The analysis yielded results for multiple silo models, each with varying plate thicknesses. These results were analyzed and presented through graphical representations to illustrate the differences in structural behavior among the different models. Graphs showing the displacement of various points or nodes within the silo structure were created. Graphs displaying reaction forces at the support points of the silo were generated.
The analysis of the structural model reveals notable differences in displacement based on variations in plate thickness. Specifically, the observations indicate that the model with a plate thickness of 0.1 meters exhibits the highest displacement, measuring 65.8 millimeters. Conversely, the model with a plate thickness of 0.5 meters displays the lowest displacement, measuring 59.9 millimeters. This trend suggests a clear inverse relationship between plate thickness and displacement, with thicker plates resulting in reduced displacement. As the thickness of the plate increases, the displacement progressively decreases, indicating greater structural stiffness and resistance to deformation under the applied load.
In the structural analysis of the silo models, the maximum reaction observed was 1027.2 kN, which occurred for the model with the maximum plate thickness of 0.5 meters. This maximum reaction represents the maximum force exerted on the support columns or foundations due to the structural loading and material pressures within the silo.
Conversely, the minimum reaction observed was 366.4 kN, which occurred for the model with the minimum plate thickness of 0.1 meters. This minimum reaction indicates the least force experienced by the support columns or foundations in the analyzed silo configurations. The observed variations in reactions highlight the influence of plate thickness on the structural behavior and load distribution within the silo. As the thickness of the plates increases, the overall stiffness and load-bearing capacity of the silo structure tend to increase, leading to higher reaction forces at the supports. Conversely, thinner plates result in lower stiffness and load-bearing capacity, leading to reduced reaction forces.
The analysis results indicate that the maximum shear plate stress observed in the silo structure is 0.297 N/mm², identified in Model-6, which employs a plate thickness of 0.35 meters. This stress level represents the highest magnitude of shear stress experienced within the silo's plates under the applied loading conditions. It signifies the critical point where the internal forces cause the material to experience significant shearing forces along the plane of the plate.
Conversely, the minimum shear plate stress is recorded as 0.109 N/mm², observed in Model-1, which utilizes a plate thickness of 0.1 meters. This value represents the lowest magnitude of shear stress detected within the silo's plates. The minimal shear stress typically occurs in regions where the plate experiences lower internal forces or where the structural geometry mitigates shear stress concentrations.
In the presented graph, the plate stresses for various models of the silo are analyzed. The primary focus is on comparing the maximum stresses observed in two specific categories: Principal top stress and Tresca top stress. For Model-1, which has a plate thickness of 0.1 meters, the maximum stress values are recorded for both Principal top stress and Tresca top stress. These stress values are higher compared to the other stress components, namely Principal bottom stress, Von Mises top stress, Von Mises bottom stress, and Tresca bottom stress. As the thickness of the plate increases from 0.1 meters to 0.5 meters, a consistent trend is observed: the stresses decrease progressively for all stress components across the different models. This trend suggests that thicker plates contribute to a reduction in stress levels within the silo structure. The decreasing stress levels with increasing plate thickness can be attributed to the enhanced structural robustness provided by thicker plates. Thicker plates offer greater resistance to deformation and distribute loads more effectively, resulting in lower stress concentrations within the silo walls.
The graph illustrates the distribution of various stress components across different models of the silo structure, each characterized by a distinct plate thickness. Among these stress components, membrane stress (SX) is observed to exhibit its maximum value in model-1, where the plate thickness is set to 0.1 meters. This indicates that the silo experiences the highest level of tensile or compressive stress in the X-direction (typically along the length or width of the silo) when the plate thickness is at its minimum.
In contrast, shear stresses (SQX and SQY) and membrane stresses in the Y-direction (SY) and shear-stress XY (SXY) exhibit different trends. These stress components reach their minimum values in model-9, characterized by a plate thickness of 0.5 meters. This suggests that the silo experiences the lowest levels of shear and membrane stresses in the Y-direction and shear stress along the XY plane when the plate thickness is at its maximum.
The analysis of the figure reveals significant insights into the stress distribution within the silo structure. Specifically, the maximum stress is observed at the bottom corner of both the silo beam and column. This indicates that these regions experience the highest levels of stress within the structure. The stress concentration at the bottom corner of the silo beam and column can be attributed to several factors. Firstly, these areas are subjected to higher loads due to the weight of the stored material acting vertically downwards. Additionally, the geometry of the silo, particularly at its corners, can contribute to stress concentrations as the structural elements experience bending and shear forces. In contrast, the stress distribution along the walls of the silo shows less variation. This suggests that the walls are relatively uniform in terms of stress levels, with no localized areas of significantly elevated stress. This uniform stress distribution along the walls is likely due to the distributed nature of the hydrostatic load acting on the entire surface area of the silo walls.