You are on page 1of 9

STORAGE TANKS / SILOS FOR GRAINS / LIQUIDS

Dincel Construction System Pty Ltd Level 3, 7K Parkes Street PARRAMATTA NSW 2150 Phone: (612) 9689 1877 Fax: (612) 9689 2028 Email: construction@dincel.com.au

COPYRIGHT Dincel Construction System Pty Ltd All rights reserved. No part of the information contained in this document may be reproduced or copied in any form or by any means without written permission from Dincel Construction System Pty Ltd. DISCLAIMER The information contained in this document is intended for the use of suitably qualified and experienced architects and engineers and other building professionals. This information is not intended to replace design calculations or analysis normally associated with the design and specification of buildings and their components. Dincel Construction System Pty Ltd accepts no liability for any circumstances arising from the failure of a specifier or user of any part of Dincel Construction System to obtain appropriate professional advice about its use and installation or from failure to adhere to the requirements of appropriate Standards and Codes of Practice, and relevant Building Codes.

Copyright

Page 1 of 9

CONTENTS FOOD CONSERVATION / STORAGE TANKS SILOS CASE STUDY LIQUID / WATER STORAGE TANKS

FOOD CONSERVATION / STORAGE TANKS SILOS


Grain Storage In most countries grains are among the most important staple foods. However, they are produced on a seasonal basis, and in many places there is only one harvest a year, which itself may be subject to failure. This means that in order to feed the worlds population, most of the global production of maize, wheat, rice, sorghum and millet must be held in storage for periods varying from one month up to more than a year. Grain storage therefore occupies a vital place in the economies of developed and developing countries alike. The main function of storage in the economy is to even out fluctuations in market supply, both from one season to the next and from one year to the next, by taking produce off the market in surplus seasons, and releasing it back onto the market in lean seasons. This in turn smooths out fluctuations in market prices. The desire to stabilise prices of basic foods is one of the major reasons why governments try to influence the amount of storage occurring, and often undertake storage themselves. Storage with reduces the following:

Significant reduction in construction time and cost of storage facilities including structure and mechanical facilities. Maintenance and supervision costs for both grain and storage facilities. Loss of quality and nutritional value of grain by keeping the grain insect-free and below its safe moisture content and temperature.

Factors Influencing the Choice of Bulk Store Compared to most other foodstuffs, such as meats and vegetables, grains are relatively easy to store. If grain is kept insect-free and below its safe moisture content, it will keep for many years with minimal loss of quality or nutritional value. Low temperature is an important factor in minimising insect activity and in maintenance of nutritional quality in general. Storage at or below the safe moisture content is essential for prevention of deterioration caused by micro-organisms and insects. Where insects are present, temperatures are high, and most especially where moisture content is above safe levels, then storage of grain becomes both risky and difficult, and losses will be difficult to avoid. It is in these circumstances that the type of store and its design become critical to the safety of the stored grain. It is worth remembering that most often, the value of the grain (in dollars-per-tonne) is usually greater than the cost of the structure in which it is stored. Minor expenditure in improving the quality of the store can thus be quickly recovered if commodity losses are commensurably reduced.

Copyright

Page 2 of 9

Whilst the choice of storage design is wide, the essential requirements needed to store grain safely remain the same. These are that the storage structure must keep the grain free from water ingress, insects, rodents and birds. The store should also permit easy and economical disinfestation of grain in the event of insect infestation and, if grain is to be stored at moisture content above safe levels, provision should be made for cooling the grain. Selection of Storage Type Once a storage need is identified, the choice arises as to the type of store that is most suitable for a particular application. The following storage options may need to be considered: round or rectangular, tall or short, steel or concrete, flat floored or hoppered, permanent or temporary. In terms of structural cost per tonne of storage, the walls and roofs with round tanks are more economical than rectangular ones. The reasons are: Storage pressure on the walls is effectively resisted by hoop tension forces only without bending in case of round tanks. The roof with cylindrical structures carries its load in direct compression and tension without bending. Round tanks have no joints and offers air-tight structure which is better for fumigation.

Structural efficiency is also increased by minimising the height of the structure. For a given volume of storage, the lower the height of the walls, the more grain/liquid pressure is applied directly to the floor surface, the lesser the load there is on the walls. Furthermore, the minimum structural surface area (and hence cost) for a given volume of grain/liquid, is achieved if the wall height is relatively low. For instance in the case of a cylindrical tank with a conical roof, the minimum surface area of walls and roof is achieved when the wall height is around half the radius of the bin. It is thus no coincidence that the lowest cost stores are generally in the shape of squat cylindrical tanks where the walls are relatively low compared to the diameter.

WATER TANK GRAIN SILO


Acrylic render / exposed finish (optional) Concrete Floor / Footing

Copyright

Page 3 of 9

Construction Materials The choice of construction material is usually between steel and concrete. The choice between steel and concrete is dependent on a number of considerations, all of which ultimately comes down to capital and operational costs. The fact that in most countries conventional steel and concrete are both so widely used indicates that these costs are generally not dissimilar. Conventional concrete is usually the preferred construction material in coastal areas or where high corrosion risk is severe. The concrete is also preferred where bins have to be very tall (above 30 metres). However, the construction of storage tanks is far more economical than conventional concrete (reinforced or prestressed) tanks. The reasons for this are as follows: s formwork is at least half the price of conventional formwork and much faster to erect. The permanent water and air-tight polymer formwork eliminates the issues for concretes durability and crack control. This in turn eliminates issues normally related to: Porosity of concrete and corrosion of reinforcement. The use of conventional reinforcing bars and pre-stressing for crack control. The joints of permanent polymer can be further and easily sealed to offer a waterproof and even air-tight monolithic walls. This will achieve the following:
> > >

Control of leakage of air in or out of the tank walls. Control of condensation and fungal growth. High levels of air-tightness for fumigation in concrete silos. The use of CO2 for disinfection of grain which is normally not used in concrete silos without protective membranes on the concrete surfaces for not causing corrosion problems. Significantly sealed grain silo with reduced oxygen content.

>

The solid construction with permanent polymer surfaces prevents entry of rodents into the storage tank and offers maintenance free ready finish. Appropriate cost effective insulation techniques applied to achieve the following: will

Keeps the storage below 17C ~ 20C which will eliminate infestations of most insects. Elimination of heat conductivity type of condensation for fungal growth in grain silos.

Copyright

Page 4 of 9

As a rule of thumb, the costs of conventional modern bulk grain storage and handling facilities can be broken down roughly as follows: Storage Component Structures and Support Mechanical Equipment Electrical and Controls 40% to 60% 10% to 20% 20% to 40% 10% to 20%

Subject to the usage of with the appropriate insulation temperature technique, the abovementioned costs (storage component to remain unchanged) are significantly reduced. However, most importantly, the stored grain and the structure will have a much longer life span and less maintenance costs.

Copyright

Page 5 of 9

www.dincelsolutions.com

CASE STUDY LIQUID / WATER STORAGE TANKS

Telephone: (612) 9689 1877 Facsimile: (612) 9689 2028 A.B.N. 78 083 839 614

Level 3, 7K Parkes Street Parramatta NSW 2150 Email: construction@dincel.com.au

Copyright

Page 6 of 9

CASE STUDY LIQUID / WATER STORAGE TANKS


This case study compares the use of Dincel Construction System with a conventionally formed method of construction for a circular liquid/water storage tank. The storage tank for this case study is based upon the following: GEOMETRY Diameter Height Maximum Storage Volume = = = 30m internal 4m 2.82ML

DESIGN Wall is hinged at base free at top. Tank is considered in both above and below ground situations. Primary loading case is internal water pressure due to stored liquid. Liquid is in a quiescent state. Conventional reinforcement design in accordance with AS3735 2001 Concrete Structures For Retaining Liquids. Exposure classification = B1 (pH of liquid > 6.5).

For the two options considered, the walls have been analysed to determine horizontal hoop stresses and vertical bending stresses due to the retained liquid and a hinged base restraint condition. The method of reinforcement to resist these stresses along with crack control provisions are outlined for each of the options as follows.

Copyright

Page 7 of 9

CONVENTIONALLY FORMED CONCRETE WALL For the conventionally formed option, the calculated hoop stresses are resisted by horizontal reinforcement placed in both the inside and outside faces of the tank wall. The concrete is assumed to be cracked and therefore provides no strength when considering tensile hoop stresses. Crack widths are controlled by the provision of minimum reinforcement quantities and limiting the stress within the reinforcing bars. The vertical bending stresses are resisted by reinforcement placed in both the inside and outside faces of the wall. In the particular example we are considering for this case study, the minimum required wall thicknesses is 250mm to satisfy bending, cover and reinforcement placement requirements. The minimum cover to reinforcement is 40mm and 16mm diameter reinforcing bars have been adopted.

DINCEL CONSTRUCTION SYSTEM (DCS) For the Dincel Construction System option, the construction of the tank utilises the DCS permanent polymer formwork which is filled with concrete. In the case of above ground applications the hoop stresses are resisted by 3 rows of externally installed steel bands and vertical bending stresses are resisted by vertical reinforcement in both faces between the steel bands. In the case of below ground tank applications the tensile hoop stresses are resisted by passive resistance of the soil and compacted backfill. In the empty state of inground tank the compressive hoop stresses are resisted by the concrete. The Dincel walling system consists of a permanent polymer formwork shell which encloses concrete infill. The permanent polymer formwork has inbuilt crack inducers which provide controlled articulation of the concrete resulting in the elimination of crack control reinforcement (refer to website waterproof walls). The tensile capacity of 40 Mpa (average) offered by Dincel-Form is ignored for calculation of bending reinforcement between steel bands.

Copyright

Page 8 of 9

COMPARISON OF OPTIONS The case study will compare the quantity of concrete and quantity of steel reinforcement for the two options. The results are set out in the table below.

COMPARISON OF MATERIAL QUANTITIES ST EEL REINFORCEMENT (TONNES)

OPTION Conventionally formed and reinforced (above and below ground) Dincel Construction System (above ground) Dincel Construction System (below ground)

CONCRETE VOLUME (M3)

95 (40 Mpa) 69 (25 Mpa)

10.1 3.95

69 (25 Mpa)

1.8

COMMENTS AND CONCLUSION Clearly the above summary table, which reflects the material quantities for the two options, shows a significant saving in both concrete volume and steel reinforcement tonnage. The advantages of constructing water/liquid storage tanks utilises the Dincel Construction System for the walls are summarised as follows: 27% reduction in concrete volume. 25 Mpa concrete is used rather than 40 Mpa. 60% reduction in steel reinforcement for above ground applications. 82% reduction in steel reinforcement for below ground applications. Permanent watertight tank with permanent waterproof membrane. Elimination of expensive curved formwork. Rapid erection of Dincel Construction System formwork requiring minimal bracing. Unskilled labour use. Elimination of steel corrosion and maintenance. Protection against chemically aggressive ground such as acidic and saline conditions.

Copyright

Page 9 of 9