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

net/publication/241328923

The Damaging Effects of Earthquake Excitation on Concrete Cooling Towers

Article · July 2008

DOI: 10.1063/1.2963913

CITATIONS READS

3 314

2 authors, including:

Farhad Abedi Nik

Sadra Institute of Higher Education
8 PUBLICATIONS   52 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Farhad Abedi Nik on 09 October 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

The Damaging Effects of Earthquake Excitation
on Concrete Cooling Towers

Farhad Abedi-Nika, Saeid Sabouri-Ghomib

a
Asst. Professor of Civil Engineering, SADRA Institute of Higher Education, Tehran, Iran
Farnikan@aut.ac.ir
b
Associate Professor of Civil Engineering, K.N.T University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
Sabouri@kntu.ac.ir

Abstract. Reinforced concrete cooling towers of hyperbolic shell configuration find widespread
application in utilities engaged in the production of electric power. In design of critical civil
infrastructure of this type, it is imperative to consider all the possible loading conditions that the
cooling tower may experience. an important loading condition in many countries is that of the
earthquake excitation, whose influence on the integrity and stability of cooling towers is
profound. Previous researches have shown that the columns supporting a cooling tower are
sensitive to earthquake forces, as they are heavily loaded elements that do not possess high
ductility, and understanding the behavior of columns under earthquake excitation is vital in
structural design because they provide the load path for the self weight of the tower shell. This
paper presents the results of a finite element investigation of a representative “dry” cooling
tower, using realistic horizontal and vertical acceleration data obtained from the recent and
widely-reported Tabas, Naghan and Bam earthquakes in Iran. The results of both linear and
nonlinear analyses are reported in the paper, the locations of plastic hinges within the supporting
columns are identified and the ramifications of the plastic hinges on the stability of the cooling
tower are assessed. It is concluded that for the (typical) cooling tower configuration analyzed,
the columns that are instrumental in providing a load path are influenced greatly by earthquake
loading, and for the earthquake data used in this study the representative cooling tower would be
rendered unstable and would collapse under the earthquake forces considered.
Keywords: Cooling Towers, Earthquakes, Nonlinear Behavior.

INTRODUCTION
Reinforced Concrete Cooling Towers are kind of special structures that could be
seen in most of power-plants and substations. To design these structures, a variety of
loading conditions should be taken into account. It is important to check all of loading
conditions. All these loading conditions will be used in designing an element of the
structure. Earthquake does have a crucial effect on the stability of these structures.
Previous studies of Gran and Young [1], Castiau [2], Kratzig [3] and Sabouri-Ghomi
[4] made sign towards damage of columns of RC cooling towers during earthquake.
Due to the importance of columns in study of seismic behavior of cooling towers,
current research concentrates on studying the behavior of columns of RC cooling
towers during earthquake. Also in finite element modeling of the whole structure a
particular attention was focused on the columns of structure.
 In order to decrease computation time, critical sections of accelerometers of Tabas,
Naghan and Bam earthquakes were selected and used. Maximums of horizontal and
vertical accelerations in these accelerometers are listed in Table 1.

TABLE 1 - Maximum horizontal and vertical acceleration of Tabas, Naghan and Bam earthquakes
EARTHQUAKES Horizontal PGA (%g) Vertical PGA (%g)
TABAS 0.82 0.57
NAGHAN 0.74 0.5
BAM 0.79 1.01

CASE STUDIES
In order to study the nonlinear behavior of RC cooling towers,The RC cooling
tower of Shazand thermal power plant has been selected. It is one of the tallest
reinforced concrete cooling towers in Iran with the height of 134 meters. An important
characteristic of this structure is its long columns in comparison with the columns in
similar structures. The structure consists of a 106 m height hyperbolical shell above 36
pair of X-type RC columns. The general specifications of this structure is shown in
Figure 1.

FIGURE 1. The general specification of the case study concrete cooling tower

Dynamic analysis has been performed in two separate sections. First the finite
element model of structure with elastic elements was set up and dynamic analysis
accomplished. Then, the finite element model with nonlinear elements established and
the results of dynamic analysis obtained. A comparison is made based on the force and
displacement responses of model in both cases. By this way we will have a better
understanding of the structural behavior.
After a wide study on nodal displacements, finally four key nodes A, B, A', and B'
were selected. Displacement responses of the model found at these nodes (A and B)
were compared to displacements of nodes A' and B'. This will make the distortion of
top and bottom parts available. (See Figure 2)

FIGURE 2. The chosen key points for displacement control

FINITE ELEMENT MODELING

In FE modeling with ANSYS [5], foundation is modeled by selecting linear three-
dimensional SOLID45 elements. For nonlinear modeling of the columns, SOLID65
three dimensional concrete elements are invoked. These types of elements are capable
of cracking in tension and crushing in compression. Shell of the structure with the
height of 106m is modeled by using three different types of elements, SOLID65,
SOLID45, and SHELL63. SOLID65 is used to model one meter of height of the shell
above the columns where the risk of stress concentration and local non-linearity is
quite likely. Five meters above this level is modeled by SOLID45, a linear three-
dimensional element. Finally, the rest of the shell with 100meters height is modeled by
thin elastic-shell element SHELL63. All the columns and one meter the height of the
shell above the columns (SOLID65) are reinforced by LINK8 three-dimensional spar,
considering nonlinear material properties for them.

STUDYING THE NONLINEAR BEHAVIOR OF THE MODEL IN

EARTHQUAKE
The selected accelerometers were used to apply acceleration into the model. It was
seen that concrete of the column was cracked. Moreover, in some cases the reinforcing
bars of columns have passed proportional limit of elastic behavior and experienced
nonlinearity. Cracking of concrete and yielding of reinforcing bars took place in lower
parts of the shell, near columns. Figure 3 demonstrates the sequence of plastic hinge
occurrence and their position in the analyzed model. In this figure, plastic hinges
happen where the reinforcing bars in cross-section yield and enter into nonlinear
phase. As it can be seen, plastic hinges almost happen in columns, in contact region of
columns and foundation, in the interface of columns and shell, and in intersection of
two columns. Plastic hinges in shell always happen after formation of other hinges in
structure. This almost ensue after serious damage to environs columns.

FIGURE 3. Position and sequence of plastic hinges in the model subject to Tabas, Naghan, and Bam
earthquakes

Figure 4 highlights the comparison that has been made between linear and
nonlinear time history of base shear. Moreover, chronological position of plastic
hinges is depicted with filled circles in Figure4. As it can be seen linear and nonlinear
responses are coinciding in each other. However, there is an apparent decrease in
nonlinear response after formation of plastic hinges. It can be described as the stiffness
of the structure decreases, income force to the structure and consequently the base
shear decreases. In current nonlinear analysis, based on Tabas and Bam records, the
analysis in some time steps after 2.4 and 3 seconds was diverged. As well, there was a
sever decrease in base shear nonlinear response of the model after aforesaid stage.
This can be explicated due to instability of the structure at this time.
 Tabas Earthquake

15000

10000
V=C.R.W

5000
Base Shear (Ton)

V=C.W

V=C.W
-5000

V=C.R.W
-10000

Nonlinear Response Linear Response

-15000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Time (Sec.)

Naghan Earthquake

15000

10000
V=C.R.W

5000
Base Shear (Ton)

V=C.W

V=C.W

-5000

V=C.R.W
-10000

Nonlinear Response Linear Response

-15000
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
Time (Sec.)

Bam Earthquake

10000

V = C .R . W

5000

V=C.W
Base Shear (Ton)

V=C.W

-5000

V = C .R . W
-10000

Nonlinear Response Linear Response

-15000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Time (Sec.)

FIGURE 4. Comparison of linear nonlinear base shears of modeled structure

By Tabas, Naghan and Bam records

Owing to the behavior of bottom stiffener ring before incidence of instability in

structure, importance of columns in structure, and drift of the top of the columns, a
comparison between linear and nonlinear displacements has been made. This is almost
helpful in understanding the behavior of structure. For this, elastic and inelastic
displacements of point B' under aforementioned earthquake records were found.
Figure 5 shows the comparison of responses.

Tabas Earthquake

0.15

0.1

0.05
Horizontal Displacement (m)

-0.05

-0.1

Nonlinear Response Linear Response

-0.15

-0.2
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Time (Sec.)

Naghan Earthquake

0.15

0.1
Horizontal Displacement (m)

0.05

-0.05

-0.1

Nonlinear Response Linear Response

-0.15
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
Time (Sec.)

Bam Earthquake

0.3

0.25

0.2
Horizontal Displacement (m)

0.15

Nonlinear Response Linear Response

0.1

0.05

-0.05

-0.1
0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.4
Time (Sec.)

FIGURE 5. Comparison of horizontal elastic and inelastic displacement of point B’ under Tabas,
Naghan and Bam earthquake records
 Figure 6 shows the base shear versus displacement of columns of this structure in
both linear and nonlinear states. Due to the effect of the bottom stiffener ring, the
displacements of the columns at the top assumed to be equal to each other. Based on
the results, the location of force and deformation covers particular zone in elastic state.
On the other hand, hysteretic diagram of columns in nonlinear state shows an increase
in displacement and a decrease in correspondent force.
Inner area of hysteretic loops renders the dissipated energy. This dissipated energy
will be higher for wider hysteretic loops. As it can be seen, absorbed energy by the
system is not considerable. There is a reduction in stiffness of the model in large
deformations. Hence, we can claim that the structure does not show a stable and
proper hysteretic behavior.

Tabas Earthquake - Nonlinear Horizontal Displacement of Point (A') Versus Base Shear Tabas Earthquake - Linear Horizontal Displacement of Point (A') Versus Base Shear

15000 15000

10000 10000

5000 5000
Base Shear (Ton)

Base Shear (Ton)

0 0

t = 2.66 Sec.

-5000 -5000

-10000 -10000

-15000 -15000
-0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 -0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15
Displacement (m) Displacement (m)

Naghan Earthquake - Nonlinear Horizontal Displacement of Point (A') Versus Base Shear Naghan Earthquake - Linear Horizontal Displacement of Point (A') Versus Base Shear

15000 15000

10000 10000

5000
Base Shear (Ton)

5000
Base Shear (Ton)

0 0

-5000 -5000

-10000 -10000
-0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 -0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1
Displacement (m) Displacement (m)

Bam Earthquake - Nonlinear Horizontal Displacement of Point (A') Versus Base Shear Bam Earthquake - Linear Horizontal Displacement of Point (A') Versus Base Shear

10000 10000

5000 5000

t = 2.38 Sec.

0
Base Shear (Ton)

0
Base Shear (Ton)

-5000 -5000

-10000 -10000

-15000 -15000
-0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Displacement (m) Displacement (m)

FIGURE 6. Force-displacement graph of columns, Tabas, Naghan and Bam records.

 CONCLUSIONS
1. Positions and sequences of plastic hinges formation on columns depend on the
nature of earthquake record. However, plastic hinges mainly form on columns
at the junction of columns, columns and foundation, and columns and shell.
Plastic hinges of shell were almost the very last plastic hinges formed in the
model. They come about after serious damages to adjacent columns.
2. Inelastic behavior of structure due to formation of plastic hinges reduces
stiffness of the model and consequently decreases applied base-shear and
increases displacements compared to the elastic state.
3. Bottom stiffener ring prior to incident of instability in structure due to
earthquake, exhibited a rigid behavior. Then, the displacement of the columns
at the top could be considered equal to each other. Upper parts of the shell
experience a minor deterioration. This may affect longitudinal and transverse
forces at the top of the shell.
4. Hysteretic loops of the modeled structure do not represent apposite energy
absorption. Stiffness and rigidity of the model decreases when the
displacement starts to increase.

REFERENCES
1. Gran C. S., Yang T. Y. "Nastran and Sap IV applications on the seismic response of column
supported cooling towers". Computers & Structures, Vol 8. pp761- 768. Pergamon press Ltd.
1978, Printed in Great Britain.
2. Castiau Th, Gaurois R. "The design of cooling towers in extremely serve earthquake
condition". Eng. Structure. 1991, Vol. 13, January.
3. Kratzig W. B. '7oward safe and economic seismic design of cooling tower of extreme height,
1979.
4. Sabouri-Ghomi.S. “The effect of earthquake on stability of concrete cooling towers”, K.N.T
University of technology, Tehran, Iran, 1999.
5. Ansys (Ver. 8. 00). Users manual. Swanson Analysis System. Inc.

View publication stats