PROJECT ID: CEET/CE/2013/08 PROJECT ID: CE/2013/08

KIGALI INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
A PROJECT REPORT ON

STABILITY INVESTIGATION ON STEEL FRAMES OF EXISTING WATER TANK SUPPORTS

Samuel BIGIRUMWAMI (REG.NO: GS 20100512) Yvan RWAMPUNGU (REG.NO: GS 20101119)

Mr. Eric SERUBIBI

BACHELOR OF SCIENCE DEGREE IN CIVIL ENGINEERING

KIGALI INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY CERTIFICATE This is to certify that the Project Work STABILITY INVESTIGATION ON STEEL FRAME OF EXISTING WATER TANK SUPPORTS. is a record of the original work done by Samuel BIGIRUMWAMI (REG.No: GS20100512) and Yvan RWAMPUNGU (REG.No:GS20101119) in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of Bachelor of Science Degree in Civil Engineering at Kigali Institute of Science and Technology during the Academic Year 2012-2013.

Mr. Eric SERUBIBI Project Supervisor

Dr G. Senthil KUMARAN Head, Dept. of CE&ET

Submitted for the Project Examination held at KIST on /. /2013.

DECLARATION We, BIGIRUMWAMI Samuel and RWAMPUNGU Yvan, declare that the project entitled STABILITY INVESTIGATION ON STEEL FRAME OF EXISTING WATER TANK SUPPORTS presented here for the Award of a Bachelor of Science Degree in Civil engineering at Kigali Institute of Science and Technology (KIST), is our own work and all sources quoted have been acknowledged by means of complete references.

BIGIRUMWAMI Samuel Signature DATE /../2013

RWAMPUNGU Yvan Signature DATE /../2013

DEDICATION This work is dedicated to: The Almighty God SEMIVUMBI J. Bosco GAHONGAYIRE Jeanne RWAMPUNGU Isaac MUKASAHAHA Beatrice GATSINZI Family KAGERUKA Family To our brothers and sisters To our classmates

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Thanks are due to KIST administration and to the department of Civil Engineering and Environmental Technology in particular for the knowledge acquired through these four years of study in the department. We offer our sincerest gratitude to Mr. Eric SERUBIBI for his effort in guiding us and for his sincere advices during the supervision of this work. We also wish to express our thanks to our friends and colleagues for their considerable contribution in achieving this hard work.

iii

ABSTRACT The Purpose of this project is to make investigation on steel frame of existing water tank supports, to check if the stability requirements are met and also check if water tank supports met the design standards. This study was completed into two main phases. The first phase was data collection done at several sites where water tanks are constructed, in choosing water tank supports to be investigated the following were considered: the supports height should be greater than 3m from the ground level to the bottom of the tank, the tank capacity should be between 2.5m 3to 10m3 and the tank should be constructed in Rwanda as it is our case study. The second phase was to analyze the data collected, in data analysis we used Autodesk Robot Structural Analysis for the calculations and got the results which allowed us to make conclusion, after calculations, the results shows, 13% of water tank supports are not meeting design requirements and some of them exhibit signs of instability.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENT DECLARATION ............................................................................................................................. I DEDICATION ................................................................................................................................ II ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................................................ III ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................. IV TABLE OF CONTENT ................................................................................................................. V LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................... VII LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................... VIII LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................................... X CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 11 1.1. 1.2. 1.3. GENERAL INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 11 PROBLEM STATEMENT ............................................................................................ 11 OBJECTIVE OF THE RESEARCH .............................................................................. 13 GENERAL OBJECTIVE........................................................................................ 13 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................... 13

1.3.1. 1.3.2. 1.4. 1.5. 1.6.

HYPOTHESIS ............................................................................................................... 13 SCOPE OF THE PROJECT ........................................................................................... 13 SIGNIFICANCE AND RATIONALE ........................................................................... 14 Personal significance .............................................................................................. 14 Public and administrative significance ................................................................... 14 Academic significance ............................................................................................ 14

1.6.1. 1.6.2. 1.6.3. 1.7.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................................................................... 14

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................................... 16 2.1. 2.2. 2.3. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 16 TERMINOLOGIES ....................................................................................................... 16 PROPERTIES OF STEEL.............................................................................................. 16 PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF STEEL ................................................................. 17 MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF STEEL .......................................................... 17 v

2.3.1. 2.3.2.

2.3.3. 2.4.

CHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF STEEL ................................................................ 18

STEEL CONNECTIONS ............................................................................................... 19 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 19 RIVETED CONNECTIONS .................................................................................. 19 BOLTED AND PIN CONNECTIONS .................................................................. 21 WELDED CONNECTIONS .................................................................................. 22

2.4.1. 2.4.2. 2.4.3. 2.4.4.

CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................ 30 3.1. INTRODUCTION. ................................................................................................................... 30 3.2. TOOLS. ................................................................................................................................ 30 3.3 TECHNIQUES. ........................................................................................................................ 30 3.4. STRUCTURAL
STEEL

SECTION

AND THEIR CHARACTERISTIC

TENSILE

AND YIELD

STRENGTH. ................................................................................................................................. 32 3.4.1. 3.4.2. 3.5. Structural steel Sections. ......................................................................................... 32 Characteristic Tensile and yield Strength. .............................................................. 34

WATER TANK PROPERTIES. ............................................................................................. 35

3.6. ASSUMPTIONS. .................................................................................................................... 35 CHAP 4. DATA ANALYSIS. ...................................................................................................... 36 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION. ................................................... 66 5.1. CONCLUSION. ................................................................................................................. 66 5.2. RECOMMENDATION...................................................................................................... 66 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 72 BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES..................................................................................................... 72 INTERNET REFERENCES .............................................................................................................. 72 COMPUTER REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ 72 APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................. 73

vi

LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1.Chemical composition of steel ...................................................................................... 18 Table 2.2.Maximum permissible stresses in rivets ....................................................................... 20 Table 2.3.Minimum size of single run fillet weld. ........................................................................ 27 Table 2.4.values of k for different angles ..................................................................................... 28 Table 3.1. RHS available on Rwandan market. ............................................................................ 32 Table 3.2. SHS available on Rwandan market. ............................................................................ 33 Table 3.3. Rolled steel equal angle available on Rwandan market. ............................................. 34 Table 3.4. CHS available on Rwandan market. ............................................................................ 34 Table 3.5. Properties of plastic tanks ............................................................................................ 35

vii

LIST OF FIGURES Fig1.1: Water tank support in state of instability. ......................................................................... 12 Fig.2.3.Example of bolt assembly................................................................................................. 22 Fig.2.5.Most common edge preparations ...................................................................................... 25 Fig.2.6.Different types of butt welds ............................................................................................ 25 Fig.2.7 Effective throat thickness of partial penetration butt weld ............................................... 26 Fig.2.8 Common fillet welds ........................................................................................................ 26 Fig.2.9.Specifications of fillet weld .............................................................................................. 27 Fig.3.1. Interface of Robot Structural Analysis Professionals 2012 ............................................. 31 Fig.3.1.Rectangular hollow sections ............................................................................................. 32 Fig.3.2. Square hollow section ...................................................................................................... 33 Fig.3.3. Rolled steel equal angle ................................................................................................... 34 Fig.3.4: Circular hallow section .................................................................................................... 34 Fig.4.1:case1(photo,model,3D ...................................................................................................... 36 Fig.4.2: case2(photo,model,3D).................................................................................................... 37 Fig.4.3:case3 (photo,model,3D).................................................................................................... 38 Fig.4.4: case4(photo,model,3D).................................................................................................... 39 Fig.4.5: case5 (photo,model,3D)................................................................................................... 40 Fig.4.6: case6 (photo,model,3D)................................................................................................... 41 Fig.4.7: case7 (photo,model,3D)................................................................................................... 42 Fig.4.8: case8 (photo,model,3D)................................................................................................... 43 Fig.4.9: case9(photo,model,3D).................................................................................................... 44 Fig.4.10: case10(photo,model,3D)................................................................................................ 45 Fig.4.11: case11(photo,model,3D)................................................................................................ 46 Fig.4.12: case12(photo,model,3D)................................................................................................ 47 Fig.4.13: case13(photo,model,3D)................................................................................................ 48 Fig.4.14:case14 (photo,model,3D)................................................................................................ 49 Fig.4.15:case15 (photo,model,3D)................................................................................................ 50 Fig.4.16: case16(photo,model,3D)................................................................................................ 51 Fig.4.17: case17(photo,model,3D)................................................................................................ 52 Fig.4.18:case18 (photo,model,3D)................................................................................................ 53 Fig.4.19: case19(photo,model,3D)................................................................................................ 54 viii

Fig.4.20: case20(photo,model,3D)................................................................................................ 55 Fig.4.21: case21(photo,model,3D)................................................................................................ 56 Fig.4.22: case22(photo,model,3D)................................................................................................ 57 Fig.4.23: case23(photo,model,3D)................................................................................................ 58 Fig.4.24: case24(photo,model,3D)................................................................................................ 59 Fig.4.25: case25(photo,model,3D)................................................................................................ 60 Fig.4.26: case26 (photo,model,3D)............................................................................................... 61 Fig.4.27: Case27 (photo,model,3D) .............................................................................................. 62 Fig.4.28: case28 (photo,model,3D)............................................................................................... 63 Fig4.29: case29 (photo,model,3D)................................................................................................ 64 Fig.4.30: case30 (photo,model,3D)............................................................................................... 65

ix

LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS o KIST: Kigali Institute of Science and Technology o RHS: Rectangular Hollow Section o SHS: Square Hollow Section o CHS: Circular Hollow Section o EWSA: Energy Water and Sanitation Agency o Fig: Figure o DL: Dead Load o LL: Live Load o 3D: Three Dimension o CHAP: Chapter o Fy: Yield stress o MPa: Mega Pascal o Lmin: Minimum length o N: Newton o kN: Kilo Newton o m: metre o mm: millimeter o %: percentage o
o

C: Degree Celcius

o CAD: Computer Aided Drawing o EUROCODE: European Code of Practice

tf: Allowable Stress in Shear vf: Allowable Stress in tension pf: Allowable Stress in bearing.

CHAPTER I. GENERAL INTRODUCTION 1.1. INTRODUCTION

Stability of steel frame means to ensure the structural safety of steel frame by considering the characteristic strength of the steel used and type of connections. Therefore in this work titled Stability Investigation on Steel Frames of Existing Water Tanks Supports the issue was to analyze whether steel frames used in the design of water tanks supports were meeting the standards thus ensuring the safety. This study was done on 30 different cases, investigating on the stability of common steel used, different frames and type of connections used. 1.2. PROBLEM STATEMENT

Nowadays, due to the lack of water and in order to decrease the amount of water lost from public water supplier, for example EWSA, new buildings either residential or public which are constructed in RWANDA are having water tanks. This is a preventive, safe and economic method which is also advised by the government because the water demand is increasing while the supplier is unable to satisfy the existing population demand. Therefore problems of lack of water can be avoided by providing methods which can help the population to satisfy his water demand in case the public water supply has failed. Also in order to support the public water supplier, rainwater can be stored and used in some issues which do not need special treatment of water. Sometimes water tanks are laid over platforms on the ground level but the other case which is the most used and recommended is the use of supports to sustain it at a higher level and thus maintain or increase the desired water pressure. The common supports are made of steel or reinforced concrete and this work will focus on steel framed supports. The problem is that steel frame of some water tank supports exhibit signs of instability (deflection, collapse ) and this may cause accidents. The most import ant causes are the lack of stability and natural catastrophes.

11

The following is an example of water tank collapsed in GITEGA because of the steel members which is not strong enough to supports the load applied.

Fig1.1: Water tank support in state of instability.

Fig1.2: Water tank supports collapsed.

This work put our concern on the lack of stability of those steel framed supports which is mainly due to the improper design, soil conditions including poor bearing capacity. 12

1.3.

OBJECTIVE OF THE RESEARCH

1.3.1. GENERAL OBJECTIVE The general objective was to investigate the stability of the steel framed supports of various water tanks that are constructed in RWANDA. 1.3.2. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES To check if the steel frames design of water tank supports in Rwanda meets the design standards. To assess and cross-check the stability requirement of steel frame by Euro code 3, if the stability requirement are met. To recommend to whom it may concern in government institutions to establish and follow up rules of design of steel framed supports. 1.4. HYPOTHESIS

As a recommended, safe and preventive method against water problems, the construction of water tanks in our country is developing. These water tanks are often constructed with supports to sustain it at a certain height. The main hypotheses of this project are: 1. The designed or constructed steel framed water tank supports are stable and meet the structural safety recommended by Euro code 3 guidelines. 2. The designed or constructed steel framed water tank supports are not stable and sometimes they are failing, thus not meeting the structural safety recommended by Euro code 3 guidelines. This can be explained by the following reasons: 1.5. The steel framed supports are not designed taking into account the soil conditions. The steel framed supports used are not strong enough and do not meet the recommended strength. The steel framed supports are not properly designed. Water tanks supports are not designed for wind loads and earthquakes. SCOPE OF THE PROJECT

This research was focused on assessing the stability of steel frames of the existing water tank supports and it was carried out in RWANDA investigating 30 different water tank supports and 13

the supports height should have 3m and above from the ground level to the bottom of the tank and the capacity of the tank should be between 2.5m3 to 10m3. 1.6. SIGNIFICANCE AND RATIONALE

1.6.1. Personal significance There are many reasons which prompted us to carry out this study but the main motivation is that in the field of civil engineering, we are interested in structural analysis. As civil engineers, we need to conduct such study because we want to investigate on stability of steel frame of existing water tank supports. Therefore in conducting this study we were able to enhance our knowledge about steel frame analysis and structural design of steel structures according to Eurocode 3. 1.6.2. Public and administrative significance This study will be a guide for different residential houses and public institutions and it will be useful for many construction companies during the design and implementation of steel structures that support water tanks. 1.6.3. Academic significance This study is in line with the High Education requirements which suggest that every student in his/her final year must submit and present a dissertation for the award of a Bachelors degree .In addition, this study will help undergraduate students to do their researches in their final year projects. They will also be able to use it in their academic courses such as Engineering mechanics, strength of materials, structural analysis I&II, Design of steel structures...etc. Scientifically this study may help other civil engineers who are interested in steel frame analysis when they want to conduct a deep study about stability of steel frames of water tank supports. 1.7. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This research was done using the following methodology steps: The documentation using internet and books was used with respect to the title of the project to get enough theoretical information about steel frame analysis and the design procedure for steel according to Euro code 3.

14

Gaining information from different engineers and designers. The data was collected from different site where water tanks are constructed. Data analysis and interpretation of all investigated water tank supports was done using Autodesk Robot Structural Analysis software.

15

CHAPTER II. LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1. INTRODUCTION

Previous work has been done in the mentioned research field, but many of them have put their concern on other different project like mechanical properties of steel and design of roof trusses for buildings. The proposed research intends to achieve its goal by investigating the stability of steel frames of water tank supports and further recommendations from the research will be taken into account in the future design and implementation. Steel is a common building material used throughout the construction industry. Its primary purpose is to form a skeleton for the building or structure essentially the part of the structure that holds everything up and together. Steel has many advantages when compared to other structural building materials such as concrete, timber, plastics and the newer composite materials. Steel is one of the friendliest environmental building materials; steel is 100% recyclable. Steel, unlike wood, does not warp or twist and does not substantially expand and contract with the weather. Unlike concrete, steel does not take time to cure and is immediately at full strength. Steel is versatile, has more strength with less weight, has an attractive appearance, can be erected in most weather conditions, is of uniform quality, and has proven durability and low life cycle costs. These advantages make steel the building material of choice. 2.2. TERMINOLOGIES Stability: Ability to maintain a firm position. On the other hand, the word stability involves safety, resistance, strength of any structure. Steel frames: usually refers to a building technique with a "skeleton frame" of vertical steel columns, horizontal and diagonal I-beams and tubes, constructed in a rectangular grid to support the floors, roof, water tanks, walls and any structure of a building which are all attached to the frame. Investigation: the act of searching inquiry for ascertaining facts; detailed or careful examination. 2.3. PROPERTIES OF STEEL

The properties of steel depend primarily upon the carbon it contains, influenced by the quantity and kind of the other ingredients (impurities), and further influenced by the cooling of the steel 16

from its molten state. This last named influence determines the size and composition of crystals which steel assumes upon cooling. The grades of steel are classed according to their hardness due to their contained carbon. The higher the percent of carbon, the greater the strength and brittleness, and less the elongation before breaking. Two classes are distinguished: mild steel which will not harden when suddenly cooled, and high carbon steel which will harden when suddenly cooled from a red heat. 2.3.1. PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF STEEL It is made up of iron and carbon It is a conductor of electricity and is magnetic as it contains iron It is an alloy as it is composed of two elements. It also exhibits the following characteristics such as durability, flexibility and strength 2.3.2. MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF STEEL Stress-strain behavior: The behavior of mild steel shows that it is like an elastic material directly proportional to the stress up to the yield whereas high yield steel does not have defined yield point, but show a more gradual change from elastic to plastic behavior.

Fig.2.1.Typical stress strain diagram for structural carbon steel (Eurocode 3, part1.1) In the design, the strength considered depends on the yield stress for mild steel, while for high Yield; the strength is based on specified proof stress of 0.2 per cent. 17

Elastic moduli: E, G These are commonly defined in terms of relationship between stress , and strain , in that region where the curve is linear. The most frequently used is the modulus in tension. Youngs modulus E=tension stress/tension strain Shear modulus G=shear stress/shear strain Notch-toughness: There is always a possibility of microscopic cracks in a material or the material may develop such cracks as a result of several cycles of loading. Such cracks may grow rapidly without detection and lead to sudden collapse of the structure. The material in which that does not happen is known as notch-tough steels. [5-6] Hardness It may be defined as the resistance of a material to indentations and scratching. This is generally determined by forcing and indentor on to the surface. The resultant deformation in steel is both elastic and plastic. [6] Fatigue Fatigue is the result of a member being subjected to reversing or fluctuating stress even when the maximum applied stress drops below that normally required to produce fracture and ,in fact, under the yield strength of the material.[6] 2.3.3. CHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF STEEL Table 2.1.Chemical composition of steel Constituents Carbon (for thickness)diameter up to 20mm Carbon ( for thickness) diameter over 20mm Sulphur Phosphorous Maximum percent 0.23 0.25 0.055 0.055

18

2.4.

STEEL CONNECTIONS

2.4.1. INTRODUCTION A structure is an assembly of various elements or components which are fastened together through some type of connection. If connections are not designed properly and fabricated with care, they may be a source of weakness in the finished structure, not only in their structural action but also because they may be the focus of corrosion and aesthetically unpleasing. Whereas the design of main members has reached an advanced stage, based upon theories which has been developed and refined, the behavior of connections is often so complex that theoretical considerations are of little use in practical design. Following are the requirements of a good connection in steelwork: 1. It should be rigid, to avoid fluctuating stresses which may cause fatigue failure. 2. It should be such that there is the least possible weakening of the parts to be joined. 3. It should be such that it can be easily installed, inspected and maintained. The following are the common types of connections used for structural steelwork a) Riveted connections b) Bolted connections c) Welded connections d) Pinned connections The first three are extensively used but this last time riveting is being superseded in importance by welding and high strength bolting. Throughout this project, the type of steel frame connections that has been used for the investigation is the welded connections due to the fact that it is the most common used and is the cheapest. The bolted connections are commonly used in wide projects which mostly has been studied and designed according to standards thus fulfilling the safety and stability (EWSA tanks). This is the reason why in the following, the project will emphasize on welded connections. 2.4.2. RIVETED CONNECTIONS 2.4.2.1.Rivet and Riveting Riveting is a method of joining together structural steel components by using inserting ductile metal pins, called rivets, into holes of the components to be connected from coming apart.

19

A rivet consists of a shank of given length and diameter, and a head known as manufactured head. The size of the rivet is defined by the diameter of the shank.Riveting is essentially a forging process. The process of riveting consists in driving a hot rivet in its plastic state and the formation of a head in the other hand. Depending on means used to drive rivets, they are hand driven rivets which are driven by hand operated equipment, and power driven rivets which are driven by power operated equipment. The diameter of unheated rivet, before driving is known as the nominal diameter. Rivets are manufactured in nominal diameters of 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 27, 30, 33, 39, 42 and 48 mm. The diameter of rivet hole is made larger than the nominal diameter of the rivet by 1.5 mm for rivets less than or equal to 24 mm and by 2 mm for diameters exceeding 24 mm. 2.4.2.2.Working stresses in rivets The working stresses (or maximum permissible stresses) in mild steel shop is given in table 2. Table 2.2.Maximum permissible stresses in rivets Type of rivet Axial tension, tf N/mm2 (MPa) 1. Power driven rivets 2. Hand driven rivets 2.4.2.3. 100 80 Shear, vf N/mm2 (MPa) 100 80 Bearing, pf N/mm2 (MPa) 100 250

Types of riveted joints

A riveted joint may be classified according to (a) arrangement of rivets and plates which is the main classification (b) mode of load transmission, and(c) nature and location of load with respect of rivet group. Here are different types according to the a) Arrangement of rivets and plates According to the arrangement of rivets and plates, riveted joints may be of the following types: 1) Lap joint: - Single rivet - Double riveted 2) Butt joint: - Single riveted butt joint with single cover plate - Single riveted butt joint with double cover plate - Double riveted butt joint with single cover plate - Double riveted butt joint with double cover plate

20

2.4.2.4.

Modes of failure of riveted joint

A riveted joint may fail in one of the following ways: 1. Shearing failure across one or more planes of the rivets 2. Tension failure (tearing) in the plate 3. Bearing failure between the plates and the rivets 4. Plate shear or shear out failure in the plate 2.4.3. BOLTED AND PIN CONNECTIONS 2.4.3.1.INTRODUCTION A bolt is an externally threaded fastener designed for insertion through holes in assembled parts, and is normally intended to be tightened or released by torquing a nut. For structures which are not subjected to shock or vibrations, bolts can be used instead of rivets. In bolted connections, bolts and nuts are used. The three types of bolts used in structural applications are (a) unfinished or black bolts, (b) turned and fitted bolts and (c) high- strength bolts. In pinned connections, pins are used for jointing the members. Advantages of bolted connections 1. The bolting operation is very silent, in contrast to the hammering noise in riveting. 2. Bolting is a cold process, and hence there is no risk of fire. 3. Bolting operation is far quicker than riveting. 4. There is no risk involved in the bolting, in contrast to the risk of flying rivets in riveting work. 5. Less man-power is required in making the connections. Disadvantages of bolted connections 1. The bolted connections, if subjected to vibratory loads, result in reduction in strength if they get loosened. 2. Bolted connections for a given diameter of bolt, have lesser strength in axial tension since the net area at the root of the threads is less. 3. Unfished bolts have lesser strength because of non-uniform diameter. 4. In the case of black bolts, the diameter of hole is kept 1.5 mm more than the diameter of the bolt, and this extra clearance does not get filled up, in contrast to the riveted joints.

21

2.4.3.2.

Bolt types

A bolt is a metal pin with a head formed at one end and the shank threaded at the other end in order to receive a nut. In common steel structural work, however, the following three bolt types are recognized: 1. Ordinary unfinished or black bolts 2. Turned and fitted bolts 3. High strength bolts

. Fig.1.3.Example of bolt assembly (www.google.com) 2.4.4. WELDED CONNECTIONS 2.4.4.1. INTRODUCTION

Welding is a process of connecting pieces of metal by application of heat (fusion) with or without pressure. A metallic bond is established between the two pieces. This bond has the same mechanical properties as the parent metal. The most important methods used for the process of fusion are the oxyacetylene or gas welding and electric arc welding. The metal at the joint is melted by the heat generated from either an electric arc or an oxyacetylene flame and fuses with metal from welding rod. After cooling, the parent metal (base metal) and the weld metal form a continuous and homogeneous joint. There are numerous welding processes, but the one most commonly used in Civil Engineering Structures is electric-arc welding. ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF WELDING The following are advantages of welded joints:

The welding joint can be made more than 100% strong. So welding joint will never failed. With concern of welding there no need any kind of mould, pattern etc.

22

During the fabrication with welding, results in lighter construction and there are savings in materials.

It is possible with welding technique to add the specific material with desired characteristics to any portion of the machine parts.

In general case the welding equipments are not costly. Designing of welding fabrication is not so tough. Welding can be mechanized. A wide range of metals and its alloy or dissimilar metals can be joined by welding process. Welding joining of metals is performed in any position, so it does no need any kind of special construction.

Portable welding machine equipments are available, so portability of welding machine can be avoided. The following are disadvantages of welded joints:

Produced ultra-violet light is very harmful for health and fumes and spatters also. Edge preparation should be prominent for good weld. A skilled welder is required to produce a good quality of welding joints. A residual stress and distortion is occurred, as a result work piece may damage. After welding stress relief is required of weld joint. During heating the metallurgical changes occurred in the weld filler metal. Due to this reason the molecular structure of base metal different from filler metal.

Jigs or fixtures are required to hold the weld jobs. 2.4.4.2. TYPES OF WELDS AND WELDING JOINTS

By means of welding, it is possible to make continuous, load bearing joints between the members of a structure. A variety of joints is used in structural steel work and they can be classified into four basic configurations namely, Lap joint, Tee joint, Butt joint and Corner joint. For lap joints, the ends of two members are overlapped and for butt joints, the two members are placed end to end. The T- joints form a Tee and in Corner joints, the ends are joined like the letter L. Most common joints are made up of fillet weld or the butt (also calling groove) weld. Plug and slot welds are not generally used in structural steel work (figure 2.4). Fillet welds are 23

suitable for lap joints and Tee joints and groove welds for butt and corner joints. Butt welds can be of complete penetration or incomplete penetration depending upon whether the penetration is complete through the thickness or partial. Generally a description of welded joints requires an indication of the type of both the joint and the weld.

Fig.2.4.Common types of welds (Design of structural connections to Eurocode 3) Though fillet welds are weaker than butt welds, about 80% of the connections are made with fillet welds. The reason for the wider use of fillet welds is that in the case of fillet welds, when members are lapped over each other, large tolerances are allowed in erection. For butt welds, the members to be connected have to fit perfectly when they are lined up for welding. Further butt welding requires the shaping of the surfaces to be joined as shown in Figure. 2.5.

24

Fig.2.5.Most common edge preparations (www.google.com)

a) BUTT WELD OR GROOVE WELD Butt weld or groove weld is used when the plates to be jointed are in the same plane, or when a T-joint is desired. A butt weld is designated according to the shape of groove made during the preparation of ends of the pieces to be joined. The common types of butt welds are shown in figure 2.6.

Fig.2.6.Different types of butt welds (www.google.com) Butt welds have high strength, high resistance to impact and cyclic stress. They are most direct joints and introduce least eccentricity in the joint. But their major disadvantages are: high residual stresses, necessity of edge preparation and proper aligning of the members in the field. Therefore, field butt joints are rarely used. 25

A butt weld is specified by the size of the weld, which is defined by the effective throat thickness. The reinforcement is the extra metal deposited proud of the surfaces of the pieces jointed, as shown in figure 2.7 (a). The reinforcement may vary between 1 mm to 3 mm and is not included in the throat thickness.

Fig.2.7 Effective throat thickness of partial penetration butt weld (Design of structural connections to Eurocode 3)

The square butt joints are used for thickness less than 8 mm. The effective thickness of the weld, called throat thickness, is less than the thickness T of the plates jointed. It is taken as T. In the single V-built joint, the throat thickness is taken as T. In double V-butt joint, the weld is fully effective and hence the throat thickness is taken equal to T. As a rule, in single U, single V and single J butt welds, where welding is done from one side, full penetration is not possible and hence effective throat thickness is taken equal to T. In double-V, double U and double J butt welds, full penetration is possible and the effective thickness of throat is taken equal to the thickness of plates jointed. Whenever two plates of different thickness are jointed, the thickness of thinner plate must be taken into account. b) FILLET WELD When the lapped plates are to be jointed, fillet welds are used. These are generally of right angled triangle shape. Common used fillet welds are Single-sided fillet welded joint types and aregiven in the figure 2.8 given bellow:

Fig.2.8 Common fillet welds (www. Google.com) 26

Specifications of Fillet welds

Fig.2.9.Specifications of fillet weld (www.google.com)

A fillet weld is specified by the following: (i) (ii) (iii) Size of weld Throat thickness Length of weld

1. Size of weld: the sides containing the right angle of the fillet are called legs. The size of the weld is specified by minimum leg length. The length of the leg is the distance from the root of the weld to the toe of the weld, measured along the fusion face. Table 2.3.Givesthe minimum size of single run fillet weld, as specified by IS: 816- 1969. Table 2.3.Minimum size of single run fillet weld. Thickness of thicker part Up to 10 mm 10 to 20 mm 20 to 32 mm 32 to 50 mm Min. size 3 mm 5 mm 6 mm 8 mm (first run); 10 mm (min.)

Note: when the minimum size of the weld is greater than the thickness of thinner part, the minimum size of the weld should be equal to the thickness of thinner part. 2. Throat thickness: The theoretical throat is the perpendicular distance between the root of the weld, and the hypotenuse joining the two ends of the legs. Reinforcement is 27

neglected. The effective throat thickness is taken equal to the theoretical throat thickness, and when the angle between the fusion faces is 90 (as is generally the case), we have: Effective throat thickness, Or Where the size of weld = minimum leg length

For angles other than 900 between the fusion faces, effective throat thickness = k x minimum leg length. Table 4.Gives the values of k for different angles between the fusion faces, as per IS: 816-1969: Table 2.4.values of k for different angles Angle K 60 to 90 0.7 91 to 100 0.65 101 to 106 0.60 107 to 113 0.55 114 to 120 0.5

It may be noted that a fillet weld is not used for jointing parts if the angle between the fusion faces is less than 60 or greater than 120. The maximum size of fillet weld at the square edge of a plate (figure 2.6.a) is 1.5 mm less than the plate thickness and in case of a weld at the rounded edges of flanges or the toe of an angle is kept three fourths the thickness of the edge (figure 2.6.b ). When the fillet weld is placed parallel to the direction of the forces on both the sides of the member, it is called side fillet weld. When the weld is placed at the end of the member, such that it is perpendicular to the direction of the force, it is called end filletweld. If the axis of the weld is inclined to the direction of force, it is known as diagonalfillet weld. 3. Effective length of weld: The effective length of the weld is taken as overall length minus twice the weld size. The effective length should not be less than four times the size of the weld; otherwise the weld size must be taken as one fourth of its effective length. If only the side welds are used, the length of the each side fillet weld must not be less than the perpendicular distance between the two. When the ends are returned, as shown in figure 2.9.b, the ends should be carried continuous for a distance not less than twice the size of the weld, especially when the joint is subjected to tensile force. c) DEFECTS IN WELDING

28

Welding is highly specialized technique of jointing, and it should be done carefully so that no defects or imperfections are left. The most important defects arising from the welding technique are as follows: 1. Undercutting: this defect takes place due to excessive current and excessive length of arc, resulting in the formation of groove in the base metal. 2. Overlap: it takes place when the weld metal overflows the groove, but does not fuse with base metal. 3. Incomplete penetration: this defect takes place the weld metal does not penetrate up to the root of the joint because of faulty groove preparation, or because of faulty technique used during welding. 4. Lack of fusion: it takes place when the parent metal is coated with some foreign matter and when the groove is not clean. Due to this, they will be lack of union between two runs of weld metal. 5. Slag inclusion: it takes place because of formation of oxides due to chemical reaction among the base metal, air end electrode coating, during welding. 6. Porosity: it takes place when a group of gas pores get entrapped in the weld. It is a defect of gas inclusion. 7. Edge melting: this defect occurs in fillet welds because of careless welding.

29

CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY 3.1. Introduction. This chapter explains the methodology used to investigate the stability of steel frames of various water tank supports in RWANDA. It indicates techniques and tools used. The data used in this research were collected from different sites in Rwanda where water tanks are constructed especially in public institutions and residential houses. In data collection, the desired data were: photo of water tank support, sketch of structural frame, size and dimensions of steel section used and to know if it is rectangular hollow section (RHS), circular hollow section (CHS) or any other types of section which can be used, volume of water tank which was considered as the load to be applied, the shape of the tank and the location of investigated water tank supports. 3.2. Tools. Tools used during the data collection are as follows: Digital camera: used to take the photos of the tank and the whole structure. Meter: used to take measurements of the frames. Drawing sheet: we used it to draw the model of water tank supports. Note book: used to take notes of information required about the investigated water tank such as volume, self-weight of the tank etc After collecting all the data, AutoCAD software were used to draw the entire frame model of water tank supports. 3.3 Techniques. The data sheet we used in this project consists of the photo taken at the site where the tank is constructed and the model drawn in AutoCAD software. While analyzing the data collected Autodesk Robot Structural Analysis Professional 2012 software was used to clearly show the maximum deflection, maximum stress, and maximum

30

shear forces.

Fig.3.1. Interface of Robot Structural Analysis Professionals 2012 The following are the steps involved in analyzing the structure in Robot software: 1. Open the software and start drawing the model in 3D using the investigated hollow steel sections. The shell design was used to simulate our steel frames. 2. Load definition: we applied the load we had in data collection excluding wind load because all the supports we had were less than 10m height, therefore, are not affected by wind as according to Eurocode, see appendices 1. Dead load 1(DL1): self-weight of the structure(steel tubes) Dead load2 (DL2): load from tank+ self-weight of the tank. Live load (LL):(1.5 kN/m2 from Eurocode ) Combination1 (1.35DL1+1.35DL2+1.5LL)

2. Analysis :the following are the results done by the software: Displacement Stresses Moments Shear 31

 3.4.

Deflection Reactions

Structural steel Section and their characteristic Tensile and yield Strength.

3.4.1. Structural steel Sections. During our research project, a visit at SONATUBES s.a.r.l was done to know the structural steel sections that are available on Rwandan market, so below are the following information from SONATUBES s.a.r.l for steel sections available in Rwanda: Rectangular Hollow Sections: It is available in different dimensions.

Fig.3.1.Rectangular hollow sections Table3.1. RHS available on Rwandan market. Breadth(mm) Height(mm) 30 40 50 60 80 30 40 40 40 60 80 20 20 30 40 40 20 20 20 20 40 40 Thickness(mm) 1 0.9 1 1.2 1.5 3 2 1.5 3 3 2 32

80

40

Square Hollow Section:

Fig.3.2. Square hollow section Table3.2. SHS available on Rwandan market. Breadth(mm) Thickness(mm) 12 16 20 25 30 40 30 30 40 40 50 0.8 0.8 1 1 1.2 1.2 2 3 2.5 3 3 Rolled steel equal angles

33

Fig.3.3. Rolled steel equal angle

Table3.3. Rolled steel equal angle available on Rwandan market. Breadth(mm) 20 30 40 50 Height(mm) 20 30 40 50 Thickness(mm) 2.5 2.5 3 4

Circular hallow sections: with specified dimensions

Fig.3.4: Circular hallow section Table3.4. CHS available on Rwandan market. Diameter(mm) 22 25 32 50 Thickness(mm) 1.4 1.4 1.8 2.3

3.4.2. Characteristic Tensile and yield Strength. In data analysis we considered the maximum stress obtained in the member compared to the yield strength of the steel section we had, the nominal yield strength for structural hollow section from Eurocode 3 is 235N/mm2 for S 235H as steel grade. See the appendix 2 34

3.5.

Water Tank Properties.

Water tank found on site were of two types: plastic tanks and steel tank. During the research project a visit at ROTO TANK INDUSTRIES was done to know the properties of those tanks made in plastic (Roto Tank, Afri Tank) we find them to have the following properties: Table 3.5. Properties of plastic tanks Capacity 10m3 5m3 3.5m3 3m3 2.5m3 3.6. Assumptions. In analyzing the data we had in data collection, the following assumptions were considered: All steel members are new, with yield strength of 235 MPa for S 235H as steel grade. The steel connections are fixed (welding). Wind load were not considered in load definition as the support heights of all water tank supports are less than 10m height as recommended by Eurocode 3. Self-weight 300kg 150kg 115kg 100kg 75kg

35

CHAPTER IV. DATA ANALYSIS.

Fig.4.1:case1(photo,model,3D) Case Location (KIST Restaurant). Tank Cylindrical tank with 5 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2) Steel Tube RHS 60*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflection and displacement ) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 206.72MPa at the bar 128, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 206.72MPa<235MPa, we conclude that all steel members of this tank are strong enough to resist applied loads.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.1cm at the bar53, 55, 57&128, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L= 190cm Allowable deflection=190/325=0.5cm>0. 1cm. Hence safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.2cm at node 461. Hence it is stable.

36

Fig.4.2: case2(photo,model,3D) Case Location (KIST, NUR Campus). Tank Cylindrical tank with 5 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2) Steel Tube RHS 80*40*3mm, RHS 60*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflection and displacement ) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 342.33MPa at the bar 41, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 342.33MPa>235MPa, we conclude that all steel members of this tank are not strong enough to resist applied loads.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 3.4cm at the bar 43, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L= 260cm Allowable deflection=260/325=0.8cm<3.4 cm. Hence not safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.0cm at node 1, 24&78. Hence it is not stable.

37

Fig.4.3:case3 (photo,model,3D) Case Location (KIST, Guest House). Tank Cylindrical tank with 3 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2)

Steel Tube RHS 80*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflection and displacement ) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 65.80MPa at the bar 47, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 65.80MPa<235MPa, we conclude that all steel members of this tank are strong enough to resist applied loads.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.0cm at the bar21, 31, 47&54, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L= 95cm Allowable deflection=95/325=0.3cm>0.0c m Hence safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.1cm at node 13, 28&181. Hence it is stable.

38

Fig.4.4: case4(photo,model,3D) Case Location (KIST, FAED). Tank Cylindrical tank with 5 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2)

Steel Tube RHS 60*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflection and displacement ) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.1cm at the bar 94, Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 169.64MPa in Y direction and 0.2cm at the bar 90, in Z direction, comparing at the bar 83, comparing this to the allowable deflection from value to the yield strength of Eurocode3: L/325, where L is the 235MPa of hollow section length of member. steel bars. L= 220cm 169.64MPa<235MPa, we Allowable conclude that all steel deflection=220/325=0.6cm>0.2c members of this tank are m. strong enough to resist Hence safe. applied loads.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.3cm at node 230. Hence it is stable.

39

Fig.4.5: case5 (photo,model,3D) Case Location (Kimihurura, Rugando). Tank Cylindrical tank with 5 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2)

Steel Tube RHS 60*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflection and displacement ) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 218.55MPa at the bar 41, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 218.55MPa<235MPa, we conclude that all steel members of this tank are strong enough to resist applied loads.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.2cm at the bar 64, in Y direction and 0.1cm at the bar 52, in Z direction, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L= 200cm Allowable deflection=200/325=0.6cm>0. 2cm Hence safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.0cm at node1. Hence it is stable.

40

Fig.4.6: case6 (photo,model,3D) Case Location (Kibagabaga). Tank Cylindrical tank with 5 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2

Steel Tube RHS 80*40*3mm,RHS 60*40*3mm, RHS 40*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflection and displacement ) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 77.44MPa at the bar 7, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 77.44MPa<235MPa, we conclude that all steel members of this tank are strong enough to resist applied loads.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.0cm at node 1, 16&21. Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.2cm at Hence it is stable. the bar 7, in Y direction and 0.1cm at the bar 10, in Z direction, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L= 180cm Allowable deflection=180/325=0.55cm>0. 2cm. Hence safe.

41

Fig.4.7: case7 (photo,model,3D) Case Location (Kibagabaga). Tank Cylindrical tank with 3 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2

Steel Tube RHS 80*40*3mm, RHS 40*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflection and displacement ) 2. Deflections 3.Displacements

1.Stresses (Max and min)

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 158.68MPa at the bar27, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 158.68MPa<235MPa, we conclude that all steel members of this tank are strong enough to resist applied loads.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.4cm at the bar 16&17, in Y direction and 0.1cm at the bar 31, in Z direction, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L= 150cm Allowable deflection=150/325=0.46cm<0. 4cm, Hence not safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 1cm at node 95, in Z direction which leads to the instability of the structure. Hence it is not stable.

42

Fig.4.8: case8 (photo,model,3D) Case Location (KIST, MMI). Tank Cubic tank with 7 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2

Steel Tube CHS with 10cm diameter

Results(stresses, deflection and displacement ) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 242.02MPa at the bar 30, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 242.02MPa>235MPa, we conclude that all steel members of this tank are not strong enough to resist applied loads.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 2cm at the bar 42, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L= 190cm Allowable deflection=190/325=0.5cm<2c m, Hence not safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.0cm at node 1, 2&20 in Z direction. Hence it is not stable.

43

Fig.4.9: case9(photo,model,3D) Case Location (Gitega). Tank Cylindrical tank with 10 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2

Steel Tube RHS 60*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflection and displacement ) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 664.41MPa at the bar 61, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 664.41MPa<235MPa, we conclude that all steel members of this tank are not strong enough to resist applied loads.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 1.8cm at the bar 7, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L= 200cm Allowable deflection=200/325=0.6cm<1. 8cm Hence not safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.1cm at node 48 in Y direction. Hence it is not stable.

Fig: Photo of structure collapsing after few days.

44

Fig.4.10: case10(photo,model,3D) Case Location (Muhima). Tank Cylindrical tank with 5 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2

Steel Tube RHS 60*40*3mm,RHS 40*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflection and displacement ) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 8.39MPa at the bar72, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 8.39MPa<235MPa, we conclude that all steel members of this tank are strong enough to resist applied loads.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.0cm at the bar7, 15, 73&79, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L= 100cm Allowable deflection=100/325=0.3cm>0.0 cm Hence safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.0cm at node1, 4, 13, 17&22. Hence it is stable.

45

Fig.4.11: case11(photo,model,3D) Case Location (CHUK). Tank Cylindrical tank with 2.5 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2

Steel Tube CHS with 8cm diameter

Results(stresses, deflection and displacement ) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 28.44MPa at the bar17, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 28.44MPa<235MPa, we conclude that all steel members of this tank are strong enough to resist applied loads.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.1cm at the bar13, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L= 350cm Allowable deflection=350/325=1.07cm>0. 1cm Hence safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.1cm at node 46, 155 in X direction and at node 16, 20 in Y direction. Hence it is stable.

46

Fig.4.12: case12(photo,model,3D) Case Location (Gikondo). Tank Cylindrical tank with 2.5 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2)

Steel Tube RHS 60*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflection and displacement ) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 40.51MPa at the bar3, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 40.51MPa<235MPa, we conclude that all steel members of this tank are strong enough to resist applied loads.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.0cm at the bar1, 3, 10&18, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L= 75cm Allowable deflection=75/325=0.2cm>0.0c m Hence safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.1cm at node 53 in Z direction. Hence it is stable.

47

Fig.4.13: case13(photo,model,3D) Case Location (Remera). Tank Cylindrical tank with 2.5 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2)

Steel Tube RHS 50*50*3mm

Results(stresses, deflection and displacement ) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 30.72MPa at the bar15, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 30.72MPa<235MPa, we conclude that all steel members of this tank are strong enough to resist applied loads.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.0cm at the bar2, 8, 11, 15, 16&18, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L= 75cm Allowable deflection=75/325=0.2cm>0.0c m. Hence safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.1cm at node 18 in Z direction. Hence it is stable.

48

Fig.4.14:case14 (photo,model,3D) Case Location (Kibagabaga). Tank Cylindrical tank with 3 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2)

Steel Tube RHS 60*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflection and displacement ) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 46.16MPa at the bar30, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 46.16MPa<235MPa, we conclude that all steel members of this tank are strong enough to resist applied loads.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.0cm at the bar6, 10, 12, 14, 35&38, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L= 90cm Allowable deflection=90/325=0.2cm>0.0c m Hence safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.0cm at node1, 5, 12&17. Hence it is stable.

49

Fig.4.15:case15 (photo,model,3D) Case Location (Kibagabaga). Tank Cylindrical tank with 3.5 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2)

Steel Tube RHS 80*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflection and displacement ) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.0cm Notes: The calculated maximum at the bar14, 15, 18, 19,24&35, stress is 58.19MPa at the bar76, comparing to the allowable comparing this value to the deflection from Eurocode3: yield strength of 235MPa of L/325, where L is the length of hollow section steel bars. member. 58.19MPa<235MPa, we L= 120cm conclude that all steel members Allowable of this tank are strong enough deflection=120/325=0.3cm>0.0 to resist applied loads. cm Hence safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.1cm at node 106 in Z direction. Hence it is stable.

50

Fig.4.16: case16(photo,model,3D) Case Location (Kicukiro, El Castilo Hotel). Tank 2 Cylindrical tanks with 3 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2)

Steel Tube RHS 80*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflection and displacement) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 164.21MPa at the bar101, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 164.21MPa<235MPa, we conclude that all steel members are strong enough to resist applied loads.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.0cm at the bar16, 23, 37, 85&114, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L= 200cm Allowable deflection=200/325=0.6cm>0. 0cm Hence safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.2cm at node 43 in Z direction. Hence it is stable.

51

Fig.4.17: case17(photo,model,3D) Case Location (Kicukiro, El Castilo Hotel). Tank Cylindrical tank with 3 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2)

Steel Tube RHS 60*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflection and displacement) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 62.64MPa at the bar16, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 62.64MPa<235MPa, we conclude that all steel members are strong enough to resist applied loads.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.0cm at the bar1, 3, 16, 22, 30&33, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L= 100cm Allowable deflection=100/325=0.3cm>0. 0cm Hence safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.1cm at node 21 in Z direction. Hence it is stable.

52

Fig.4.18:case18 (photo,model,3D) Case Location (NDERA). Tank Two Cylindrical tanks with 5 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2)

Steel Tube RHS 80*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflections and displacement) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 67.26MPa at the bar22, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 67.26MPa<235MPa, we conclude that all steel members are strong enough to resist applied loads.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.0cm at the bar2, 9, 13, 16, 21&28, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L= 110cm Allowable deflection=110/325=0.3cm>0.0 cm Hence safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.1cm at node 46 in Z direction. Hence it is stable.

53

Fig.4.19: case19(photo,model,3D) Case Location (HUYE). Tank Cylindrical tank with 5 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2)

Steel Tube RHS 80*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflections and displacement) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.0cm at Notes: The calculated the bar2, 3, 16, 25, 32&35, maximum stress is 32.77MPa at comparing to the allowable the bar34, comparing this value deflection from Eurocode3: to the yield strength of 235MPa L/325, where L is the length of of hollow section steel bars. member. 32.77MPa<235MPa, we L= 100cm conclude that all steel members Allowable are strong enough to resist deflection=100/325=0.3cm>0.0 applied loads. cm Hence safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.1cm at node 106 in Z direction. Hence it is stable.

54

Fig.4.20: case20(photo,model,3D) Case Location (MUSANZE). Tank Cylindrical tank with 3 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2)

Steel Tube RHS 60*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflections and displacement) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 44.88MPa at the bar2, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 44.88MPa<235MPa, we conclude that all steel members are strong enough to resist applied loads.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.0cm at the bar2, 17, 18&24, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L= 75cm Allowable deflection=75/325=0.2cm>0.0c m Hence safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.1cm at node 21 in Z direction. Hence it is stable.

55

Fig.4.21:case21(photo,model,3 D) Case Location (MUHANGA). Tank Cylindrical tank with 3 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2

Steel Tube RHS 60*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflections and displacement) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.0cm at Notes: The calculated the bar2, 28, 58, 22, 54&84, maximum stress is 28.45MPa at comparing to the allowable the bar4, comparing this value deflection from Eurocode3: to the yield strength of 235MPa L/325, where L is the length of of hollow section steel bars. member. 28.45MPa<235MPa, we L= 105cm conclude that all steel members Allowable are strong enough to resist deflection=105/325=0.3cm>0.0 applied loads. cm Hence safe. 56

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.0cm at node1, 9, 21, 41, 68&107. Hence it is stable.

Fig.4.22: case22(photo,model,3D) Case Location (MUHANGA). Tank Cylindrical tank with 3 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2)

Steel Tube RHS 60*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflections and displacement) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.1cm at the bar29, Notes: The calculated comparing to the allowable maximum stress is 48.58MPa at deflection from Eurocode3: the bar2, comparing this value L/325, where L is the length of to the yield strength of 235MPa member. of hollow section steel bars. L= 200cm 48.58MPa<235MPa, we Allowable conclude that all steel members deflection=200/325=0.6cm>0.1c of this tank are strong enough m to resist applied loads. Hence safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.1cm at node 53 in Z direction. Hence it is stable.

57

Fig.4.23: case23(photo,model,3D) Case Location (KIBAGABAGA). Tank Cylindrical tank with 3 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2

Steel Tube RHS 80*40*3mm ,RHS 60*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflections and displacement) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 43.04MPa at the bar3, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 43.04MPa<235MPa, we conclude that all steel members are strong enough to resist applied loads.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.1cm at the bar29, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L= 200cm Allowable deflection=200/325=0.6cm>0.1 cm Hence safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.1cm at node 100 in Z direction. Hence it is stable.

58

Fig.4.24: case24(photo,model,3D) Case Location (KIBAGABAGA). Tank Two cylindrical tank with 2 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2)

Steel Tube RHS 60*60*3mm, RHS 60*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflections and displacement) 1. Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 132MPa at the bar8, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 132MPa<235MPa, we conclude that all steel members are strong enough to resist applied loads.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.1cm at the bar5&27, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L= 150cm Allowable deflection=150/325=0.4cm>0.1c m Hence safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is0.2cm at node 157 in Z direction. Hence it is stable.

59

Fig.4.25: case25(photo,model,3D) Case Location (KIBAGABAGA). Tank Cylindrical tank with 5 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2) Steel Tube RHS 60*40*3mm, RHS 40*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflections and displacement) 1. Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 64.79MPa at the bar1, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 64.79MPa<235MPa. Hence strong.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.0cm at the bars 3, 13&25, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode 3: L/325, where L is the length of member.L=100cm,Yallow=100/3 25=0.3cm>0.0cm. Hence safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.1cm at node5&13 in Y direction and 0.1cm at node67 in Z direction. Hence it is stable.

60

Fig.4.26: case26 (photo,model,3D) Case Location (KIMIRONKO). Tank Cubic tank with 5 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2)

Steel Tube RHS 60*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflections and displacement) 1. Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 58.38MPa at the bar1, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 58.38MPa<235MPa. Hence strong.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.0cm at the bars 2, 4, 9, 16, 19&26, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode 3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L=100cm,Yallow=100/325=0.3cm >0.0cm.Hence safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.1cm at node 17. Hence it is stable.

61

Fig.4.27: Case27 (photo,model,3D) Case Location (KIMIRONKO). Tank Cylindrical tank with 10 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2)

Steel Tube RHS 60*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflections and displacement) 1. Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 61.80MPa at the bar8, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 61.80MPa<235MPa. Hence strong.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.0cm at the bars 5, 10, 33, 35&44, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode 3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L=110cm,Yallow=110/325=0.3 3cm>0.0cm. Hence safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.1cm at node 93. Hence it is stable.

62

Fig.4.28: case28 (photo,model,3D) Case Location (NYAMIRAMBO). Tank Cylindrical tank with 3 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2)

Steel Tube RHS 60*40*3mm,RHS 40*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflections and displacement) 1. Stresses (Max and min) 2. Deflections

3.Displacements

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 37MPa at the bar3, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 37MPa<235MPa. Hence strong.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.0cm at the bars 5, 6, 17, 19&31, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode 3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L=75cm,Yallow=75/325=0.2cm> 0.0cm. Hence safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.1cm at node 94. Hence it is stable.

63

Fig4.29: case29 (photo,model,3D) Case Location (NYAMIRAMBO). Tank Cylindrical tank with 3 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2)

Steel Tube RHS 60*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflections and displacement) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2.Deflection

3. Displacement

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 29.24MPa at the bar26, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 29.24MPa<235MPa, we conclude that all steel members are strong enough to resist applied loads.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.0cm at the bar2, 3, 3, 4&38, comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L= 85cm Allowable deflection=85/325=0.2cm>0.0cm Hence safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.1cm at node1, 29, 54, 86, 96&120 in all directions. Hence it is stable.

64

Fig.4.30: case30 (photo,model,3D) Case Location (MUHANGA). Tank Cylindrical tank with 2.5 m3 volume Load values(kN/m2)

Steel Tube RHS 60*40*3mm

Results(stresses, deflections and displacement) 1.Stresses (Max and min) 2.Deflection

3. Displacement

Notes: The calculated maximum stress is 61.85MPa at the bar39, comparing this value to the yield strength of 235MPa of hollow section steel bars. 61.85MPa<235MPa, we conclude that all steel members are strong enough to resist applied loads.

Notes: The calculated maximum deflection is 0.0cm at the bar6, 9, 29, 31, 35&39 comparing to the allowable deflection from Eurocode3: L/325, where L is the length of member. L= 85cm Allowable deflection=85/325=0.2cm>0.0c m Hence safe.

Notes: The calculated maximum displacement is 0.1cm at node33 in Z direction. Hence it is stable.

65

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION. 5.1. CONCLUSION. The main objective of this project was to conduct a study on stability investigation on steel frames of existing water tank supports, to check if water tank supports that are constructed in Rwanda are stable and met the design standards (Eurocode 3 for Steel structures). To work on such a project was a great opportunity to understand more about design of steel structures and stability checking. During the data analysis, we considered the maximum stress, deflection and displacement in the members of the whole structure. The stress obtained in the member shows the strength of the steel members and it affects also the stability of the structure. The investigation was done on 30 different cases of water tank supports. After the investigation, the results shows that for 100% of water tank supports made in steel, 13% of them are not meeting design requirements and/or exhibit signs of instability due to the following reasons: Poor workmanship for connections. Bad framing (for example, to project a member from a joint to the center of another member). 5.2. RECOMMENDATION. Based on the investigation done on this research about the stability of steel frame of water tank supports, some recommendations are addressed to the clients (individuals who want to construct the elevated water tanks) and for construction companies: For clients; make sure that before construction of water tank supports, the structural design has been done by an engineer to ensure the safety and economy of the structure. For construction companies and engineers; we recommend that in steel framing; the load has to be transferred from joint to joint, and not from joint to member For welders; we recommend that they should weld all sides of steel section to be welded to ensure the strength of the joint.

66

REFERENCES Bibliographic References PROF. IR. FRANS BIJLAARD, (2008), Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures ready for practice, EUROCODES Background and Applications, Brussels. MUNDERERE EGIDE, (2009).Comparative study of bolted and welded connections applied on steel roof truss. Dissertation, KIST, RWANDA. DR. B.C. PUNMIA; ASHOK KUMAR JAIN and ARUNA KUMAR JAIN, (1998), Comprehensive Design of Steel Structures, New Delhi.

S.K. DUGGAL, (1998), Design of Steel Structures, New Delhi. LEONARDO DA VINCI, (2003), Design of structural connections to Eurocode 3/Frequently asked Questions, Watford. Eurocode Load Combination for Steel Structures: Publication No 53/10, The British Constructional Steelwork Association Ltd, December 2010. Internet References http:/www.google.com/eng/stability,investigation,steel frame, November 2012. Computer References AutoCAD 2007 Autodesk Robot Structural Analysis 2012.

67

APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1

68

APPENDIX 2

69

APPENDIX 2 (Continued).

70

APPENDIX 3

71

APPENDIX 3(continued)

72

APPENDIX3 (continued)

73

APPENDIX3 (Continued)

74