See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265844986

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF DESIGN OF

RECTANGULAR WATER TANKS WITH
REFERENCE TO IS 3370
Conference Paper March 2012

READS

455

1 author:
Er Bharat Bhushan Jindal
MM University Sadopur Ambala
12 PUBLICATIONS 1 CITATION
SEE PROFILE

Available from: Er Bharat Bhushan Jindal

Retrieved on: 28 May 2016

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF DESIGN OF RECTANGULAR WATER

TANKS WITH REFERENCE TO IS 3370
Bharat Bhushan Jindal1*, Ajay Goyal2 and Devinder Sharma3
1,2,3

Department of Civil Engg., Baddi University of Emerging Sciences and Technology,

Makhnumajra, Baddi, District Solan, H.P.-173205, India

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Abstract
Indian Standards has recently revised IS 3370 code of
practice for the design of liquid retaining structures. This
recently revised edition incorporated limit state design
method. IS 3370 -1965 version didnt include the limit state
design method on the pre assumption that liquid retaining
structures should be crack free. However, this edition of
Indian Standards adopts limit state method mainly
considering two aspects. Firstly, it limits the stresses in steel
so that concrete is not over stressed and in the second aspect
it limits the cracking width.
In this study a rectangular water tank of storage capacity of
2500 kl was designed as per IS 3370 -2009 which included
these aspects as well as working stress method. The tank was
chosen as per the guidelines laid down in IS 3370-2009
edition. Water tank was designed as per the working stress
methods of both versions of IS 3370 as well as limit state
design method of IS 3370-2009. The results were then
compared.
It was found that the size of members as well as steel
requirement decreased significantly in limit state of
serviceability design method. However, the requirement of
area of steel increased in the limit state of deemed to satisfy
condition.
Keywords: water tank, limit state design method, IS 3370.

1. Introduction
Liquid storage tanks are commonly used in industries for
storing chemicals, petroleum products, etc. and for
storing water in public water distribution systems.
A reinforced concrete tank is a very useful structure for
the storage of water, sewage sedimentation and for other
similar purposes. Generally three kind of water tanksresting on ground, underground tanks and elevated tanks
are in use. The tanks resting on ground like clear water
reservoirs, settling tanks, aeration tanks etc. are supported
on the ground directly. The walls of these tanks are
subjected to pressure and the base is subjected to weight
of liquid and upward soil pressure. The tanks may be
covered on top.
From design point of view, the tanks may be classified as
per their shape as rectangular tanks, circular tanks, overhead service reservoir (OHSR), and Intz type tank i.e.
OHSR for large capacity. Rectangular tanks are provided
for smaller to moderate capacity. For small capacities,
circular tanks prove uneconomical as the formwork for
*

circular tanks is very costly. The rectangular tanks should

be preferably square in plan from point of view of
economy. It is desirable that longer side should not be
greater than twice the smaller side.
Three methods of design have been adopted so far i.e.
working stress method, ultimate load method and limit
state method. However, ultimate load method has become
obsolete these days.
Limit state design method, though semi-empirical
approach, has been found to be the best for the design of
reinforced concrete structures over the elastic theory of
design where the level of stresses in concrete and steel are
limited so that stress-deformations are taken to be linear.
There are two limit states- limit state of collapse and limit
state of serviceability which includes deflection and
cracking. The structure is first designed under limit state
of collapse and then checked under serviceability.
Because of its superiority over other two methods,
IS 456- 2000 has been thoroughly updated in its fourth
revision in 2000 taking into consideration the rapid
development in the field of concrete technology and
incorporating important aspects like durability etc.
This standard has put greater emphasis to limit state
method of design by presenting it in a full section
(section 5), while the working stress method has been
given in Annex B of the same standard.
Accordingly, structures or structural elements shall
normally be designed by limit state method.
A structure designed with limit state method when fail
occurs, the failure will be in plastic stage and not in
elastic stage. Therefore, the cracking and cracking width
can be significant at the failure stage.
Design Methods for Water Tanks
Working stress method of design, though was accepted in
the earlier times, has several limitations. However, in
situations where limit state method cannot be
conveniently applied, working stress method can be
employed as an alternative. It is expected that in the near
future the working stress method will be completely
replaced by the limit state method. The designer is free to
adopt any of these methods as per cl. 18.2 of IS 456-2000
is still left to the designer.
The liquid retaining structure should have limited
cracking width, this was the main reason why working

Author for correspondence; E-Mail: bbjal1972@hotmail.com, Tel. +91 98 05782318

___________________________________________________________________________
stress method is used and the Indian Standard
IS: 3370 -1965 did not adopt the limit state design
method even after adoption by IS: 456 1978 in other
RCC structures. However, IS 3370 adopted limit state
design method in 2009 with the following advantages limit state design method considers the materials
according to their properties , treats load according to
their nature , the structures also fails mostly under limit
state and not in elastic state and limit state method also
checks for serviceability.
IS 3370-2009 adopts limit state design method with
precautions. It adopts the criteria for limiting crack width
when the structures are designed by considering ultimate
limit state and restricts the stresses to 130 MPa in steel as
per clause 4.4.3.1 so that cracking width is not exceeded
this is considered to be deemed to be satisfy condition.
This precaution ensures cracking width to be less than 0.2
mm i.e. fit for liquid storage. This also specifies clearly
how a liquid storage structure differs with other structures
in which upper limit for crack width is 0.3 mm as per
clause 35.3.2 in IS:456-2000 .
A thorough study of both the versions of IS 3370 reveals
the following four methods of designs:
1. Working stress method in accordance IS 3370 -1965.
2. Working stress method in accordance IS 3370 -2009.
3. Designing by Ultimate Limit State and then checking
cracking width by limit state of serviceability as per
guideline laid down in IS 3370 -2009.
4. Limit state design method by limiting steel stresses in
accordance with IS 3370-2009 and checking cracking
width under serviceability.
2.

3. Limit state design method with crack width

calculations and check in accordance with IS 3370 -2009.
4. Limit state design method deemed to satisfy (limiting
steel stresses) in accordance with IS 3370 -2009.
3.

Results & Discussions

The design parameters and the section designed

component wise has been detailed here as under.
However, the calculations which are well established
which has not discussed here.
Rectangular Water Tank
Roof Slab
Maximum bending moment = 65.25 10 6 kNm

Roof Slab

Thickness
mm

Area of
steel,

Higher grade of steel was not selected, as in liquid

retaining structures permissible stresses in steel are
independent of grade of steel as per clause 4.5.3.2 of
IS 3370 (Part 2 ) 2009. Grade of concrete has been taken
as M30, as minimum grade of concrete for RCC
structures is M30 as per IS 3370 (Part1 ) 2009.

250

154

154

1260

1260

Not
Applicable

Not
Applicable

mm

Columns
Total load = 270 kN

Columns

Area of
Cross
Section

Working Stress
Method
IS 3370IS 33701965
2009

Limit state design

method
Crack
Deemed
Theory
to satisfy

122500

122500

40000

40000

980

980

1206

2387

mm

Area of
steel
mm2

Base Slab
Maximum bending moment = 75.30 kNm

Base
Slab
Thickness
mm

Steel

As per discussion above, the water tank was designed by

the following four design methods.
1. Working stress method in accordance with IS 3370 1965.
2. Working stress method in accordance with
IS 3370 -2009.

Limit state design

method
Crack
Deemed
Theory
to satisfy

250

Objectives Of Study

To analyze the design methods of liquid retaining

structures suggested by IS 3370 both versions so that a
conclusion can be made as to which method is more
reliable and economical for a designer.
To do the comparative study of provisions in IS 3370 1965 and IS 3370 -2009, a ground level water tank was
chosen for moderate capacity. One rectangular tank was
taken in this study. M30 grade of concrete and Fe-415
grade of tor steel was used conforming to the stresses
specified in IS 3370 and IS 456.

Working Stress
Method
IS 3370IS 33701965
2009

mm2

Working Stress
Method

Limit state design

method

IS 33701965

IS 33702009

Crack
Theory

Deemed to
satisfy

230

230

230

230

2790

3220

1950

4137

___________________________________________________________________________
However, the steel requirement is higher in deemed to
satisfy condition in comparison to cracking width check
method due to the limiting of steel stresses to 130 MPa
earlier it was 140 MPa.

Vertical Wall
Bending Moment at base = 91.16 kNm/m
Axial Force at base
= 55 kN/m
Vertical
Wall
Wall
thickness
at bottom

Working Stress
Method
IS 3370IS 33701965
2009

Limit State Design

Method
Crack
Deemed
Theory
to satisfy

520

520

230

230

190

190

180

180

1300

1925

1570

3900

4185

4830

904

4830

mm

Wall
thickness
at mid
height
mm
Steel at
base
mm2

Steel at
mid height
mm2

Comparison of working stress method as per IS 33701965 & IS 3370-2009

The size of members remained same in both the cases.
Steel required has slightly increased while designing by
IS : 3370-2009 provisions.
Comparison of limit state design methods as per IS
3370-2009
Size of members remained same in both the limit state of
collapse as well as deemed to satisfy conditions.
Steel requirement increased in case of deemed to satisfy
condition due to the limiting of steel stresses to 130 MPa
earlier it was 140 MPa.

4.

Conclusions

Based on the results and discussions following

conclusions are arrived at:
1. As per working stress method design of IS 3370 -1965
and IS 3370 -2009, size of members remained same .
However, the requirement of area of steel slightly
increased in IS 3370 -2009 as the allowable stresses in
steel were lower.
2. As per limit state of collapse design method and
deemed to satisfy criteria of IS 3370 -2009 the size of
members remained same.
However, the requirement of area of steel increased in IS
3370 -2009 in deemed to satisfy criteria in comparison to
serviceability as the allowable stresses in steel were
lower.
3. The size of members decreased for limit state design
method by IS: 3370 -2009 in comparison to working
stress design methods of both IS : 3370 -1965 and IS
3370 -2009 .
However, steel requirement increased considerably for
limit state design method in comparison to working stress
methods of both IS 3370 -1965 and IS 3370 -2009 .
4. It was found that the provisions of reinforcement
through the surface zones in IS 3370 -2009 provides
economical and more effective reinforcement.
However, it was also felt that IS 3370-2009 should have
provided direct tensile stress and compressive stress
under bending and limit state.
References
[1] Syal I. C., Goel A.K.,2010. Reinforced Concrete
Structures,4th Revised Edition, S.Chand & Co., New Delhi.

Comparison of working stress method and limit state

design method of IS 3370 both versions

[2] Robert D. Anchor, 1992. Design of Liquid Retaining

Concrete Structures, 2nd edition, British Library

The size of members decreased for limit state design

method by IS 3370 -2009 in comparison to working stress
design methods of both IS 3370 (1965 ) and IS 3370 2009 .
However, steel requirement increased considerably for
limit state design method in comaprison to working stress
methods of both IS 3370 (1965 ) and IS 3370 -2009 .

[3] IS 3370 ( Part I-IV )- 2009, Concrete Structures for the

Storage of Liquids Code of Practice, Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi.

Comparison of limit state design methods of IS 3370

The size of members remained same in both design
methods of limit state method.

[4] IS 3370 ( Part II )- 1965, Code of Practice for Concrete

Structures for the Storage of Liquids, Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi.
[5] IS 456 -2000, Plain and Reinforced Concrete - Code of
Practice , Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.