Seismic Design of Coker Structures using ASCE 7-05

2007 ASCE Standard for Seismic Design of Petrochemical Facilities

D. S. (Stan) Martin P.E. Bechtel Corporation Oil, Gas, and Chemicals Global Business Unit Houston, Texas

Seismic Design of Coker Structures

Growth trend in U.S. and worldwide for Coker projects due to shifting crude oil supply patterns Refineries are processing more high sulfur/ low quality crude oil Delayed Coking process converts the heavy bottom of the barrel components into solid coal-like fuel Coke is used for Power Generation, Cement production (Kiln fuel), Exports

Seismic Design of Coker Structures

Bechtel Corporation has been active in recent growth of Delayed Coking Entered Alliance with Conoco in 1994 as exclusive agent for marketing and licensing its process technology for delayed coking Recent projects in which seismic loading controlled design of the coker structure
Client Conoco_Phillips PetroCanada Location Borger, TX Edmonton, Alberta, Canada St. Croix, USVI Billings, MT Code ASCE 7-98 NBC (Canada) 1995 Seismic Criteria SDC B Zone 1

HOVENSA Conoco

UBC-97 UBC-88

Zone 4 Zone 2B

Seismic Design of Coker Structures

Steel Drilling Structure

Coke Drums (in Pairs)

Concrete Table-Top

Foundation Mat / Pit

Seismic Design of Coker Structures

Coke Drums Diameter: 23-6 Base Ring to Upper Seam: 80-0 Operating Wt (Pair): 4112 kips % of Seismic Mass: 19.5% Table-Top Structure 6 Columns w. 8-0x 8-0 Cross Section Column Grid: 1 N-S Bay @ 37-0 2 E-W Bays @36-0 Top Level: 7-0 Thick Slab Intermediate Level: 4-0 Thick Slab with 8 wide x 7 deep beams on Col lines Lower Level: 8wide x 7 deep beams on Col lines Self Wt: 14213 kips % of Seismic Mass: 67%

El 77-0 El 57-9 El 27-0

El 0-0

EXAMPLE PROBLEM FOR UPDATED ASCE SEISMIC GUIDELINES FOR PETROCHEMICAL FACILITIES

Seismic Design of Coker Structures

Seismic Design Criteria for Example
Site Class C (Assumed Soil Properties, Chap 20) SDS (0.2 sec) = .51g (Section 11.4) SD1 (1.0 sec) = .20g (Section 11.4) Occupancy Category III (Table 1.1) Importance Factor 1.25 (Table11.5.1) Seismic Design Category D (Tables 11.6-1 &
11.6.2)

Seismic Design of Coker Structures

Seismic Analysis and Design Step 1 - Determine the Fundamental Period of the Structural System
Coupled Model, Fixed Base Concrete Sections Cracked Drums Modeled as Linear Elements Steel Modeled as Weight at Support Points

TN-S: 0.74 seconds TE-W: 0.69 seconds

Seismic Design of Coker Structures

Seismic Analysis and Design Step 2 Select the Analysis Procedure
Permitted Analytical Procedures listed in Table 12.6-1 Period less than 3.5 Ts (1.37 sec) Coker Table Top contains Vertical Stiffness (Type 1) and Mass (Type 2) Irregularities as defined in Table 12.3.2

Equivalent Lateral Force Analysis is not permitted. Modal Response Spectrum Analysis is chosen

Seismic Design of Coker Structures

Seismic Analysis and Design Step 3 Develop the Design Response Spectrum (Section 11.4.5)
Coker Example Response Spectrum 0.60
Accel eration (g)

0.50 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 Seconds 4.00 5.00 6.00

Seismic Design of Coker Structures

Seismic Analysis and Design Step 4 Prepare the Analytical Model
(Sections 12.7 and 15.3)

Seismic Design of Coker Structures

Seismic Analysis and Design

Step 5 Process the Dynamic Model

Mode No. 1 Freq (Hz) 1.348 Period (Sec) 0.742 X-Spectrum % Participation Y-Spectrum % Participation 84.74

1.443

0.693

85.58

2.983

0.335

3.74

3.088

0.324

3.02

8.475

0.118

6.34

10

8.731

0.115

6.39

TOTALS

94.99

94.82

Mode Shape 1 8 6

Seismic Design of Coker Structures

Seismic Analysis and Design

Step 6 Response Spectrum Analysis

Ensure 90% of mass participating Combine internal modal forces from design response spectrum using SRSS or CQC Check base shear for need to scale results upward
Direction N-S E-W Coupled Analysis RSA (V) 5296 k 5710 k ELF (V) 6186 k 6623 k RSA/ELFS (Base Case) 0.86 0.86 Scaling Required? no no

Seismic Design of Coker Structures

Seismic Analysis and Design

Step 7 Select a Structural System for the Concrete Table Top (1of 3)
Considered a NBS similar to Buildings Available systems listed in Table 15.4-1
For SDC D, the following moment frame systems are permitted;
Lateral Force Resisting System Ordinary Reinforced Concrete Moment Frame (OMF) Intermediate Reinforced Concrete Moment Frame (IMF) Intermediate Reinforced Concrete Moment Frame (IMF) Special Reinforced Concrete Moment Frame (SMF) R 0.8 0.8 3.0 8.0 Height Limitations 50 ft No limit 50 ft (Discussion Follows) No limit Detailing Requirements ACI 318, excluding Chapter 21 ACI 318, including Chapter 21 ACI 318, including Chapter 21 ACI 318, including Chapter 21 ASCE 7 Section 14.2.2.6

Seismic Design of Coker Structures

Step 7 Select a Structural System for the Concrete Table Top (2 of 3)
SMF (R=8) not recommended
Damage to structure, equipment and piping systems from even moderate Seismic Event could affect plant operations Structure likely to maintain a significant degree of original stiffness after reinforcement yielding due to massive member proportions. This could result in serious under-design and disguise approach of push-over limit

IMF (R=0.8 when Ht>50ft)

Cost Penalty for Overdesign and Detailing Seismic loads in higher design categories will control member sizes and pile on even more seismic mass

Seismic Design of Coker Structures

Step 7 Select a Structural System for the Concrete Table Top (3 of 3)
SDC Structural System (Recommended) OMF R Detailing Requirements Exclude ACI Chapter 21

A&B

C
D, E, F All

IMF
IMF ** Coke Drums

3
3 3

Include ACI Chapter 21

Include ACI Chapter 21 Welded steel with special detailing

** Outside of current ASCE Ht Limitation of 50 ft. Task Committee believes OK for oversize petrochemical structures, but requires comprehensive analysis and approval of Owner and permitting authority

Seismic Design of Coker Structures

Seismic Analysis and Design

Step 8 Develop Load Combinations

DL(1.2) + LL(1.0) + EL(1.0) DL (.9) + E(1.0) EL includes
100% primary direction lateral load 30% perpendicular direction lateral load 20% of DL x SDS in vertical direction Accidental Torsion Redundancy Factor of 1.3 applied to lateral loads

Seismic Design of Coker Structures

Seismic Analysis and Design

Step 9 Post Processing (1 of 2)

Drift in Concrete Table-Top
Level Max Computed Story Drift N-S 73.5 - 54.25 0.83 E-W 0.68 Allowable Story Drift (per Table 12.12.1) 2.66

54.25 - 23.5
23.5 0

2.30
1.32

1.99
1.20

4.26
3.25

Seismic Design of Coker Structures

Seismic Analysis and Design

Step 9 Post Processing (2 of 2)

Member Forces and Capacities

Bending Check at Elev 73.5

E-W Moment in Slab at Elev 73.5

Seismic Design of Coker Structures

Seismic Analysis and Design

Step 10 Develop Design Details

#4 TIE SETS SPACED @ 11" (TYP) 7 TIES PER SET 2" 18-11's 2-11's EXTEND COLUMN TRANSVERSE REINFORCEMENT TO TOP OF JOINT
7'-0"

8'-0"

2-11's 2-11's 2-11's 18-11's

#4 TIE SETS SPACED @ 11"

NO LAP SPLICES IN N-S BEAM SPAN LAP SPLICE E-W BEAM AT MIDSPAN (2 LOCATIONS)

BEAM CROSS SECTION

8'-0"

68 - #11 BARS

DETAIL AT TOP OF COLUMNS

8'-0"

#4 TIES

COLUMN CROSS SECTION

Seismic Design of Coker Structures

Step 11 Design Nonbuilding Structures supported by the Table-Top
Coke Drums
Seismic loading from the RSA of the combined model R=3 for skirt-supported elevated vessels provided special detailing requirements met Loads usable for drum design and anchorage to table-top

Steel Drilling Structure

Seismic loading (Fp) from Chapter 13 Design as Ordinary Concentrically Braced Frame with R=1.5 OCBF does not have height limitations or detailing requirements Higher seismic loading typically not problem as wind governs design

Seismic Design of Coker Structures

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS