.6 HITS) 4248x6386 415763 FNL6 404.1 4688 +28.2x4081 = 11396 21.9 2067.6 —45280 Toial 6395 Applying an equal and opposite moment Af, at f~2, the radial moment at f=B is Ma(Eq. (2) = 511.694 {4 $e 101.4 KN-m/m Design moment Mje= ~1368.6+ 101.4 = ~ 1267.2 kN-m/m ‘This problem was analysed using the finite clement method which yielded Mf, KN-mjm = 1145 Exampue 6.2 The lower portion of a chimney shell is enlarged in the form of a onesshcot _hyperboloid to ‘transmit the load to an annular foundation. Axial load from the shaft is 97.750 KN and the horizontal wind shear and moment transmitted by the cylindrical shaft to the hyperboloid at its waist circle are 3800 KN and 3 11 000 KN-m respectively. Calculate the meridonal force At the base of the hyperboloid where itis fixed to the raft, With reference to Table 6.20, the geometrical properties of the hyperboloid are, astm, el06m, eT, ndDem, Sato / 7 Sin 72209511 co 7203000, foo 9/26 wtt4s, Baas a b Si cot? “7 . set —-= 2.02 sine vo @(1- 8), were 2 = 11.1453 «2.022 88.26 Ri a 88, 25000%0.4 _ mn 8 Op 710 KNIsq.m + Am 1.3(~ 88.26)/\/ [L145 x04 = ~ 54.34108 TALL CHIMNEYS From Table 6.21, /1 1.583 for Rja= 1.325. Js= +0.0524, ja= ~0,0749 and js — 0.1477. imitarly from other tables we get j2= —0.2633, Dre Membrane Analysis: Metidonal membrane lorces (Ny) ate obtained using Table 6.20 Due to self’ weight = — 10 x 8(1.583) = 97750. 2x 10.6 x 0.9511 = 3800 > 2.02 73H 1060.951 =311000 FR 10.6 09ST Due to axial load = Due to shear=: El Due to moment = =9263 A Total Ny = - 2785.0 kNim “ = 3800 8 «0.9511 Tax 202% 10.6) ‘Ne ue to moment) = —314 000% 80 = =1170 ‘No (due to shear)= Hen: T74 Total Rotation at base [rosesc-oae- P72 cane 00 oy) 3800 gen (ray) | ~o1aT)] = 279% Inward deflection at base [ircfostnasscacios(o2e 84.) racoh =H8.36 =97 750 ditas 6 (02+ ) + 10.604 ~0.2°:926.14:11705 4+-10.60(0.2(— tsos20.n]= = 44686 We now apply uniform edge shear Hand moment Af (directions as shown in Fig. 6.10) in order to eliminate base rotation and displacement since the shell is fixed to the rate Due to Shear Ht Cie VF xO9SII W= ~ 1.345, y= fom SSSI 1S IN eos 2/0) aps.ng ye, 180.9511 = 346.18 H/E, «(sy (= 1.345 H) sin (+ 0.2633, » so} 17.0} 10) in Due to Moment Mt c Minvinan At the edge where ¢ Hence SM oa ate 0 \ hs at ~ RAE TIIS(—1.235 31) 608 0° apy 96 4 (F134 aD sin (= 4) Design %, MOIS 20.58 = 4468 0 (Table 6.20, case 7), 2755 ~ + 1.345 x 13.65 x 22 from whieh and ‘cot Po sin y 0.3090 O.95i1 2759 kN/m Mf 4) 0.9511 un M 13.65 kN x (=00.707) FOUNDATIONS 109 224.58 M/E = 1.15 kN-m 4 kNjm7 ELASTIC DESIGN ina Mey structure f subjected to a combination of frees ang from Ta awe weit, faces gaumeratue dicen earthyuake, ete. The interaction sf thee pron nn be taker fo account which makes chimney-design process. complex, It is normal practice to I tor adorn uy sell by conditing an clastic anal for sai onde anda vinseauaey by the linitstate approach. Thereafena cheek eimai ae eee the structure can safely withstand transient dynamic loads 7.1 Loads The various tnads and corresponding permissible strewsss that need tw be considered are sheeted fn codes of practice and hence not repeated here. Its important te remember that Wind and seismic forces need not be considered to act simultaneously. 7.2 Shell Analysis The combined ction of various toads produces vertical and ei ‘umferential stresses ina chimney shell. These stresses av evaluated as given below on assumption that the shell antes a greseseeton, circular in plan and of uniform thickness and teat thickness) diameter ratio is siaSIGN wn weight, 1s has to be practice to then cheek © that the idered are ember that esses in a the shell hickness/ ELASTIC DESIGN 111 (@)_ Vertical Stresses Due to Aviat fond and a Moment Netti sess are caused by dead leds with oF without a moment due to wind or seismic installations a single chimney serves more than one steam generator and hence for fue gas entry more than one opening at the same elevation is provided ins chine ney shell. The analytical procedure presented below permits evaluation of stresses in a chin: ney shell with such multi-lue openings. Consider a circular shell with four openings subjected to a vertical axial load (W) and a ‘moment (1) with wind direction as shown in Fig. 7.1. During seismic analysis, this direction should be the one tlong which seismic forces are considered to act, Neutral -Axis within Section (B-
g.|f0s:ifartman
eas) | Lanes) yg | fas fn
oqur 46 308 TS | oat |
oasis 130 56] 0.0668. 97 75 0.5306 130/60 | 02713 —0.140s 097m
sss 29 | = = 2, 032 pigs fom en? OF
0.4982 130 $6 | 9.0859 100 75° 0.5634 130) 61 [0.3477 0.184 o.9529
0375 130 Gs | 0.0227 92 75, 9.8911 130] 65. | 0.0795 —O.OH4 0.9971
0.5953 127 6s | = =! 08983 aartes | et OT
05121 130 $6 | 01039 102 75) 0.5923. 30! 0.9308
O64 130 6S | 0.0850 95 75| 0.6488 130, Go 0.9887
OGi7 8 66 | 0.0298 92 75; 0.6883 a8 ler 09972
Ose BS et] - = 0.6708 125) 67 =
0.8235 130 s5| 0.4203 105 75| 0.6175 130 0.5056
06199 130 63 | 0.0655 (97 73) Oeym2 130 o.578s
Og 129 67 | 0.0483 95 75, O209 139 0'9892
07273 126 68| 00230 92 75) Oasl Ia 09873
O76 13 | = = | O68 18 =
Wind shear Q acting at an angle @ from the ¥ axis, will yield shear forces Qx=Q sin @ and
2y~Q cos 0 and resulting shear stresses fos and for have been evaluated for different B and
values. Theit maximum values together with the location (7°) and wind direetion at which
they occur (ie. 0° from the centre of opening of half angle B) are given in Table 7.2.
7.4. Deflection
‘A tapered chimney is treated as a cantilever beam with a varying moment of inertia in order
to evaluate lateral displacements under wind loads and duc to insolation effects (Sec. 5.7).
7.5 Corbel Effect
Brick lining is often supported off corbels projecting from the concrete shell (Fig. 7.7(a)).
The magnitude of the montent due to corbel load can be substantial particularly when a large
‘sap is provided between the lining and shell for inspection purposes. A corbel moment pro-
duces compressive and tensile stresses similar to those due to a temperature differential
(See. 5.2). These stresses can be combined with vertical stresses due to axial load plus a
‘moment to arrive at the final values in the same manner as shown for vertical temperature
stresses. As shown in Fig. 7.7(b), Mcand Mee should be used for checking the adequacy of
internal and external reinfdrcements respectivelypli
138 TALL CHimNeys |“!
Mei .
na
Fig. 27
Xt is shown elsewhere!® that the moment value at a vertical distance x from the corbet |
will be
0s Ax)
where
Da Ea s2
This moment dies down rapidly to one-third and 1% of its value at x= 4/7 and x
respectively.
7.6 Mlustrative Example
‘Srsider an annular RC section 200mm thick, 10m dia, and subjected to an axial load of
{M00 KN and a wind moment of 21 600 KN its Thews are ta diametrically opposite open-
and mabgending an angle of GO" anc 40° respectively at the contre, Wane 3% reinforcement
and modular ratio m= 12, evaluate the maximum scl act concrete vertical stresses. Also,
en the wind shear is 310 KN, calculate the maninue ehege stress and the location at which
£802 m r= 5m, W= S400 KN, 41=21.600 kN, 2=30, = 20, p=0.003,
€=21600/5405=4.0 and efr=4/s 0.8
"p= 12% 6°003/(1 ~ 0,003) = 0.036ve corbet
2.29\/r
Uoad of
site open-
‘rcement
cs. Also,
at which
ELASTIC DESIGN 139
From Chart 7.1
p=79 ~
Concrete stress at centre of the shell [Ey. (7.2)]
1
2 {£08 79° +08 20°}
Maximum steel stress [Eq. (7.5)] = 121.9 Nisq-mm
0.2
‘Maximum conerete stress = 6,07 [ mee] = 6.28 N/sqemm
For 8= 30° and j= 20", from Table 7.2, we have ¢=0.9892 and the maximum shear stress
occurs when wind blows at an angle of 68" from the centre of the 60° opening (Y-axis). Its
value is 0.7209 x 310/103 =0,224 N/sq-mm and it occurs at 129° from the Y ani
For purpose of explaining the method, the above result is obtained through detailed caleus
lations given below.
Referring to Table E.1, we get
<= B= 2.269
1-028 [220-5 in ssn 09-2020 309226]
7.313 m+
ty-2s[ 2200+ Gin ssn 6] =15:59 wt
Tip" 18.657 mt
5 [22 sin 60°+sin 40° _ (cos 30°-+cos 20°)?
= 1.865 m*
2 4 2369
tiy= Tin= 3 (005 60° = cos 40° ~A(eos 30°--c0s 20°) (sn 20
= 1.480 m* .
Sin=0.2%25 [sin y— sin 30°— Se |]
= Slsin 7—0.5+ (y~ 30°/822,889]
(y= 30°)
sin 30°)/2.269)
si sfos easy
= 510.866 02 5~cos y~(y~ 30°)/71.994]
Fora wind angle of 68° and using Eq. (E.18), we get
[ 0.9892 sin 68° 1,480 cos 68”
37313
Qip=310 146.768 KN140 TALL cHiMNEYS,
15= 310 [SGT OH TO
i
75.83,
At y= 129"
Sip=1.987 and: - | Sig= 0,60
Sn \
bie iG 60-30 ,o ILS mse sand d
From Eq. (E.5),
0.218.657 1.865 —
= 213.66 KN/sg.m
From Table 7.2, ¢y/r 0.1434 and using ig, (1.19)
x0.
{ Sor=
1ia4s*
2
9.79 KN/sq.m0
Total shear stress =/os+ for
213.661.9.79
a Tg) 70.224 Nisq.nn
n6$"(0.1494)(11.3452—4
63.631 kN
Se (oy 3160
= eg (129 pe) =2967 m
“Fos= 9-601 (146.768 x 18.657 — 63.631 % 1.48) + 1.987 (63.631 x 1.865 ~ 146.768 x 1.48)
Las?)
2967)=2.967 m
8x 1.48)
jee
8
LIMIT STATE DESIGN
In a chimney shell the steel tensile stress ean inerease rapidly with small increases in the
overturning moment. Since the moment is caused by wind load, the magnitude of which is
a variable quantity and difficult to predict accurately, it becomes important to check the
structure's strength under limit state conditions, Such an analysis is ulso required to ensure
a consistent factor of safety throughout the height of « chimney structure,
8.1 Partial Load Factors
For the limit state of collapse, some codes recommend the same partial load factor for both
dead and wind loads. This may not be appropriate since while there is a virtual certainty
regarding the magnitude of dead loads, there is uncertain variability in respect of wind loads.
It may therefore be advisable to confirm the structural adequacy for load combinations with
partial load factors
101.5 DLELS LL.
0.9 DL +14 WL
1.2 (Div LL+ WE)
The above load factors are given for general guidance, but in arcas where abnormal wind
conditions prevail it would be advisable to undertake a statistical analysis of wind records
and then predict the Ioad factor to adopt for wind loads. Degree of risk coupled with the
corresponding cost penalty will play a role in arriving at the final decision, The following
two limit states are discussed below! .142 TLL cuinavers |
1. Limit state of collapse
2. Limit state of servic
8.2 Limit State of Collapse
As mentioned above, estimated lpatds are Fuctored t
4 structure has to be designed. Given below is an sanalyi
in steel and concrete under the ultintate load condition
ive at the ultimate loads for which
Procedure for obtaining stresses
(a) Stress and Strain Variati
’ inearly aeross the diamczer and the maximum concrete strain in |
srenetic ar Compressive tte (at msan radius) at fale taken as 0.0035, ‘The charactenatc |
strength of concrete (fx is taken as its day cube sitensth and te dese e
a8 K fa The concrete stess block is shown in Fig. 8.14) front which i vill he cea nen
Stress is assumed constant at fe for strains exceeding 0.002, Tor kesver rings ag
block is taken to he parabolic and given hy the couatien,
h
pe“ Quw=s2)
STRESS BLOCK
|
|
i
|
ePAABCUE | ee gg /POEIOH STRESS mock
\ :
STRESS,
A
03 ‘
Bo 1
Neg &
@) a
Fig, 81 (Contd ©5 for which
sing stresses
te strain in
raracteristic
sthis taken
seen that
; the stress
cK
HOU ryt unstn 4a
wana
(HIGH VIELO STEEL ( TORSTEEL GRADE ToRLO)
415 x(Kyor Ky) /mma
MLO STEEL
250 x(ky of kp) N/mm2
STRESS
° +008
STRAIN
) ©
Fie. 6-1 (0) Design stress-strain dieram for concrete (b) Strain diram,(e) Design stress.
Strain diagram for steel in tension and compresevon
{1 can be readily shown that when the ultimate strain of 0.0035 is just reached, A=4/7,
jereatier, with further increase in compression, the strain diagram is assomet io rotate
about O IFig. (8.1(6)] until the strain reaches 0.002 over the entire section. Wate Plotting
charts, the value of k is taken as 0.45,
The stress-strain curve for both mild stel and cold-worked deformed bars under tension or
Giateafter, the stress is assumed constant for further increase in strain until failure te
characteristi steel tensile strength fis taken as 250 N/sq.mm for mild steel Jand 415 N/sq.mm
for Torstec! grade Fe 415 (Tor 40) and in compression the yield strength is taken ac Son
ie stesestrain diagtam for steel is shown in Fig. 8.1(e) with desien strength taten og
‘v-fie and kaxfr in compression and tension respectively,
(b) Ultimate Strength
For analysis, two cases are considered, viz. when the neutral axis les within the section and
{chen it ies outside it. For cach of these cass, two alternative stress diagrams forstel have
to he considered and the resulting four stress diagrams are shown in Figs. 8.2 (a tod), The
anibtial procedure to determine stresses in steel and concrete under the limit state of
collapse is detailed in Appendix F.STRAIN
14 TALL CHIMNEYS
concrete
()
Stee
STRESS
ket
UIRAL axis .
Katy
CONCRETE STEEL
STRESS
)
ecu ketew
1 ns
staan bool cy,
le| -
. AnsuLAR froca:
A
H
dof CONCRETE
- 0
STRAIN STRESS
w
Fig, 8.2 (Cond)Kf
STEEL
yt
kaetye
oe
n ¥s|
4
fF | Z
VQ atte gies dam
cou ke fey is tye
CONCRETE STEEL
STRAIN STRESS
yield strain (ey, > ey), (b) Maximum
sion steal is fess than yio'd strain (ey, < ¢y)+ (e) Yield strain exceeded in
of comprassion steol (%4 < =v), (d) Yield strain exceeded in all compression
From the equilibrium of forces acting on a chimney cross-section we have
We=V+Q-T (refer Appendix F)
ek Sex (Lp P + ke fyeprt O~ ke foaprt T
=kefes (1 p)rt-n (6)
where r
akcfe (2)
and 2 efx (55)
Also, VitQit Ty oe
Prtg Ont ant, cos 4 (62)
7” Pen @Q—-a(0)
Taking ki =k2=0.87 and fre= fu, the values of coefficient n for different e/r rati
in charts 8.1 to 8,30 for ready use is a design oflice, to arrive at the ultimate
re plotted
load Ws.
(©) Overtarning
‘The stability of a structure against overturning should be checked with load factors as indi-
cated under type 2 in Sec. 8.1.Mus
Wu
ee Mu/ Wy
8
>
mh
146 TALL cHiMNeYS
Fk fey (= p)eten
2
€
2
Wu
Chart 8.1 Annular section without openingsLIMIT'STATE DESIGN 147
Wo
Mul. Le he ;
Rn > i TW phere
we y ee
THY eM / Wy ¢
Wotk-teg (Iep)eeten [2° 1 se
i 2 2
f i.
ie i
1 '
“6
26 6
42-0 E
a 4 2k
TA} joe e'
| 22 i: ae
| 2-0 E 3 4
oF i
4 SOE D0
18 * —- Io [+]
rok 4 Lat dis
‘L
16 Der 16
16 —| Veg
12 1-2
10 foto do
LoS q
ose ove
oe = fyt = 250N nm fos
| PT +
ona HES eed? . 1% love
otal 7 ohhh 2
‘on -08 10S: SOS
q
Chart 8.2 Annular section with ono opening148 TALLCHIMNEYS
i 20, “Bel cope prope Pera
f eS 4 TH]
i .
|
ee Ma / Wy
Wek fea (ip) ern} 4 i;
ri
I L
Chart 6:3 Annular section with one openingLIMITSTATE DESIGN 149
T
TS
4) ea) per
es Mu/ Wy
eBoy (I-pIrten 1)
E ++
07-06 «10K: DGC
Chart 8.4 Annular section with one opening9 E
150 TALL. ae
e=Mu/ Wy
Wy fey -p)eten
ne
a
Share 8.6 Annular section with ene openingau
Wythe fey (Iepietin | 18
"7
es My/ Wy f
Chart 8.6 Annular section with two openings152 TALL CHIMNEYS
ra
e=Mu/ Wy
Wye ke fey (I= p)reten
4 ane
fyt = 250N/ an?
a= 20°
15°
Chart 8.7 Annular section with two openings‘Chart 6.8 Annular section with two openings184 TALL cHiMNeYs
Ww
29 Abul 2-0 ae 77 7 ryt0
:
> Bal rrTTy:
BN ee Mu/ Wu hs
Wut kefeg -p)rten | 18]
7 [7] i—+—} 7
“FLD PareLIMIT STATE DESIGN 155
10 Mm 18 2 26° 300-38
a
‘Chart 8.10 Annular section with two openings
20, Way Mu] 2.0 ai : Bad
Ae ; r
45 bid 1.9
HN ee Mu/ Wu
Wut kite, I-pirten | 18 1-8
ney + 7
"s ry — hs
’ ‘ r Ass
ne hee
va ea
ve s
ey -
>
1-0
os
0-8
o7
os
ou LL LPT yt 250M
[+ wl 0
e Be 2
os Hert ee tao 25. be
oa Eta loa
‘on 08 “38 oat A680156 TALL CHIMNEY,
28 Mud wal ano
Wh 2
ory
aul
Wy =k fey (I= pleeten
7
a)
rep
a;
ee
in 25 sa
Chart 8.11 Annular section with two apeninasAVATE DEIN tH
HEP gay pie
2 ho
a
Wetn Pe Pe Y ba
We
a
hye
fpr
‘Chart 8.12 Annular section with two openings188 TALL chimneys
9 a]:
€; es My / Wy
Wut ke tey pie stn fe$9 ea
amu) Wy
Wy? fe O-pIebn
[ts ed Tt
eto |
“ie a6 a3
q
Chart 8.14 Annular section with two openings160 Tasers
20
3 E .
2h eM / Wy
Wye kf, U=pireten J 8
17
16
CHF B45 Annular soction with two oponinos28
anh
Wo Mu
en Mu / Wy
Was ke fey (I> p)reton,
Chart 8.18 Annu
ome
Section without openings162_ TALL CHIMNEYS
20. Woy Mu
“peg
4) a ae
. Fp “| ~]a6
2 eemy/ my | E Wey
Wat ketey Iep)etin | 3°4E pH pe
re | 4
a TT ii: 20m T+
yh al ATT PTs
a6 ey | Z
to
e=M/ Mh,
ia Wu? k= te, U~ wae ¥e | ve
i 7 :
q we]
2 j {| 4,
ree "y
7° yo he
| fv Y|_
| | hs
6
4 |
a ne
i? Ltt Sh.2
as | 3h.
4 | -
die i i,
{ 4
hea
Tees
ta ;
Ve oe
0-8 LI os
re fyt = SI5N /romt fox
oe 8-20 |,,
©
loaf Mz O
, “ 12 16-2 2h 32892380 “S569?
Chort 6.18 Annular soetion with one opening164 TALL CHIMNEYS
20
€ .
ant
Woy Mu
eo My / Wy
Woe kote, (ete
T
ver.
T
Chart £19 Annular ««2
”
ta hfe (Iep)ectin
rT
ra].
eM / Wy al ~
“6
s
ity
fyt = 415N/mert fox
q
Chart 8.20 Annular section with ono opening
tH bePt4 p= 30°
LEE - AS OF
eae a ae a Naa ag a166 TALL cHiMNeys
20 Wal Mu " ' of |
45 E i
ee My / Wy
War beta (= pirten |
Haft AL “Ppt tt A {
|
“TP
Chart 8.21 Annular section with two openings4
i
LIMIT STATE DESIGN 167
9 6 wf i.
eeMy/Wy t
us kefc, (I= pete | 6
TT : | i,
| 6
ost . 4 hs
< j
1 @ hc
1 ha
12 2
4
1-0
o-9
0-8
7168 TALL CHiMNEYSi
LIMIT STATE DESIGN 169,
26 Way Mu
TIT ETT TE mt 2
See) EA] TT
es My/ Wy se
are Wy? ke fey (I= p)reten | 18 Fe
Sar Torry Pr
oad ha 7 he
9|
M6 | v6 T Lh bh
For
TN
. . Lt
2 cr * * a 1228 BP GAO wk
4
(Chart 6.24 Annular section with two openingsChart 825 An
170 TALL chimneysLIMIT STATE DESIGN 171
7 Ty ° 2 7 7 r TTTT4
AT 19 £5 E oft
Me en My / Wy
Wut kete (I=pietin | M8 q
41-7 T E
1
‘“ 1-6
15
74
PODER
Lt Fk fyt = 4ISN/mnt Jou
HT Elje- 2g |.
~ECELL LEE jan 28 ..
02 4 oe
sth BBE SBE3
|
}
I
|
p
fe
Lo. 2 _ “ 22 a __|
Chart 3.27 Annular sestion w
172_ TALL chimneysley
e=My/ Wy
btoy eprom
LeLMIT STATE DESIGN 175
Wy kefey (= peta
T
Chart 8.30 Annular section with two openings176 TALL CHINNEYS
8.3 Vertical Temperature Etfe
The feet of temperature dilerental on the ultimate load eartying capacity of a section is
seamife below. I the maxinvum recommended temperature dilevential of 120 evita
then the corresponding strain will be 1.1 x 103 (200.0013, Ifa section carrying this
seat iublected to inczeasing compression, the maximum and minimum strains t hale
Nou be 0.0035 and 0.0022 respectively. Sines the stres in conerste is assumed costars tee
Strains exceeding 0.002, the ultimate loadhcarrying eapacity remains the same ae obtained
Without considering a thermal gradient. Similuely, on the tensile sido of the section, any
increaso in strain boyond the yield stain of steel does not altect the scetion's load-carrying
Cihacity. Thus the effect of a thermal gradient of the magnitude normally encoumiacy ce
chimneys is generally ignored in the evalvation of ukimate vertical load dating nae stage
analysis,
8.4 Limit State of Serviceability
The purpose of this limit state isto ensure satisfactory performance of a structure from cone
sideration of serviceability. ‘The following two aspects deserve sttent
1. Deflection
2. Crack width
(a) Defect
The calculation procedure for evaluating dellections is ident
design, For this purpose,
cal to That wed iy an elastic
the characteristic Toul is used with a load factor of unity,
(b) Crack Width
Mile evaluating the eruck width in a chimney, the stiffening elect of uncracked concrete
in the tension zone ean be ignored since all parts of a shell perimeter are likely to be cate
Jeeted to tension at some time or anoihsr due to wind loads acting trom stent dineetang
over a period of time. The permissible erack widths may be ta
ast
J. Exterior surfaces and internal suréaces where inspection is not possible 0.3 mm
2. Exterior surfaces subject to severe climatic conditions snd intevant anne
faces which are likely to he exposed to gases under lini» failure cont
tion and where inspection is not possible OL mm
Mier ey
Crack width, oy = git St (8.3)
I
stance between the point considered far erack width evaluation and the surf
of tcinforeement. This point on the concrete surface 1
between adjoining reinforcement bars
neratly located centrallysection is
°C exists,
ying this
at failure
astant for
obtained
jon, any
scarrying
wtered
mit state
rom con-
n clastic
conerete
be sub-
irections
0.3 mm
0.1 mm
(8.3)
surface
entrally.
LIMIT STATE DESIGN. 177
*1=strain at the location of erack-width evaluation |
c=-clear cover to reinforcement
= overall depth of member : : |
x= depth of the neutral axis
If the calculated value of cy is greater than the recommended permissible values given above,
then spacing of steel reinforcement may have to be reduced or the quantum of see increa-
sete Method of obtaining strain Ce) and distance (1) for diferent loading ones
described below.
(9 Vertical Axial Lood and Moment
mn this case, the location of neutral axis (p) can be obtained from Charts 7.1 to 7.17:
A-x=r(Cosetcosp) and a =f/E,
(Gi) Vertical Aviat Load and Moment Plus Temperature .
‘iis tensile stress in stecl (f) is fist determined by clastic analysis as given in Sec. 7.2. Then
the fctcious temperature stress f, (refer Sec. 5.3) is obtained. Thereafter, the maximum ven
cal tensile stress in steel fis obtained by Eq. (5:8) or (5.9) depending on whether fr mf
or fe > m-f, respectively,
fall
-x=t) FZ ane.
hax (& #10)
i) Cirumfercatal Moment
‘The irewerentia ste in sts! due to wind moment and temperature eect are sepaac
tly obtained and algebraically added. Dividing this by fives oy
hox=e(I=n)
where 1 is given by Eq. (5.5).
8.5 Mlustrative Example
An annular circular cross-section of 8.4-m mean diameter and 275-tnin wall thickness has
wo diametrically opposite openings subtending angles of 50° and 30° respectively at the
centre. This section is subjected to an axial load of 11 700 KN and a wind moment of 39 300
KN-m, M30 concrete is used with [2-mm dia, high-yield Tor. 40 bars (Jje=415 N/sq.mm)
equally spaced on each face giving a total of 0.3% steel area. Check whether the ultimate
axial load-carrying capacity of the section is adequate when the load factors for axial load
and moment are (.9 and 1.4 respectively. Calculate the horizontal crack width under work=
ing loads given above and also when the concrete is subjected to a temperature gradient of
40°C. The following data may be assumed: £,=200 kN/sq.mm, coefficient of expansion =
11x 104°C, Ee 16670 Nisq.mm, m= 12. Coeflicients ki, kz and k for fre, fr and for may
be taken as 0.87, 0.87 and 0.45 respectively. Conerete cdver= 50 mm.ee
178 TALL CHIMNEYS
Solution *
$0,003
1.036
(0,005
© 39300
PI Toa “YS
From Chart (7.9),
' 20925 and 8d ‘
CW 0.928: 11 0010-8
Srp) EOS 1 0.003)
BUF eos 15°
~cos 81
10.530 kN
9A Nesqamm,
Steel stress-«(12-<9.4) &
eos. 168.8 Nes.
= 11 700°<0,
Ultimate axial
Ultimate moment MOO 1.4 S5020KN-m
me S8000
ro ss0%4. 97 124
kaha O87 415¢ 0.003
Eh (1Ep) bs AO a) 208
From Chart 8.24, 2 0.7
will be
Hence the ultimate axial lod-cary
apacnly sf the section
We kf Wo p)ren
= 0.48 < 30(1 0.003) %
HUS80 KN > 10530 kN
Evaluation of Crack Width
“@) Without temperature effect
Total sect areas 2 4.22°(0.275 0,3 108/100 21 771 sq.mm
With 12-mm dia bars equally dist
will be 280 mm.
Distance from conerete surface to contre of reinforcement
ses JEEP Se] 0145 om
Strain «1 + 168.8/200 > 107 == 0.844 x 10-4
0.70. 10>
0.275%
uted and equilly spaced on
face, the bar spacing
0-6 = 56 wan
Jh= x= 4200 (608 15? Fens SP) -> 25 for a tapered one. In the above equation,
equivalent mass mis that mass which, if uniformly distributed along the chimney height, will
have the same total kinetic energy as the multisdegree freedom system. To evaluateth's mass,
achinney is modelled as 7 number of lumped masses Mand distributed masses mu, nia, «., mn
Per unit length over heights 0-21, 21-72, »»5 za-t-Zm If its characteristic shape is pi for the sth
mode and we equate the kinetic energy of the actual system with that of the equivalent
system, we get
[ricseayl aogt fm
ma pide +.
from which
EMovin E fines
m= gt : 3
| Pad:
Jn Eq, (9.2) the equivalent mass for the first mode is used. Since the weight of brickdining
contributes significantly towards the total mass, the stability of a chimney should be checked
both for tines and unlined conditions. Such a check may impose a limitation on the height
of construction that can be permitted without taking up brick-lining work
9.3 Effect of Flexi
ity on Response
For a flexible structure, such us a chimney, we can write
yaO=¥ areacosiont ,
Where yar is the lateral displacement at elevation z in the ith mode and qi is a multiplier for
the same mod
In this mode, wind load on the rth mass of a chimney model (with f masses) is say Fr. Then,184 TALL CHIMNEY
work done at point r by this load will be Fp,
total work done will be ¥
the equivalent mass mn, the Kinetie (KE) snd potcatial (PL) energies ean be writen down as
ite Panpiede Lae pnt
and ail aie [emt | eae
pe {ee ‘yj de
Lagrange’s equation For each acsonitnt mode fs
AED COS) ET Sm
we
from which
x Fie 1
< mi
and wey .
few"
In the above equation, the mechanical admittance Function £4! is given by
[til yeajny
9.4 Along-wind Response
As seen from §
The first term AC? is the quasi
Je KOUK,. The dyna
atic: fore
forve is 2K Cou whore value at Wveation ris say Ba
nd the response to such st leading will be“Pn. Using
down as
(9.4)
(9.5)
(9.6)
ag will be
hen.
on
DYNAMIC WIND ANALYSIS. 185
“Taking the value of os from Eq. (3.2) and introducing the aerodynamic admittance function,
An [refer Sec.3.4 (b)], we obtain y
ob lan= f Se dylan Poa
‘The above response spectrum is shown in Fig. 9.1. It will be scen that the primary response
is obtained in the frequency range m~4n to n+4n, Hence the above integral can be writen
A? and
4040.1504- okr-G) die wate)
where A185 destin
. Asin fe= sin BY (m= Beas pe cox ov] -
and ses ee ] wan
The (otal shear fores along the \'axis will be 4-Oc as soon tram see, 7.56. WT wind §
@ acts at an angle from tie ¥ axis, values of Qx ane Qy will be sin
tively. From the above discussion it follows that the design sh
2-Q sin 9. Using Eq. (7.8),
and Q evs U respec
the A axis: will be
F atlon,
Ona of ese te -eos |
eum [214 2h ino | “ey
en of5
The shear stress (fas) in Scetion 1 dus to these shear forees is then determined using
Eq. (7.9). The shear stress (for) in Seetion 1 due to torsion will he
for=®: (bi ary (E19)
‘The design shear stress
the algebraic sum of shear stresses fos anl for. These stresses
have been evaluated for di
ferent opening angles B and y: for the section ander consideration,
The maximum shear stress values as well as the locations and wind angle at which they
occur are given in Table 7.2,
ne
eHence an
(E14)
(B15)
(E.16)
(E17)
1d shear
9 respec-
will be
(E.18)
vd using
(E19)
stresses
eration,
ich they
APPENDIX F
LIMIT STATE ANALYSIS
‘The ‘analytical procedure for determining a section’s capacity under limit state of collapse is
Sescribed below in summary form and reference should be made to Figs. 8.1 and 8.2 ard to
Table F..
(a) Neutral Axis within Section
Compressive Zone
Consider an clement rt-dy in the comprestive zone, Stress in the rectangular portion of the
block is Afet. In the parabolic portion, at a distance x from the neutral axis, the stress level
will be
7 [2r (cos 71~c0s p) (cos y- cos p)~ r (cos y= cos p}*)
since AZ = r (cos 71~cos p) and x=r (cos y~ cos #), the total compresstéia in concrete (V) will
be
»
m2] =p) | rik-fardy-+(t=p) { ELE 2008 y cosy
“Rae
a
~2easrcose-teoste cosy) dy] 1)
= (I= p) rtkfes (P)
and the expression for P is given in Table F.1.Toate Fit
@ Net ii cn, ~
Parla oe ar 2605 %sIn p 780 29-3 sin 2,
2 Range) Mrewry. 408 rocor pi}
* 2 UE aio
2 1 .
SSH rcasppft-n (L wae teen an)
APE Gn2043 sna) 2 one remy, e(Poorr corn,
SE) B(srrine)) ‘
2 OE eRe (nes 7-6-9) con
2 (sin yin p)—2 Om
M008 P+ 2
#fbo-wusscora-d daze
-f sin 27.42 coss-sin y,
© Menara cutest eo,
Fa2r(mu-ny+ —. 2 i
(60 PSin KO —9) 605 9)
Fz wsiny,
WIZ —u-,) cos 94
i
cop cory, {H— P4200" 2p
Besintps hosing
#480291 | sinay,
(When mactmun censie strain is.
Potato
F=1400
eos pin y,
fess than oF equal to c,,
9) €08 Psin wtsin Pity
(605 800s 7)
2 ON) 2009 a~}
(2) Neutral axis outside sects
28
Per Art yy 3
5
cou |—H- 19-0 B Hin wnsin yy
98
oe fe--n-r9 evo E2265 8) (sn usin yp
town Foinachn ap}
=2 (sin y,
seb en
Ein actin ar} on
muon
vse dongp [00 fc yn wan yn
FOU Wd F660 2. sin 29)
7 F=0
© Only part of compressive tet has ruched yield stra
BoD asin
Fm2¢sin sin gy
GOIN 2p-c0s Wain 2%, -c08%,)
1
“
U7) sin u—sin y,) ; R
cos 6)
= H6in 204 sin 299)
AU compressive stest has reach
G=2(e-u-)
In
td yield strnineo 9)
Cos
APPENDIX F 257
The lever arm of the elemental compressive force is r (cos y—cos 9). Introducing this in
cach of the above integrals and then integrating yields the moment of the compressive forces
(Vi) about the neutral axis: ”
Vie (1p) rth fa (Pi)
and the expression for V is given in Table F:1,
The stress in steel placed in the compressive zone will be ‘equal to the concrete strain multi-
plied by £s in the portion y > 72, For ¥ < ya, the concrete compressive stress will be ki:fus
and the total compression in steel (Q) will be given by
o-ane[ ft yt j fe foe S282
*
cos 72— cos p (2)
=kiprt fe O
and the moment of this force about the neutral axis will be
Q1= kipr*t fe (1)
Expressions for @ and Qj are given in Table F.1.
meos-t | 22 2,
reveos [fis os P~cosp)+core |
(i Tensile Zone
Now consider an element in the tensile zone. Here the following two conditions have to be
considered,
1, When Maximum Tensile Strain Exceeds én
ys defines the angular location where stecl reaches its yield strain, we get
on. 0.0035
0s P= C08 ys Cos B~ cos p
‘neglecting the ellect of shell thickness. Hence
rancos [is (cos cos 9) +s 9] ea)
It can be readily shown that the total tensile force (7) will be
~2pr a So Sp SE P=OSY,
ream | testes | oma
ib *
= prika- fu (T)
The moment of this force about the neutral axis (71) will be
Tis prtks fu (Ti)
Refer Table F.l for expressions T and 7;
2. When Maximum Tensile Strain is Less Than or Equal t0 en
In this case the steel strain is given by
0.0035 (cos p ~ cos »)
cos B= cos p
(Fa)APPENDICES
and stress = e448 with 3,209 KN/sq-min,
ra2{” Woon (cos pcos -
roof Eee ty (Ps)
AS before, expressions for T and’ Ty are siven in Table F.1
(8) Neutral Axis Outside Section
The stress and sicain diageams for this ease are shown in Fig. $.2¢ and 1A is th depth
OF the section and Zr locates the neutral axis, then the distance from the origin of the para-
bolic stress block to the bottom fibre of the section (0.4) will be
OA= 4% ~h= 14 cos Bp "Os fe)
If defines the angular location where strain reaches 0, 002,
608 B= COs Yq aftr
cos" {(4 cos f J eos py7}
cle will he
ie,
The total compress
yo
rnesett-ol fare | eo] (Fo)
where F058 C05 m7 ~606 2 oxy
and aer[e 7 8 cosy} (refer See. $.2a)
The distance of the elemen
this, the moment (¥) ut
area trom an axis nthe chiamney eemtre is» com with
Mga mPessive forees about a horivenny AN passin through the
chimney centre ean be deter InPressions for F and Py ne any im Vable bt and
it should be noted 4 1 fat this ease the moment is ahout ay 400 througt the chimney centre
and not about the neutral axis,
IEYs defines the aigular location where si
2005 2 eos 75
Feosn)
Taking £,=200 kN/sq-mm
no OF9 on ewndeoa7] wn
leved,
1 Pare of the steet having reached vets Mrain ys apy
For expressions giving Q and 2s seer Vable 1.)
f All the $1061 having reached ‘yleld strain
In thi
UB ease the entire steel wilh he jinder a uniform compressive siresy A fe
oe Opeth fre (=n =f)(FS)
i APPENDIX G
coun | RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
! }
(F.6) =
Recent developments are reflected in the model chimney code published by CICIND* in
October 1984 and in the proceedings of a seminar on tall reinforced concrete chimneys held
Sec. 8.2a) at New Delhi from 25th to 27th April 1985. Some of these developments and views are
listed below.
sy. With
rough the
vet an 9 chi
vey centre There is an increasing awareness ofthe need to install test apparatus, inserted through pres
planned ports, to sample the gases leaving a chimney and to measure their pressure, velo.
city, composition, ete. Similarly, stations should be sct up at relevant locations throughout
the country to continuously monitor pollutant GLC levels.
| ©) Meteorological Da
Icis realised that there is an urgent need to collect, analyse and present meteorological data
in a form suitable for designers. Also, further work is necessary for: properly relating the
extreme mean hourly wind with the extreme wind speed. Such studies should lead to a better
cstimate of design wind speeds, wind profile and lapse rate of potential temperature.
(7
(©) Elastic Design /
CICIND has indicated a method for evaluating the rotation of a chimney foundation resting
‘on soil or on piles. Such a rotation causes secondary moments in the chiminey shell
“CIGIND is Comite International Des Chiminees Industrielle Schllestrage 33, PO Box 1713, D—4000
Dusseldorf, West Germany. . 7260 aPPenoices
@ Limit State Anatys
(i) The value of es
1.0035 (See,
2a) is based on te
sts conducted on rectangular
i) Sections. CICIND has suggested a sliding meat law for concrete whereas some
ai GLUE commend a ca value oF 0.002 at the ecm of the shell and 00035 at the outer
i face of shell. I: is concluded tht a
Aeceptable value of vy for conerets
tablished after conducting comprehensive tects
| (i) CICIND ‘has ‘recommended
ature of load, such as d
should be
sections with openings,
depted depending on the
lresand seismic effets,
on anu
Uifferent load factors 16 be
Wd weight, loads due 6 wis
nd, tem
fle. These factors also depend on the hoad coral uation oF scrviccabiity:cohutition
i being examined.
4 Gi) CICIND states that the characteristic crack Width may be fimited (© 0.2.0.3 and
Basen for aggressive, normal and very clean envinenn
Based on this, a formula has besn piven for deter He maxim bar siameter
i acceptable. .
} (i) CICIND has outlined a
i chimney shell element under 1
and moments due to temperatu,
imal conditions respectively
ate design approwch for evaluating
‘ombined action of axial
nd corbel loads,
the capacity of a
transverse moment
© Dynamie As
(@ For analysis of chimneys restin
interaction should be conside
! Gi) Ins is stated that a chimney is unlikely 10 be
, Ke Tha inc el 25 for paratle-sded and taper cha
investiga gts fetutement is psthaps to sinery Gan
! investigation for vortex shedding is not na
I where (is the weight ut ehtims
the same lev
(4) The gust factor changes with height,
can be used. As a result, tor ev
on soil itis susvestest that soil stencture
eveited into laws oseiltutions if
spectively, It is
1D recommends that
“urs iP C0r all levels, GAP 9 EN
aboved level and ¥ the volume of chimecy
To allose for this etivet an equi
‘aluating along
ion
Fent gust load
ind response. the portion
| ‘
{ (iv) It is felt that a correlation fy
may have to be used if short dural
or ‘higher than 06 (refer para 9.i(6) ant bg. O.14))
on peak cross-wind amplituctes are deg
Lining
There is evidence to
iegestt
{Interlocking bricks (with a shatiow interlock), manufacturedlon rectangular
whereas some
035 at the outer
ete should be
ith Gpenings,
ending on the
| seismic effects,
sility condition
to 0.2, 0.3 and
1s respectively,
m bar diameter
be capacity of a
asverse moment
at soil structure
€ oscillations if
spectively. It is
‘commends that
> 20 kN/m,
chimney above
valent gust load
om
and Eq. (9.14))
desired,
), manufactured
{ APPENDIXG 261
{
{0 slose tolerances, exhibit more strength when thermally loaded as compared to nominter-
locking bricks,
(g) Construction
@ Technical specifications should require the contractor to carry out a comprehensive
design for all elements of the proposed temporary staging.
(i) There is a need to develop a comprehensive quality assufance document for chimney
construction. It should cover requirements in respect] of structural detailing, concrete
Strength. labour skill, degree of supervision, measures for safety of men and equip.
ments, planning and scheduling, inspection and maintenance, ete.
(i) Acrodynamle Effects
(@) Model studies should be encouraged so that ‘guidelines can be developed for assessing
bufettng effects on chimneys due to tall structures (e.g, boiler plants, cooling towers
tc.) in the vicinity.
(i) A view is gaining acceptance that instrumentation of chimneys should be made
mandatory. Then, data can be generated about along-wind and across-wind oscillations
of chimneys which has to be duly correlated with corresponding wind speed and its
distribution. This will help in tuning the existing design methods,|
|
L
“Sosa: on Sk Ge a
1 Aoanivats SCAND AK Gunna, “Chimney height for toxic mae
"Chemical Ace ttnday,
¥ 20, June 69, p 540,
3 AMAN RG, “Pacts to consider when valeting st0ck eign,
pechinrs service, Seemmt che *,¥2, pun
ant 80d ereetin oF se chimney “CDSH. yi,
AND RE Rie
8,» 1821,
tions ef tall ical seactures, si Cone. 1.V 99, Ay
Vs “Use of the win
cos, V
MMe Fe Hm ontipte sours y 295,
‘oMling oF hewel sick tiuents inant
tin. Kevin,
wD, New York, 1976,
ar pati HF the needcions a sinite mee blue
0,309. Malan concentration at Broun tenn Hot", Aum,
& Naoweins, 5 E axo G Nowa, “Chimneys and SPEIE OF sme", J. nat. of tut, ¥ 29,
Nov. 1935 9 530,
70. Houswer, GW, “Ea
'V 28, July 1956, pgs,
F190, RNY. “Vibrations of insuly tapered Eamiilever beuns”, ans, asc,
V 228, Part 1, 1963, p 1020,
72: Insts KAND R.G Cocisee, “Wid inde oscillations of eiecutar chin
Ener., V 49, June 1971, pase
Fa RNG AW. “Dynamic response of mutts ‘hiwneys", CDS, ¥ 1
MAS 893-95: “Crea for ein aiken “lesign OF structures madi
New Delhi
1S. 1S: 4998-75 (wane n “Cviesin th
New Deli,
36. Tear, 3G, Piastic chim se¥s ang ANNE MERS, Plies and Potynrs, V 36, Fe, 196 ba.
Ty, MORON. K I, “Chinn y ass vie Mech. Lingg.. V 24, Nov. 1977, 73,
Fo, Er SStton ant dion a ein {nine UP 0 8050 Wh”. Seeosst DS, 4 ay
9, A Gilet Chinas Dsien, WO Seton and Wee Press, Surrey, UK. 1976
acts,
1.
oe snd stweks, Seer,
Standards tnstituion,
A OF esintonced nner
*SHHMNEHS, Alan Stantunls tsitation,
101
tos.
106,rm state of
1m operating
» Feb. 1981,
ASCE, Y 84,
‘rans, ASCE,
56.
inings”", CDs
J. of Aero
of the seevice
cular section
orough Univ.
sum, Environ,
fork, 1976.
assian plume
Falofe", Arm,
f Fuel, V 28,
thes", ACTS.,
Trans. ASCE,
veka", Struct,
cde Institution,
dds Institution,
V1 p 103,
REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY 265
80. Jeany, AP ano P-E Winn, “Determination of structural damping of «lage mullifve chimney fom
the response to wind excitation”, Proc. ICE (UK), V 83, Patt 2, Dec. 1972, p 569.
Jouns, DJ AND RJ ALLWwo0D, “Wind induced ovalling osellaions of citcular cylindrical shell struce
tures such as chimneys", Proc. Symp. on Wind Effects on Bldgs. and Siri, Loughborough Univ. of
Tech., Apr. 1968, 28.1.
82, JORDAN, RW, “Tensile stress effects on damping”, Concrete, V 11, Mar. 1977, p31
83. Jonny, G L, “World's largest acid proof brick’ chimney” goes into operation”, Power Enet. V 67,
Jue 1963, p @2.
84. J6Ro, © AND S Sconem, ““An experimental study of cold inflow into chimneys", A¢m. Environ, V 1,
Nov. 1967, p645,
85. Konevev, BG, “Vibrations of tower structures and certuin methods of damping their vibrations
Proc. Int. Res. Sem. on Wind Effects on Bulds, and Sirs., Ottawa, Canada, 11-15 Sept. 1961, V. 2, D312
36, Koren von H., “Vortex excitation”, Proc. of the Conference on Tower Shaped Structures, "The ‘Hagse,
24-26 Apr. 1968, p 115.
87. Kausiaswany, TN, S DURVASULA, GIN V RAO AND KR Repoy, “A study of the interference
effects of the proposed 80 m high extension chimney for Faridabad thermal power station”, USe
angalore, India, Rep. IWTR, No, 142, Aug. 1978.
+ "Model observations of wind effects on tall chimuey", Proe. nd US Nat. Conf. on Wind
Enep. Res, June 22-25, 1915, Colorado State Univ., Colorado, p 1-4-1.
89. Kuwano, K, Y Naxao, ¥ Oaata ax K O84, "Study on the selsnc responses of cylindlca stacks”,
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd, Tech. Rev. V'3, May 1966, p. 33.
90. Larro, O, “Architectural design of cower-shaped structures”, Pree. ofthe Sym. on Tower-shaped Sirs
Bratislava, June 1966, p 1.
91, Leouerren, 40, Alr Potuton, Part A~Analysis, Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, 1972
92. LepWon, J AND A ScxUa, “Deformation ofthe chimney eaused by insolation”, Proe. of a Conf. on
Tower-shoped Sirs, Apt, 24-26, 1969, p 331,
93, Lee, CH ano H H Janatt, "Siesses in concrete chimneys weakened by openiogs", JACI, V 73, Aug.
1976, p 465.
98, Lowney, K AND J Tavton, “Sutface coating a chimney liner, Second CDS, V 1, p 140,
95, Manmooor, P, ‘Structural dampers", ASCE, V 95, St. 8, Proc. paper 6725, Aug. 1909, p 1661,
96. Manter, G, “Meteroligische probleme beider bestimmung von_sehorastcin-—mindesthochen', Chemle
AIngenieur Tech., V 50, Nov. 1978, p 831.
of aconcrete chimney shaft with multifus openings", J. of Struct. Enge.,
Roorkee, India, V 5, July 1977, p83.
+. AND § B Desa, "Design of citcular raft foundations for chimneys", CE and PWR, Aug.
1967, » 905, —
99, —_—nentom ANDI Vatuveg id
chirmeys", Proc. of It. Srp. an Furthpudte Shae
MO, Dept. of CE, Row, 1976, V 1p 60
178, ene. “Oneration experienc with powerplant stacks. and tl as
1969, p 29,
180. Wewwex, © “Slipforming a chimney 450 high #4 WM, Now York, Dee. 1961, p 74
te eatpmate BE, “Practica solations a some wind ia ced wich Problems”. Pree. Ine. Sump.
Wed. in Ind, Keswick (UK), 12 Apr. OTK popes Ie
Tax; Wtosiss 1 “Analyais and design of tomer foundatte «ASCE (PON, Mar. 1909, p 77,
Tee wha 3 Euadomentals of Ae Potion, Addon Were Con Mass, 1973,
BS, Wonsoeec i Movement in lage concete chimneys" Comore V8, July 1974, p42,
185. WoooanrsL ano JF M Mauhit, “Purtir perience tse of helical stakes for avoiting wind
Wane lations of structures with citcuar of neu ete sacetion”, NPLJtero/387, June 1939,
186 Wom: ERs “The osilations of lege circular sucks nen roe. Inst. af Civ. Engr, Vs, 1969,
ps7
fae Zatyiat, W 3.C3 E Monn, A Hates, “An investigation in
1B. Za My S Chu ano 3 M Dovit,“Desien of sel che ae
323,
189, Zrcon at elite serodyuamiebetaviur a seks" Ot an as J Nov. 1 1971, p69,
150. ZvKOV SA. ZF Niattstv, VS Beansent avo Losxurov, “Optimising tle main characteristics of
shimmers of hith capacity pover stations, Thermal Lies ny Apr. 1972p 72
Air Conf, Rotorua, New Zea-
Meal exiacin and gee oF fee standing
ee St Louis, MO, ue Rt, 17H, Ue
Contain, VA, Oct,
‘ulilue chimneys”, Cas, v 2,
ASCE S., V 9S WOR, “Oct, 197,995-4P-26,
high factory
56, p 1295,
ads on
)
en ‘
INDEX
Access door 209 Construction 215
Now Zes. Accessories 207
Aerodynamic admittance 37
Airvent 211
e Architecture 6
ce secu
: Atmospheric pressure 11
i. Oct, Aviation warning lights 209
: Breeching 209
mer on Buffeting 29, 39
ap 207
ng * Chimney
wn rind classification 4
43, 1969) construction material 2, 5
definition 1
"y function 1
-+ 1972, history 1
industrial 1
6. s
multifiue 5
ser shape 8
sizing 7
tall 5
types 4
Clean-out door 209
Conereting 217
Corbel effect 137 2
DALR 13
Damping 180
Damping parameter 139
Deflection 137, 176
cocficient 35
force 34
Draft
net 10
theoretical 9
Dynamic analysis 180
Dynamic stiffness 194 _
Earthquake effects—see Seismic
Elastic analysis
inferential stresses 134
110
Vertical stresses at openings 111
Environmental aspects 14
Equivalent mass 183
Exit size 9
Exit velocity 7
Formwork270 ) INDEX
jump-form 218 .
slipform 218
Foundations
design 72
general aspays 7! .
lords
pile 86
pile cap 87
craft 73)
‘raft positioning 73
shell of revolution 94
subsoil charaeteristies 71
Fraction factor 11
“Galleries 211
Ground level concentration
acceptable limits 14
accuracy 18
enhancement factor 24
estimating 16
multi-souree 24
special aspects 23
Gust loading 37
Head loss.
dynamic 10
friction 10
Height
effective 13
limiting 13
physical 9
forces AS
Insolation effect 67
Insulation 195, 203
Ladder 209
Laser aligning 216
182
spectrum 39
Lightning protection 208
Limit state design
collpse state 142
crack wide 176
deflection 176
artist toast fotos 1H
semiceabihty hint 16
stress and strain variation 142
temperature ellects 176
ultimate strength ° 143,
coating 199
eonerete 199
construction 220
corrosion 196
desiza 199
functions 196
history 2
mony 197, 220
metal 198, 200, 220
plastic 199
Properties 1%
roughness 12
seismic etfeets
temperature eiiver. 6S
thermal conductivity 203
types 197
wind loads on 34
vibrition 201
lock-in 33
Mechanical admittance 184
Mix desig
Modal
analysis 48
frequency 46
higher modes 46
moment 47
multiplier 183
participation factor 47
shear 47
Mode coe
Model stu
limitation
216
ient 0
A a aeModel studies (Consd.)
need 221
simulation 221
Modulus of elasticity 180
Mortar
‘geregate 203
eement 202
Mounting for lift
Multi
1g materials 210
ive chimney 5
Ovalling 189
Painting 209
Participation fuctor 47
Particulate setting 21
Peak faetor 186
Period of vibration 43
Physical dimensions
base dimensions
exit size 9
Physical height 9
shape
Phateforms 21)
Plume
buoyant 12
dispersion 14
proliles
souree size 12
spread 14
Standard deviation 15
Pollution—multissource 24
Rayleiuh method 46
Reinforcement laying 217
Response
tcrossewind 188
slong-wind 184
Nexibibity elfects on 183,
spectrum method 43
time-history 48
Reynolds number 181
Roughness coeficient 12
INDEX 274
Seismic
acvelersition 42
coellicient 43
cllects 42
effects on liners 48
excitation 41
moment 44
response 43
shear 44 '
zone factor 43
Shear 44
Shelis
conical 96
disphicement 9
edge 11
hyperholoid 95
membrane farees 94
rotition —9§
Svot hopper 213
Specteal energy 30
Stability 182
Stability obs 2p
Stick 1
Steonhal number 32
Temperature
cieumlcremist stress 6a
ombined stress 6p
cllvets 56
efivets on liners 65
gradient
muilti-tie 58
single ue $6
in access void 65
fog mean differential 64
Profile Md
vertical ties 59
Thermal conductivity 56, 203
Time-history analysis 48
Tolerances 216
Torsion 135
Velocity
exit 7272 nore
termini > spectea
Ventilation of void 03 Wink! ethceis
Vortex bufeting > 3
exeit tien cireunst Hone
formation ireumfere:.: 1 fstiibution
| lock-in drat
i shedding 39 dynamic ¢
suppression bn efleetson iii it :
lift Fore 9, 152
Wind Wind speed
+ definition 29 character
gust loads 3 critical S18)
loads 29, 34 gusts 5