International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 4, Issue 11, November 2014)

Comparative Study of Design of water Tank With Reference to

IS: 3370
M Bhandari1, Karan Deep Singh2
1

Dr B R Ambedkar National Institute of Technology, Jalandhar, India

2
Graduate Civil Engineer, Jalandhar, India
Water storage tanks are designed as per the provisions of
IS 3370. This code has been revised in 2009. In the pre
revised version, the tanks were designed using working
stress method and on the philosophy of no cracking. As per
IS 3370:2009, use of limit state method has been permitted.
Hence this study was undertaken to compare the provisions
of IS 3370: 1965 and IS 3370: 2009 and to analyze the
cost effectiveness in the terms of amount of steel
reinforcement and concrete by comparing the design results
of different types of water tanks by limit state and
working stress design methods.

Abstract-- Limit state method which is widely used has been

adopted in the new version of IS 3370-2009 Code of practice
for concrete structures for storage of liquids. As per the
provisions of the earlier version of the code ( IS 3370-1965),
the designing of water tanks was permitted by working stress
method only.This study was conducted in order to compare
the design provisionsof IS 3370 (1965) and IS 3370 (2009).In
this study, a comparison of design of water tanks using the
Working Stress and Limit State methods was carried out. To
accomplish the comparative study, design of three types of
water tanks that is an elevated circular tank of 500 kl
capacity, an elevated square tank of 250 kl capacity and an
underground rectangular water tank of 250 kl capacity were
taken up. The quantities of materials were calculated for each
problem. The results have been presented in the form of
graphs and tables, and it has been observed that Design of
water tank by Limit State Method is most economical as the
quantity of material required is less as compared toworking
stress method.

II.

Concrete - In the construction of concrete structures for

the storage of liquids, the imperviousness of concrete is an
important basic requirement. Aggregates and cement are to
be proportioned to yield a high quality concrete. The
permeability of any uniform and thoroughly compacted
concrete of given mix proportion is largely dependent on
the water cement ratio .While an increase in the water
cement ratio leads to an increase in inherent permeability, a
very much reduced water cement ratio of a mix with a
given cement content may cause compaction difficulties
and thus may prove equally harmful. The mix should be
designed in such a way that the resultant concrete has a
high degree of imperviousness. Honeycombing and
segregation of aggregates are to be minimized as these
lead to defects which are responsible for leakage in water
storage structures.
For a given mix made with particular materials, there is
lower limit to water-cement ratio which can be used
economically on any job. It is essential to select a rich mix
compatible with available aggregates, whose particle shape
and grading have an important bearing on workability
which must be suited to the means of compaction selected.
The minimum cement content, maximum water cement
ratio and minimum grade of concrete are tabulated below.

Keywords-- working stress method, limit state method,

effective cost.

I.

GENERAL REQUIREMENTS ACCORDING T O IS: 3370

INTRODUCTION

Water is considered as the source of every creation and

is thus a very crucial element for humans to live a healthy
life. High demand of Clean and safe drinking water is
rising day by day as one can not live without water. It
becomes necessary to store water. Water is stored generally
in concrete water tanks and later on it is pumped to
different areas to serve the community.
Water tanks can be classified as overhead, resting on
ground or underground depending on their location. The
tanks can be made of steel or concrete. Tanks resting on
ground are normally circular or rectangular in shape and
are used where large quantities of water need to be stored.
Overhead water tanks are used to distribute water directly
through gravity flow and are normally of smaller capacity.
As the overhead water tanks are open to public view, their
shape is influenced by the aesthetic view in the
surroundings.

231

International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 4, Issue 11, November 2014)
Table 2.1
Minimum Cement Content, Maximum water- Cement Ratio and
Maximum Grade of Concrete

SI
No.

Concrete

Minimum
cement
content

Maximum
free water
cement
Ratio

Minimum
Grade of
Cement

Plain
concrete

250

0.5

M20

Reinforce
d cement
concrete

320

0.45

M30

Prestrese
d
concrete

360

0.4

M40

3.1 Comparison in Minimum Reinforcement

A comparison of provisions regarding minimum
reinforcement is shown below in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1
Comparison of Minimum Reinforcement Provisions

IS : 3370 1965

For small capacity tanks up to 50 m3 at locations where

there is difficulty in providing M30 grade concrete, the
minimum grade of concrete may be taken as M25 in areas
other than the coastal areas.
III.

Minimum
Reinforcement

Minimum
Reinforcement

A ) The minimum
reinforcement in walls,
floors and roofs in each
of two directions at
right angles shall have
an area of

A) The minimum
reinforcement in walls,
floors and roofs in each
of two directions at
right angles, within
each surface zone shall
not be less than

1. 0.3 % of cross
sectional area of
sections thickness < 100
mm

COMPARISON O F IS 3370-1965 & IS 3370-2009

2. Linearly varying
from 0.3 % to 0.2% for
thickness 100 mm to
450 mm.

In this section, a comparison of different provisions in

the pre revised and revised versions of IS 3370 has been
made.
The revision incorporates a number of important
modifications and changes , the most important of them
being are-

3.0.2 % for section of

thickness > 450mm

Scope has been clarified further by mentioning

exclusion of dams, pipes, pipelines, lined structures &
damp proofing of basements.
A clause on exposure condition has been added.
A new sub clause on loads has been added under the
clause of design.
Regarding method of design , it has been specified that
one of the two alternative methods of design ie LSD
or WSD may be used.
A clause on durability has been added giving due
reference to IS 456 in place of earlier clause on
protection against corrosion.
Provision of crack width calculations due to
temperature and moisture and crack width in mature
concrete has been incorporated in limit state design.

IS : 3370 -2009

1. 0.35 % of surface
zone as shown in for
HYSD bars.
2. 0.64 % of surface
zone for mild steel bars.
B ) The minimum
reinforcement can be
further reduced to
1. 0.24 % for HYSD
bars.

4. In concrete sections
of thickness >225 mm,
two layers of
reinforcement be placed
one near each face .

2. 0.40 % for mild steel

bars. For tanks having
any dimension not more
than15 m.

B) The minimum
reinforcement specified
above may be decreased
by 20 % in case of
HYSD bars.

C) In wall slabs less

than 200 mm in
thickness, the
reinforcement may be
placed in one face.

3.2 Comparison in Permissible Stresses

Provisions regarding permissible stresses in steel
reinforcement different conditions have been tabulated for
the two codes.

232

International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 4, Issue 11, November 2014)
Table 3.2
Comparison of Provisions for Permissible Stresses in Steel

As = Area of steel
= Allowable tensile stress in concrete

Permissible
Stresses in
N/mm2
IS 3370 -1965

Type of Stress

Plain
round
mild
steel
bars

Tensile stress
in members
under direct
tension
Tensile stress
in members
under direct
tension
a)On liquid
retaining face
b)on face away
from liquid for
members less
than 225 mm
c)on face away
from liquid for
members more
than 225 mm
Compressive
stress in
columns
subjected to
direct load

150

Permissible
Stresses in
N/mm2
IS 3370 -2009

High
strengt
h
defor
med
bars

Plain
round
mild
steel
bars

High
strengt
h
deform
ed bars

150

115

130

= Allowable tensile stress in concrete

3.3.2 Limit state method: The permissible limit of crack
width is 0.2mm. The crack widths due to temperature and
moisture effects shall be calculated as given below:
To be effective in distributing cracking, the amount of
reinforcement provided needs to be at least as great as
given below:
crit
Where,crit= critical steel ratio, the minimum steel ratio,
of steel area to the gross of the whole concrete section,
required to distribute the cracking .
= direct tensile strength of the immature concrete is
given in Table 3.3.
fy= characteristic strength of the reinforcement.

150

150

150

150

125

115

130

Table 3.3:
Comparison of Provisions for Permissible Stresses in Steel

190

M30

M35

M40

M45

M50

fctN/mm2

1.15

1.3

1.45

1.6

1.7

1.8

= ratio of the tensile strength of the concrete to the

125

175

125

average bond strength between concrete and steel which

can be taken as 2/3 for immature concrete.
= size of each reinforcing bar
Width of fully developed crack,

140

Wmax = Smax
Where = (Coefficient of thermal expansion of
concrete)

3.3.1 Working stress method : From no cracking criteria

)

M25

Maximum spacing of crack Smax =

3.3 Design on Basis of Crack Width

Grade of
concrete

IV.

P ROBLEM FORMULATION

In order to carry out the comparative study, three types

of problems of water tank design were taken into
consideration.
1. Overhead circular water tank - 500 kl
2. Overhead square water tank
- 250 kl
3. Underground rectangular water tank - 250 kl

m=
where , m = Modular Ratio
T = Design Tensile force
Ac = Area of concrete

233

International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 4, Issue 11, November 2014)
Table 4.1
Comparative Results of Overhead Circular Tank

4.1. Design Methods

A thorough study through both the versions of IS: 3370
reveals the following four methods of designs:
1. Working stress method in accordance IS 3370 (1965).
2. Working stress method in accordance IS 3370 (2009).
3. Limit State method and then checking cracking width
by limit state of serviceability IS 3370 (2009).
4. Limit state design method by limiting steel stresses in
accordance IS 3370 ( 2009 ) (Deemed to be satisfied).
The tank portion of tanks of different capacities was
designed by the above mentioned four methods as per the
provisions of IS 3370:1965 and IS 3370:2009. The
quantities of steel and concrete for different tanks by
various design methods have been calculated and presented
in Tabular as well as graphical form. The quantities of
materials for different components of a circular overhead
tank for different design theories have been tabulated in
Table 4.1. Tables 4.2 and 4.3 present the quantities of
materials for Overhead square Tank and an underground
tank, respectively.
A comparison of design by working stress method as per
IS 3370-1965 and IS 3370-2009 shows that the amount of
concrete remains unchanged. The quantity of steel slightly
increases as per IS 3370-2009 as the permissible stresses
are slightly lower than those adopted in IS 3370-1965. It is
further observed that the steel quantity decreases
significantly as per IS 3370-2009 in those members where
the designed amount of reinforcement is less than the
minimum reinforcement. This is because, in IS 3370-2009,
the minimum reinforcement is calculated on the basis of the
area of cross section of the surface zones and not on the
basis of entire cross section as in IS 3370-1965. The steel
and concrete quantities for Limit State design Method as
per IS 3370-2009 decrease significantly as compared to
working stress methods of IS 3370-1965 and IS 3370-2009
because higher permissible stresses are permitted and crack
width is checked. The quantities of steel for all tanks
considered in this study were observed to be the maximum
for design as per Limit State Method based on Deemed to
Satisfy Criteria.

PARAME
TER

Working Stress
Method
IS 3370
IS
-1965
3370 2009

Limit State Design Method

IS 3370 -2009

Crack
Theory

Crack
Width

Deemed
To
Satisfy

TOP DOME
Thickness

100 mm

100 mm

100

% age

------

Nil

Nil

240

175 mm2

120

100 mm

mm
Nil

change
Reinforce

ment

mm

% age

------

130 mm2

mm
-27.08

-50

- 45.8

change
TOP RING BEAM
x-sec Area

44000m
2

% age

44000m
2

30000mm2

30000m
2

-----

-----

-31.81

530

555 mm2

350

-31.81

change
Reinforce

ment

mm

% age

-----

mm
+ 4.71

0.03

555 mm2

mm

-34

+ 4.7

change
CYILINDRICAL WALL
Top

175 mm

175 mm

100 mm

thickness
% age

.13

100 mm

mm
----

----

-42.8

-42.8

250 mm

250 mm

120 mm

120 mm

----

----

-52

-52

420

480 mm2

260

480 mm2

change
Bottom
Thickness
% age
change
Top R/F

mm
% age

mm

----

+14.28

-38

2420

2790

1510

+ 14.28

change
Bottom

234

R/F

mm

mm

mm

% age

----

+ 15.8

-37.6

.03

2790 mm2

mm
+ 15

International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 4, Issue 11, November 2014)
Table 4.2

change
BOTTOM RING BEAM
x-sec Area

% age

Comparative results of overhead square tank

412500

4125002

302500

0.09

302500

mm2

mm2

mm2

mm

mm2

----

Nil

-26.6

-29.8

4365

5040

3956

7325 mm2

PARAMETER

change
R/F at
Support

mm

mm

mm

% age

----

+ 15.46

-33.26

+ 67.82
Top Thickness

change
R/F at

1975

2280

1318

mid-

mm2

mm2

mm2

----

+ 15.44

-33.26

% age change
Bottom
Thickness
% age change
VERTICAL
R/F

3665 mm2

section
% age

+ 85.56

change

At Base

Tension

9766

11200

6085

11200

Ast

mm2

mm2

mm2

mm2

% age

----

+ 14.68

- 37.70

+ 14.68

% age change
At Mid Height

change

% age change
BOTTOM SPHERICAL DOME

Thickness

200 mm

200 mm

150 mm

150 mm

% age

----

----

-25

-25

Top at corner
% age change

change
Reinforce

480

350 mm2

ment

mm

% age

----

814
2

mm
-27.08

+ 69.58

0.12

At middle of
wall
% age change
BOTTOM
SLAB

1508 mm2

mm
+ 214.16

change

840
mm2

930
1065 mm2
mm2
+
----+ 26.78
10.71
760
550
310 mm2
mm2
mm2
------59.21
27.63
HORIZONTAL R/F
800
925
1065 mm2
mm2
mm2
+
----+ 33.12
15.62
760
555
545 mm2
mm2
mm2
-----27
-28.28

% age change
R/F at mid
section

380
mm
----3790
mm2

% age change

-----

R/F at End
section

1135
mm2

% age change

-----

Thickness

235

WORKING
LIMIT STATE DESIGN METHOD
STRESS
METHOD
IS
IS
IS 3370 -2009
3370
3370
DEEMED
CRACK
CRACK
TO
1965
2009 THEORY WIDTH SATISFY
SIDE WALL
280
280
150 mm
150 mm
mm
mm
---------- 46.42
- 46.42
350
350
200 mm
200mm
mm
mm
--------- 42.85
- 42.85

380
mm
----4370
mm2
+
15.30
1315
mm2
+
15.85

.12 mm

+ 135
310 mm2
-59.21

.8 mm

1895 mm2
+136.88

.16 mm

530 mm2
-30.26

300 mm

300 mm

-21

-21
2

3310 mm

.11 mm

-13
940 mm2
-17.18

1975 mm2

6180 mm2
+ 63

.16 mm

1710mm2
+ 50.66

International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 4, Issue 11, November 2014)
Table 4.3:
Comparative results of underground rectangular tank

250
mm

% age
change
Reinforce
ment
% age
change

3336
mm2

Thickness

250
mm

% age
change

------

------

------

R/F at
support
% age
change
R/F at
center
% age
change

3125
mm2

Reinforce
ment
% age
change
TOP
SLAB
Top
thickness
% age
change
Reinforce
ment
% age
change

1200
mm2

Thickness
% age
change
R/F at
edge
% age
change
R/F at
center
% age
change

----2290
mm2
-----

-----

IS
3370 CRACK
THEORY
2009
LONG WALL
250
200 mm
mm
-----

-----

180
mm

180m
m

150 mm

----

----

-16.6

1505
mm2
---425
mm

1735
1300
mm2
mm2
+
- 13.62
15.28
BOTTOM SLAB
425
300 mm
mm

DEEMED
TO
SATISFY

6000

0.11
mm

8104

4000

-20
5601
mm2

5636

0
WSM-1965 WMS-2009

-20

0.12
mm

DTS

Fig 1: Quantity of steel for overhead circular water tank

7491
mm2
+ 140

16000

3805
mm2

14000

+ 66.15

12000

OVERHEAD SQUARE WATER

TANK

Quantityof steel

10000

700
mm2
-41.66

0.13

LSD

QuantityDESIGN PHILOSPHIES

200 mm

0.07
mm

10238

8863

2000

+ 67.90

8000

13667

6000
4000

150 mm
-16.6

2000

2425
mm2

9882

10453
7965

+ 61.12
.16
mm

DESIGN PHILOSPHIES

300 mm

----

-----

-29

-29

1020
mm2

940
mm2

825
mm2

1540
mm2

------

- 7.43

- 19.11

+ 50.9

3545
mm2

4090
mm2
+
15.37

3590
mm2

6688
mm2

- 1.27

+ 88.66

----

8000

200 mm

-20

TOP PORTION
3605
4020
mm2
mm2
+
+ 28.64
15.36
2640
2050
mm2
mm2
+
- 10.48
15.28
BOTTOM PORTION
880
700
mm2
mm2
-41.66
26.66

10000

IS 3370 -2009
CRACK
WIDTH

-20

3850
3030
mm2
mm2
+
-9
15.40
SHORT WALLS
250
200 mm
mm

12000

STEEL (KG)

Thickness

IS
3370
-1965

OVERHEAD CIRCULAR WATER TANK

LIMIT STATE DESIGN
METHOD

STEEL (KG)

PARAME
TER

WORKING
STRESS
METHOD

4.2 Total Quantity Of Steel

Fig 2: Quantity of steel for overhead square water tank

236

International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 4, Issue 11, November 2014)
18000

UNDERGROUND
RECTANGULAR WATER TANK

16000

60

Quantity of steel

14000

CONCRETE m3

STEEL (KG)

Volume of

50

12000

40

10000
16998

8000
6000

OVERHEAD SQUARE WATER

TANK

70

30

12664

11954

65

20

10038

4000

65

45.33

45.33

LSD

DTS

10

2000

WSM-1965 WMS-2009

DESIGN PHILOSPHIES
DESIGN PHILOSPHIES

Fig 5: Concrete volume for overhead square water tank

Fig 3: Quantity of steel for underground rectangular water tank

120

4.3 Quantity Of Concrete

OVERHEAD CIRCULAR WATER TANK

UNDERGROUND RECTANGULAR
WATER TANK

Volume of Concrete
100

CONCRETE m3

80
80

70

Volume of Concrete

60

CONCRETE m3

60

113.9

40

50
40

113.9

76.05

81.306

81.306

LSD

DTS

20

76.05

30

46.142

20

46.142

WSM-1965 WMS-2009

DESIGN PHILOSPHIES

10

Fig 6: Concrete volume for underground rectangular water tank

0
WSM-1965 WMS-2009

LSD

DTS

V.

DESIGN PHILOSPHIES

CONCLUSIONS

Limit State Method was found to be most economical

for design of water tanks as the quantity of steel and
concrete needed is less as compared to working stress
method.

Fig 4: Concrete volume for overhead circular water tank

237

International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 4, Issue 11, November 2014)
There was no change in size of members for working
stress method by IS: 3370 (1965) and IS: 3370
(2009). However, steel requirement increased in IS:
3370 (2009) for overhead circular type, overhead
square type and for underground rectangular water
tanks, as the allowable stresses in steel were lower.
The size of members remained same for limit state
design methods by IS: 3370 (2009) in as well in
deemed to satisfy criteria for all the three tank
designs. However, the requirement of area of steel
decreased in IS:3370 (2009) in limit state design
method and increased in deemed to satisfy criteria for
all the three tank designs as the allowable stresses in
steel were lower.
It was found that the provisions of reinforcement
through the surface zones in IS: 3370(2009) provides
economical and more effective reinforcement by limit
state method.

[2]

Dayaratnam P., 1986. Design of Reinforced Concrete Structures, 3rd

edition, Oxford &IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd.
[3] Durgesh C. Rai,2002 Review of code Designing Forces for Shaft
Supports of Elevated Water Tanks.
[4] Durgesh, C. R. (2001) Performance of Elevated Tanks in Mw 7.7
BhujEarthquake.Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute
of Technology, India
[5] IS : 456 2000, Plain and Reinforced Concrete Code of Practice
[6] IS : 3370 ( Part I )- 1965, Code of Practice for Concrete Structures
for the Storage of Liquids
[7] IS : 3370 ( Part II )- 1965, Code of Practice for Concrete Structures
for the Storage of Liquids
[8] IS : 3370 ( Part IV )- 1965, Code of Practice for Concrete Structures
for the Storage of Liquids
[9] IS : 3370 ( Part 2 )- 2009, Concrete Structures for the Storage of
Liquids Code of Practice
[10] IS : 1786 1985, Specification for High Strength Deformed Steel
Bars and Wired for Concrete Reinforcement
[11] 11.IS : 1786 1985, Specification for High Strength Deformed Steel
Bars and Wired for Concrete Reinforcement
[12] Jain Ashok K., 2002. Reinforced Concrete Limit State Design,
6thedition, Nem Chand &Bros, Roorkee

REFERENCES
[1]

Cusson D., Hoogeveen T., 2007. Test method for determining

coefficient of thermal expansion of high-performance concrete at
early stages, National Research Council Canda, Ottawa, Canada.

238