西南交通大学学报

第 56 卷 第 5 期 Vol. 56 No. 5
JOURNAL OF SOUTHWEST JIAOTONG UNIVERSITY Oct. 2021
2021 年 10 月

ISSN: 0258-2724 DOI：10.35741/issn.0258-2724.56.5.9

Research article

Engineering

STATE OF THE ART OF TANK STRUCTURAL EVALUATION REVIEW: A

CASE STUDY OF AN ELEVATED CONCRETE WATER TANK
CONCERNING CRACK INITIATION

水箱結構評估的最新進展：關於開裂引發的高架混凝土水箱的案例
研究

Taufiq Rochman *, Suhariyanto

Civil Engineering Department, State Polytechnic of Malang
Jl. Soekarno Hatta no.9 Malang, Indonesia, tаufiq.rоchmаn@polinemа.ac.id, suhаriyantо@polinеma.аc.id

Received: June 25, 2021 ▪ Review: July 23, 2021 ▪ Accepted: August 18, 2021 ▪ Published: October 30,
2021

This article is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

Abstract
This study aims at the structural evaluation of the elevated concrete water tank condition, including
crack initiation, through nondestructive testing. The growing demands for environmental quality have
resulted in a rise in the design and construction of tanks and reservoirs in the construction industry.
Cracks for water line leakage were found during watertight testing in concrete tanks. Long-term liquid
leaking may permanently damage the tank and can contaminate the groundwater. Given the critical
existence of leaked cracks in tank serviceability and durability, the contribution examines the triggers and
effects of their occurrence. An inspection of the existing water tank system is conducted to ascertain its
condition. The investigation included structural design checks, concrete compressive strength tests, visual
assessments, hammer inspections, and Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity (UPV) testing with Portable Ultrasonic
Non-Destructive Digital Indicating Tester (PUNDIT). This observation is made at many elevations on
various sampling points on the tank structure's elements, including columns, beams, tank floor slabs, and
tank wall shells. The results indicate the presence of flexural type cracks in the main beam's middle span
and diagonal beams. Additionally, cracks attributed to long-term drying shrinkage were discovered on the
diagonal of the floor slab and cracks of the same pattern on the main beam's middle span. The deflection
estimated by structural remodeling was larger than the deflection estimated by design. The computed
crack width in the main and diagonal beam exceeds the acceptable crack width.

Keywords: Elevated Concrete Tank, Structural Evaluation, Crack Width, Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Test,
Structural Modeling
91 Rochman and Suhariyanto / Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University / Vol.56 No.5 Oct. 2021

摘要 本研究旨在通過無損檢測對高架混凝土水箱狀況進行結構評估，包括裂紋萌生。對環境質量
日益增長的需求導致建築行業對儲罐和水庫的設計和建造有所增加。在混凝土罐的水密測試中發
現了水管洩漏的裂縫。長期液體洩漏可能會永久損壞水箱並污染地下水。鑑於洩漏裂縫在儲罐適
用性和耐久性方面的關鍵存在，本文研究了其發生的觸發因素和影響。對現有水箱系統進行檢查
以確定其狀況。調查包括結構設計檢查、混凝土抗壓強度測試、目視評估、錘擊檢查和使用便攜
式超聲波無損數字指示測試儀進行的超聲波脈衝速度測試。這種觀察是在儲罐結構元件（包括
柱、梁、儲罐底板和儲罐壁殼）的不同採樣點的許多高度上進行的。結果表明，主樑的中跨和斜
梁中存在彎曲型裂縫。此外，在樓闆對角線處發現了因長期乾縮引起的裂縫，在主梁中跨處發現
了相同圖案的裂縫。結構改造估計的撓度大於設計估計的撓度。主樑和斜梁中計算的裂紋寬度超
過了可接受的裂紋寬度。

关键词: 高架混凝土罐、結構評估、裂縫寬度、超声波脉冲速度测试、結構建模

I. INTRODUCTION The main channels between the various tanks are

The tank is one of the oldest structures built
by humans. The appearance of cracks was the
most visible indicator of a concrete or steel
structure's initial failure. Observation of the crack
surfaces revealed that the separation was not only
tangential, as expected but also radial [1]. Instead
of making new tanks, the same researcher
discovered that repair was done by changing the
shape and materials for any structure in the tank
and strengthening with vertical stiffener [2].
Gross et al. [3] investigated the tank's failure
caused by a brittle fracture in the shell above and
the weld below the second course. Crack
propagates completely through the entire tank
due to lack of durability in the steel to arrest the
crack at high temperature and high stress.
The collapse may also be triggered by grain
storage, which causes hoop tensions in the tank
wall to rise during a time of falling temperatures
[4], as shown in Figure 1. Significant distortions
at bolted seams, including fatigue cracks in the
steel plates, were discovered in another project,
and structural analysis reported major
overstressing of the steel at the bolted seams [5].
A nondestructive assessment of concrete
radioactive waste tanks was performed by [6],
and the nondestructive testing program described
maximizes the ability of many little-known
techniques to obtain full information about the
concrete condition and integrity of these nuclear
waste tanks, thus minimizing to zero the risk of
contamination of any operator. When access to
the tank outside walls was open, sonic logging
techniques provided a very positive assessment
of the concrete condition in these tanks [6].
Another case, such as the tilting of phosphoric
acid storage tanks in the chemical fertilizer
factory in Aqaba, Jordan, was noticed [7].
Moreover, they recommend jacking to its
horizontal location with the tilted storage tanks.
constantly inspected and maintained that is
important if the phosphoric acid is to mitigate
possible leakage into the foundation soil. After
all actions, the continuous monitoring of storage
tank inclination is also needed to perform [7].
A few studies on rectangular elevated water
tanks; most are on-land, circular, and steel. As a
result, the author raised the point that this study is
novel and extremely beneficial to the owner in
maintaining the structural tanks' health.
II. NONDESTRUCTIVE EVALUATION
OF TANKS
A. The Causes of Tank’s Collapse and Their
Durability Testing
The root causes and severity of the tank
problem have been identified by [8]. The average
service life has also been estimated to be at the
first apparent cracks and the rest of the tank
components. The RC Dome collapse in a
wastewater digester tank of the treatment plant is
also examined in [9]. They stated that the absence
of an overflow safety mechanism was a major
shortcoming in the tank's self-defense capability.
The conditions inside the dome had little or no
influence on the failure. The preexisting cracking
of the digester was just a part of the dome failure,
not the cause. The dome and anchors should be
built to withstand uplift forces caused by internal
overpressure that exceeds the dome's weight.

Figure 1. Variation of hoop tensile forces with tank height
[1]
In situ durability assessment testing was done
by [10] to the deteriorating concrete water tanks.
They pointed the significant criteria affecting the
longevity, efficiency, and service life of
established structures, such as a provided
concrete cover, reinforcement diameter loss due
to corrosion, carbonation depth, and chloride
concentration, among others, and residual
compressive strength, should be defined and
examined using basic field and laboratory testing
methods.
Another researcher studied the performance of
storage tanks damaged by hurricanes. They
recommend that an unanchored tank must be
studied to ascertain its strength under wind load.
They said the vertical displacement at the base
could decrease the buckling strength of the shell,
and it may be vulnerable to failure [11]. While
another investigated thermal buckling of open
storage tanks under fire and results as the
increases in temperatures in fire exposed tanks
cause thermal expansion, which causes
nonuniform displacement and stresses in the
cylindrical shell [12].
B. FE Modeling, Design, and Thermal
Assessment
The case study [13] examined thermal
cracking of the tank at early age construction
modeling FEM through the tank thickness such
as done by another researcher in Figure 2. They
found that a rise in the crack width of the first
crack is very important. The diagonal crack width
is considered in the construction joint, which
describes the less efficient crack width reduction
[14].
The seismic performance of storage steel
tanks under earthquakes was analyzed by [15].
They found that almost half of Italy was
92
endangered; the vast majority of the tanks
suffered excessive damage. Their low
performance is mostly due to a significant delay
in adopting and implementing appropriate
seismic provisions, which has resulted in a lack
of design and detailing [15]. A more detailed
seismic design standard for liquid storage tanks
was also presented by [16] and [17]. Research
[18] proposed a technique for developing seismic
fragility curves for unanchored oil-storage tanks
focused on numerical research. They used
nonlinear dynamic response analysis to account
for the uncertainties in pre-code tank using PSSA
(probabilistic seismic safety analysis). Seven
hundred fifty tank-liquid-earthquake events
produced fragility curves in terms of shell height-
tank diameter H/D and percent absolute.
According to [18], the most significant cause of
confusion in the PSSA of pre-code tanks is the
fragility of H/D.
Research on thermal cracking of a rectangular
concrete tank wall was also conducted by [19,
20] under construction and separating cracks by
[21]. They claimed that applying air-entraining
agents decreases thermal cracking while
simultaneously lowering the tensile strength of
concrete and the modulus of elasticity, resulting
in lower restraint stresses [19]. Additional
measurements should also be taken to validate
and define the degree of crack width adjustments
along with the wall thickness and evaluate the
effect of crack width differences on water
tightness [20].
Figure 2. Finite element model implemented in the tank wall
[28]
Corrosion performance of steel rebars of old
underground RC (reinforced-concrete) water-
storage tanks was also studied in [22]. A visual
analysis, half-potential, chloride penetration, and
electrochemical impedance research were
employed to determine the condition of the tank's
slab. Thus, it is suggested that the lower section
of the roof be patched at least 12 cm below the
roof slab. Additionally, a good ventilation system
must be provided to decrease the impact of
chloride and humidity [22]. Fragility assessment
of floating roof storage tanks during severe
rainfall was also investigated by [23]. Roofs with
well-designed and well-maintained rainwater
accumulations tend to be particularly fragile
during storms, but with well-maintained drainage
93 Rochman and Suhariyanto / Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University / Vol.56 No.5 Oct. 2021
appear to be a little more than average unlikely to
collapse [23].
A new diagnostic index based on surface
waves was also studied on a concrete digester
tank. The suggested diagnostic index and other
important indices like cutoff frequency and
resonant frequency increase inspection credibility
[24].
The numerical model for design and 35 years
after was developed in [25] using mechanical
properties of the material (gathered during the
initial project) and data from destructive and
nondestructive experiments conducted during the
current stage. By comparing the evolution of
stress distribution in the two phases, the goal was
to predict the level of degradation in structural
elements during the exploitation phase. The
variables influencing the structure's stability were
examined.
Another research [60] stated that a typical
error strengthens the structure by using
inappropriate boundary conditions. According to
the foundation slab, the common problem is to
verify the wall anchorage solely by inspecting the
local failure. They also detailed the process for
evaluating the material's consistency, the
distribution of reinforcement, and the strength
parameters of concrete. Additionally, they
suggested the IVD (identification-verification-
design) scheme to facilitate the design [60].
C. Further Seismic Assessment
An evaluation of seismic performance factors
for concrete tanks was also performed by [26],
and they point out that concrete tanks provide
less ductility than the building. At the same time,
sloshing in concrete cylindrical tanks in seismic
load was also reported in [27], seismic response –
in [28], and the same researchers generalized
SDOF (single degree of freedom system) for
concrete rectangular tanks in [29] and followed
by [30]. Many researchers studied seismic or
ground motion such as [31] simulates pre-
stressed concrete tank underground motion and
[32] performed seismic analysis on large tanks.
Research [33] examined the soil-structure
interaction on the tank's seismic response; [34]
provided innovative reduction techniques. Due to
soil-structure interaction and the flexibility of the
tank walls, earthquake characteristics affect the
pattern of base moment reduction in isolated
tanks. The highest reduction in peak value is
considered in soft soil for low-frequency
earthquakes. However, a similar reduction is
obtained for stiff soil for high-frequency
earthquakes [35].
Nayak [36] ranks water tanks in their seismic
performance using nondestructive testing. They
found that the displacement of the water tank was
reduced by 4.89%, 88.28%, and 92.89%,
respectively, for FRP, damper, and bracing. The
bracing method demonstrated the best
displacement reduction compared to all other
events. Following retrofit, acceleration improved
13.63% for FRP, 69.19% for damper, and
78.78% for bracing compared to IS 1893-2002.
The use of various retrofit methods results in a
decrease in displacement. This simplification
results in the structure behaving almost rigidly.
The study's various retrofit procedures result in a
reduction in velocity and an increase in
acceleration [36]. Seismic fragility and
vulnerability of elevated steel tanks were
provided in [37] and [38], and the effect of the
far-field and near-field earthquakes was studied
in [39].
Nonlinear behavior and concrete tank
conditions were studied in [40], while the
building surmounted by tank under hydrostatic
load was investigated [41]. They noticed that
when a structure is exposed to a seismic load, it
experiences severe damage, resulting in nonlinear
behavior that dissipates energy. Although
assuming the system to be elastic simplifies the
engineer's task, it obscures a fundamental
perception of actual performance. Thus, when
applied to established buildings, the use of
conventional procedures focused on a linear
examination may result in misleading
conclusions about the structure's actual
performance. They found that considering
nonlinear analysis in engineering calculations;
during the design stage in engineering offices; is
essential for a deeper understanding of the
performance point [41].
Numerical modeling and study of the steel
and concrete tank were also performed in [42] on
the dynamic response for impact loading and
done for differential settlement in [43]. Several
researchers [44] and [45] examined a large-scale
tank using numerical and experimental
investigation with floating roof and ferrocement
water tank, respectively. Large-scale oil tanks are
vulnerable to shell-to-bottom fillet loss. The
findings of computational modeling indicate that
the stress distribution in the shell-to-bottom
connection is highly complicated and that stress
values are mainly influenced by three parameters:
the base thickness of the annular bottom plate,
the radial width of the annular bottom plate
projection outside the shell, and the radial width
of the concrete ringwall [44]. Even in simplest
two-dimensional forms, the mentioned models

were adequate for determining the stress and
strain distributions in the system [45]. Thus, a
numerical analysis may be advantageous for
constructing low-cost ferrocement water tanks
utilizing basic geometrical and content models.
D. Hydrodynamic Pressure Effect and
Stability
A hydrodynamic pressure effect on tank wall
was also studied in [46] and [47]; a
computational fluid dynamics analysis of an
elevated circular water tank was proposed in [48].
For the study of fluid-structure relations, three
distinct finite element approaches to describing
fluid motion are possible: Eulerian, Lagrangian,
and mixed methods. The Eulerian method uses
the velocity potential (or pressure) to explain the
fluid's behavior, while the Lagrangian approach
uses the displacement field. In mixed methods,
the element formulation incorporates both the
pressure and displacement fields [47].
The behavior of an RC overhead water tank
under different staging patterns was studied in
[49]. At the same time, another research [50]
analyzed the stability parameter of a composite
foundation of an oil storage tank in a loess area
treated with compaction piles. When the
calculation coefficient is 1.05, the corresponding
sensitivity values for E, , and c are 0.312, 0.816,
and 0.704, respectively; when the calculation
coefficient is 1.20, the corresponding sensitivity
values for E, , and c are 0.078, 0.478, and 0.478,
respectively. Sensitivity values decrease as E, ,
and c increase. Since the sensitivity value
represents the relative effects of E, , and c on
the stabilization of the composite foundation, the
sensitivity of the three soil parameters is  > c >
E. Although  and c significantly impact stability,
E has a negligible effect [50].
E. Corrosion Assessment
Nondestructive investigation techniques
regarding corrosion assessment were also studied
in an elevated water tank [51]. A temporal
analysis of the performance of an RC storage
tank considering the corrosion was also done by
[52]. The residual section of steel reinforcement
after corrosion has been calculated. This section
was determined to reduce and rapidly exceed the
crucial level in elevated and severe aggressive
environments. Naturally, this affects the service
life of the tank wall, which is shortened by more
than half when exposed to a high-aggressive
setting, despite the importance of the concrete
cover. Corrosion analysis based on many factors
affecting the initiation period, such as the
concrete cover and the concentration of chlorides
94
ions, revealed that the tank's service life might be
extended significantly by providing a large
concrete cover [52].
Another research [53] compared damage due
to corrosion in concrete tanks for raw and treated
water. [54] stated the possible causes of damage
to concrete tanks using numerical experiments of
fluid-structure-soil interaction. A high chloride
concentration in concrete results in harmful
localized corrosion. Their increased
concentration increases the risk of significantly
reducing the cross-section of the reinforcement
when the ions migrating into it accelerate
electrochemical deterioration and even induce
concrete degradation due to crystallizing strain.
They may not inflict surface harm to a
reinforcement bar but rather cause iron to be
released from the depths; increased
concentrations of sulfate anions trigger sulfate
corrosion in concrete. The underlying principle is
the existence of dissoluble sulfates and relative
humidity. The presence of sulfate minerals causes
damage in concrete. These naturally occurring
derivatives are insoluble in water and have an
amount greater than the original compounds.
These products crystallize in the pores of the
cement stone, creating major internal pressures
that disintegrate the concrete base and result in
the creation of cracks [54].
Generally, deterioration and defects in
concrete structures can be depicted [55].
Eliminating the causes of possible failures would
undoubtedly reduce the amount and rate of
maintenance needed. In the case of broken
structural concrete with exposed reinforcement,
the primary cause of current failures and defects
is likely to be related to material and construction
quality deficiencies. Corrosion in reinforced steel
bars is a serious problem that dramatically
decreases the life and durability of concrete
buildings. Corrosion of the reinforcement was
anticipated due to poor construction, as the
concrete covers varied in thickness from 8mm to
16mm. In the case of vibrated floor slabs, it is
necessary to increase the mass and stiffness of
the concrete structure in order to enhance the
floors' vibration performance [55]. Another
researcher [56] studies the post-spill sulfuric acid
tank foundation evaluation. They found that
significant defects in the base pier were
discovered as a direct result of sulfuric acid
contamination, necessitating research to maintain
safe operating conditions. The assessment and
analysis are largely focused on visual observation
of the vertical face of the pier, noticing extreme
degradation, and making laboratory analyses of
concrete at this site. With roughly 2 inches of
95 Rochman and Suhariyanto / Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University / Vol.56 No.5 Oct. 2021

scaling along the face of the pier due to general

1
deterioration and chemical degradation, plus 12 5 0500 5
inches of sulfate assault in the current concrete, 1
250 250
1
approximately 2 + 12 inches of the original pier 25
0 1
25
0 1
section's circumference was deemed damaged 25
0 5
25
0
[56]. 25
0
Chloride penetration in concrete hydraulic
1
systems subjected to various seawater heads was 05
00
studied in [57] regarding a hydraulic pressure
tank. At the same time, the methods for 25
5

1
reinforcing the open tank's reinforced-concrete 0
25 25
1

framework were examined in [58] and stated that 0

the problem examined in their case study
occurred during the construction of the sewage
treatment system when the location of the built
object collided with an existing extensive
reinforcing structure. Owing to technical
constraints, neither the reinforced structure could
be removed nor supported against the newly
designed tank's wall. The used tanks may have
been loaded and drained in separate cycles,
resulting in two-way bending of the walls at the
objects' interface (to the inside and the outside of
the tanks) [58].
The tension stresses in the reinforced concrete
(RC) pedestal (supporting system) of the tank
subjected to seismic behavior are evaluated by
[59] using a process focused on Housner's model.
A pitting corrosion model is designed to assess
the reinforcements section's evolution over time
in various conditions. They proposed that these
parameters, such as the quality and properties of
the concrete composition, the conditions of its
implementation, and the climatic and
environmental conditions, be included in the
classification of exposure classes as sources of
aggression to design more sustainable systems in
aggressive environments.
III. CASE STUDY OF ELEVATED
CONCRETE TANKS
Based on the storage water tank structural
calculation report, the structural geometry of an
elevated concrete tank at several elevations is
depicted in Figure 3.
25
1 0 1
25
0 0
1
5 0500 5
250 250
5
25
0
1
05
00
5
25
0
Figure 3. Geometry of the tank and the cracks’ positions
The parameters of the materials used based on
the design report are as follows:
a) Concrete compressive strength for walls, slabs,
pile cap corresponds to K-350 grade (C30 grade).
b) Reinforced steel A36 consists of deformed
bars with diameters of D13 and D10, which have
the yield strength fy = 400 MPa, and plain bars
12 have the yield strength fy = 240 MPa,
respectively.
A. Several Nondestructive Testing and
Assessments
The concrete's average compressive strength
after 28 days at the construction time is measured
to be 393 kg/cm2. The tank system has also been
subjected to an immersion inspection. The
immersion test is conducted approximately one
year after construction is completed. The
immersion measurement is conducted by filling
the tank to a depth of 5.0 m. At a water depth of
5.0 m, there is no leakage. The immersion test
was conducted for four days to a depth of 5.0 m.
Leakage existed at many points on the north and
east tank’s walls and the tank floor layer when
water was attempted to be filled above 5.0 m.

During the immersion test, no monitoring of
beam and floor plate deflection is performed.
B. Visual Observation
Visual observations include cracks in
structural elements located at elevations of 24 +
450 and 19 + 450. The following figure
illustrates the results of visual observations of
cracks occurring in structural elements at an
elevation of 24 + 450.
a)
b) c)
Figure 4. Cracks in the a) beam B3; b) mid-span beam B3
from the side and bottom view; c) mid-span beam B3 from
the bottom view
The cracks in beam B4 (beam 40/120) and
beam B3 (25/90) located at an elevation of 24 +
450 are cracks in the center of the span with a
crack width of 0.5 to 1 mm. The crack in the
middle of the span is circular in the beam that
begins at the top of the beam pointed to as
flexural cracks for both Figure 4 and Figure 5.
a) b)
Figure 5. a) Side view of cracks in the mid-span of beam B4
b) Bottom view of the cracks surrounding the mid-span of
beam B4
96
The below are the cracks that appear on the
floor slab elevations 19 + 450 and 14 + 450, as
depicted in Figure 6.
a)
b)
Figure 6. a) Diagonal cracks in 19 + 450 elevation floor
slab; b) diagonal cracks in 19 + 450 elevation floor slab
On the floor slab elevations 19 + 450 and 14 +
450, there is a diagonal crack that runs parallel to
the diagonal beam of the same pattern; this crack
is shown as a result of long-term drying
shrinkage caused by cross-sectional volume
shrinkage caused by the loss of mixed water both
chemically and physically during the concrete
hardening stage. This phenomenon occurs within
a few weeks and several months after pouring.
C. Hammer Assessment
In general, the hammer test or Schmidt
rebound hammer is a surface hardness test. The
hammer test measures the hardness of the
concrete on the surface layer (+4 cm). However,
it is just a preliminary indication of consistency
and quality diversity for structural elements of
large dimensions. The hammer test is conducted
at 12 random locations, as 4 points in the column,
4 points in beam, 3 points in tank floor slabs, and
only 1 point in the tank wall shell. The position
of the hammer test point can be depicted in
Figure 7.
97 Rochman and Suhariyanto / Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University / Vol.56 No.5 Oct. 2021

Figure 9. Three testing methods (a) direct, (b) semi-direct

and (c) indirect

Numerous studies on UPV testing have been

conducted to determine the quality of concrete
using all available methods. It is known that:
a) Because the indirect method is 28% slower
than the direct method, a correction factor of
Figure 7. Location of hammer test sample points K, B, and 1/0.72 is required using the indirect method;
S are columns, beams, and slabs position, respectively b) Because the semidirect method is 15% slower
than the direct method, a correction factor of
The compressive strengths obtained from the 1/0.85 is required when performing the test in the
hammer test of the concrete are column as 653.75 semidirect method.
kg/cm2, for beam as 459.85 kg/cm2, for floor slab There are several formulas for estimating the
as 536.36 kg/cm2, and wall shell as 472.16 compressive strength of concrete using the
kg/cm2. ultrasonic pulse velocity measurement results, as:
1) Chung & Law (1983)
D. Concrete Quality Control Utilizing UPV
f'c = 47.66 * e 0.558.Vc
UPV testing was used to determine the
concrete's strength and the depth of cracks. where f'c – estimated concrete compressive
PUNDIT (Portable Ultrasonic Non-Destructive strength (kg/cm2); Vc – measured ultrasonic pulse
Digital Indicating Tester) was included in this velocity in concrete (km/s).
project to conduct UPV testing. Proceq's 2) Chung & Law Modifications
PUNDIT Lab product was used for testing in this
f”c = 0.0037 * f ’c1.9064
project. In general, the PUNDIT tool consists of
the following components: a) PUNDIT display b) where f”c – compressive strength of concrete
two 54 kHz transducers, c) two lead transducers, cylinder equivalent (kg/cm2); f ’c – the
and d) reference bar. These components are compressive strength of the estimation results
shown in Figure 8. with the simple Chung & Law formula (kg/cm2).
3) Sudarmadi et al. – Development of Formulas
f 'c = 71.41.v2 - 293,74.v + 433,86
where f 'c – compressive strength of concrete
equivalent to cubes (kg/cm2); v – velocity of
ultrasonic pulses in concrete (km/s).
Table 1 illustrates the concrete content
Figure 8. PUNDIT Lab products from Proceq classification according to longitudinal pulse
velocity.
The UPV test on concrete is based on the
concept of measuring the ultrasonic pulse Table 1.
velocity as it passes through the concrete. It may Concrete quality classification based on longitudinal pulse
then be used to assess the uniformity of concrete velocity
and the compressive strength of the concrete, Longitudinal Pulse Velocity Concrete Quality
among others, based on the measured ultrasonic km/s.103 ft/s
pulse velocity. The UPV test method may be > 4.5 > 15 Excellent
carried out in three distinct ways, as shown in 3.5 – 4.5 12 – 15 Good
3.0 – 3.5 10 – 12 Doubtful
Figure 9: absolute, semidirect, and indirect.
2.0 – 3.0 7 – 10 Poor
< 2.0 <7 Very poor
 98

UPV testing was performed at 11 locations,

10 of which were identical to the hammer test site.
Note that the quality of the concrete referred to is
the homogeneity and density of the concrete.

E. UPV Measurement of the Crack Depth

The UPV is used to determine the existence
and also the width of a crack. Six points were a)
chosen for crack depth measurement, of which
two were effective. Meanwhile, the four points
were unable to determine the extent of the crack
due to the unreliable signals or the signals are too
weak. Using UPV, the determination of existing
concrete parameters of structures can be seen in
Table 2 for structural strength, while the b)
element’s crack depth is depicted in Table 3. Figure 11. Internal forces in beam-slab structures (a) flexural
moment diagram of Mz; (b) shear diagram of Fy
F. Structural Modeling of Water Tank
The tank was remodeled using STAAD Pro Table 2 summarizes the deflection ratio
v8i structural model and analysis, especially at caused by the combination of DL+LL.
the beam elevation 24 + 450, since visual results
suggested structural cracks appeared in flexural Table 2.
cracks type. Deflection summary of each dimension
Beam dimension Design Analysis checking
(cm) (cm) (cm)
40/120 -0.539
25/90 -0.15 -0.596
25/50 -0.719

a) While the approximate crack width in the

beam is depicted as follows, assuming that the
reinforcement is built according to the design
drawing, the K350 (or C30) concrete is of good
consistency, and the tank is filled with water to a
depth of 5 m.
Figure 12 shows the notations used in further
formulas.
b)

Figure 10. Beam-slab in tank base (a) structural modeling;

(b) combined loads

Structural concrete self-weight can be set as

dead load (DL) while live load (LL) equals water Figure 12. Notations used in further formulas
to a depth of 5.5 m. The load combination under
consideration is DL+LL. The following Figure The distance from the point considered to the
10 a) is the isometric modeling of the beam surface of the nearest longitudinal bar is acr equal
configuration at an elevation of 24+450 and to
Figure 10 b) is combined service loads, 𝑠 2 𝑑𝑏 𝑑
𝑎𝑐𝑟 = (2) + √(𝑑′ + ) − 2𝑏 = 39.8 mm,
specifically DL and LL. 2
The output of the force in Mz and Fy that
and the applied service moment is MS = 867 kNm
occurs due to the combination of DL+LL loading
(computed from the STAAD Pro software). The
is as Figure 11:
elastic moduli of concrete can be approximated
as:
𝐸𝐶 = 0.5(20 + 0.2 𝑓′𝑐𝑢 ) = 13.5 kN/mm2
99 Rochman and Suhariyanto / Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University / Vol.56 No.5 Oct. 2021

While the elastic moduli of steel ES is concrete compressive strength data from ready-
estimated at 200 kN/mm2, the modular ratio can mix providers.
be computed as
𝛼=
𝐸𝑆 𝐴
= 14.815, and 𝜌 = 𝑏.𝑑𝑆 =0.004133
IV. DISCUSSION
𝐸𝐶 The following summarizes the findings of the
The depth of the neutral axis can be UPV and hammer test and the concrete
determined as compressive strength from ready-mix providers
as described in Table 6.
𝑥 = −𝛼. 𝜌 + 𝑑. √(𝛼. 𝜌)2 + 2. 𝛼. 𝜌 = 338.12 The compressive strength of slabs and beams
mm at elevation 24+450 is described in Figure 13
𝑥 based on UPV, hammer test, ready-mix, and
𝑧 = 𝑑 − 3 = 1037 mm design data.
Stress in the steel rebar is
𝑀𝑆
𝑓𝑆 = = 440 N/mm2
𝐴𝑆 .𝑧

and the concrete stress can be estimated as

𝐴 .𝑓
𝑆 𝑆
𝑓′𝐶 = 0.5.𝑏.𝑥 = 12.36 N/mm2
The strain at soffit concrete beam/slab is
Ready Design
𝑓𝑆 ℎ−𝑥 -mix
𝜀1 = . = 0.002334 Figure 13. Compressive strength comparison at 24 + 450
𝐸𝑆 𝑑−𝑥

and strain due to the stiffening effect of concrete The following points may be addressed based
between cracks for the crack width of 2 mm is on an assessment of the outcomes of observations,
used: testing, structural modeling, and other supporting
𝑏.(ℎ−𝑥)2 data:
𝜀2 = 3.𝐸 = 0.00321 a) The concrete used in the construction is
𝑆 .𝐴𝑆 .(𝑑−𝑥)
of K350 standard (i.e., C30);
The average strain for crack width is b) According to the ready-mix provider's
𝜀𝑚 = 𝜀1 − 𝜀2 = 0.002013. data, the compressive strength of the concrete is
393 kg/cm2;
Hence, the calculated crack width from c) The compressive strength of surface
average strain is concrete can be estimated using the hammer test
3.𝑎𝑐𝑟 .𝜀𝑚 for the column is as 653 kg/cm2, while for beams
𝑤= (𝑎𝑐𝑟 −𝑐) = 0,24 mm.
(1+2. (ℎ−𝑥) ) and slabs is 494 kg/cm2;
d) The compressive strength of concrete is
The maximum allowable crack width estimated using the UPV test for the column is
according to the ACI condition is stipulated in 268 kg/cm2 and 205 for beams and slabs;
Table 3. e) According to the UPV test data, the
Table 3. average concrete quality both for homogeneity
Guide to reasonable crack widths, reinforced concrete under and density for columns are fair, and for beams
service load and slabs were poor;
Exposure Condition Crack Width f) There are indications based on visual
(mm) observation: Structural cracks occur in the mid-
Dry air or protective membrane 0.41 span of a 40/120 beam and a diagonal beam at an
Humidity, moist air, soil 0.30 elevation of 24+450. While cracks on the
Deicing chemical 0.18
diagonal of the floor slab at elevation 19+450 are
Seawater spray, wetting, and drying 0.15
Water retaining structures 0.10 caused by long-term drying shrinkage and cracks
of the same pattern on the diagonal slab at
Since the water tank is one of the water- elevation 14+450;
retaining structures, the maximum crack width g) The estimated deflection result obtained
allowed is less than 0.15 mm. In the 40/120 and from structural modeling is higher than the
25/90 beams, the approximate crack width is 0.24 estimated deflection results obtained from the
mm, larger than the allowable crack width. Table design;
6 shows the UPV and hammer test results and the

h) The crack width measured for the 40/120
and 25/90 beams exceeds the allowable crack
width.
Refer to the UPV test results, visual
inspection, and structural modeling; there is an
indication that the water tank structure is
performing less than expected.
V. CONCLUSION
A brief explanation regarding the structural
evaluation of the tank, including crack initiation,
has been done. An example of nondestructive
testing was also given to judge the usability of
the existing tank. Crack detection is the initial
step to approximate the structural life of a water
tank, especially from concrete material. As usual
procedure after nondestructive testing, FEM
modeling should be performed to ensure the
residual capacity of cracked tanks under axial,
bending, and their seismic response under
earthquake.
According to the UPV test results, visual
inspection, and structural remodeling, there is
evidence that the water tank structure is
performing less than expected.
Additionally, the following is suggested:
a) A load test is recommended to assess
tank structural performance under service load.
The load test is conducted under Article 22 of the
Procedure for Calculating Concrete Frameworks
for Buildings (SNI 03-2847-2002). The preferred
solution is to conduct a direct load test
considering the structure's age and condition.
Core drilling (coring) is not recommended since
it involves destructive testing and is time-
consuming.
b) If the load test results meet the
requirements, the leak must be repaired, for
example, by adding a leak-proof coating or
injection until the water tank can be operated as
designed.
If the load test results do not satisfy the
criteria, the following are possible alternatives:
structural retrofitting, for instance, using CFRP
(Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer) wrapping or
another method of strengthening. The water tank
is also kept at an appropriate depth.
REFERENCES
[1] GURFINKEL, G. (1988) Large steel
tanks: Brittle fracture and repair. Journal of
performance of constructed facilities, 2 (1),
pp. 30-43.
[2] GURFINKEL, G. (1988) Tall steel
tanks: failure, design, and repair. Journal of
100
performance of constructed facilities, 2 (2),
pp. 99-110.
[3] GROSS, J.L., SMITH, J.H., and
WRIGHT, R.N. (1989) Ashland tank-
collapse investigation. Journal of
performance of constructed facilities, 3 (3),
pp. 144-162.
[4] GURFINKEL, G. (1989) Brittle
fracture and collapse of large grain-storage
tank. Journal of performance of constructed
facilities, 3 (3), pp. 163-183.
[5] GURFINKEL, G. & PECKNOLD, D.A.
(1997) Conical hoppers of tall steel tanks:
Case history of failure and repair. Journal of
performance of constructed facilities, 11 (2),
pp. 50-57.
[6] DAVIS, A.G., EVANS, J.G., and
HERTLEIN, B.H. (1997) Nondestructive
evaluation of concrete radioactive waste
tanks. Journal of performance of constructed
facilities, 11 (4), pp. 161-167.
[7] ASSA'AD, A. (1998) Differential
upheaval of phosphoric acid storage tanks in
Aqaba, Jordan. Journal of Performance of
Constructed Facilities, 12 (2), pp. 71-76.
[8] BHADAURIA, S.S. & GUPTA, M.C.
(2006) In-service durability performance of
water tanks. Journal of performance of
constructed facilities, 20 (2), pp. 136-145.
[9] MONCARZ, P.D., GRIFFITH, M.,
and NOAKOWSKI, P. (2007) Collapse of a
reinforced concrete dome in a wastewater
treatment plant digester tank. Journal of
performance of constructed facilities, 21 (1),
pp. 4-12.
[10] BHADAURIA, S.S. & GUPTA, D.M.C.
(2007) In situ performance testing of
deteriorating water tanks for durability
assessment. Journal of performance of
constructed facilities, 21 (3), pp. 234-239.
[11] GODOY, L.A. (2007) Performance of
storage tanks in oil facilities damaged by
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Journal of
performance of constructed facilities, 21 (6),
pp. 441-449.
[12] BATISTA-ABREU, J.C. & GODOY,
L.A. (2013) Thermal buckling behavior of
open cylindrical oil storage tanks under
fire. Journal of performance of constructed
facilities, 27 (1), pp. 89-97.
[13] SERUGA, A. & ZYCH, M. (2015)
Thermal cracking of the cylindrical tank
101 Rochman and Suhariyanto / Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University / Vol.56 No.5 Oct. 2021
under construction. Case study. Journal of
Performance of Constructed Facilities, 29
(4), 04014100.
[14] ZYCH, M. (2015) Thermal cracking of
the cylindrical tank under construction. II:
Early age cracking. Journal of Performance
of Constructed Facilities, 29 (4), 04014101.
[15] BRUNESI, E., NASCIMBENE, R.,
PAGANI, M., and BEILIC, D. (2015)
Seismic performance of storage steel tanks
during the May 2012 Emilia, Italy,
earthquakes. Journal of Performance of
Constructed Facilities, 29 (5), 04014137.
[16] WANG, L.Y. (2003) Seismic Design
Standards and Guidelines of Steel and
Concrete Liquid Storage Tanks.
In Advancing Mitigation Technologies and
Disaster Response for Lifeline Systems, pp.
327-338.
[17] LIU, Z. (2018) Seismic design and
analysis of concrete liquid-containing tanks.
In: Structures Congress 2018: Bridges,
Transportation Structures, and Nonbuilding
Structures, pp. 444-454.
[18] RAZZAGHI, M.S. & ESHGHI, S.
(2015) Probabilistic seismic safety evaluation
of precode cylindrical oil tanks. Journal of
Performance of Constructed Facilities, 29
(6), 04014170.
[19] SERUGA, A. & ZYCH, M. (2016)
Research on thermal cracking of a
rectangular RC tank wall under construction.
Case study. Journal of Performance of
Constructed Facilities, 30 (1), 04014198.
[20] ZYCH, M. (2016) Research on thermal
cracking of a rectangular RC tank wall under
construction. II: comparison with numerical
model. Journal of Performance of
Constructed Facilities, 30 (1), 04014199.
[21] BILCIK, J., GAJDOSOVA, K., and
BOLHA, L. (2013) Analysis of separating
cracks development in concrete
tanks. Procedia Engineering, 65, pp. 75-80.
[22] TAJI, I., GHORBANI, S., TEYMOORI,
R.J., HOSEINPOOR, M., DAVOODI, A.,
SHEIBANI, A.R., and DE BRITO, J. (2020)
Corrosion Performance of Steel Rebars in the
Roof of a 65-Year-Old Underground
Reinforced Concrete Water-Storage
Tank. Journal of Performance of
Constructed Facilities, 34 (4), 04020077.
[23] BERNIER, C. & PADGETT, J.E.
(2020) Fragility Assessment of Floating Roof
Storage Tanks during Severe Rainfall
Events. Journal of Performance of
Constructed Facilities, 34 (6), 04020101.
[24] KIRLANGIÇ, A.S., CASCANTE, G.,
and SALSALI, H. (2020) New Diagnostic
Index Based on Surface Waves: Feasibility
Study on Concrete Digester Tank. Journal of
Performance of Constructed Facilities, 34
(6), 04020114.
[25] FILIP, A. & COVATARIU, D. (2019)
Assessment of the Time-dependent
Behaviour of a Reinforced Concrete Water
Tank by using the Finite Elements Method.
In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science
and Engineering, 586 (1), 012021.
[26] MOUNIR, M., SAFAR, S., EL-
ARABATY, H., and SAYED-AHMED, E.Y.
(2012) Evaluation of Seismic Performance
Factors for Elevated Reinforced Concrete
Tanks. In IABSE Symposium Report, 98 (1),
pp. 41-50.
[27] SHAHVERDIANI, K., RAHAI, A., and
KHOSHNOUDIAN, F. (2010) Sloshing in
concrete cylindrical tanks subjected to
earthquake. Proceedings of the Institution of
Civil Engineers-Engineering and
Computational Mechanics, 163 (4), pp. 261-
269.
[28] CHEN, J.Z. & KIANOUSH, M.R.
(2005) Seismic response of concrete
rectangular tanks for liquid containing
structures. Canadian Journal of Civil
Engineering, 32 (4), pp. 739-752.
[29] CHEN, J.Z. & KIANOUSH, M.R.
(2009) Generalized SDOF system for seismic
analysis of concrete rectangular liquid
storage tanks. Engineering Structures, 31
(10), pp. 2426-2435.
[30] UHLÍŘOVÁ, L., & JENDŽELOVSKÝ,
N. (2020) Rectangular reinforced concrete
tank loaded by seismic load. In MATEC Web
of Conferences, 310, 00008.
[31] PAVEL, F. (2020) Seismic risk
assessment of on-ground circular reinforced
concrete and prestressed concrete water tanks
using stochastic ground motion
simulations. Bulletin of Earthquake
Engineering, pp. 1-18.
[32] LI, J., YOU, X., CUI, H., HE, Q., and
JU, J. (2015) Analysis of large concrete
storage tank under seismic response. Journal

of Mechanical Science and Technology, 29
(1), pp. 85-91.
[33] ASGARI, M.H., KHODAKARAMI,
M.I., and VAHDANI, R. (2020) The Effect
of Topographic Irregularities on Seismic
Response of the Concrete Rectangular Liquid
Storage Tanks Incorporating Soil–Structure–
Liquid Interaction. Iranian Journal of
Science and Technology, Transactions of
Civil Engineering, 44 (4), pp. 1179-1197.
[34] BAGHCHESARAEI, O.R.,
LAVASANI, H.H., and BAGHCHESARAEI,
A. (2018) Nonlinear Behavior of Circular
Concrete Storage Tanks: History Pushover
and Dynamic Loadings by Providing an
Innovative Technique to Reduce the Seismic
Response of Semi-Buried Tanks. In Applied
Mechanics and Materials, 878, pp. 54-60.
[35] SHEKARI, M.R. (2018) A coupled BE–
FE–BE study for investigating the effect of
earthquake frequency content and
predominant period on seismic behavior of
base-isolated concrete rectangular liquid
tanks. Journal of Fluids and Structures, 77,
pp. 19-35.
[36] NAYAK, C.B. & THAKARE, S.B.
(2019) Seismic performance of existing
water tank after condition ranking using
nondestructive testing. International Journal
of Advanced Structural Engineering, 11 (4),
pp. 395-410.
[37] PHAN, H.N., PAOLACCI, F., BURSI,
O.S., and TONDINI, N. (2017) Seismic
fragility analysis of elevated steel storage
tanks supported by reinforced concrete
columns. Journal of Loss Prevention in the
Process Industries, 47, pp. 57-65.
[38] COHEN, Y., LIVSHITS, A., and
NASCIMBENE, R. (2017) Comparative
approach to seismic vulnerability of an
elevated steel tank within a reinforced
concrete chimney. Periodica Polytechnica
Civil Engineering, 61 (3), pp. 361-380.
[39] VERN, S., SHRIMALI, M.K., BHARTI,
S.D., and DATTA, T.K. (2021) Seismic
Behavior of Baffled Liquid Storage Tank
Under Far-Field and Near-Field
Earthquake. Recent Advances in
Computational Mechanics and Simulations,
pp. 445-456.
[40] RAFIEERAAD, M., KIANOUSH, M.R.,
and MOSLEMI, M. (2021) Nonlinear
102
behavior of ground-supported circular
reinforced concrete tanks. Canadian Journal
of Civil Engineering, 48 (2), pp. 220-232.
[41] L'HADJ, L.A., HAMMOUM, H., and
BOUZELHA, K. (2018) Nonlinear analysis
of a building surmounted by a reinforced
concrete water tank under hydrostatic
load. Advances in Engineering Software, 117,
pp. 80-88.
[42] YAN, C., ZHAI, X.M., and WANG,
Y.H. (2019) Numerical study on the dynamic
response of a massive liquefied natural gas
outer tank under impact loading. Journal of
Zhejiang University-SCIENCE A, 20 (11), pp.
823-837.
[43] TARASENKO, A., CHEPUR, P., and
GRUCHENKOVA, A. (2019) Numerical
Modeling of a Vertical Steel Tank
Differential Settlement Development. In
Energy Management of Municipal
Transportation Facilities and Transport, pp.
60-70.
[44] SHI, L., SHUAI, J., WANG, X., and XU,
K. (2017) Experimental and numerical
investigation of stress in a large-scale steel
tank with a floating roof. Thin-Walled
Structures, 117, pp. 25-34.
[45] MOITA, G.F., ESTEVAM, B.,
CARRASCO, E.V.M., and BONIFÁCIO,
S.N. (2003) Experimental and numerical
analysis of large ferrocement water
tanks. Cement and Concrete Composites, 25
(2), pp. 243-251.
[46] HUSSEIN, A.A., AL-NEAMI, M.A.,
and RAHIL, F.H. (2021) Hydrodynamic
pressure effect of the tank wall on soil-
structure interaction. Modern Applications of
Geotechnical Engineering and Construction,
pp. 173-184.
[47] KOTRASOVÁ, K. (2017) Study of
hydrodynamic pressure on wall of
tank. Procedia Engineering, 190, pp. 2-6.
[48] KHATI, T., KALONI, S., and
NARAYAN, S. (2020) Computational fluid
dynamics analysis of elevated circular water
tank. Journal of Graphic Era University, pp.
87-94.
[49] SHRIGONDEKAR, A. H.,
PARULEKAR, G. D., and KASAR, V. R.
(2017) Behavior of RC overhead water tank
under different staging patterns. Intl. Journal
of Engineering Research & Technology, 6
103 Rochman and Suhariyanto / Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University / Vol.56 No.5 Oct. 2021
(04).
[50] CHENG, X., JING, W., YIN, C., and LI,
C. (2018) Stability parameter analysis of a
composite foundation of an oil storage tank
in a loess area treated with compaction
piles. Soils and Foundations, 58 (2), pp.
306-318.
[51] NAYAK, C.B. & THAKARE, S.B.
(2017) Investigation of corrosion status in
elevated water tank by using nondestructive
techniques in Baramati region. In
International Conference on Construction
Real Estate, Infrastructure and Project
Management, NICMAR, Pune, pp. 1-17.
[52] BOUZELHA, K., AMAZOUZ, L.,
MILOUDI, N., and HAMMOUM, H. (2019)
Temporal analysis of the performance of a
RC storage tank considering the
corrosion. Procedia Structural Integrity, 22,
pp. 259-266.
[53] LUTOMIRSKA, M. & LUTOMIRSKI,
S. (2014) Comparison of Damage due to
Corrosion for Reinforced Concrete Tanks for
Raw and Treated Water. Procedia
Engineering, 91, pp. 244-249.
[54] KOTRASOVA, K., HEGEDUSOVA, I.,
HARABINOVA, S., PANULINOVA, E.,
and KORMANIKOVA, E. (2017) The
possible causes of damage to concrete tanks,
numerical experiment of fluid-structure-soil
interaction. In Key Engineering
Materials, 738, pp. 227-237.
[55] JAMALUDDIN, N., AYOP, S.S.,
IBRAHIM, M., BOON, K.H., YEOH, D.,
SHAHIDAN, S., and SHAMRUL-MAR, S.
(2017) Forensic Building: Deterioration and
Defect in Concrete Structures. In MATEC
Web of Conferences, 103, 02016.
[56] NAEGELE, C., TRIANDAFILOU, N.,
and MAHAMID, M. (2020) Post-Spill
Sulfuric Acid Tank Foundation Evaluation.
In Structures Congress 2020, pp. 552-559.
[57] ALFATLAWI, T.J. & ALSULTANI,
R.A.A. (2019) Characterization of chloride
penetration in hydraulic concrete structures
exposed to different heads of seawater: Using
hydraulic pressure tank. Engineering Science
and Technology, an International Journal, 22
(3), pp. 939-946.
[58] CHMIELEWSKI, R., KRUSZKA, L.,
and MUZOLF, P. (2020) The selection of
methods for strengthening of the reinforced-
concrete structure of the open tank. Case
Studies in Construction Materials, 12,
e00343.
[59] HAMMOUM, H., MILOUDI, N.,
BOUZELHA, K., AOUES, Y., and AMIRI,
O. (2021) Temporal analysis of the
performance of an elevated concrete tank
considering the corrosion of the steel
reinforcement. Frattura ed Integrità
Strutturale, 15 (56), pp. 94-114.
[60] DROBIEC, Ł., GIERCZAK, J.,
IGNATOWICZ, R., KOZIOŁ, P., and
NOWAK, T. (2021) Concrete Tank Failure
as the Result of Implementing Wrong
Boundary Conditions for Wall Support—
Case Study. Materials, 14 (10), 2474.
参考文:
[1] GURFINKEL, G. (1988) 大型鋼罐：脆
性斷裂和修復。建造設施性能雜誌，2 (1)，
第 30-43 頁。
[2] GURFINKEL, G. (1988) 高鋼罐：故障、
設計和維修。建造設施性能雜誌，2 (2)，
第 99-110 頁。
[3] GROSS, J.L., SMITH, J.H., 和 WRIGHT,
R.N. (1989) 亞甚蘭坦克倒塌調查。建造設
施性能雜誌，3 (3)，第 144-162 頁。
[4] GURFINKEL, G. (1989) 大型儲糧罐的
脆性斷裂和倒塌。日。建造設施的性能，
3 (3)，第 163-183 頁。
[5] GURFINKEL, G. 和 PECKNOLD, D.A.
(1997) 高鋼罐的錐形料斗：故障和維修案
例歷史。建造設施性能雜誌，11 (2)，第
50-57 頁。
[6] DAVIS, A.G., EVANS, J.G., 和
HERTLEIN, B.H. (1997) 混凝土放射性廢
物罐的無損評價。建造設施性能雜誌，11
(4)，第 161-167 頁。
[7] ASSA'AD, A. (1998) 約旦亞喀巴磷酸儲
罐的差異劇變。建築設施性能雜誌，12
(2)，第 71-76 頁。
[8] BHADAURIA, S.S. 和 GUPTA, M.C.
(2006) 水箱在役耐久性能。建造設施性能
雜誌，20(2)，第 136-145 頁。
[9] MONCARZ, P.D., GRIFFITH, M., 和
NOAKOWSKI, P. (2007) 污水處理廠消化

池中鋼筋混凝土圓頂的倒塌。建造設施性
能雜誌，21 (1)，第 4-12 頁。
[10] BHADAURIA, S.S. 和 GUPTA, D.M.
C. (2007) 用於耐久性評估的老化水箱的現
場性能測試。建造設施性能雜誌，21 (3)，
第 234-239 頁。
[11] GODOY, L.A. (2007) 受卡特里娜颶風
和麗塔颶風破壞的石油設施中儲罐的性能。
建造設施性能雜誌，21 (6)，第 441-449 頁。
[12] BATISTA-ABREU, J.C. 和 GODOY,
L.A. (2013) 火災下開放式圓柱形儲油罐的
熱屈曲行為。建造設施性能雜誌，27 (1)，
第 89-97 頁。
[13] SERUGA, A. 和 ZYCH, M. (2015) 在
建圓柱罐的熱裂化。案例分析。建築設施
性能雜誌，29（4），04014100。
[14] ZYCH, M. (2015) 在建圓柱罐的熱裂
解。 II：早期開裂。建築設施性能雜誌，
29（4），04014101。
[15] BRUNESI, E., NASCIMBENE, R.,
PAGANI, M., 和 BEILIC, D. (2015) 2012 年
5 月意大利艾米利亞地震期間鋼儲罐的抗
震性能。建築設施性能雜誌，29（5），
04014137。
[16] WANG, L.Y. (2003) 鋼和混凝土液體
儲罐的抗震設計標準和指南。在推進生命
線系統的緩解技術和災難響應中，第 327-
338 頁。
[17] LIU, Z. (2018) 混凝土儲液罐的抗震設
計與分析。在 2018 年結構大會：橋樑、
運輸結構和非建築結構，第 444-454 頁。
[18] RAZZAGHI, M.S. 和 ESHGHI, S.
(2015) 預編碼圓柱形油罐的概率地震安全
性評估。建築設施性能雜誌，29（6），
04014170。
[19] SERUGA, A. 和 ZYCH, M. (2016) 在
建矩形鋼筋混凝土罐壁熱裂研究。案例分
析 。 建 築 設 施 性 能 雜 誌 ， 30 （ 1 ） ，
04014198。
[20] ZYCH, M. (2016) 在建矩形鋼筋混凝
土罐壁熱裂研究。二：與數值模型的比較。
建築設施性能雜誌，30（1），04014199。
[21] BILCIK, J., GAJDOSOVA, K., 和
BOLHA, L. (2013) 混凝土儲罐中分離裂縫
發展的分析。 繼續 工程，65，第 75-80
頁。
104
[22] TAJI, I., GHORBANI, S., TEYMOORI,
RJ, HOSEINPOOR, M., DAVOODI, A.,
SHEIBANI, AR, 和 DE BRITO, J. (2020) 屋
頂鋼筋的腐蝕性能 65 年曆史的地下鋼筋
混凝土蓄水箱。建築設施性能雜誌，34
（4），04020077。
[23] BERNIER, C. 和 PADGETT, J.E.
(2020) 嚴重降雨事件期間浮頂儲罐的脆弱
性評估。建築設施性能雜誌，34（6），
04020101。
[24] KIRLANGIÇ, A.S., CASCANTE, G.,
和 SALSALI, H. (2020) 基於表面波的新診
斷指數：混凝土消化池的可行性研究。建
築設施性能雜誌，34（6），04020114。
[25] FILIP, A. 和 COVATARIU, D. (2019)
使用有限元方法評估鋼筋混凝土水箱的時
間相關行為。在眼壓會議系列：材料科學
與工程，586（1），012021。
[26] MOUNIR, M., SAFAR, S., EL-
ARABATY, H., 和 SAYED-AHMED, E.Y.
(2012) 高架鋼筋混凝土儲罐的抗震性能因
素評估。在國際橋樑與結構工程協會研討
會報告，98 (1)，第 41-50 頁。
[27] SHAHVERDIANI, K., RAHAI, A., 和
KHOSHNOUDIAN, F. (2010) 混凝土圓柱
罐在地震作用下的晃動。土木工程師學會
會刊 - 工程和計算力學，163 (4)，第 261-
269 頁。
[28] CHEN, J.Z. 和 KIANOUSH, M.R.
(2005) 用於含液體結構的混凝土矩形儲罐
的地震響應。加拿大土木工程雜誌，32
(4)，第 739-752 頁。
[29] CHEN, J.Z. 和 KIANOUSH, M.R.
(2009) 用於混凝土矩形液體儲罐抗震分析
的廣義單自由度系統。工程結構，31 (10)，
第 2426-2435 頁。
[30] UHLÍŘOVÁ, L., 和 JENDŽELOVSKÝ,
N. (2020) 由地震荷載加載的矩形鋼筋混凝
土罐。在中西部艾滋病培訓教育中心社區
» 教育 會議網絡, 310, 00008。
[31] PAVEL, F. (2020) 使用隨機地震動模
擬對地面圓形鋼筋混凝土和預應力混凝土
水箱進行地震風險評估。地震工程公報，
第 1-18 頁。
[32] LI, J., YOU, X., CUI, H., HE, Q., 和 JU,
J. (2015) 地震反應下大型混凝土儲罐分析。
機械科學與技術雜誌，29 (1)，第 85-91 頁。
105 Rochman and Suhariyanto / Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University / Vol.56 No.5 Oct. 2021

[33] ASGARI, M.H., KHODAKARAMI, [43] TARASENKO, A., CHEPUR, P., 和

M.I., 和 VAHDANI, R. (2020) 地形不規則 GRUCHENKOVA, A. (2019) 立式鋼罐差
對包含土壤-結構-液體相互作用的混凝土 異沉降開發的數值模擬。在市政交通設施
矩形液體儲罐地震響應的影響。伊朗科學 和運輸的能源管理中，第 60-70 頁。
技 術 雜 誌 ， 土 木 工 程 彙 刊 ， 44 (4) ， 第 [44] SHI, L., SHUAI, J., WANG, X., 和 XU,
1179-1197 頁。 K. (2017) 大型浮頂鋼罐應力的實驗和數值
[34] BAGHCHESARAEI, O.R., 研究。薄壁結構，117，第 25-34 頁。
LAVASANI, H.H., 和 BAGHCHESARAEI, [45] MOITA, G.F., ESTEVAM, B.,
A. (2018) 圓形混凝土儲罐的非線性行為： CARRASCO, E.V.M., 和 BONIFÁCIO, S.N.
通過提供一種創新技術來減少半埋罐的地 (2003) 大型鋼筋水泥水箱的實驗和數值分
震響應來實現歷史推覆和動態載荷。在應 析。水泥和混凝土複合材料，25 (2)，第
用力學和材料，878，第 54-60 頁。 243-251 頁。
[35] SHEKARI, M.R. (2018) 是-有限元-是 [46] HUSSEIN, A.A., AL-NEAMI, M.A., 和
耦合研究，用於研究地震頻率含量和主要 RAHIL, F.H. (2021) 水箱壁對土壤-結構相
周期對基礎隔震混凝土矩形液罐抗震性能 互作用的流體動壓影響。岩土工程與施工
的影響。流體與結構雜誌，77，第 19-35 的現代應用，第 173-184 頁。
頁。 [47] KOTRASOVÁ, K. (2017) 罐壁流體動
[36] NAYAK, C.B. 和 THAKARE, S.B. 壓研究。 繼續 工程，190，第 2-6 頁。
(2019) 使用無損檢測進行狀況分級後現有 [48] KHATI, T., KALONI, S., 和
水箱的抗震性能。國際先進結構工程雜誌， NARAYAN, S. (2020) 高架圓形水箱的計
11 (4)，第 395-410 頁。 算流體動力學分析。圖形時代大學學報，
[37] PHAN, H.N., PAOLACCI, F., BURSI, 第 87-94 頁。
O.S., 和 TONDINI, N. (2017) 鋼筋混凝土 [49] SHRIGONDEKAR, A. H.,
柱支撐的高架鋼儲罐的抗震脆弱性分析。 PARULEKAR, G. D., 和 KASAR, V. R.
過程工業中的損失預防雜誌，47，第 57- (2017) 不同分段模式下鋼筋混凝土架空水
65 頁。 箱的行為。國際機場工程研究與技術雜誌，
[38] COHEN, Y., LIVSHITS, A., 和 6（04）。
NASCIMBENE, R. (2017) 鋼筋混凝土煙囪 [50] CHENG, X., JING, W., YIN, C., 和 LI,
內高架鋼罐地震易損性的比較方法。理工 C. (2018) 壓實樁處理黃土地區儲油罐複合
學院期刊土木工程, 61 (3), 第 361-380 頁。 地基穩定性參數分析。土壤和基礎，58
[39] VERN, S., SHRIMALI, M.K., BHARTI, (2)，第 306-318 頁。
S.D., 和 DATTA, T.K. (2021) 遠場和近場 [51] NAYAK, C.B. 和 THAKARE, S.B.
地震下擋板液體儲罐的地震行為。計算力 (2017) 在巴拉馬蒂地區使用無損技術調查
學和模擬的最新進展，第 445-456 頁。 高架水箱腐蝕狀況。在建築房地產、基礎
[40] RAFIEERAAD, M., KIANOUSH, M.R., 設施和項目管理國際會議上，尼瑪，浦那，
和 MOSLEMI, M. (2021) 地面支撐圓形鋼 第 1-17 頁。
筋混凝土儲罐的非線性行為。加拿大土木 [52] BOUZELHA, K., AMAZOUZ, L.,
工程雜誌，48 (2)，第 220-232 頁。 MILOUDI, N., 和 HAMMOUM, H. (2019)
[41] L'HADJ, L.A., HAMMOUM, H., 和 考慮腐蝕的鋼筋混凝土儲罐性能的時間分
BOUZELHA, K. (2018) 在靜水載荷下鋼筋 析。 繼續 結構完整性，22，第 259-266
混凝土水箱上方建築物的非線性分析。工 頁。
程軟件進展，117，第 80-88 頁。 [53] LUTOMIRSKA, M. 和 LUTOMIRSKI,
[42] YAN, C., ZHAI, X.M., 和 WANG, Y.H. S. (2014) 鋼筋混凝土罐原水和處理水腐蝕
(2019) 衝擊載荷作用下大型液化天然氣外 造成的損壞比較。 繼續 工程，91，第
罐動態響應的數值研究。浙江大學學報- 244-249 頁。
科學一種, 20 (11), 第 823-837 頁。 [54] KOTRASOVA, K., HEGEDUSOVA, I.,
HARABINOVA, S., PANULINOVA, E., 和

KORMANIKOVA, E. (2017) 混凝土儲罐損
壞的可能原因，流固耦合數值試驗。在關
鍵工程材料，738，第 227-237 頁。
[55] JAMALUDDIN, N., AYOP, SS,
IBRAHIM, M., BOON, KH, YEOH, D.,
SHAHIDAN, S., 和 SHAMRUL-MAR, S.
(2017) 法醫建築：混凝土結構的退化和缺
陷.在中西部艾滋病培訓教育中心社區 » 教
育會議網站, 103, 02016。
[56] NAEGELE, C.、TRIANDAFILOU, N.
和 MAHAMID, M. (2020) 硫酸洩漏後儲罐
基礎評估。在 2020 年結構大會，第 552-
559 頁。
[57] ALFATLAWI, T.J. 和 ALSULTANI,
RA (2019) 暴露於不同海水水頭的水工混
凝土結構中氯化物滲透的表徵：使用液壓
106
罐。工程科學與技術，國際期刊，22 (3)，
第 939-946 頁。
[58] CHMIELEWSKI, R., KRUSZKA, L., 和
MUZOLF, P. (2020) 露天罐鋼筋混凝土結構加
固 方 法 的 選 擇 。 建 築 材 料 案 例 研 究 ， 12 ，
e00343。
[59] HAMMOUM, H., MILOUDI, N.,
BOUZELHA, K., AOUES, Y., 和 AMIRI, O.
(2021) 考慮鋼筋腐蝕的高架混凝土儲罐性能的
時間分析。斷裂和結構完整性，15 (56)，第
94-114 頁。
[60] DROBIEC, Ł., GIERCZAK, J.,
IGNATOWICZ, R., KOZIOŁ, P., 和 NOWAK,
T. (2021) 因實施錯誤的牆體支撐邊界條件而
導致的混凝土儲罐失效——案例研究。材料，
14（10），2474。