Predict storage-tank heat transfer precisely Use this procedure to determine the rate of heat transfer from a j vertical storage tank when shortcut methods are inadequate. f caergy expense at plants and tankfarms, Though many procedures for calculating such heat-transfer requiree sents have been published (1,3.5,7.,10], the simply jag assumptions that they use can lead to significant £2] ors in computed heat-transfer rates. This is of con = | cem because efficient sizing of tanks, insulation, heaters and coolers depends on accurate estimates of heat trans. fer to and from the various tank surfaces, And the uti ‘The procedure presented here determines the heat iransfer to or from a vertical-cylindrical storage tank seated on the ground—like the one in Fig. 1. It includes EJ ie effects of tank configuration, liquid level, ambient yi 1d wind speed, as well as temperature A jyriations within the tank and between air and ground, partially worked example shows how to use the tech- ique, and how to do the calculations om a computer. [Storage tanks come in many different shapes and bes. Hotizontalcylindrical and spherical tanks are for storage of liquids under pressure; atmospheric fanks tend to be vertical-cylindrieal, with flat bottoms and conical roofs as shown in Fig.l. The example pre ented here is forthe latter configuration, bu the proce. Pare applies to any tank for which reliable hear woreter “oreations are available For the sake of simplicity, we assume thatthe tank contents are warmer than the ambient at, and that we sxe concerned with heat fos from the tank rather than teat gain. But the method may, of eourse, be applied to ihe case { Consider, then, the categories of surfaces from which eat may be transferred across the tank boundaries wet |e dry sidewalls, tank bottom, and roof. In the context “ated here, “wet” refers to the portion of the wall subs | Berged under the liquid surface, whereas “dry” refers 10 jk portion of the wall in the vapor space, above the surface In general, the heating coils would be located near ‘bottom of the tank, in the form of flat “pancakes.” Mecefore, the temperature of the air (or vapor) space my D. Rana ond Samir P.Rethars Help, Dahan oad Fikaris Fc [Heating or cooling storage tanks can be a major | RTT ERNE RTT 127 above the liquid level may be expected to be lower than : the liquid itself. Experience has shown thatthe average bulk temperatures of the liquid and vapor space may Be | significantly (Le, more than 5°F) differen, and they are teated accordingly in our procedure, Use of differ ent liquid and vapor temperatures isan important des parte from the traditional approach, whieh assumes the same value for both, ur basic approach is to develop equations for calew- lating the heat loss from each of the four categories of surfaces, and then add the individual eat loses to get the total heat loss. Thus For dry sidewall gy = UyAg(Ty—T,) (1) VAT T) 2) YAT-T) 3) = UATy~T) (8) latter nt @) When using these equations in design or rating probe lems, we either assume the various temperatures for typ- For wet sidewall 4, For tank bottom 4, For tank roof Total | Tyateal vertical ytndiat tankical conditions or determine them by measurement. ‘The area values are also easy to obtain: (6) @ @) (aD /2\D2/4 + g2)M2 9) The complications arise when we tty to estimate the overall heat-ransfer coefficients Uy, U, Uy and U,, for the four surfaces of the tank. For the tank geomet chosen, these can fortunately be calculated from the individual film heat-transfer coefficients in the conven. tional manner, using published correlations ‘The overall coefficients Table I shows the component coefficients for each surface. The overall heat-transfer coefficient for the dry sidewall ofthe tank (U,) is ealculated as the sum of the Fesistances of vapor film, fouling, metal wall, insulation (ifany), and outside air (convection plus radiation). The outside-air heat-transfer cocficent (hyy) is function of wind velocity as well as temperature gradie artery [gr bone Effect of wind velocity and AT on heattransfor rate ent. Data on the effect of wind velocity and AT have been presented by Stuhlbarg [/0] and Boyen [2], Wieg a lite bit of manipulation, their data were replotes, yielding the “wind enhancement factor” (W;)in Fig 2 By definition: Wh = hael Baw = hard hay (0) ‘Therefore, once the outside-air coefficient for stil aig a) is known, the overall dry-sidewall coefficient st various wind velocities ean be computed a: WU g = Whe + tylhy + by/ky W/W ae + fgg) + Wing (11) Similarly, the overall coefficients for the wet sidewal bottom and roof surfaces ate: Ug = Vig + tyke + tL + U/Wrhige + hee) + Whgy (12) VU, = hay + ty/y + Whig + hing (13) 1/0, = Wy + ty /yg + U/W hag + hid) + Vip (14) Bq, 19 and 14 assume that the roofand bottom are not insulated, which is generally the case in temperate el ‘mates. We shall now review correlations for the indivi. val heat-transfer coefficients needed to obtain the over all coefficients. Individual film heat-transfer coefficients The film heat-ransfer coefficients may be divided into four categories: convection from vertical wally convection from horizontal surfaces, pure conduction, and radiative heat transfer. Within each category, cor. ‘elations ate presented for several flow regimes, Vertical-wall film coefficients. These apply tothe in- side wall (wet or dry) and the outside wal (still air) Fer vertical plates and cylinders, Kato etal. (6} recommend the following for liquids and vapors: Nyy = 0.138 NBII — 055) (13) where 0.1 < Nop < 40 and Noy > 102 For isothermal vertical plates, Ede [#] reported the following for liquids: Nyy = 0.495628 (16) where Np > 100 and 10 < (Np, Np,) < 108, andl for gases: Nyy = 0.0295 NBEO NBS (1 + 0.5 NBE)-949 (17) where Np, = 5 and (Nor Np) > 10° For vertical plates taller than 3 ft, Stublbarg (10) | recommends: 0.45 & L-P95 (Ng, Np)? (13) where 10" < (Ng, Npy) < 108, Horizontal-surface heat-transfer coefficients. Thest coefficients apply to the roof and inside-bottom surfaces ‘of the tank. The bottom is assumed to be flat. For sur Faces facing up {6}: Nyy = 0114 (Ne Np) (19) For surfaces facing down: Nye = 0.27 (No, Np P28 onyarg {10} (13) s. The surfaces, For si (19) i Nomenclature ©” » A Are of eaten surface; A for Botts, dy Gforce wally for wet wall, Ar rot fi, Specie ext a constant pres, Bru/ibeF Ub Diameter of tank, 0 se : Bee oth equations apply in the range 2x 10" < Big, Nex) <3 x 10% Equivalent coefficients for conductive heat transfer. [The wall and insulation coefficients are derived from he thermal conductivities: h by/ty 1) kilt 22) ‘The coefficient for heat transfer to and from the ground [i the coefcient for heat conduction from a semi- iafnite solid (9: lig = B ko/nD 3) | _ Fouling coefficients. The coefficients ty, fing and hy, | apply to the vapor and liquid at the wallyand the liquid at the bottom of the tank, respectively, "These are em- pirical, and depend on the type of fluid and other fac tom such as tank cleaning. Generally, rg is the greatest of the three, and Ayy the least, indicating that the great ‘est fouling resistance is at the bottom of the tank. Equivalent coefficient for radiative heat transfer. ‘The coefficient for sidewalls and roof depends on the ‘emissivity of these surfaces, and is given by [8] 7 eet) 00 With these relationships, we now have the tools to cal- culate heat transfer to or from the tank. Example ‘ABC Chemical Corp. has a single manufacturing plant in the US. and exports a high-visesity specialty oil product to Europe. The ail is offloaded in Pare City, and siored in a fat bottom, conical-oof tank rented from XYZ Terminal Co. Led, The tank Is located out | doors and rests on the ground. Its equipped with pan: ‘ake-type steam-heating coils because the oil must be ‘mainiained above 50°F in order to preserve its fluidity Other pertinent data are: tank diameter is 20 fy tank height is 48 ft (to the edge of the roof); roof incline is in, per foot; tank sidewalls ate Yin. carbon steel inst lation is Vj-in. berglass, on the sidewall only. XYZ Terminal Co. does not have metering stations con the steam supply to individual tank, and proposes to charge ABC Chemical for tank heating on the basis ‘of calculated heat loses, using the conventional tables [1], and assuming a tank wall temperature of 30°F. The project engineer from ABC Chemical decided to inves tigate hiow XYZ’s estimate would compare with the more elaborate one described in this article. First the engineer collected basic data on storage and climate, Oil shipments from the US. arrive at Pore City approximately once a month, in 100,000-gal batches Deliveries to local customers are made in. 8,000-gal tanktrucks three mes a week on average. The typical variation in tank level over a 20-day period is Known from experience. ‘The ambient temperature goes through a more com plex cycle, of course. Within the primary cycle of 365 days there are daly temperature variations, But in the seasonal cycle, heat supply is required only during the winter months, when temperatures fall well below 50°F. Wind conditions at the storage site are not as well defined, and therefore much harder to predict. How- ‘ever, we can assume that the wind speed will hold con stant for a short period of time, and calculate the heat loss for this unit period under axed set of conditions, ‘The wind speed to be used must be based on the known probability distribution of wind speeds at the site, ‘The procedure for determining the annual heat loss ‘consist of adding up the heat loses calculated for each unit period (which could be an hour, 12 hours, 24 hour, or 20 days, as appropriate). This example dem- onstrates the calculation of heat loss for only one unit period, of 12 hours, using an ambient temperature of 1292 Denkiy, ort Specific heat, umlb*F 8 025 028 40 2.007 o07 on2 00181. 0015 1x10 9002 o02 11000 Bru/h2h ‘200 11900 500 1osuitehrr 0.028 090 hid as iow lity he agora sinned to ile a ‘Second iteration yields closer ‘temperature estimates 35°F, a wind velocity of 10 mph, and a liquid level J 50%. The other data required are given in Table 11 Note that the liquid temperature is controlled at 35°F to provide a 5°F margin of safety Since the Prandt] and Grashof numbers occur repeat. edly in the film heat-transfer coefficient equations, ang jt remain relatively unchanged for all the conditions of| interest, let us first calculate their values, Thus, for the liquid phase LiptgB AT /y? = 97.5 LAT Clk = 484 Similarly, for the vapor phase, Ng, = 1.90 x 1OTLS AT, and Np, = 0.28. We can now calculate the individual film heat-transfer coefficients, using the ap propriate L and 37" values in the Grashof numbe equations. This is an iterative process that requires ini, & tial estimates for wall and ground temperatures, play wall temperatures Cocfficient for vapor at wall (fy). As an initial ap. proximation, assume that the wall’ temperature is the average of the vapor and outside-air temperatures T, = (50 + 35)/2 = 42.5°R, Then find the Grashot limber: Nop = 1.90 X 10%(L — Ly)¥(Ty — Ty) 1.90 x 107(24)(7.5) 97 x 10% Employing Eq. 15, find the Nuseelt number and then the coefficient (k= 0.0151, L = 48 ft, Ly = 24 fi} Nya = 0.138(%, 898 (NB.9 — 055) = 921.1 ye = (921IVAY/CL = Ly) = 0.581 Beu/feth- Coefficient for liquid at the wall (hy,.). Here, neither Npp Nor (Ng, Npy) falls within the range of the applica. blecorrelations (Eq. 16,18) Let us try both, again using an average for T, T+ Ty2 = 49°F 97ATLY(T,, — Tq) = 1.35 x 107 Using Eq. 16 and 18, we get wo estimates for the heat transfer coefficient (d= 0.12, Np, = 484) faye = (OAD5A/L )( Moy Npy)®2 = 0.704 Btu/f2h-*F (0454/L2°5).Na, Np) 415 Buu/ftth-*F To be comervative, we use the higher value: yg = 1415 Buus fue Coefficient for vapor at roof (hy). We consider this a flat plate, with a diameter of 20 ft, and use Eq. 208 again with an average T,, of 42.5°F (k = 000151}: 19 x 107 D%(Ty ~ T,) = 1.14 x 10? (0.27k/D)(No, Np_)°2 = 0.154 Beu/fh- Coefficient for liquid at tank bottom (yy). Assure that the ground temperature (T) is 5°F above ambi ent, and use an average of liquid and ground tempera tures as a first approximation for the tank-bottom tem erature: ‘‘hem, figue the Grashof number, and use Eq 1910 get | the coefficient: ae No, = 9747D% 9.85 x 108 - Np = 283 x 108 ire a= 1105 Ba/tehF CaM | _coctcient for ouside ai at roof (ty). Aswme | 1oe Time the rot unas aa eae fas te tae an Nor = 1.9 x 10°D4(T., ~ Ty Figg = 0.663 Beu/fe?h- Lid x 108 90 alate the | Coefficient for outside air at wall (fi). Assume that thetemperature drop across the film is one-fourth of the drop from the inside fluid to the outside air (averaged for the wet and dry walls), and use Eq. 15 t0 find the coefficient: AT = 175/4 = 4.379°F 19x 10D AT = 9.19 x 10" 0.51 Bru/fi?h-"F | ses, pl Conduction coefficients for ground, metal wall, and insulation (hg) hy, and h,). These are straightforward, fiom Eq, 21-25: | hg = Bhg/aD = 0.102 Beu/fth-°F Radiation coefficients for dry and wet sidewall, and 1008 (gas nes fg,)» AS for the outside-air film coeffi- cients, assume that Ty, = 7, +0.25 (Thuy —T,), where Thuy, is the temperature of the liquid or vapor inside the tank, ifthe surface is insulated, For the unin- sulated roof, assume that Try = Ty + 05(Ty — Ty), ‘Then Ty = 38.75°F for the (insulated) dry sidewall for the wet sidewall, and Ty, = 42.5°F for the roof. Using Eq, 24, find the coefficient for each of the theee cases applic Jing = 0.757 Btu/fi2heF 0.739 Beu/ftth."F 0.765 Beu/fth.*F ee ay Closing in on results Table TIT summarizes the heatctransfer coeficients ]nsccalclated, including the corrections for wind, Hand f,, are multiplied by 33 and 3.1, respectively der this based On data for 10-mph wind in Fig. 3, Substituting S Eq. 24) |e individual coefficients in Eq. 11-14, we obtain the 151k | U values listed in Table TI What remains to be done? When we began the calcu- ” Jnvons, we assumed that the outside-wal temperatures fith.F “were related to the bulkefluid temperatures by T= Ty + 05(Tyyiy — T,) for uninsulated surfaces Tay = Ty + 025(Tyax ~ T,) for insulated surfaces Inorder to calculate accurate coefficients for heat trans- fet, we must now obtain better estimates of these wall ‘temperatures. This requires an iterative procedure that fan be programmed and run on a computer, For dry wall, the rate of heat loss is given by all three of the following: 94 = Us Ag(Ty — Ty) (25) thy AalTy — Ty) (26) = ea + hase A g(Tay — Ta) 7) Solving Eq. 25 and 27 for Ty yiek Tag = (UH ng + hie) MTy — Ty) + Ty (28) Similarly, solving Eq. 25 and 26 for T, yields: Te Ty~ Ualtve\Ty— Ty) (29) Using the same approach, now calculate Ty and Toy for the wet wall, and T,, for the roof and bottom of the tank To find the correct wall temperatures, use the ini estimates of U and h values in Eq, 28 and 29 (and in the parallel equations for the other surfaces) to get new T., And Try Valucs. Table IV shows these temperatures after a second iteration. Using these new temperatures, re- compute Grashof numbers, individual heat-ransfer coefficients and overall coefficients, and then iterate again to get a new set of Ty and T.,, values. When the current and previous iteration’s temperature estimates re the same (within a specified tolerance), the iteration is completed, ‘Table V lists the individual and overall coefficients after the second iteration. Although it is clear that addi- al iterations are needed, let us accept these values as sufficiently accurate for the present purpose. Then we can obtain the total heat-transfer rate (Q) by using the U values in Eq. 1-5 and summing. Table VI shows the calculated heatransfer rates through each boundary, and the total rate. Note that the roof and bottom of the tank account for only slight heat loss, despite being uninsulated, ‘This, of cours, is for the unit period of time, when wind speed is 10 mph, the tank i half full, and the air is 35°F, Table VII shows how the results of unit-period SSA ENOTES WRT 131 Revised coefficients after second iteration‘Summing losses for unit periods 2 EY one SU yields heat loss for 30 days heat losses can be tabulated and added to get the cumu- lative heat loss for a month or year. Of course, this re- quires climatic data and tank-level estimates for the overall time-period. Comparison with other methods Aertin and Street [] offer a very simple method for calculating heat los from tanks. Fora tank with {in of sidewall insulation, and a wind speed of 10 mph, the recommended overall U (based on k= 0.019 for the insulation) is 0.14 for AT= 60°F and 0.14. for AT = 100°F. Adjusting these values for t= 0.028 and AT = 17°F, asin our example, yields an overall U of 0.206 Btu/ft*h-"F. The total exposed surface is 3,331 ft? (Gank bottom not included), and thus the overall ate of heat wansfer by their method = 0.206 x 3,331 x 17 = 11,666 Bru/h ‘This compares with a heat loss of 8,913 Btu/h (for the expoted surface) calculated by the procedure ofthis article-—see Table VI. Thus their method yields a result 31% too high in this case, Stublbarg [10] takes an approach similar to that pro- posed here, but his method differs in how the outside tankwal film coefficient is computed, Stuhlbarg recom- ‘mends the use of a manufacturer's data table, and does not explicitly distinguish between the bulk liquid tem- perature and the outside-wall surface temperature in calculating the proper heat-transfer coefficient. 132 SRE RoR STE a The algebraic method of Hughes and Deumaga [51 resembles the one presented in this article in mar ways. But it does not recognize differences between 1, uid and vapor temperatures inside the tank, nor dace account for the interaction between ST and wind in calculating a wind-enhancement factor. Finally, eyes though their procedure requires iteration, the focus er the iterative efforts is co get better estimates of fg properties, not tankwall temperatures, Conclusions Our engineer at ABC Chemical was abl to eyotn a significant reduction inthe heating charge pope by the XYZ Terminal Co, which had used anon method for its ctimate because the procedure ne sented here is rational and defensible. A rigorous ee tion ofthe iterations can easy be reached on 2 dig compute or even a programmable caleslaon, ang ey ‘ort pays of im beter design or operation extn Mar ipo Ey References 5 fren Rew 908 SHE pap nt Chemin se Do * Plo 8 Fey RM, and Chie, GH. “Chel Engincen' Handbook ely BicGia Mal, New Yor, Wap 16, me 9 Rohenow, WM and Marae, B."andook of Heat Tania Meret, Now Yo e488, 18 Sars, oo Dep Tit Heng Cal Ae, a 38. Sai ‘The authors EWS ee ee involved i al anpeets of engineering doign, He holds # B.Tech “ho 1 potion! engines in lr sna ind ctv in AICHE as chairman gate i Sc on ‘ann, rt ta eae ati Rode ees Sut” &j hit hae plang Mi Romar Rar Be sana he eee wes Rochen