International Journal on Recent Technologies in Mechanical and Electrical Engineering (IJRMEE) ISSN: 2349-7947

Volume: 2 Issue: 10 005 - 009

_______________________________________________________________________________________
Static Analysis of Coal Bunker and Validation of the Results
using STAAD PRO
Gauri Dilip Ambekar Prof. Kiran Narkar
Post Graduate Student Professor
Department of Mechanical Engineering Department of Mechanical Engineering
D. Y. Patil College of Engineering Akurdi D. Y. Patil College of Engineering Akurdi
Pune, India Pune, India
gauri0073@gmail.com knarkar@gmail.com

Abstract—Bunkers are the structures used to store the solid and granular materials at power plants. Bunkers are so designed that
they can withstand the live pressure acting on walls as well as their self-weight. The bunker failure is caused due to lack of
required structural redundancy in most of the structures, as well as lack of alternate load path to redistribute stresses and forces
within the structure. The main issue is to check the deformation and stresses in bunker during analysis so that the bunker failure
can be reduced. The analysis results are then validated using STADD PRO software.
Keywords- Bunker; deformation; stress.
__________________________________________________*****_________________________________________________
I. INTRODUCTION
σ max = (B1 X q X b2)/ t2 (1)
The main objective is to design a safe bunker for company and
check critical regions from analysis. The main function of
σmax = maximum allowable bending stress = 1650 (IS 800,
bunker is to store the coal. Bunkers thereby have to sustain the
section 11, clause 11.4 [19] )
coal pressure, self-weight, wind pressure on the site as well as
B1= constant which depend on Spacing sizes a and b
the seismic load. The walls of the bunker are typically
q = internal pressure
subjected to both normal pressure and vertical frictional shear
b = lateral length of spacing
or traction produced by the material stored inside the bunker.
t = thickness
The magnitude and distribution of both shear and normal
pressure over the height of the wall depend on the properties
The values of spacing size (a and b) are obtained from this
of the stored material and whether the bunker is being filled or
equation. Let Bunker be divided by maximum spacing 1000 X
discharged. Other potential loads, including seismic and wind
800 mm above waist and 1000 X 500 mm in portion below
loads, stresses created by temperature difference between the
waist. Normal pressure for each horizontal ring stiffener level
bunker wall and the stored bulk solids, potential expansion of
is calculated by following formula IS 9178 part II, clause 9.5.
the stored material, and differential settlement of the
foundation or support columns, should also be considered
Pn = Pv Cos2 θ + Ph Sin2 θ + Ws Cos θ (2)
during the design process.
Where,
Pn, normal pressure on wall
II. DESIGN OF BUNKER
Pv, vertical pressure on wall
The analytical design of bunker is carried out using IS codes Ph, horizontal pressure on wall
9178 part I, II, III. The design parameters like angle of wall Ws, self-weight of bunker
friction and pressure ratio are calculated analytically. θ angle between the hoppers
TABLE I. ANGLE OF WALL FRICTION AND PRESSURE RATIO FOR
GRANULAR COAL MATERIAL B. Bunker Plate Thickness below Waist
Assume hopper plate of 1000 X 500 mm subjected to 6305
Angle of wall friction (δ) Pressure Ratio (λ) kg/m2 and all edges fixed.
Σ b = allowable bending stress = 1650 kgf/cm2
a = 1000, b= 500, q= 0.6305 kg/cm2, B1 = 0.4974
During filling During emptying During filling During emptying
σ b = (B1 X q X b2)/t2
Substituting all values, t = 7.89 mm.
26.25̊ 21̊ 0.5 1.0 Therefore, t = 8 mm
8 mm + corrosion allowance = 8 + 4 = 12 mm.
A. Normal Pressure Calculation for Bunker Walls
Consider bunker walls divided in plates by horizontal and C. Bunker Plate Thickness above Waist
vertical ring stiffeners. From Roark’s formula for stress and Assume hopper plate of 1000 X 600 mm subjected to 4354
strain, Table 11.4, clause 8.a [18], the maximum spacing kg/m2 and all edges fixed.
between horizontal and vertical ring stiffeners in flat plates is Σ b = 1650 kgf/cm2
governed a = 1000, b= 600, q = 0. 4354kg/cm2, B1 = 0.4680
σ b = (B1 X q X b2)/t2
5
IJRMEE | October 2015, Available @ http://www.ijrmee.org
________________________________________________________________________________
 International Journal on Recent Technologies in Mechanical and Electrical Engineering (IJRMEE) ISSN: 2349-7947
Volume: 2 Issue: 10 005 - 009
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Substituting all values, t = 5.6 mm. C. Boundary Conditions
So, thickness of 6 mm is selected. The bunker is supported directly to the 12 m distant support
6 mm + corrosion allowance = 6 + 4 = 10 mm columns. The beam faces are selected which are connected to
column and are given fixed support. Top beam, Middle beam,
Waist beam are connected to column. The same support
III. FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF BUNKER
condition is applied to all the loading conditions used for the
Following procedure was adopted for static analysis of analysis of the bunker.
bunker.
A. Modelling
The first step of pre-processing is to generate the 3-D model
of the given component which is compatible to import in the
solver. The 3-D model of the bunker is created in
Solidworks 14.The modeling of bunker is shown in Fig. 1.
These files were used for analysis further process.

Figure.1 Bunker model

Figure. 3 Fixed support condition of bunker
B. Meshing
The thin shell mesh is done for the bunker model. Shell 181 D. Coal Load Application
elements are used for meshing the model. The number of nodes Variable pressure is applied on the bunker wall from inside.
formed is 55255. The element quality is checked, it comes out This is the calculated coal pressure which will try to cause the
as 0.9175 whose ideal value is 1.00. Warping factor of mesh is deflection of bunker walls.
3.909; its acceptable value is < 10. Aspect ratio of the mesh is
1.6816 whose acceptable value is < 5. Jacobian value for the
mesh is 1.133 whose acceptable value is > 0.6.

Figure.4 Coal load application

Figure. 2 Meshed Model of Bunker

6
IJRMEE | October 2015, Available @ http://www.ijrmee.org
________________________________________________________________________________
International Journal on Recent Technologies in Mechanical and Electrical Engineering (IJRMEE) ISSN: 2349-7947
Volume: 2 Issue: 10 005 - 009
_______________________________________________________________________________________
IV. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
The allowable criteria for deflection and stress are as below.
1) The allowable deflection for wall plates and stiffeners is
taken as Length/325.
2) The maximum deflection for flat plate is not more than
about one-half the thickness; after analysis in ANSYS the
maximum deflection for every small plate between horizontal
and vertical stiffener spacing is observed and minimum
deflection in respective spacing is subtracted. The answer
should be less than the half of respective plate thickness; if not
corresponding stiffener sizes are increased to attain this
allowable condition.
3) The stresses in wall plates and stiffeners shall not exceed
0.66 times yield strength i.e. 165 MPa.

Figure. 7 Bunker stiffener stresses in allowable range for coal load and self-
weight

Figure. 5 Bunker plate deflection in allowable range for coal load and self-
weight

Figure. 8 Bunker stiffener deflections in allowable range for coal load and self-
weight

Figure. 6 Bunker plate stress in allowable range for coal load and self-weight
V. VALIDATION
The validation of Ansys results is carried out on STAAD Pro
(finite element software). STAAD stands for Structural
Analysis and Design. It is one of the first software applications
in the world made for the purpose of helping the structural

7
IJRMEE | October 2015, Available @ http://www.ijrmee.org
________________________________________________________________________________
International Journal on Recent Technologies in Mechanical and Electrical Engineering (IJRMEE) ISSN: 2349-7947
Volume: 2 Issue: 10 005 - 009
_______________________________________________________________________________________
engineers to automate their work, to eliminate the tedious and
lengthy procedures of the manual methods. It addresses all
aspects of structural engineering analysis, design, verification,
and visualization.

A. STAAD Pro Model Of Bunker

Figure. 11 Live load on the Bunker Wall

Fixed support is assigned to the four side columns of Bunker.

Figure 9 STAAD Pro model of bunker.
The 3D model of Bunker is made using nodes and lines. The
desired properties of beams are then assigned to the structure.
The complete model consists of plate and beam elements.
B. Meshed Model of Bunker
The same boundary conditions are applied as in the ANSYS
15.
C. Live Load and Dead Load
In this case live load and dead load are applied
simultaneously on the bunker wall. It is the critically
loaded condition; the results of stresses and deflection are
shown below.

Fig.10. Meshed Model of Bunker

Meshing of the bunker in STADD Pro is done using

quadrilateral elements. The plate elements are divided into
small elements for getting the more appropriate results.
After meshing the next step is the application of boundary
conditions. Here the live load which consists of coal pressure
is applied on the walls of the bunker in appropriate direction. Fig. 12. Von misses plate stress contour for Load combination of live load and
The Applied pressure is normal to the walls of bunker so the dead load
pressure values are assigned in the local co-ordinate system.

8
IJRMEE | October 2015, Available @ http://www.ijrmee.org
________________________________________________________________________________
International Journal on Recent Technologies in Mechanical and Electrical Engineering (IJRMEE) ISSN: 2349-7947
Volume: 2 Issue: 10 005 - 009
_______________________________________________________________________________________
I would like to thank Azhakusundhareswaran K, B and H
Division, Thermax Ltd, for giving me a good guidance in solid
works software and constant encouragement to carry out my
project work in the division, which helped me in the successful
completion of the project work.
I thank my internal guide Prof. K. M. Narkar, Mechanical
Engineering Department, D. Y. Patil College of Engineering,
pune for his constant encouragement, guidelines and
discussion for completion of the project work.
I thank Dr. P.R. Panchagade, Head of Department, D. Y. Patil
College of Engineering, pune for his constant encouragement,
which led to timely completion of the project work.
Last but not the least, I thank my beloved parents and dear
friends who motivated and supported me in doing this project
work.

REFERENCES
[1] Carson J.W, ―Load Development and Structural
Considerations in Silo Design‖ Jenike and Johnson
Fig. 13. Deflection of beam for load combination of live load and dead load.
incorporated.
[2] Dr. H. Wright & Associates Consulting and Design
TABLE II COMPARISON BETWEEN ANSYS 15 AND STAAD PRO V8I Engineers,‖ Improving the Free Flow Capability of Power
RESULTS FOR BUNKER PLATE Station Coal Bunkers‖, Volume 15, Number 3, July/
September.
Load Combination ANSYS Results STAAD Pro Results [3] Carson J. W and Holmes Tracy, ―Silo Failures: Why Do
Stress Deflection Stress Deflection They Happen?‖ USA, 4th ed., 499–512, July 2003.
(MPa) (mm) (MPa) (mm) [4] Walters, J.K., ―Theoretical analysis of stresses in silos with
Self-weight + Live vertical walls‖, University of Sydney, Australia, March
Load 83.91 2.5233 78.3 3.21
1989.
[5] Qiqiu Zhao, Jofriet, J. C., ―Structural Load on Bunker Silo
TABLE III COMPARISON BETWEEN ANSYS 15 AND STAAD PRO V8I
Walls: Experimental Study‖, Canada, 27 April 1991, 273-
290.
RESULTS FOR BUNKER STIFFENER
[6] Salzano .E, Iervolino .I, ―Seismic risk of atmospheric
Load Combination ANSYS Results STAAD Pro Results
storage tanks in the framework of quantitative risk
Stress Deflection Stress Deflection analysis‖, University of Naples Federico II Napoli, Italy,
(MPa) (mm) (MPa) (mm) Science Direct, 16 (2003) 403–409.
Self-weight + Live [7] J. M. Rotter, T. S. Hull, Wind Loads in Squat Steel Silos
Load
61.12 1.4018 52.2 2.76 during Earthquakes‖, University of Sydney, Australia, July
1988.
[8] IS 2062; Hot rolled medium and high tensile structural
steel- specification; September 2011.
CONCLUSION [9] IS: 9178 (Part I); Criteria for design of steel bins for storage
of bulk materials; Part I-General requirements and
Finite element analysis is done for Bunker using ANSYS assessment of loads; April 2013.
Workbench 15 to check whether the Bunker design is safe [10] IS: 9178 (Part II); Criteria for design of steel bins for
under loading conditions. The results has showed that the storage of bulk materials; Part II- design criteria; April
bunker design is within safe limit of allowable strength of IS 2013.
2062 grade B steel material. Results from STADD Pro v 8i [11] IS: 9178 (Part II); Criteria for design of steel bins for
storage of bulk materials; Part III- bin designed for mass
show reasonable agreement with ANSYS results.
flow and funnel flow; April 2013.
The bunker weight comes out to be 68.534 tons whereas the [12] IS 800; General Construction in Steel- Code of practice;
actual weight of the bunker is 71.071 tons. The weight of December 2007.
bunker is considerably reduced. The total weight reduced
comes out to be 2.537 tons. Cost of one kg of IS 2062 grade B
steel cost 80 INR. This has also reduced the material cost for
bunker as 2.03 lacs INR. Nearly, 3.56 % of weight is reduced.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I wish to express my extreme gratefulness to Mr. Abhay Patil,
Engineering Head of Department, B & H Division, Thermax
Ltd, Pune, for giving me an opportunity to do project in this
prestigious organization and provide a very healthy academic
ambience.
9
IJRMEE | October 2015, Available @ http://www.ijrmee.org
________________________________________________________________________________