Design and Analysis of storage vessel (Silo)

Sandip Patel*, Vishant Patel

*PG Student, LaljibhaiChaturbhai Institute of Technology, Bhandu
Assistant Professor, LaljibhaiChaturbhai Institute of Technology, Bhandu

Abstract
Bulk storage tanks are very important for industrial and agricultural facilities. The value of these
tanks to society exceeds by far the economic value of the tanks and their contents. This is because the failure
of tanks and their accessories is not limited to the immediate danger to nearby human lives, but also to a
large extent leads to serious consequences and very likely to long-term environmental damages. Thus to
prevent failure of the silo it must be design properly. This report contents designing of the silo as per
various applicable code and standards. The silo is designed for various types of load acting on it e.g. dead
load, live load, wind or seismic load, load during filling and discharging of bulk material etc. Stress
calculation has been done for Silo having storage capacity of 580 m3 for storing plastic pellets. This include
different kind of stresses developed in silo i.e. circumferential stress, axial stress, equivalents stresses.
Finally, all stresses are verified by allowable stress values of construction material according to standards.
Axial buckling and circumferential buckling stresses are verified as per DIN 18800 part 4 1990.

Key Words: Tall structure, Silo design, Design verification

d. Bag silos
Introduction e. Bins
f. Sand and salt silos
Silo may be classified as storage structure g. Fabric silos
generally used for storing coal, cement, food grains,
and other granular materials. Steel silos may be Tower silo
directly supported at ground level in which case Storage silos are cylindrical structures, typically 10
walls are extend to the foundation and the stored to 90 ft (3 to 27 m) in diameter and 30 to 275 ft (10
material rest either on the foundation ordirectly on to 90 m) in height with the slip form and Jump from
the ground. As an alternate the stored material may concrete silos being the larger diameter and taller
be supported by silo bottoms elevated above the silos. They can be made of many materials. Wood
ground. Elevated steel silos may be supported by staves, concrete staves, cast concrete, and steel
columns directly attached to the shell or by special panels have all been used, and have varying cost,
supporting steel or concrete structural framing. In durability, and air tightness tradeoffs. Silos storing
case of small diameter silos, the metal walls may grain, cement and woodchips are typically unloaded
extend down to the foundation and support the entire with air slides or augers.
structure.
1.2 Types of silos bunker silos
a. Cement storage silos Bunker silos are trenches, usually with concrete
b. Tower silo walls, that are filled and packed with tractors and
 Concrete stave silos loaders. The filled trench is covered with a plastic
 Low-oxygen tower silos tarp to make it airtight. These silos are usually
c. Bunker silos unloaded with a tractor and loader. They are
inexpensive and especially well-suited to very large Following are the main components of silo.
operations.  Cylindrical Bin
 Conical Bottom
d. Bag silos  Roof
Bag silos are heavy plastic tubes, usually around 8 to  Short Skirt for support to entire assembly
12 ft (2.4 to 3.6 m) in diameter, and of variable
length as required for the amount of material to be
stored. They are packed using a machine made for
the purpose, and sealed on both ends. They are
unloaded using a tractor and loader or skid-steer
loader. The bag is discarded in sections as it is torn
off. Bag silos require little capital investment. They
can be used as a temporary measure when growth or
harvest conditions require more space, though some
farms use them every year.
e. Bins
A bin is typically much shorter than a silo, and is
typically used for holding dry matter such as cement
or grain. Grain is often dried in a grain dryer before
being stored in the bin. Bins may be round or square,
but round bins tend to empty more easily due to a
lack of corners for the stored material to become
wedged and encrusted.

f.Sand and salt silos

Sand and salt for winter road maintenance are stored
in conical dome-shaped silos. 

g. Fabric silos
Fabric silos are constructed of a fabric bag
suspended within a rigid, structural
frame. Polyester based fabrics are often used for Figure :Silo Components [3]
fabrication of the bag material, with specific Classification
attention given to fabric pore size. Upper areas of For design purposes, bins are classified by their size,
silo fabric are often manufactured with slightly geometry, the type of flow during discharge of the
larger pore size, with the design intent of acting as a contents, and the structural material of the wall. The
vent filter during silo filling. Some designs include importance of each of these parameters in design is
metal thread within the fabric, providing a static discussed below.
conductive path from the surface of the fabric to
ground. The frame of a fabric silo is typically Bin Size and Geometry
constructed of steel. Fabric silos are an attractive The bin size and geometry depend on the functional
option because of their relative low cost compared to requirements such as the storage volume and the
conventional silos. However, when fabric silos are method andrate of discharge, the properties of the
used to store granular or particulate combustible stored material, available space and economic
materials, conventional practices prescribed by considerations. Bins usually consist of a vertical
established industry consensus standards  sided section with a flat bottom or a bottom with
1.3 Components of silo inclined sides, known as the hopper. They are
usually circular, square or rectangular in cross-
section and may be arranged singly or in groups. The membrane stresses and meridional and
Circular bins are more efficient structuresthan circumferential bending moments were then
square or rectangular bins, leading to lower material evaluated in the silo wall and inthe reinforcing
costs. For the same height, a square bin provides elements. The influence of the eccentricity ofthe
more storage than a circular bin whose diameter hopper in a silo of intermediate eccentricity
equals the length of the side of the square bin. Flat- wasanalyzed, and conclusions were drawn for the
bottom bins require optimal design of these structures
less height for a given volume of stored material.
The bin size is determined by feeding and discharge D. Briassoulis [2] have done the analysis of the
rates and the maximum quantity of material to be behavior and the state of stress developing in a silo
stored. High discharge rates require deephoppers shell under real asymmetric pressure distributions
with steep walls. Flat bottomed bins usually have concerning both storing and discharge. The results
low discharge rates and are used when the storage obtained suggest that the design of such structures
time is long, the discharge is infrequent and the may not neglect the asymmetric features of the real
storage volume is high. pressures developed by the stored material.
Y. Zhao,J.G.Teng [3] Generally cone cylinder-skirt
Objective of study transition junction is subject to a large
The objective of this project is to give a detailed circumferential compressive force which is derived
design and analysis of hopper bottom grain storage from the horizontal component of the meridional
aluminum silo as per applicable codes and tension in the conical hopper, so either a ring is
Standards. provided or the shell walls are locally thickened to
strengthen the junction. Extensive theoretical
 To Modify hopper design. studies have examined by Y.Zhao and J.G.Teng for
 To remove RCC columns (A silo with the buckling and collapse strengths of these
eccentric hopper supported on LLDPE) junctions, leading to theoretically based design
 Tests include determination of parameter of proposals. They present the results of a series of
the bulk material related with the analysis of tests on cone-cylinder-skirt-ring junctions in steel
explosion silos under simulated bulk solid loading. In addition
 To reduce weight ratio is 1/3 to the presentation of test results including geometric
 To improving long life imperfections and failure behavior, the
 Maintain bulk solid material quality. determination of buckling modes and loads based on
displacement measurements is examined in detail.
Literature Review
This Chapter described the literature review for the Y. Zhao J.G. Teng [4] presented the finite element
project. Literature review mainly includes stored modeling of the experiments on cone-cylinder- skirt-
material pressures calculation, construction ring transitionjunctions in steel silos under simulated
procedure, interaction between grains and walls of bulk solid loading presented inthe companion paper.
its storage structure, pressure distributions, design Before presenting the finite element results, the issue
and analysis of the silos.P.Vidal. et al [1] proposed of modeling the interaction between the stored solid
three-dimensional finite element analysis for the and the shell wall throughout the loading process is
filling of cylindrical siloshaving aneccentric hopper, first examined. Results from nonlinear bifurcation
using different boundary conditions silos supported analysis using the perfect shapes and nonlinear
at the transition or on discrete columns. The analysis using the measured imperfect shapes are
analysis included the options of the presence or then presented andcompared withthe experimental
absence of reinforcement in the transition and walls. results. These comparisons show that despite the
The results for the pressures on the wall for a structural complexity of steel silo transition
flexible wall and all the boundary conditions were junctions, their behavior can be satisfactorily
compared with those for a silo with a rigid wall. predicted by finite element analysis considering a
number of important factors including geometric
imperfections, effects of welding and the interaction harmonic index; the effect was significant for von
between the junction and the stored solid. Next, they Mises equivalent stress. Buckling analysis with
present results ofnonlinear analysis of these geometrical non-linearity and material non-linearity
junctions with assumed eigen mode-affine considered show that the effect of patch loads could
imperfections. These results shed considerable light be covered by a certain percentage increase of the
on the effect of ring buckling on the load-carrying vertical frictions, if the patch load approach were
capacity of transition junctions. adequate to represent the non-uniformity of wall
pressures in circular flat-bottomed steel silos.
F. ayuga et al. [5] has done experimental work on
silo which was cylindrical of 1.9 m in diameter and Anjanette al [8] presented different three-
5 m in height of the vertical wall, with emptying dimensional models whose distinguishing feature is
hoppers designed with three different eccentricities. the simulation of both stored granular material and
The wall has been made of smooth steel, with silo walls, without resorting to simplifications. The
enough thickness and reinforcements to be models developed predict the stress state of
considered rigid. Specially designed sensors have cylindrical metal silos flat bottomed, subjected to the
been fixed in these silos, in order to measure the action ofstored granular material in their interior.
horizontal pressure and the friction force between The behavior assigned to the stored material is
the wall and the bulk solid. The horizontal pressure elastic, and that assigned to the structure is the
cells measure the deflection of a circular thin plate classical bilinear elastic-perfectly plastic, typical of
by means of four strain gauges and the friction metallic materials such as steel. Two geometric
forces sensor measure the deformation of a small parameters are analyzed: height and thickness of the
cantilever beam by two strain gauges. wall. The results obtained from numerical methods
(hoop, meridional or vertical, normal and shear
Feat Tinis.et al [6] proposed that cylindrical silo stresses) are compared with those obtained via ENV
walls are subjected to both normal pressures and 1993-1-6.
vertical friction shear or traction due to stored
material inside the silo which vary along the wall. Dr. JohnW. Carson [9] Silos and bins fail with a
The normal pressure on cylindrical walls cause frequency which is much higher than almost any
circumferential stress and the vertical frictional other industrial equipment. Sometimes the failure
shear will cause cumulative axial compressive stress. only involves distortion ordeformation which, while
Due to complexity of the problem, the finite element unsightly doesnot pose safety or operational hazards
and numerical integration techniques are very in other cases failure involves complete collapse of
widely used for buckling and collapse analysis. the structure with accompanying loss of use and
even loss of life. The major causes of silo failures
C.Y. Song. [7] investigated the structural behavior are due to shortcomings in one or more three
of circular steel silos subject to patch loads. The categories.
investigations reveal that the patch loads have a Methodology
great effect on the stress states in the silo from the First of all an exhaustive literature survey has
linear elastic analysis (LA). Geometrical non- been done and research gaps has been identified.
linearity and primary pressures have beneficial Then various designs and operating parameters have
effect. Fourier decompositions of the two square- been identified.Include different kind of stresses
shaped patch loads show that the effect of the shape developed in silo i.e. circumferential stress, axial
of patch loads de- pends not only on the harmonic stress, equivalents stresses. Compression of ANSYS
index, but also on particular stress component. For a and Experimental Data.All stresses are verified by
pressure with a lower harmonic index (e.g. cos h, allowable stress values of construction material
cos 2h), only limited effect was observed for all according to standards. Axial buckling and
stress components. A pressure with medium-sized circumferential buckling stresses are verified as per
harmonic index (cos 4h, cos 6h) has a great effect on DIN 18800 part 4 1990.
meridional compressive stress, while for higher
Load Consideration
1 Dead load Figure: Hopper
2 Live load
3 Equipment load
4 Wind load
5 Seismic load
6 Stresses acting in silo
7 Loads from external restraints

Designing of Silo Components

Design inputs
 The specification of the silo to be designed
are as follows. Capacity of silo =580 m3
 Material to be stored =LLDPE plastic pellets
 Lower diameter of cone da =200 mm Figure: Bin
 Angle of inclination of hopper wall= 60
degree
 Angle of internal friction(φ) =28 degree
 Bulk density of material(w) =650 kg/m3
 Filling eccentricity ef =0 mm
 Discharging eccentricity eo =0 mm
 Height over ground Ho =7000 mm

Figure: Roof
Designing of cylindrical bin.
Diameter and height selection as per required capacity
D Capacity/m (m3 ) Tank height in meter/No of course required
(m)
4.8/2 7.2/3 9.6/4 12/5 14.4/6 16.8/7 19.2/8
3.0 7.07 34 51 68 - - - -
4.5 15.9 76 115 153 191 - - -
6.0 28.3 136 204 272 339 407 474 542
7.5 44.2 212 318 424 530 636 742 848
9.0 63.6 305 458 610 763 916 1069 1221

C = 0.785 × D2 × H
By trial and error method following parameters are obtained from Table 1 for the silo having
2500 mm Course height and 551 m3 Capacity.
Diameter of silo =6000 mm,
Height of cylindrical bin =19500 mm,
Volume of cylindrical bin =551 m3 ,
Material:EN AW 5754    

Design temperature: T=80° C =1.00

t
RP 0.2=80N/mm2 E=70N/mm2 µ =0.75
m
RP 0.2(T ) =80N/mm2 E(T)=68N/mm2 E*(T)=53N/mm2

Safety factors: LFH:Y=1.70 LFHZ:Y=1.50

Table : Material property for EN AW 5754[14]

Material:EN AW
5083    
Design temperature: T=80° Ct=1.00
RP 0.2=125N/mm2 E=70N/mm2 µm=0.75
RP 0.2(T )
E(T)=68N/mm2
=80N/mm2 E*(T)=63N/mm2
Safety factors: LFH:Y=1.70 LFHZ:Y=1.50
Table 4.3: Material property for EN AW 5083[14]

Sr No Name of pressure During filling During

Emptying
1 Maximum Pw 9.75 K N/m2 9.75 K N/m2
2 Maximum Ph 25.40 K N/m2 32.28 K N/m2

3 Maximum Pv 50.80 K N/m2 32.28 K N/m2

Depth Z/Zof e−Z/Z of Xf=1-e−Z/Z of Pw×Xf Ph×Xf Pv×Xf
Z
Meter
kN/m2 kN/m2 kN/m2
1 0.13 0.88 0.12 1.17 3.05 6.10
2 0.26 0.77 0.23 2.24 5.84 11.68
3 0.38 0.68 0.32 3.12 8.13 16.28
4 0.51 0.60 0.40 3.90 10.16 20.32
5 0.64 0.53 0.47 4.58 11.94 23.88
6 0.77 0.46 0.54 5.27 13.72 27.43
7 0.90 0.41 0.59 5.75 14.99 29.97
8 1.02 0.36 0.64 6.24 16.26 32.51
9 1.15 0.32 0.68 6.63 17.27 34.54
10 1.28 0.28 0.72 7.02 18.29 36.58
11 1.41 0.24 0.76 7.41 19.30 38.61
12 1.54 0.21 0.79 7.70 20.07 40.13
13 1.66 0.19 0.81 7.9 20.57 41.18
14 1.79 0.17 0.83 8.09 21.08 42.16
15 1.92 0.15 0.85 8.29 21.59 43.18
16 2.05 0.13 0.87 8.48 22.10 44.20
17 2.18 0.11 0.89 8.68 22.61 45.21
18 2.30 0.10 0.90 8.78 22.86 45.72
19 2.43 0.09 0.91 8.87 23.11 46.23
20 2.56 0.08 0.92 8.97 23.37 46.74
21 2.69 0.07 0.93 9.07 23.62 47.24
22 2.82 0.06 0.94 9.17 23.88 47.75
23 2.94 0.05 0.95 9.26 24.13 48.26
Table-Pressure acting during filling condition

depth Z/Zoe e−Z/Z oe Xe=1-e−Z/Z oe Pw×Xe Ph×Xe Pv×Xe

Z
meter
kN/m2 kN/m2 kN/m2
1 0.20 0.82 0.18 1.76 5.81 5.81
2 0.40 0.67 0.33 3.22 10.65 10.65
3 0.60 0.55 0.45 4.39 14.53 14.53
4 0.81 0.44 0.56 5.46 18.08 18.08
5 1.01 0.36 0.64 6.24 20.66 20.66
6 1.21 0.30 0.70 6.83 22.60 22.60
7 1.41 0.24 0.76 7.41 24.53 24.53
8 1.61 0.20 0.80 7.80 25.82 25.82
9 1.81 0.16 0.84 8.19 27.12 27.12
10 2.01 0.13 0.87 8.48 28.08 28.08
11 2.21 0.11 0.89 8.68 28.73 28.73
12 2.42 0.09 0.91 8.87 29.37 29.37
13 2.62 0.07 0.93 9.07 30.02 30.02
14 2.82 0.06 0.94 9.17 30.34 30.34
15 3.02 0.05 0.95 9.26 30.67 30.67
 16 3.22 0.04 0.96 9.36 30.99 30.99
17 3.42 0.03 0.97 9.46 31.31 31.31
18 3.62 0.02 0.97 9.46 31.31 31.31
19 3.83 0.02 0.98 9.56 31.63 31.63
20 4.03 0.01 0.98 9.56 31.63 31.63
21 4.23 0.01 0.99 9.65 31.96 31.96
22 4.43 0.01 0.99 9.65 31.96 31.96
23 4.63 0.01 0.99 9.65 31.96 31.96
Table : Pressure acting during emptying condition

Figure 6: Wall frictional pressure during filling and emptying

Figure 7: Horizontal pressure during filling and emptying

 Figure : Vertical pressure during filling and emptying

[Nos] hi Pv Ph td tmin tact

[mm] [Mpa] [Mpa] [mm] [mm] [mm]
1 2500 0.016 0.014 3.937 5 5
2 5000 0.032 0.028 4.874 5 5
3 7500 0.048 0.042 5.811 5 6
4 10000 0.064 0.056 6.747 5 7
5 12500 0.080 0.070 7.683 5 8
6 15000 0.096 0.084 8.619 5 9
7 17500 0.112 0.099 9.555 5 10
8 19500 0.127 0.113 10.490 5 12
Table : Shell thickness calculation

section t(mm) h(mm) G(kN)

1 5 2.5 6.35
2 5 2.5 6.35
3 6 2.5 6.90
4 7 2.5 7.63
5 8 2.5 10.17
6 9 2.5 11.40
7 10 2.5 12.55
8 12 2.0 12.21
Table : Dead load for cylindrical bin

Sectio n T h(z) h D Phwind Ap Hw,i Mw,i,o

[m] [m] [m] [m] [kN/m2 ] [m2] [kN] [kN.m]
1 5 24.5 2.5 6 0.876 15 13.14 321.93
2 5 22 2.5 6 0.876 15 13.14 289.08
3 6 19.5 2.5 6 0.806 15 12.09 235.755
4 7 17 2.5 6 0.806 15 12.09 205.53
5 8 14.5 2.5 6 0.806 15 12.09 175.305
6 9 12 2.5 6 0.806 15 12.09 145.08
 7 10 9.5 2.5 6 0.707 15 10.605 100.748
8 12 7.5 2 6 0.707 12 8.484 63.63
Table: Moment due to wind on vertical wall Segments

Thickness calculation for conical bottom

Conical bottom design has been done as per ASME SEC VIII DIVI. Thickness of various
section of the cone can be obtained based on maximum internal pressure. Internal
Pressure(P)=0.140 Mpa
Diameter(D)=6000 mm

Half apex angle(α)=30 degree Material stress value(S)=60 Mpa Joint efficiency(E)=0.6
Required thickness due to internal Pressure

tc = p×d
2 × cosα × (S × E − 0.6 × P )

Calculated conical bottom thickness for three section. Top section thickness tC 1=12mm
Middle section thickness tC 2=8mm

Bottom thicknesstC 3=6mm

Sr t hh x x/hh Diameter Pvf Pnf Ptf

No
1 12 5.02 5.02 1.00 6000.00 72.37 70.42 6.51
2 12 5.02 4.5 0.90 5422.37 57.95 71.57 6.62
3 12 5.02 4 0.80 4844.82 45.91 72.42 6.70
4 12 5.02 3.5 0.70 4246.93 35.55 72.96 6.75
5 8 5.02 3 0.60 3689.24 26.78 73.12 6.76
6 8 5.02 2.5 0.50 3105.78 19.48 72.77 6.73
7 8 5.02 2 0.40 2531.36 13.52 71.71 6.63
8 6 5.02 1.5 0.30 1956.18 8.77 69.60 6.44
9 6 5.02 1 0.20 1378.49 5.07 65.71 6.08
10 6 5.02 0.5 0.10 800.80 2.23 57.97 5.36
Table: Pressure in conical bottom due to filling

Sr t hh x x/hh Diameter Pve Pne Pte

No
1 12 5.02 5.02 1.00 6000.00 72.37 140.40 6.51
2 12 5.02 4.5 0.90 5422.37 57.95 112.43 5.22
3 12 5.02 4 0.80 4844.82 45.91 89.07 4.13
4 12 5.02 3.5 0.70 4246.93 35.55 68.98 3.20
5 8 5.02 3 0.60 3689.24 26.78 51.96 2.41
6 8 5.02 2.5 0.50 3105.78 19.48 37.78 1.75
7 8 5.02 2 0.40 2531.36 13.52 26.22 1.22
8 6 5.02 1.5 0.30 1956.18 8.77 17.01 0.79
9 6 5.02 1 0.20 1378.49 5.07 9.83 0.46
10 6 5.02 0.5 0.10 800.80 2.23 4.33 0.20
Table: Pressure in conical bottom due to discharging
 Figure : Normal pressure during filling and discharging

Figure : Wall frictional pressure during filling and discharging

Stresses in cylindrical bin

Section t z Phe Phi Ph Nphi σphi

[mm] [m] [kN/m2 ] [kN/m2 ] [kN/m2] [kN/m] [Mpa]
1 5 2.5 10.65 4.5 15.15 45.45 9.09
2 5 5 20.66 4.5 25.16 75.48 15.1
3 6 7.5 25.82 4.5 30.32 90.96 18.19
4 7 10 28.08 4.5 24.58 73.74 12.29
5 8 12.5 30.02 4.5 34.52 103.56 12.95
6 9 15 30.99 4.5 35.49 106.47 11.83
7 10 17.5 31.31 4.5 35.81 107.43 9.03
8 12 19.5 31.63 4.5 36.13 108.49 9.03
Table : Tensile circumferential stress.(during discharge)

Shell t h Z Phwind nphi Σphi

Sec-
tion
[mm] [m] [m] [kN/m2] [kN/m] [Mpa]
1 5 24.5 2.5 0.876 2.628 0.5256
2 5 22 5 0.876 2.628 0.5256
3 6 19.5 7.5 0.806 2.418 0.4836
4 7 17 10 0.806 2.418 0.403
 5 8 14.5 12.5 0.806 2.418 0.30225
6 9 12 15 0.806 2.418 0.26867
7 10 9.5 17.5 0.707 2.121 0.19282
8 12 7.5 19.5 0.707 2.121 0.17675
Table : Compressive Stress due to wind Pressure

Shell t h Z Ph nphi Σphi

Sec- min.
tion
[mm] [m] [m] [kN/m2] [kN/m] [N/mm2]
1 5 24.5 2.5 -0.5 1.5 0.3
2 5 22 5 -0.5 1.5 0.3
3 6 19.5 7.5 -0.5 1.5 0.3
4 7 17 10 -0.5 1.5 0.25
5 8 14.5 12.5 -0.5 1.5 0.1875
6 9 12 15 -0.5 1.5 0.16667
7 10 9.5 17.5 -0.5 1.5 0.13636
8 12 7.5 19.5 -0.5 1.5 0.125
Table: Compressive Stress due to discharging
 Shell Plate Depth Resulting Axial Allowable Utilization
section thick- [m] tensile forcestress stress coefficient
ness [kN/m] [MPa] [MPa]
[mm]
t z Nx σmax Σzul σmax / σzul
1 5 2.5 8.92 1.78 45.9 0.038
2 5 5 13.41 2.68 45.9 0.058
3 6 7.5 19.96 3.99 45.9 0.086
4 7 10 28.57 4.76 45.9 0.103
5 8 12.5 39.19 4.89 45.9 0.106
6 9 15 51.89 5.76 45.9 0.125
7 10 17.5 65.68 5.97 45.9 0.13
8 12 19.5 78 6.5 45.9 0.141
Max = 0.1416
Table : tensile axial stress (Dead Load + Wind Load + Over pressure)

Stress verification

Sectio n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Σphi 4.17 4.20 9.40 9.17 7.60 7.23 6.19 5.83
Σx 2.09 3.60 4.70 4.58 3.80 3.61 3.10 2.91
Table : Stresses in shell during filling

Figure : Maximum principal stress(MPa) in shell during filling

Figure : Maximum principal stress(MPa) in shell during discharge

Stresses in shell during discharge

Sectio n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
σphi 7.66 12.3 15.1 13.99 11.14 10.24 8.5 7.92
Σx 3.83 6.15 7.55 7 5.57 5.12 4.28 3.96

Figure : Axial stresses on shell wall during filling and discharge

Figure : Circumferential stresses on shell wall during filling and discharge

Stresses in cone during filling

Sr t hh x x/hh Diameter Pvf Pnf Ptf Σxf σPhi,f

No
1 12 5.02 5.02 1.00 6000.00 72.37 70.42 6.51 17.60 8.80
2 12 5.02 4.5 0.90 5422.37 57.95 71.57 6.62 16.17 8.08
3 12 5.02 4 0.80 4844.82 45.91 72.42 6.70 14.62 7.31
4 12 5.02 3.5 0.70 4246.93 35.55 72.96 6.75 12.91 6.46
5 8 5.02 3 0.60 3689.24 26.78 73.12 6.76 16.86 8.43
6 8 5.02 2.5 0.50 3105.78 19.48 72.77 6.73 14.12 7.06
7 8 5.02 2 0.40 2531.36 13.52 71.71 6.63 11.34 5.67
8 6 5.02 1.5 0.30 1956.18 8.77 69.60 6.44 11.35 5.67
9 6 5.02 1 0.20 1378.49 5.07 65.71 6.08 7.55 3.77
10 6 5.02 0.5 0.10 800.80 2.23 57.97 5.36 3.87 1.93
Table : Filling pressure in conical bottom
 Maximum principal stress(MPa) in cone during filling

Stresses in cone during discharging

Sr t hh x x/hh Diameter Pve Pne Pte σX e σPhi,e

No
1 12 5.02 5.02 1.00 6000.00 72.37 140.40 6.51 35.10 17.55
2 12 5.02 4.5 0.90 5422.37 57.95 112.43 5.22 25.40 12.70
3 12 5.02 4 0.80 4844.82 45.91 89.07 4.13 17.98 8.99
4 12 5.02 3.5 0.70 4246.93 35.55 68.98 3.20 12.21 6.10
5 8 5.02 3 0.60 3689.24 26.78 51.96 2.41 11.98 5.99
6 8 5.02 2.5 0.50 3105.78 19.48 37.78 1.75 7.33 3.67
7 8 5.02 2 0.40 2531.36 13.52 26.22 1.22 4.15 2.07
8 6 5.02 1.5 0.30 1956.18 8.77 17.01 0.79 2.77 1.39
9 6 5.02 1 0.20 1378.49 5.07 9.83 0.46 1.13 0.56
10 6 5.02 0.5 0.10 800.80 2.23 4.33 0.20 0.29 0.14

Table : Discharge pressure in conical bottom

Figure : Maximum principal stress(MPa) in cone during discharge

 Figure : Axial stresses on cone wall during filling and discharge

Figure : Circumferential stresses on cone wall during filling and discharge

Buckling Verification

Figure : Circumferential buckling

 Figure : Axial buckling

DIN 18800 part 4 deals with the analysis of the buckling resistance of steel shell
structures. This standard specifies rules relating to the stability of un stiffened shells
susceptible to buckling. For safe design against shell buckling following load or com-
bination of the load should be verified.

• Resistance to buckling under axial compression

• Resistance to buckling under external pressure (wind or vacuum)

• Resistance to buckling under shear from unsymmetrical actions

Conclusion
Designing of the silo components have been done using applicable codes and standards. Design load and
pressure calculation has been done for cylindrical bin and conical hopper. Verification of circumferential,
axial and equivalent stresses have been carried out considering dead load, liveload, wind load and load due
to filling and dis- charging pressure of the bulk material. Stresses in cylindrical bin and hopper have been
obtained with help of FE analysis for pressure variation during filling and discharging condition and
samehas beencompared with theoretical calculation. Verification of buckling resistance for the cylindrical
bin has been done using applicable codes.

References
[1] P. Vidal,E.Gallego,M. Guaita,F. Ayuga.,“Finite element analysis under different boundary conditions of
the filling of cylindrical steel silos having an eccentric hopper Journal of Constructional Steel ”,Research
64 (2008) 480-492.
[2] D. Briassoulis ,“Finite element analysis of a cylindrical silo shell under unsym- metrical pressure
distributions Computers and Structures ”,78 (2000) 271-281
[3] Y.Zhao, J.G.Teng ,“Buckling experiments on steel silo transition junctions I: Experimental results ”,
Journal of Constructional Steel,Research 60 (2004) 1783-1801
[4] Y. Zhao, J.G. Teng,“Buckling experiments on steel silo transition junctions II: Finite element
modelling ”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research 60 (2004)1803-1823
[5] F.ayuga,P.agudo,E.gallego,A.ramirez “New steps towards the knowledge of silos behaviour ”, Int.
Agrophysics, 2005, 19, 7-17
[6] FuatTinis,FatihBazman,“Stiffening of thin cylindrical silo shell against buckling loads. ”, Industrial
plant manufacturing and erection corp,06791,turky-2006
[7] C.Y. Song,“Effect of patch loads on structural behaviour of circlar flat bottom stell silo ”, Thin-Walled
Structures 42 (2004) 1519-154
[8] Juana,J.M.Morana, M.I. Guerraa, A. Coutoa, F. Ayugab, P.J. Aguado ,“Aguado Establishing stress
state of cylindrical metal silos using finite element method: Comparison with ENV 1993. ”, Thin-Walled
Structures 44 (2006) 1192-1200
[9] Dr.JohnW.Carson,“SiloFailures:Case histories and lessons learned ” [10] George G.Chase“SOLIDS
NOTES 10, The University of Akron ”
[11] IS 9178- 1980,“for Design of Steel bins for storage of bulk materials ”,Part 3 Bins design for mass flow
And funnel flow”
[12] Moss, Dennis R,“Pressure vessel design manual: illustrated procedures for solving major pressure
vessel design problems ”, Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 1519-154
[13] DIN 1055 Part 6,“Design loads for building:Loads on silo bin ”,2005-03
[14] EN 1999 Eurocode 9 ,“European Code for Material Std ”, Design of aluminium alloy
structures,December 2006
[15] API 650 ,“Appendix-A Table A-3a Typical sizes and corresponding capacity for
2400 mm course silo ”, Thin-Walled Structures 42 (2004) 1519-154 [16] www.dietmar-schulze.de
[17] IS 875 Part 3 ,“Code of practice for design loads (other than earthquake)for building and
structures. ”, 1987
[18] DIN 18800 part 4 ,“Analysis of safety against buckling of shell. ”,November 1990 [19] DIN EN 1991-4
,“Eurocode 1: Actions on structures Part 4: Silos and tanks.”,December 2006
[20] DIN EN 1993-4-1,“Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures Part 4-1: Silos. ”,De- cember 2010
[21] DIN EN 1993-1-6,“Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures Part 1-6: Strength and stability of shell
structures. ”,December 2010
[22] B.C.Bhattacharyya,“Introduction to chemical equipment design,Mechanical as- pects ”, CBS
Publishers and Distributors (First edition:1985)