Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: Coefficient of Friction

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
This area (Wyoming) is relatively low seismically (SDC B).  I'm working in the tanks section of ASCE 7 (I don't have it with me but I think it is section 15.7).  An unanchored or self anchored tank is an acceptable approach as long as the numbers work out.   There are many tanks small and large throughout the US that are not anchored. 
 
This tank is indoors so wind is not a factor.  When outdoors, the tank is calc'ed for wind loads with the tank empty to check sliding and overturning.  This tank is not considered a component so the ASCE 7 friction disallowance does not come into play. 
 
The problem I have is the friction factors that I can find are for a steel tank on concrete.  I have a fiberglass or plastic tank on concrete.  If it were a steel tank it would work out easily but I need to adjust for the difference in friction between steel and fiberglass.  For reference, the tank is 12' diameter by 17' tall.  It was not placarded as an ASME, API, AWWA, etc. tank so I'm not using one of those standards.
 
Paul.

On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 1:17 PM, sgeconsulting <sgordin(--nospam--at)sgeconsulting.com> wrote:
The code implicitly disallows the use of friction to resist seismic forces, hence the use of "self-anchored" tanks does not appear a great idea. Besides, such tanks will be quite susceptible to wind when empty.

That said, we routinely use friction between the footings and the soil to resist seismic forces. How does that work from the code and just rational standpoints?

SGE Mobile


On Aug 28, 2010, at 8:29, "Richard Hess" <RLHess(--nospam--at)HessEng.com> wrote:

Paul,

That will not work if it is in earthquake country.  The vertical forces will dance it all over the place.

 

Richard Hess, S.E.