Skip to content
Back to the design archive

Engineering records / Engineering record / FITTED-ROOF-ANALYSIS-R1

Fitted Roof Analysis R1.

Geometry, analysis and remaining engineering work for Fitted Roof Analysis R1.

Retained development study. Dimensions, names and checks belong to this revision—not automatically to the retrofit-only product. Manufactured tank shells are deferred. No installation instruction, certification or manufacturing release is represented.

The source reasoning

Why this detail was investigated.

This calculation uses the fitted member ends at Y=±1045.5 mm and bearing rows at Y=−1005.5, 0 and +1005.5 mm. The full 661.115 kN projected-roof load remains applied. It replaces the old edge-support geometry for this candidate; it is not a qualification result.

Read the research and limits

Research record

The detail behind
the study.

Source-linked work for this revision. Reported checks describe the stated model or test; physical qualification and applicability to the current retrofit remain separate.

Fitted roof and post-compression calculation

This calculation uses the fitted member ends at Y=±1045.5 mm and bearing rows at Y=−1005.5, 0 and +1005.5 mm. The full 661.115 kN projected-roof load remains applied. It replaces the old edge-support geometry for this candidate; it is not a qualification result.

Support modelMaximum sampled roof movementLargest post compression demand
Rigid supports at fitted seats1.592 mm62.43 kN
Assumed axial post stiffness2.691 mm59.95 kN
Half assumed axial stiffness4.069 mm57.96 kN

The post springs use EA/L for the modeled 80 × 80 × 3 mm hollow section, 1347 mm length and assumed E=60 GPa. The nominal case produces up to 1.457 mm post shortening; the half-stiffness case reaches 2.817 mm. These are sensitivity assumptions, not measured material bounds.

The solver is checked against a uniformly loaded beam on two equal axial springs, including the independently calculated support settlement and beam deflection. All 18 vertical support reactions are included in equilibrium.

The model includes roof bending, torsion and assumed shear flexibility. It still omits post bending/buckling, support-rail and base-member flexibility, joint compliance, floor/soil behavior, laminate orthotropy, local failure and lateral wall thrust. The modeled fork restraints need physical detailing. None of these movement or force values is an approved limit or a structural safety factor.

Use the forces to develop the lower load path and bearing interfaces. The shaped shoes must not concentrate those loads into an unverified floor/bedding interface. Full records are in fitted-support-analysis.json.

Source and revision record

Source: fitted-roof-analysis-r1/READ-ME.md

Source SHA-256: f48a8a0cfb6e52b06ad26565b0cdb429a33c2ddccb51baf8f6e72991ca1b81a4

Geometry and images describe this development revision. Current product ratings and manufacturing release require separate qualification.

Return to the current product.

Explore the retrofit-only platform and its compatibility, installation and service objectives.

Explore the retrofit