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

net/publication/313125580

Analysis of External Water Pressure for a Tunnel in Fractured Rocks

Article  in  Geofluids · January 2017

DOI: 10.1155/2017/8618613

CITATIONS READS
3 81

4 authors, including:

Yong Huang Ding Zhou

Hohai University Nanjing Tech University
31 PUBLICATIONS   98 CITATIONS    162 PUBLICATIONS   2,042 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Human-structure interaction View project

Liquid-structure interacion View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ding Zhou on 29 May 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Meccanica
Weakly Nonlinear Sloshing of Liquid in Rigid Cylindrical Container with a Rigid Annular
Baffle: Lateral Excitation
--Manuscript Draft--

Manuscript Number: MECC-D-16-00415R2

Full Title: Weakly Nonlinear Sloshing of Liquid in Rigid Cylindrical Container with a Rigid Annular
Baffle: Lateral Excitation

Article Type: Original papers

Section/Category: General

Keywords: cylindrical container; baffle; lateral excitation; nonlinear response; multi-modal

method

Corresponding Author: Ding Zhou, PhD

Nanjing Tech University
Nanjing, Jiangsu CHINA

Corresponding Author Secondary

Information:

Corresponding Author's Institution: Nanjing Tech University

Corresponding Author's Secondary

Institution:

First Author: Jiadong Wang, PhD

First Author Secondary Information:

Order of Authors: Jiadong Wang, PhD

S.H. Lo, PhD

Ding Zhou, PhD

Yun Dong

Order of Authors Secondary Information:

Funding Information: National Natural Science Foundation of Dr Ding Zhou

China
(11172123, 11372127)
Research Grant Council of the Hong Kong Professor S.H. Lo
Special Administration Region, China
(HKU715110E)
the Jiangsu Natural Science Fund Dr Jiadong Wang
Projects
(BK20130479, BK20160482)

Abstract: Weakly nonlinear response of liquid partially-filled in a rigid cylindrical container with a
rigid annular baffle subjected to lateral excitation is studied. A semi-analytical approach
is presented to determine the natural frequencies and modes of liquid sloshing in the
cylinder. By introducing the generalized time-dependent coordinates, the surface wave
height and the velocity potential are expressed in terms of the natural modes of liquid
sloshing. Based on the Bateman-Luke variational principle, the infinite dimensional
modal system, which is the complete analog of the nonlinear response, is given by the
variational procedure. The infinite dimensional modal system is reduced by using the
Moiseev asymptotic relations. According to the Lukovsky's formula, the resultant
hydrodynamic force and moment of the liquid pressure acting on the container mainly
depend on the position vector of the mass center of the liquid. Expanding the integral
about the weighted position coordinates into the Taylor series about the surface wave
height at the unperturbed free surface gives the formula of the position vector of the
mass centre, which depends only on the generalized time-dependent coordinates.
Excellent agreements have been achieved by comparing the present solutions with
those obtained from the Gavrilyuk's solution, SPH solution and experimental results.

Powered by Editorial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Systems Corporation
 Finally, the surface wave height, resultant hydrodynamic force and hydrodynamic
moment for a container subjected to harmonic lateral excitation are discussed in detail.

Response to Reviewers: The authors want to express their thanks to reviewers for the valuable comments. All
the modifications are given in red words in the revised version. A point-to-point
response is given as follows.

Response to Reviewer #1

Reviewer #1: The manuscript has been improved. There are some suggestions for
improving it again:
1. The contributions of this paper is also unclear. The reviewer cannot understand the
contributions from the pages 3-4. The infinite dimensional modal system, and reduced
to a finite dimensional modal system both derived from the Faltinsen.
Response: The last section of the introduction has been rewritten. A clear description
to the contributions of this paper has been given. The existed researches are restricted
to sloshing of liquid in container or free sloshing of liquid in baffled container. In the
present study, the complete analog of the weakly nonlinear response of liquid in a
baffled container subjected to lateral harmonic and seismic excitations is performed.
Please see Page 3 and Page 4.

2. Comparison with ABAQUS is weak. The experimental verification is necessary in the

field of Mechatronics. Simulation is only some ideal condition, not real. Many methods
is good on the ideal condition but bad on the real word, just because it is not real.
Response: The free surface wave heights obtained from present method are compared
with the experiment ones reported by Hosseinzadeh. A good agreement is achieved.
Please see Page 11 and Page 12.

3. Comparing nonlinear slosh model with linear one is not good. The reviewer think
comparing with the experiments is better.
Response: The aim of comparing nonlinear sloshing response with the linear one is to
reveal the effects of baffle parameters (position, inner radius) and the excitation
parameters (amplitude, frequency) on the nonlinearity of liquid response. In order to
verify the multi-modal system under the seismic excitation, the free surface wave
heights obtained from the present method have been compared with the experiment
ones reported by Hosseinzadeh. Please see Pages 11-15.

4. In conclusion, " 1. The present method can effectively solve the weakly nonlinear
response of liquid in tank " The method was presented by Faltinsen. The other two
observations are not unusual.
Response: The conclusion has been verified. Please see Page 15.

Response to Reviewer #2

Reviewer #2: The authors had tried to amend their text according to the comments
given in the previous reviewer's report. The authors have partially replied the
comments given before. However, they did not enhance the physics description of the
phenomena obtained in their study. The paper is still not acceptable in the current
presentation and following comments are given for the authors to have a better
presentation especially the results part.

1. The nonlinear effects will be generated depending on the exciting displacement,

exciting frequency and water depth in the tank. The authors should add more
simulations with different exciting displacements (small to larger) and frequencies (near
resonant frequency).
Response: More simulations with different exciting displacements and frequencies
have been added. Please see Pages 14 and 15.

2. The authors might like to study the shift of the fundamental frequency by adding the
annular baffle and the effects of position and inner radius of the annular baffle on the
shift of the resonant frequency.
Response: The surface wave height, resultant hydrodynamic force and moment with
respect to the amplitude and frequency of the excitation have been discussed in detail.
Please see Pages 14 and 15.

Powered by Editorial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Systems Corporation
 3. Besides, I have given the comments that the results presented in the text are too few
to see the contribution of the paper and asked the authors to add more discussions in
the paper. I did not find solid improvement yet.
Response: Part of the presentation for results has been rewritten and more
discussions are added. Please see Pages 12-15. In order to explain the variations of
the resultant hydrodynamic force and moment with respect to the parameters of the
baffle, the resultant forces and resultant moments from the liquid below/above the
baffle are given in Tables 1-4.

Powered by Editorial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Systems Corporation
Manuscript Click here to download Manuscript Nonlinear
response(revised_new_6).doc
Click here to view linked References

Weakly Nonlinear Sloshing of Liquid in Rigid Cylindrical

1
2 Container with a Rigid Annular Baffle: Lateral Excitation
3
Jiadong Wang1, 2, Sai Huen Lo3, Ding Zhou1,4,, Yun Dong4
4
5 1
College of Civil Engineering, Nanjing Tech University, Nanjing 211816, China
6 2
Faculty of Civil Engineering and Mechanics, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang 212013, China
7
3
8 Department of Civil Engineering, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, China
9 4
Faculty of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Huaiyin Institute of Technology, Huaian 223300,
10
11 China
12 ABSTRACT: Weakly nonlinear response of liquid partially-filled in a rigid
13
14
15
cylindrical container with a rigid annular baffle subjected to lateral excitation is
16
17
studied. A semi-analytical approach is presented to determine the natural frequencies
18
19 and modes of liquid sloshing in the cylinder. By introducing the generalized
20
21 time-dependent coordinates, the surface wave height and the velocity potential are
22
23 expressed in terms of the natural modes of liquid sloshing. Based on the
24
25 Bateman-Luke variational principle, the infinite dimensional modal system, which is
26
27 the complete analog of the nonlinear response, is given by the variational procedure.
28
29 The infinite dimensional modal system is reduced by using the Moiseev asymptotic
30
31 relations. According to the Lukovsky’s formula, the resultant hydrodynamic force and
32
33 moment of the liquid pressure acting on the container mainly depend on the position
34
35 vector of the mass center of the liquid. Expanding the integral about the weighted
36
37 position coordinates into the Taylor series about the surface wave height at the
38
39 unperturbed free surface gives the formula of the position vector of the mass centre,
40
41 which depends only on the generalized time-dependent coordinates. Excellent
42
43 agreements have been achieved by comparing the present solutions with those
44
45
obtained from the Gavrilyuk’s solution, SPH solution and experimental results.
46
47
48
Finally, the surface wave height, resultant hydrodynamic force and hydrodynamic
49
50 moment for a container subjected to harmonic lateral excitation are discussed in
51
52 detail.
53
54 Keywords: cylindrical container; baffle; lateral excitation; nonlinear response;
55
56 multi-modal method
57
58
59
60  Corresponding author, e-mail: dingzhou57@yahoo.com
61 1
62
63
64
65
 1 Introduction
2
3 Liquid sloshing can cause a serious problem in liquid container subjected to lateral
4
5 excitation. For instance, the failure of the floating roof and the fire of the oil storage
6
7 containers due to liquid sloshing were observed in some earthquake disasters [1]. As
8
9 is well known, the baffle mounted in a partially liquid-filled container could provide
10
11 the energy dissipation of the liquid [2], which reduce the sloshing amplitude. As a
12
13
14
fringe benefit, the baffles could enhance the stiffness of the container.
15
16 Subjected to excitations, the linear dynamic response of liquid in a container
17
18 equipped with baffles was investigated. Abramson [3] conducted some experiments to
19
20 study the response of the liquid in a baffled fuel container, which is subjected to
21
22 pitching and lateral excitations, respectively. Using the boundary element method,
23
24 Gedikli and Ergüven [4] simulated the seismic response of the rigid liquid-filled
25
26 container with an annular baffle. Isaacson and Premasiri [5] studied the dynamic
27
28 damping due to baffles in a liquid-filled rectangular container or reservoir undergoing
29
30 horizontal excitation. Using the finite element method, Biswal et al. [6] studied the
31
32 effect of an annular baffle on the dynamic response of a partially liquid-filled
33
34 cylindrical container. Based on the velocity potential formulation and linearization
35
36 theory, Goudarzi et al. [7] developed an analytical model to estimate the dynamic
37
38 damping ratio of liquid sloshing due to baffles in a liquid-filled rectangular container
39
40 subjected to lateral excitation. Wang et al. [8, 9] developed a semi-analytical method
41
42 to solve the natural frequencies and modes of the liquid sloshing in the cylindrical
43
44
45
container with single or multiple baffles. Based on the natural frequencies and modes
46
47
obtained, the linear dynamic response of the liquid in a baffled container subjected to
48
49 lateral excitation was analyzed [10, 11].
50
51 Generally, the nonlinear sloshing problems of liquid are described by the
52
53 Navier-Stokes equations and the dynamic and kinematic conditions on free surface
54
55 [12]. The problems are usually solved by the numerical methods [13-15]. Wu et al.
56
57 [16] developed a time-independent finite difference scheme with fictitious cell
58
59 technique to investigate viscous liquid sloshing in two-dimensional containers with
60
61 2
62
63
64
65
 baffles. However, this description creates some mathematical and computational
1
2
3
difficulties. Due to these difficulties, a lot of researchers are interested in using the
4
5
potential principle as described by Zhou et al. [17].
6
7 Based on the potential formulations, there are two different approaches to analyze
8
9 the nonlinear problems of liquid sloshing. The first approach is the numerical method
10
11 [18, 19]. Hugo et al. [20] developed a numerical method to investigate the sloshing
12
13 response of cylindrical containers subjected to earthquake ground motion. Cho and
14
15 Lee [21], and Cho et al. [22] simulated the large amplitude liquid sloshing in
16
17 two-dimensional baffled rectangular container subjected to lateral excitation. Using
18
19 the finite element method, Biswal et al. [23] studied the two-dimensional nonlinear
20
21 sloshing in both rectangular and cylindrical containers equipped with rigid baffles.
22
23 The second approach is the multi-modal method. Namely, the free surface and
24
25 velocity potential are expressed in terms of the generalized Fourier expansion.
26
27 Substituting the modal modeling into the original free boundary equations or the
28
29 equivalent variational formulation yields an infinite dimensional modal system. The
30
31 multi-modal method is an efficient and precising approach as the nonlinear partial
32
33
34
differential equations can be converted to ordinary differential equations in the time
35
36
domain. The Modeling of nonlinear slosh first comes from the study of Faltinsen et al.
37
38 [24]. They developed the general form of the infinite dimensional modal system for
39
40 the nonlinear sloshing of liquid in a three-dimensional container. The multi-modal
41
42 method can be classified into two main branches: (1) asymptotic modal method; (2)
43
44 Lukovsky-Miles variational multi-modal method based on the Moiseev asymptotic
45
46 relations. Using the asymptotic modal method, Gavrilyuk et al. [25] investigated the
47
48 nonlinear resonant sloshing of liquid in a rigid circular cylindrical container with a
49
50 rigid annular baffle. Using the variational multi-modal method, Moreover, Faltinsen
51
52 and Timokha [26, 27] reduced the infinite dimensional modal system for the nonlinear
53
54 sloshing of liquid in a two-dimensional rectangular container to a finite dimensional
55
56 asymptotic model system. Following this method, Lukovsky et al. [28] investigated
57
58 the nonlinear sloshing of liquid in a rigid upright circular cylindrical container. It
59
60 should be mentioned that the research on the multi-modal system of containers
61 3
62
63
64
65
 equipped with baffles is insufficient. Based on the Bateman-Luke variational principle,
1
2
3
Zhou et al. [17] extended the multi-modal method [24] to the free sloshing of liquid in
4
5
stationary cylindrical container equipped with a rigid baffle. In the present study, the
6
7 complete analog of the weakly nonlinear response of liquid in a baffled container
8
9 subjected to lateral harmonic and seismic excitations is further performed. Excellent
10
11 agreements have been achieved by comparing the present results with Gavrilyuk’s
12
13 solution [25], the SPH (Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics) solution and the
14
15 experiment results reported by Hosseinzadeh et al. [30]. Expanding the integral
16
17 concerned with the weighted position coordinates into the Taylor series about the
18
19 surface wave height, the formulae of the resultant hydrodynamic force and moment of
20
21 liquid pressure acting on the baffled container are derived. The effects of baffle
22
23 parameters and the excitation amplitude on the nonlinear dynamic responses (surface
24
25 wave height, resultant force and resultant moment) are discussed in detail.
26
27
28 Multi-modal Method
29
30 A rigid cylindrical container with a thin rigid annular baffle, which is partially filled
31
32 with inviscid, incompressible and irrotational liquid, is depicted in Figure 1 where
33
34 Oxyz  is the absolute coordinate system and Or z is the relative cylindrical
35
36
37 coordinate system fixed at the container. The origin of Or z is located at the center
38
39 of the bottom of the container and z axis is orthogonal to the bottom of the container.
40
41 The inner radius of the container is r2 and the inner radius of the baffle is r1. z1 , and
42
43
44 z2 denote respectively the positions of the baffle and the unperturbed (hydrostatic)
45
46
47
free surface. The thickness of the baffle is very small compared with the inner radius
48
49 of the container. The density of the liquid is  . The time-dependent liquid domain
50
51
52  is bounded by the free surface  , the wet container wall Sw , the container
53
54 bottom S b and the baffle surface S p . The potential formulation of the nonlinear
55
56
57 sloshing problem is given as follows [17]:
58
59   0 in  (t ) . (1)
60
61 4
62
63
64
65
 f
1  v 0  n  ω   r  n  on Sb  S p  Sw , (2)
2
n

 v 0  n  ω   r  n    1   on  ,
3 2
(3)
4 n
  
5
6      v 0  ω  r   g   r0  r   0 on  , (4)
7 t 2
8
9  (t ) d  const . (5)
10
11
12 z   (r , , t ) t 0  0 (r , ) ,  (r , , z, t ) t 0  0 (r , , z ) , (6)
13
14 where n is the outer normal of the boundary of the liquid domain  ,
15
z   (r , , t )  z2 is the time-dependent shape equation of the free surface  , v 0 is
16
17
18
19 the translation velocity vector of the origin O related to the co-ordinate system
20
21 Oxyz  , ω is the angular velocity vector of the container, r is the position vector
22
23
24 with respect to O , r0 is the position vector of the point O with respect to O , r
25
26
27 is the position vector with respect to O , g is the gravity acceleration vector and
28
29 equation (6) denotes the initial conditions. In the cylindrical coordinate system Or z ,
30
31 the unit vectors co-directional with the longitudinal axis (   0 ) and the z-axis ( Oz )
32
33
34 are e1 and e3 , respectively. The unit vectors e2 is given by e2  e1  e3 . Then, the
35
36 vectors in equations (1)-(6) can be written as
37
38
39
r  r1e1  r2e2  r3e3 , ω  1e1  2e2  3e3 , v0  v01e1  v02e2  v03e3 ,
40
41 v0  v01e1  v02e2  v03e3
42 . (7)
43
44 When no overturning wave occurs, the continuum problem is reduced to a discrete
45
46 conservative mechanical system with infinite degrees of freedom [24]. This implies
47
48 that the free surface and velocity potential can be expressed as:
49
50  
51   r , , t     p  t  p  r ,  ,   v0  r  ω  Θ+ Rq  t  q  r , , z  . (8)
52 p 1 q 1
53
54 where the vector function Θ denotes the Stokes-Zhukovsky potential, which was
55
56 defined in the literature [17],  p (t ) and Rq (t ) are the generalized coordinates, the
57
58
59 set { p ( r ,  )} is a Fourier basis on the unperturbed free surface and the set
60
61 5
62
63
64
65
 1 { q (r, , z)} should be complete in the unperturbed liquid domain. The variational
2
3 procedure gives the generalized form of the infinite dimensional modal system [17],
4
5 which is the complete analog of the original free-boundary problem given by
6
7 equations (1)-(6) as follows:
8
9 dAq 
10   Rq Aqq  0 , (9)
11 dt q1
12
13  Aq   Aqq I 21 I 22 I 23 I 31
14
15   Rq  
 p
Rq Rq  1
 p
 2
 p
 3
 p
 1
 p

q 1 p q 1 q1
16
17
I 32 I 33 d I 31 I I  I
 2 32  3 33    v01   2 v03   3 v02  g1  11 
18
2  3   1
19  p  p dt   p  p 
 p   p
20
21
I12 I13
22
 v02   3 v01   1 v03  g 2    v03   1 v02   2 v01  g3  
23  p  p
24
25
26 12 J11 22 J 22 32 J 33 J J J
27    12 12  13 13  23 23  0 . (10)
28 2  p 2  p 2  p  p  p  p
29
30 in which, I1 , I 2 , I 3 , Aq and Aqq are the integrals over the time-dependent
31
32
33 domain  (t ) and only depend on  p and  p . Their explicit formulations are
34
35
36
given by Zhou et al. [17]. For the forced sloshing of liquid along the longitudinal axis
37
38 (   0 ), equation (10) can be rewritten as:
39
 Aq   Aqq I11 I
40
41   Rq  
 p
Rq Rq 
 p
x(t )+g 13 =0 .
 p
(11)
q 1 p q 1 q1
42
43
44 The mode shapes of the linear sloshing solutions are { q (r , , z)} . According to the
45
46
47
Moiseev asymptotic relations [17], we have
48
49 1  11 cos  , 1  11 sin  ,  3   01 ,  4   21 cos 2 ,  5   21 sin 2 ,
50
51
52
1  11 z  z cos , 2  11 z  z sin  , 3  01 z  z , 4   21 z  z cos 2 ,
2 2 2 2
53
54 5  21 z  z sin 2 . (12)
55 2

56
57 in which,  mn (m=0,1,2; n=1) are the mode shapes of liquid sloshing and can be
58
59
60 obtained by the semi-analytical approach, which was developed by Wang et al. [8, 9].
61 6
62
63
64
65
 In the following study, the perturbation parameter  is introduced, which denotes
1
2
3
the ratio of the excitation amplitude and the inner radius of the container. The
4
5 higher-order terms than O ( ) will be neglected in the perturbation procedure, which
6
7 means the perturbation parameter  should be very small, i.e. the weakly nonlinear
8
9 analysis is considered. Substituting equation (8) into equations (9) and (11) and
10
11
12 keeping terms up to O ( ) , one has the following asymptotic modal system:
13
14
15 
1  12 1  K1 112  112  1 22  1 2  2  
16
17
18
   
K 2 1 22  21 2  2  1 22  1 2  2  K3 1 4  1 4   2 5   2 5 
19
20    
K 4 1 4   2 5  K5 13  13  K 6 13  x  t  r23 3  0 , (13)
21
22
23 
 2  12  2  K1  2  22   2  22   2 12  1 2 1  
24
25
26    
K 2  2 12  21 2  2  2 2 12  1 2 1  K3 15  15   2  4   2  4 
27
28
29
   
K 4  2  4  15  K5  2 3   2 3  K6  2 3  0 , (14)

 
3   02 3  K8 12   22  K10  11   2  2   0 ,
30
31 (15)
32
33
34  
4   22  4  K7  22  12  K9   2  2  11   0 , (16)
35
36 5   22 5  2 K 7 1 2  K9   2 1  1 2   0 , (17)
37
38
39 in which, the explicit expressions of K i (i=1,…,9) have been given by [17].
40
41
42
43
Resultant Hydrodynamic Force and Moment
44
45
The liquid velocity potential in each sub-domain has the continuous boundary
46
47 conditions of class C1 . The liquid domain with single baffle can be divided into 4
48
49
50 sub-domains ( 1 ,  2 ,  3 ,  4 ) with 3 artificial interfaces (  1 ,  2 ,  3 ) as shown in
51
52 Figure 2, namely,
53
54  (r , , z, t ), (r , , z)  i (i  1, 2)
55  (r ,  , z, t )   i . (18)
56 i (r , , z, t ), (r , , z)  i (i  3, 4)
57
Obviously, i ( i  1, 2 ),  k ( k  1, 2 ) are time-independent; i ( i  3, 4 ) and
58
59
60
61 7
62
63
64
65
 1  k ( k  3 ) are time-dependent (It should be noted that  3 and  4 have the free
2
3 surfaces  1 and  2 , respectively.). As shown in Figure 3, the unperturbed
4
5
6 (hydrostatic) liquid domain  can also be divided into 4 sub-domains
7
8 ( i , i  1, 2,3, 4 ) with three artificial interfaces (  k , k  1, 2,3 ), namely:
9
10
11  mn  r , z    mn
i
 r , z  (r , , z )  i , (19)
12
13
14 in which,  3 and  4 have the unperturbed free surfaces  1 and  2 ,
15
16 respectively. The resultant hydrodynamic force of the liquid pressure acting on the
17
18 container can be obtained by the formula [29]:
19
F  M l g  M l  v 0  ω  v 0  ω   ω  rC   ω  rC  2ω  rC  rC  ,
20
21 (20)
22
23 in which, M l is the liquid mass, rC is the position vector with respect to the mass
24
25
26 center of the liquid in the relative cylindrical coordinate system Or z . The container
27
28 is subjected to the lateral ground movement, and the formula derived by Lukovsky
29
30 [29] can be rewritten as:
31
32 F  M l g  M l  v0  rC  . (21)
33
34
35 The hydrodynamic moment about the origin O due to the liquid pressure acting on
36
37 the container can be obtained [29]:
38
39 MO  M l rC   g  v0  . (22)
40
41
42 In the cylindrical coordinate system Or z , the vectors in equations (21) and (22) can
43
44 be represented as:
45
46 F  F1e1  F2e2  F3e3 , M  M O1e1  M O 2e2  M O3e3 , g  g1e1  g2e2  g3e3 ,
47
48
49 rC  rC1e1  rC2e2  rC3e3 , (23)
50
51
52 in which, F , M O , g and rC (   1, 2,3 ) are the projections of the vectors on
53
54 the unit vectors e1 , e2 , e3 , respectively. According to equations (21) and (22), we
55
56
57 have
58
59
60

F  M l g  M l v0  rC .  (24)
61 8
62
63
64
65
 1 M O1  M l rC2  g3  v03   rC3  g 2  v02   , M O 2  M l  rC3  g1  v01   rC1  g3  v03  ,
2
3 M O3  M l  rC1  g 2  v02   rC2  g1  v01  . (25)
4
5
6 The mass center of the liquid is the unique point in the liquid domain with the
7
8 property that the summation of the weighted position vectors relative to this point is
9
10 zero. Hence, the position vector rC of the mass center satisfies
11
12
13 rC  l  rdv M l . (26)
14 
15
16 From equation (24), one obtains
17
 2 4 
rC     r dv    r dv  V ,
18
(27)
 i 1 i i
19
20 i 3 
21
22 in which, V denotes the volume of the liquid. If the surface wave height is small
23
24 compared to the inner radius of the container, the integrals over i can be expanded
25
26
27 into the Taylor series about the surface wave height at the unperturbed (hydrostatic)
28
29 free surface ( z  z2 ). The Taylor expansions for rC (   1, 2,3 ) can be written as
30
31
 4 4 
32 rC1     r1dv     r cos  ds  V , (28)
33
34
 i 1 i 
i 3 i  2 
35
 4 4 
36
rC2     r2dv     r sin  ds  V , (29)
 i 1 i 
37
38 i 3 i  2 
39
 4 1 4 
rC3     r3dv     2ds  V .
40
41 (30)
42  i 1 i 2 i 3  i  2 
43
44 Substituting equations (8) and (12) into equations (28)-(30) gives
45
113  r , z2  r 2dr   114  r , z2  r 2dr
46 r1 r2
47 0
rC1  1
r1
48 , (31)
49 z2 r22
50
51
0 11  r, z2  r dr  r 11  r, z2  r dr ,
r1 3 2 r2 4 2
52
53 rC2  2 1
(32)
54 z2 r22
55
56

   r , z2     r , z2  
57 r1 2 r2 2
3
rdr   4
rdr
 
58 11 11
rC3  12   22 
0 r1
59 2
60 2 z2 r2
61 9
62
63
64
65
    r , z2     r , z2  
r1 2 r2 2
1 3
01 rdr   4
01 rdr
32 
2 0 r1
3 z2 r22
4
5

   r , z2     r , z2  
6 r1 2 r2 2
3
rdr   4
rdr
 
7 21 21 z2
42  52 
0 r1
8 2
. (33)
9 2 z2 r2 2
10
11
12 Taking the second derivative of rC , we can obtain:
13
14
0 11  r, z2  r dr  r 11  r, z2  r dr ,
r1 3 2 r2 4 2
15
16 rC1  1 1
(34)
17 z2 r22
18
19
113  r , z2  r 2dr   114  r , z2  r 2dr
r1 r2
0
20
21
rC2  2
r1
22 , (35)
23 z2 r22
24

0 11  r, z2     r , z2  
25 r1 2 r2 2
26 3
rdr   4
rdr
 
11
rC3  12  11   22   2  2 
27 r1
28 z2 r22
29
30

   r , z2     r , z2  
r1 2 r2 2
rdr  
31 3 4
rdr
 
32 01 01
2 32  3 3 
0 r1
33
34 z2 r22
35

0  21  r, z2     r , z2  
36 r1 2 r2 2
37 3
rdr   4
rdr
  z2
21
42  4 4  52  5 5 
38 r1
. (36)
39 z2 r22 2
40
41
42 Substituting equations (31)-(36) into equations (24) and (25) gives the resultant
43
44 hydrodynamic force and moment, respectively. The container is subjected to the
45
46 lateral ground movement x(t ) along the longitudinal axis (   0 ), namely, r1  x(t ) .
47
48
49 Owing to the symmetry of the system, the resultant hydrodynamic force along   0
50
51 axis ( F1 ) and the resultant hydrodynamic moment about    2 axis ( M O 2 ) are
52
53
more significant than the other components. In the present analysis, we concentrate on
54
55
56 the analysis of F1 and M O 2 .
57
58
59 Comparison Study
60
61 10
62
63
64
65
 For the purpose of checking the validity of the present method, the forced nonlinear
1
2
3
sloshing of liquid in a rigid circular cylindrical container with a rigid annular baffle is
4
5
studied, respectively, by using the Gavrilyuk's modal system [25], the smoothed
6
7 particle hydrodynamics (SPH) and the present method. The radius of the container is
8
9 fixed at r2=1m. The position of the unperturbed free surface is taken as z2=1m. The
10
11 container is subjected to the harmonic excitation, i.e., x(t)=X0sinωt, where the
12
13 amplitude of the container movement is X0=0.02m. The liquid started movement from
14
15 rest. According to equation (8), the initial condition for the modal system is taken as
16
17 1  0 ,  2  0 , 3  0 , 1  0 ,  2  0 ,  3  0 . (37)
18
19
20 In the first case, the baffle is positioned at z1=0.75m and the inner radius of the
21
22 baffle is taken as r1=0.4m. Three different excitation frequencies are considered:
23
24 ω=4rad/s, 5rad/s and 6rad/s. The surface wave heights on the wall at θ=0 obtained by
25
26 the present modal system is compared with those obtained by Gavrilyuk's modal
27
28 system, as shown in Figures 4–6. It is seen from Figures 4–6 that the present results
29
30 are in good agreement with those from the Gavrilyuk's modal system.
31
32 In the second case, the baffle is positioned at z1=0.5m and the inner radius of the
33
34 baffle is r1=0.5m. The excitation frequency is ω=6.28rad/s. The SPH analysis is
35
36 carried out by using the commercial software ABAQUS. The surface wave profiles
37
38 across the container (at θ=0) at four different times (t=0.5s, 1.5s, 2.5s, 3.5s) are
39
40 compared with those obtained by the SPH method, as shown in Figure 7. It is seen
41
42 that good agreement is achieved between the SPH solution and the present solution.
43
44
45
To verify the correctness of the present multi-modal system under seismic
46
47
excitation, the present results of free surface wave height are compared with the
48
49 experiment results reported by Hosseinzadeh et al. [30]. A scaled steel container with
50
51 0.002m wall thickness was used in the experiment. The diameter of the container was
52
53 1.2m. The liquid filling height was 0.6m. The baffle was positioned at z1=0.5m and the
54
55 inner radius of the baffle was 0.55m. The Tabas earthquake record (Iran, 1978), scaled
56
57 to PGA=0.4g was considered as the base excitation. In Figure 8, the free surface wave
58
59 heights at the wall are compared with the experiment ones. As seen from Figure 8, the
60
61 11
62
63
64
65
 present results are in good agreement with the experiment ones. The typical nonlinear
1
2
3
phenomenon can be observed from the results: the peak value of the free liquid
4
5
surface is always larger than the trough value.
6
7 Parametric Study
8
9 The effects of baffle parameters (position, inner radius) and excitation parameters
10
11 (amplitude, frequency) on nonlinear response of liquid in container are discussed in
12
13
14
detail. The container is subjected to a lateral harmonic excitation x(t) in the form of
15
16 sinusoidal wave having the amplitude X0 and the frequency ω. The radius of the
17
18 container is fixed at r2=1m and the liquid height is taken as z2=1m.
19
20 The Effect of Position of Baffle
21
22 The inner radius of the baffle is fixed at r1=0.5m. The amplitude of the container
23
24 movement is X0=0.03m and the exciting frequency is ω=6rad/s. Under the given
25
26 lateral excitation, the maximum amplitudes of nonlinear responses are presented in
27
28 Table 1. fmax denotes the maximum amplitude of the surface wave height. Fmax and
29
30 Mmax denote the maximum amplitudes of the resultant hydrodynamic force and
31
32 moment, respectively. It is shown that fmax decreases as the baffle is positioned
33
34 towards the free surface. In contrast, Fmax increases with the increase of baffle
35
36 position z1. As the baffle moves up from the bottom, Mmax decreases to the lowest
37
38 point at z1=0.6m. However, when the baffle further moves up to the free surface from
39
40 z1=0.6m Mmax tends to increase. For different baffle positions z1=0.1m, 0.3m, 0.5m,
41
42 0.7m, the wall-pressure distribution (at θ=0) resulting in the maximum resultant
43
44
45
hydrodynamic force and moment is shown in Figure 9. It is observed from Figure 9
46
47
that the wall-pressure above the baffle decreases with the increase of z1. The change
48
49 of the wall-pressure below the baffle versus the position of the baffle is relatively
50
51 small. Fu and Mu denote the resultant hydrodynamic force and the resultant moment of
52
53 the liquid above the baffle. Fd and Md denote the resultant hydrodynamic force and
54
55 the resultant moment of the liquid below the baffle. The variations of Fu, Fd, Mu and
56
57 Md resulting in the maximum resultant hydrodynamic force and moment with respect
58
59 to the position of the baffle are given in Table 2. It is seen from Table 2 that Fu and Mu
60
61 12
62
63
64
65
 decrease with the increase of z1 while Fd and Md increase with the increase of z1. It is
1
2
3
seen from Table 2 that the increase rate of Fd exceeds the decrease rate of Fu. This
4
5
results the increase of the maximum resultant hydrodynamic force (Fmax=Fu+ Fd) with
6
7 the increase of z1. The increase rate of Md is slower than the decrease rate of Mu when
8
9 z1<0.6m. However, the increase rate of Md exceeds the decrease rate of Mu when
10
11 z1>0.6m. This results in the nonmonotonic variation of the maximum resultant
12
13 moment (Mmax=Mu+ Md).
14
15 In order to investigate the effect of the baffle’s position on nonlinearity, the present
16
17 nonlinear response is compared with the linear response [8, 11] within the first 30
18
19 seconds. Four different positions of the baffle are, respectively, considered: z1=0.1m,
20
21 0.3m, 0.5m, 0.7m. The time histories of the surface wave height fwall on the wall at θ=0,
22
23 the resultant hydrodynamic force F1 in the θ=0 direction and the resultant
24
25 hydrodynamic moment MO2 about the θ=π/2 axis are depicted in Figures 10–12,
26
27 respectively. The normalized differences of surface wave height Δfwall, resultant
28
29 hydrodynamic force ΔF1 and resultant hydrodynamic moment ΔMO2 (i.e., the
30
31 differences of nonlinear responses and linear responses are correspondingly divided
32
33
34
by the maximum values of the linear responses) are plotted in Figures 13-15,
35
36
respectively. It is seen from Figures 13–15, the nonlinearity increases with the time
37
38 and the nonlinearity decreases as the baffle closes to the free surface. According to
39
40 equations (1)–(6), the nonlinearity only appears on the free surface. Therefore, the
41
42 nonlinearity decreases as the maximum surface wave height decreases.
43
44 The Effect of Inner Radius of Baffle
45
46 The baffle is fixed at z1=0.5m. The amplitude of the container movement is
47
48 X0=0.03m and the exciting frequency is ω=6rad/s. The maximum amplitudes of the
49
50 nonlinear response versus the inner radius of the baffle are given in Table 3. It is seen
51
52 from Table 3 that fmax and Mmax increase with the increase of the inner radius of the
53
54 baffle. However, Fmax decreases with the increase of baffle inner radius r1. For
55
56 r1=0.2m, 0.4m, 0.6m, 0.8m, the wall pressure distribution (at θ=0) resulting in the
57
58 resulting in the maximum resultant hydrodynamic force and moment are shown in
59
60 Figure 16. It is observed that the wall-pressure above the baffle increases with the
61 13
62
63
64
65
 increase of r1 and the wall-pressure below the baffle decreases with the increase of r1.
1
2
3
The variations of Fu, Fd, Mu and Md with respect to the inner radius of the baffle are
4
5
given in Table 4. It is seen that Fu and Md increase with the increase of r1 while Fd
6
7 decreases with the increase of r1. Mu increases with the increase of r1 when r1<0.6m.
8
9 However, Mu decreases with the increase of r1 when r1>0.6m. The variation rates of
10
11 Fd and Md are significantly faster than those of Fu and Mu, respectively.
12
13 In order to study the effect of the baffle’s inner radius on the nonlinearity, the
14
15 nonlinear response is compared with the linear response within the first 30 seconds.
16
17 Four different inner radii of the baffle are considered: r1=0.2m, 0.4m, 0.6m, 0.8m,
18
19 respectively. The time histories of the surface wave height fwall on the wall at θ=0, the
20
21 resultant hydrodynamic force F1 in the θ=0 direction and the resultant hydrodynamic
22
23 moment MO2 about the θ=π/2 axis are depicted in Figures 17–19. The normalized
24
25 differences of nonlinear responses and linear responses are plotted in Figures 20–22.
26
27 It is observed that the nonlinearity increases with the increase of the inner radius r1.
28
29 The Effect of Excitation Amplitude
30
31 The inner radius of the baffle is fixed at r1=0.8m and the baffle was positioned at
32
33
34
z1=0.7m. Four different excitation amplitudes are considered: X0=0.01m, 0.02m,
35
36
0.03m, 0.04m, respectively. The circular frequency is taken as ω=6rad/s. Under the
37
38 lateral excitation, the maximum amplitudes of liquid response are given in Table 5. It
39
40 is seen that the maximum amplitudes of liquid response increase with the increase of
41
42 the excitation amplitude. To investigate the effect of the excitation amplitude on the
43
44 nonlinearity of response, the present results are compared with the linear ones within
45
46 the first 30 seconds. The time histories of fwall, F1 and MO2 are plotted in Figures
47
48 23–25, respectively. The normalized differences Δfwall, ΔF1 and ΔMO2 are illustrated in
49
50 Figures 26–28, respectively. It is seen that the nonlinearity increases with the increase
51
52 of the excitation amplitude.
53
54 The Effect of Excitation Frequency
55
56 The inner radius of the baffle is fixed at r1=0.7m and the baffle is positioned at
57
58 z1=0.7m. The fundamental frequency of the liquid is 3.8rad/s. Four different
59
60 excitation frequencies are considered: ω=4.5rad/s, 5rad/s, 5.5rad/s, 6rad/s,
61 14
62
63
64
65
 respectively. The excitation amplitude is fixed at X0=0.02m. Under the lateral
1
2
3
excitation, the maximum amplitudes of the nonlinear response are given in Table 6.
4
5
As seen from Table 6 that the maximum amplitudes of response increase when the
6
7 excitation frequency is close to the fundamental frequency of the liquid. In order to
8
9 study the effect of the excitation frequency on the nonlinearity of liquid sloshing, the
10
11 present results are compared with the linear ones within the first 30 seconds. The time
12
13 histories of fwall, F1 and MO2 are depicted in Figures 29–31, respectively. The
14
15 normalized differences Δfwall, ΔF1 and ΔMO2 are shown in Figures 32–34, respectively.
16
17 It is seen that the nonlinearity significantly increases when the excitation frequency
18
19 approaches the resonant frequency.
20
21
22 Conclusions
23
24 Based on the multi-modal method carried out in a recent paper [24], the nonlinear
25
26 response of the liquid partially filled in a rigid cylindrical container with a rigid
27
28 annular baffle and subjected to lateral excitation is investigated. The surface wave
29
30 height, resultant hydrodynamic force and moment with respect to the position and
31
32 inner radius of the baffle and the parameters (amplitude, frequency) of the excitation
33
34 are discussed in detail. Following observations are highlighted:
35
36 1. The resultant hydrodynamic force increases as the baffle moves towards the free
37
38 surface, however, increases with the decrease of inner radius of the baffle.
39
40 2. The surface wave height decreases as the baffle is positioned towards the free
41
42 surface, however, decreases with the decrease of inner radius of the baffle.
43
44
45
3. The nonlinearity increases with the increase of the exciting amplitude and the
46
47
accumulation of the sloshing time.
48
49 Funding
50
51 The financial supports from National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant
52
53 no. 11172123, 11372127), the Research Grant Council of the Hong Kong Special
54
55 Administration Region, China for the research project HKU715110E and the Jiangsu
56
57 Natural Science Fund Project (BK20160482) are greatly appreciated.
58
59
60
61 15
62
63
64
65
 References
1
2
3
1. Hatayama K (2008) Lessons from the 2003 Tokachi-oki, Japan, earthquake for
4
5
prediction of long-period strong ground motions and sloshing damage to oil
6
7 storage tanks. Journal of seismology 12, 255–263.
8
9 2. Abramson HN (1969) Slosh suppression. NASA report, SP–8031.
10
11 3. Abramson HN (1966) The dynamic behavior of liquids in moving containers.
12
13 NASA report, SP–106.
14
15 4. Gedikli A and Ergüven ME (1999) Seismic analysis of a liquid storage tank with a
16
17 baffle. Journal of Sound and Vibration 223, 141–155.
18
19 5. Isaacson M and Premasiri S (2001) Hydrodynamic damping due to baffles in a
20
21 rectangular tank. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 28, 608–616.
22
23 6. Biswal KC, Bhattacharyya SK and Sinha PK (2004) Dynamic response analysis of
24
25 a liquid–filled cylindrical tank with annular baffle. Journal of Sound and Vibration
26
27 274, 13–37.
28
29 7. Goudarzi MA, Sabbagh-Yazdi SR and Marx W (2010) Investigation of sloshing
30
31 damping in baffled rectangular tanks subjected to the dynamic excitation. Bulletin
32
33
34
of Earthquake Engineering 8, 1055–1072.
35
36
8. Wang JD, Zhou D and Liu WQ (2012) Sloshing of liquid in rigid cylindrical
37
38 container with a rigid annular baffle. Part II: Lateral vibration. Shock and
39
40 Vibration 19, 1205–1222.
41
42 9. Wang JD, Lo SH and Zhou D (2012) Liquid sloshing in rigid cylindrical container
43
44 with multiple rigid annular baffles: Free vibration. Journal of Fluids and
45
46 Structures 34, 138–156.
47
48 10. Wang JD, Zhou D and Liu WQ (2012) Sloshing of liquid in rigid cylindrical
49
50 container with a rigid annular baffle. Part I: Free vibration. Shock and Vibration
51
52 19, 1185–1203.
53
54 11. Wang JD, Lo SH and Zhou D (2013) Liquid sloshing in rigid cylindrical container
55
56 with multiple rigid annular baffles: lateral excitations. Journal of Fluids and
57
58 Structures 42, 421–436.
59
60 12. Ansari MR, Firouz-Abadi RD and Ghasemi M (2009) Two phase modal analysis
61 16
62
63
64
65
 of nonlinear sloshing in a rectangular container. Ocean Engineering 36, 202–212.
1
2
3
13. Kim Y (2007) Experimental and numerical analyses of sloshing flows. Journal of
4
5
Engineering Mathematics 58, 191–210.
6
7 14. Godderidge B, Turnock S, Tan M, et al. (2009) An investigation of multiphase
8
9 CFD modeling of a lateral sloshing tank. Computers & Fluids 38, 183–193.
10
11 15. Zheng X, Ma QW and Duan WY (2014) Incompressible SPH method based on
12
13 Rankine source solution for violent water wave simulation. Journal of
14
15 Computational Physics 276, 291–314.
16
17 16. Wu CH, Faltinsen OM and Chen BF (2012) Numerical study of sloshing liquid in
18
19 tanks with baffles by time-independent finite difference and fictitious cell method.
20
21 Computers & Fluids 63, 9–26.
22
23 17. Zhou D, Wang JD and Liu WQ (2014) Nonlinear Sloshing of Liquid in Rigid
24
25 Cylindrical Container with a Rigid Annular Baffle: Free Vibration. Nonlinear
26
27 Dynamics 78, 2557–2576.
28
29 18. Wang CZ and Khoo BC (2005) Finite element analysis of two-dimensional
30
31 nonlinear sloshing problems in random excitations. Ocean Engineering 32,
32
33
34
107–133.
35
36
19. Sriram V, Sannasiraj SA and Sundar V (2006) Numerical simulation of 2D
37
38 sloshing waves due to horizontal and vertical random excitation. Applied Ocean
39
40 Research 28, 19–32.
41
42 20. Hugo HB, Ernesto HZ and Alvaro AAR (2007) Nonlinear sloshing response of
43
44 cylindrical tanks subjected to earthquake ground motion. Engineering Structures
45
46 29, 3364–3376.
47
48 21. Cho JR and Lee HW (2004) Numerical study on liquid sloshing in baffled tank by
49
50 nonlinear finite element method. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and
51
52 Engineering 193, 2581–2598.
53
54 22. Cho JR, Lee HW and Ha SY (2005) Finite element analysis of resonant sloshing
55
56 response in a 2D baffled tank. Journal of Sound and Vibration 228, 829–845.
57
58 23. Biswal KC, Bhattacharyya SK and Sinha PK (2006) Nonlinear sloshing in
59
60 partially liquid filled containers with baffles. International Journal for Numerical
61 17
62
63
64
65
 Methods in Engineering 68, 317–337.
1
2
3
24. Faltinsen OM, Rognebakke OF, Lukovsky IA, et al. (2000) Multidimensional
4
5
modal analysis of nonlinear sloshing in a rectangular tank with finite water depth.
6
7 Journal of Fluid Mechanics 407, 201–234.
8
9 25. Gavrilyuk I, Lukovsky I, Trotsenko Y, et al. (2007) The fluid sloshing in a vertical
10
11 circular cylindrical tank with an annular baffle part 2: Nonlinear resonant waves.
12
13 Journal of Engineering Mathematics 57, 57–78.
14
15 26. Faltinsen OM and Timokha AN (2001) Adaptive multimodal approach to
16
17 nonlinear sloshing in a rectangular rank. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 432,
18
19 167–200.
20
21 27. Faltinsen OM and Timokha AN (2002) Asymptotic modal approximation of
22
23 nonlinear resonant sloshing in a rectangular tank with small fluid depth. Journal of
24
25 Fluid Mechanics 470, 319–357.
26
27 28. Lukovsky I, Ovchynnykov D and Timokha A (2012) Asymptotic nonlinear
28
29 multimodal of liquid sloshing in an upright circular tank: 1. Modal equations.
30
31 Nonlinear Oscillations 14, 512–525.
32
33
34
29. Lukovsky IA (1990) Introduction to Nonlinear Dynamics of a Solid Body with a
35
36
Cavity Including a Liquid. Kiev: Naukova dumka.
37
38 30. Hosseinzadeh N, Sangsari MK, Ferdosiyeh HT (2014) Shake table study of
39
40 annular baffles in steel storage tanks as sloshing dependent variable dampers.
41
42 Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 32, 299–310.
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 18
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 Figure 1 The partially liquid-filled rigid cylindrical container with an annular rigid
30
31 baffle subjected to the lateral excitation.
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 19
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17 Figure 2 Cross-section, sub-domains and artificial interfaces of the time-dependent
18
19 liquid domain  .
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42 Figure 3 Cross-section, sub-domains and artificial interfaces of the unperturbed liquid
43
44
45 domain  .
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 20
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Figure 4 The time history of the surface wave height on the wall at   0 for
23
24
25   4 rad s .
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48 Figure 5 The time history of the surface wave height on the wall at   0 for
49
50   5 rad s .
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 21
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21 Figure 6 The time history of the surface wave height on the wall at   0 for
22
23
24
  6 rad s .
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55 Figure 7 Surface wave profiles across the container at different times for
56
57  =6.28rad/s.
58
59
60
61 22
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18 Figure 8 The time history of the surface wave height on the wall at   0 subjected
19
20 to Tabas earthquake (Iran, 1978).
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51 Figure 9 The wall pressure distributions (at   0 ) resulting in the maximum
52
53
54 amplitudes Fmax and M max for r1 =0.5m and z1  0.1m, 0.3m, 0.5m, 0.7m,
55
56 respectively.
57
58
59
60
61 23
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Figure 10 The time history of the surface wave height at the container wall under the
29
30 lateral harmonic excitation for r1 =0.5m and z1  0.1m, 0.3m, 0.5m, 0.7m,
31
32
33 respectively.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 24
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Figure 11 The time history of the resultant hydrodynamic force in the   0
29
30 direction under the lateral harmonic excitation for r1 =0.5m and z1  0.1m, 0.3m,
31
32
33 0.5m, 0.7m, respectively.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 25
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Figure 12 The time history of the resultant hydrodynamic moment about the    2
29
30
31 axis under the lateral harmonic excitation for r1 =0.5m and z1  0.1m, 0.3m, 0.5m,
32
33
34
0.7m, respectively.
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 26
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Figure 13 The time history of the normalized difference of the surface wave height at
29
30 the container wall for r1 =0.5m and z1  0.1m, 0.3m, 0.5m, 0.7m, respectively.
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 27
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 Figure 14 The time history of the normalized difference of the resultant
30
31
32 hydrodynamic force in the   0 for r1 =0.5m and z1  0.1m, 0.3m, 0.5m, 0.7m,
33
34 respectively.
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 28
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Figure 15 The time history of the normalized difference of the resultant
29
30 hydrodynamic moment about the    2 axis for r1 =0.5m and z1  0.1m, 0.3m,
31
32
33 0.5m, 0.7m, respectively.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 29
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 Figure 16 The wall pressure distributions (   0 ) corresponding to the maximum
30
31
32 amplitudes Fmax and M max for z1 =0.5m and r1  0.2m, 0.4m, 0.6m, 0.8m,
33
34 respectively.
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 30
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Figure 17 The time history of the surface wave height at the container wall under the
29
30 lateral harmonic excitation for z1 =0.5m and r1  0.2m, 0.4m, 0.6m, 0.8m,
31
32
33 respectively.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 31
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Figure 18 The time history of the resultant hydrodynamic force in the   0
29
30 direction under the lateral harmonic excitation for z1 =0.5m and r1  0.2m, 0.4m,
31
32
33 0.6m, 0.8m, respectively.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 32
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Figure 19 The time history of the resultant hydrodynamic moment about the    2
29
30
31 axis under the lateral harmonic excitation for z1 =0.5m and r1  0.2m, 0.4m, 0.6m,
32
33
34
0.8m, respectively.
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 33
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Figure 20 The time history of the normalized difference of the surface wave height at
29
30 the container wall for z1 =0.5m and r1  0.2m, 0.4m, 0.6m, 0.8m, respectively.
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 34
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Figure 21 The time history of the normalized difference of the resultant
29
30 hydrodynamic force in the   0 for z1 =0.5m and r1  0.2m, 0.4m, 0.6m, 0.8m,
31
32
33 respectively.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 35
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Fig. 22 The time history of the normalized difference of the resultant hydrodynamic
29
30 moment about the    2 axis for z1 =0.5m and r1  0.2m, 0.4m, 0.6m, 0.8m,
31
32
33 respectively.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 36
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Figure 23 The time history of the surface wave height at the container wall under the
29
30 lateral harmonic excitation for  =6rad/s and X 0 =0.01m, 0.02m, 0.03m and 0.04m,
31
32
33 respectively.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 37
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Figure 24 The time history of the resultant hydrodynamic force in the   0
29
30 direction under the lateral harmonic excitation for  =6rad/s and X 0 =0.01m, 0.02m,
31
32
33 0.03m and 0.04m, respectively.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 38
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Figure 25 The time history of the resultant hydrodynamic moment about the    2
29
30
31 axis under the lateral harmonic excitation for  =6rad/s and X 0 =0.01m, 0.02m,
32
33
34
0.03m and 0.04m, respectively.
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 39
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Figure 26 The time history of the normalized difference of the surface wave height at
29
30 the container wall for  =6rad/s and X 0 =0.01m, 0.02m, 0.03m and 0.04m,
31
32
33 respectively.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 40
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Figure 27 The time history of the normalized difference of the resultant
29
30 hydrodynamic force in the   0 for  =6rad/s and X 0 =0.01m, 0.02m, 0.03m and
31
32
33 0.04m, respectively.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 41
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Figure 28 The time history of the normalized difference of the resultant
29
30 hydrodynamic moment about the    2 axis for  =6rad/s and X 0 =0.01m,
31
32
33 0.02m, 0.03m and 0.04m, respectively.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 42
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Figure 29 The time history of the surface wave height at the container wall under the
29
30 lateral harmonic excitation for X 0 =0.02m and  =4.5rad/s, 5rad/s, 5.5rad/s and
31
32
33 6rad/s, respectively.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 43
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Figure 30 The time history of the resultant hydrodynamic force in the   0
29
30 direction under the lateral harmonic excitation for X 0 =0.02m and  =4.5rad/s,
31
32
33 5rad/s, 5.5rad/s and 6rad/s, respectively.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 44
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Figure 31 The time history of the resultant hydrodynamic moment about the    2
29
30
31 axis under the lateral harmonic excitation for X 0 =0.02m and  =4.5rad/s, 5rad/s,
32
33
34
5.5rad/s and 6rad/s, respectively.
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 45
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Figure 32 The time history of the normalized difference of the surface wave height at
29
30 the container wall for X 0 =0.02m and  =4.5rad/s, 5rad/s, 5.5rad/s and 6rad/s,
31
32
33 respectively.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 46
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Figure 33 The time history of the normalized difference of the resultant
29
30 hydrodynamic force in the   0 for X 0 =0.02m and  =4.5rad/s, 5rad/s, 5.5rad/s
31
32
33 and 6rad/s, respectively.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 47
62
63
64
65
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Figure 34 The time history of the normalized difference of the resultant
29
30 hydrodynamic moment about the    2 axis for X 0 =0.02m and  =4.5rad/s,
31
32
33 5rad/s, 5.5rad/s and 6rad/s, respectively.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 48
62
63
64
65
 Table 1 The maximum amplitudes of the nonlinear response versus the position of the
1
2 baffle for r1  0.5m
3
4 The maximum The position of the baffle z1 (m)
5 amplitudes of the
6 nonlinear response 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
7
fmax (m) 0.230 0.224 0.214 0.205 0.188 0.171 0.147 0.099
8
9 Fmax (N) 2532.4 2563.2 2596.3 2615.9 2651.2 2662.7 2817.8 2923.1
10
Mmax (N·M) 1843.1 1832.4 1808.8 1762.7 1725.6 1616.4 1718.8 1723
11
12
13
14
15
16 Table 2 The resultant hydrodynamic force and moment from liquid below/above the
17
18 baffle versus the position of the baffle for r1  0.5m
19
20 The resultant force
21 The position of the baffle z1 (m)
and moment from
22 liquid below/above
23 the baffle 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
24
25 Fu (N) 2215.5 1924.5 1632.9 1326.8 1038.5 752.3 557.9 336
26 ΔFu (N) / -291 -291.6 -306.1 -288.3 -286.2 -194.4 -221.9
27
28 Fd (N) 316.9 638.7 963.4 1289.1 1612.7 1910.4 2259.9 2587.1
29
30 ΔFd (N) / 321.8 324.7 325.7 323.6 297.7 349.5 327.2
31 Mu (N·M) 1783.9 1722.6 1615.1 1451.7 1264.3 979 857.9 612.8
32
33 ΔMu (N·M) / -61.3 -107.5 -163.4 -187.4 -285.3 -121.1 -245.1
34
35 Md (N·M) 59.2 109.8 193.7 311 461.3 637.4 860.9 1110.2
36 ΔMd (N·M) / 50.6 83.9 117.3 150.3 176.1 223.5 249.3
37
38 ΔFu, ΔFd, ΔMu and ΔMd denote the increments of the resultant force and moment from liquid
39 below/above the baffle for the increment of the inner radius of the baffle Δz1=0.1m.
40
41
42
43
44
45
Table 3 The maximum amplitudes of the nonlinear response versus the inner radius of
46
47 the baffle for z1  0.5m
48
49 The maximum The inner radius of the baffle r1 (m)
50 amplitudes of the
51 nonlinear response 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
52 fmax (m) 0.168 0.170 0.172 0.178 0.188 0.199 0.215 0.227
53
54 Fmax (N) 2707.8 2706.9 2704.7 2680.6 2651.2 2640.2 2598.1 2568.2
55 Mmax (N·M) 1667.3 1678.6 1690.4 1701.5 1725.6 1778.4 1806.5 1852.4
56
57
58
59
60
61 49
62
63
64
65
 Table 4 The resultant hydrodynamic force and moment from liquid below/above the
1
2
3 baffle versus the inner radius of the baffle for z1  0.5m
4
5 The resultant force The inner radius of the baffle r1 (m)
6 and moment from
7 liquid below/above 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
8 the baffle
9 Fu (N) 1012.7 1016.5 1030.4 1031.6 1038.5 1073.7 1085.9 1130.1
10
11 ΔFu (N) / 3.8 13.9 1.2 6.9 35.2 12.2 44.2
12 Fd (N) 1695.1 1690.4 1674.3 1649 1612.7 1566.5 1512.2 1438.1
13
ΔFd (N) / -4.7 -16.1 -25.3 -36.3 -46.2 -54.3 -74.1
14
15 Mu (N·M) 1251.3 1256.5 1262 1262.5 1264.3 1277 1239.8 1194.5
16
ΔMu (N·M) / 5.2 5.5 0.5 1.8 12.7 -37.2 -45.3
17
18 Md (N·M) 416 422.1 428.4 439 461.3 501.4 566.7 657.9
19 ΔMd (N·M) / 6.1 6.3 10.6 22.3 40.1 65.3 91.2
20
21 ΔFu, ΔFd, ΔMu and ΔMd denote the increments of the resultant force and moment from liquid
22 below/above the baffle for the increment of the inner radius of the baffle Δr1=0.1m.
23
24
25 Table 5 The maximum amplitudes of the nonlinear response versus the excitation
26
27
28 amplitude for r1  0.8m and z1  0.7m
29
30 The maximum amplitudes of The excitation amplitude X0 (m)
31 the nonlinear response 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04
32
33 fmax (m) 0.065 0.137 0.214 0.293
34
35 Fmax (N) 860.2 1722.8 2593.1 3490.3
36
37
Mmax (N·M) 600.7 1208.0 1820.8 2457.8
38
39
40
41
42 Table 6 The maximum amplitudes of the nonlinear response versus the excitation
43
44 amplitude for r1  0.7m and z1  0.7m
45
46 The excitation frequency ω (rad/s)
The maximum amplitudes of
47
48 the nonlinear response 4.5 5.0 5.5 6
49
50 fmax (m) 0.392 0.225 0.157 0.121
51
52 Fmax (N) 3435.8 1805.2 1790.1 1765.4
53
54 Mmax (N·M) 4207.9 1922.8 1198.6 1175.6
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 50
62
63
64
65
Authorship change form Click here to download Authorship change form Authorship+form_SpringerNature.docx

Change of authorship request form

Please read the important information on page 4 before you begin
This form should be used by authors to request any change in authorship. Please fully complete all sections. Use black ink and block capitals and provide each author’s full name with the
given name first followed by the family name.

Section 1 Please provide the current title of manuscript

Manuscript ID no. MECC-D-16-00415_R2
Weakly Nonlinear Sloshing of Liquid in Rigid Cylindrical Container with a Rigid Annular Baffle: Lateral Excitation
Section 2 Please provide the current authorship, in the order shown on your manuscript.

First name(s) Family name ORCID or SCOPUS id, if available

1st author Jiadong Wang
2nd author Sai Huen Lo
rd
3 author Ding Zhou 0000-0003-1556-2092
th
4 author Yun Dong
th
5 author
6th author
7th author

Please use an additional sheet if there are more than 7 authors.

Section 3: Please provide a justification for change. Please use this section to explain your reasons for changing the authorship of your manuscript. Please refer to the journal policy
pages for more information about authorship. Please explain why omitted authors were not originally included on the submitted manuscript.

Dr. Yun Dong, makes the comparison between the present results with the experimental ones, which is a new increased substance, such as Figure 8, in the revised version. Therefore,
we request to add him as the fourth author.

1
 Change of authorship request form
Section 4 Proposed new authorship. Please provide your new authorship list in the order you would like it to appear on the manuscript.

First name(s) Family name (this name will appear in full on the final publication and will be searchable in various abstract and indexing
databases)
1st author JIadong Wang
nd
2 author Sai Huen Lo
rd
3 author Ding Zhou
4th author Yun Dong
th
5 author
6th author
7th author
Please use an additional sheet if there are more than 7 authors.

Section 5 Author contribution, Acknowledgement and Disclosures. Please use this section to provide revised Author Contribution, Acknowledgement and/or Disclosures of your
manuscript, ensuring you state what contribution any new authors made and, if appropriate acknowledge any contributors who have been removed as authors. Please ensure these are
updated in your manuscript.

New Disclosures (potential conflicts of interest, funding, acknowledgements):

Not applicable

New Author Contributions statement:

The fourth author, Dr. Yun Dong, makes the comparison between the present results with the experimental ones, which is a new increased substance such as Figure 8 in the revised
version.

New Acknowledgement Section:

Not applicable

State ‘Not applicable’ if there are no new authors.

2
 Change of authorship request form
Section 6 Declaration of agreement. All authors, unchanged, new and removed must sign this declaration.
* please delete as appropriate. Delete all of the bold if you were on the original authorship list and are remaining as an author

Please use an additional sheet if there are more than 7 authors. * please delete as appropriate. Delete all of the bold if you were on the original authorship list and are remaining.

3
 Change of authorship request form
Important information. Please read.

 Please return this form, fully completed, to the editorial office. We will consider the information you have provided to decide whether to approve the proposed change in
authorship. We may choose to contact your institution for more information or undertake a further investigation, if appropriate, before making a final decision.

 Please note, we cannot investigate or mediate any authorship disputes. If you are unable to obtained agreement from all authors (included those who you wish to be removed) you
must refer the matter to your institution(s) for investigation. Please inform us if you need to do this.

 If you are not able to return a fully completed form within 30 days of the date that it was sent to the author requesting the change, we may have to reject your manuscript. We
cannot publish manuscripts where authorship has not been agreed by all authors (including those who have been removed).

 Incomplete forms will be rejected.

View publication stats