You are on page 1of 7

COADE Mechanical Engineering News

11) Can multiple ESLs be attached to the same parallel port? Yes, as long as they are for different programs. The software stops searching for the ESL as soon as one is recognized. This is not a problem for "local" ESLs, but could be a problem on a network. You can not have two COADE network (red) ESLs on the same network - the software will never find the second device. 12) What networks and what operating systems are supported by the Network ESL? The network ESL from Aladdin Software Security has been used with COADE software on Novell, Pathworks, and Banyon networks. Operating systems include DOS, Windows, and Windows/NT. 13) Does a site with multiple COADE products need multiple network ESLs? No - in fact, as point #11 stated, multiple ESLs with the same 10 code can not reside on the same network. The COADENetworkESLhas been setup to supportmultiple products, each with a specified number of licenses. Only one "network" ESL per network is required (possible).

April, 1995
be available for download from the COADE BBS as well as CompuServe. In addition, an "International" version of this data base will also be included. This "International" version will include several materials commonly used outside of the U.S. The revised API material data base will be designated A650_94.MA T, and the "International" data base will be designated A650_94I.MAT. Both material data bases will be contained in the download file 0 120_ C.ZIP. To utilize either ofthese new material data base files, place the ZIP file in the TANK program directory. Extract the data base files using PKUNZIP. Then, use the TANK configuration option to select the desired data base from the necessary data directories. The new scope limitation of Appendix P will appear as a warning message in the next version of TANK. This modification to the software will simply warn the user if nozzles are specified on a tank with a diameter less than 120 feet (36.6 meters). This will not prevent the program from running or applying the rules and equations of Appendix P.

Applying API-653
By Vincent Carucci

Impact of API-650 Addendum 1
By Richard Ay

The following article has been submittedfor publication by Vincent Carucci, Vice President of Carmagen Engineering, Inc., 7 Waverly Place, Madison, NJ 07940.

API-653 and Tank Shell Thickness Assessment The primary focus of this article is to discuss API-653 requirements for the shell thickness of atmospheric storage tanks. It will begin by first briefly summarizing the background and scope of API-653 to establish a foundation for what will follow. It will then generally describe tank inspection requirements and then focus on the shell. The article assumes that the readers are generally familiar with both API-650 and API-653. Background One catastrophic brittle fracture of a storage tank that occurred in 1988 spilled approximately 750,000 gallons of diesel fuel into adjacent storm sewers that then emptied into a nearby river. The owner of the tank spent several million dollars in cleanup costs and fmes because of this one incident This failure, along with two other spills that occurred within about a year of this one, focused a great deal of attention on the condition of existing storage tanks and the potential consequences of a failure. One result of this attention was the publication of API-653 in January 1991. API-653 addresses the condition of existing, aboveground, atmospheric pressure storage tanks that were originally

. In December 1994, API issued Addendum 1 to the ninth edition of the API-650 standard. While a number of pages in this code were revised by Addendum 1, there are only two changes which affect design or analysis computations (and therefore users of COADE's TANK program). The first change of interest concerns the API materials listed in Table 3-2, and their groups listed in Table 2-3. Addendum 1 has removed materials FE 42, FE 44, and FE 52 from these tables. In place of these materials, API has added FE 430 and FE 510. The second item of interest is a change in the scope of Appendix P, for nozzle flexibilities and limiting loads. Addendum 1 has added a phrase, limiting the applicability of this appendix. As paragraph P.l now reads, the use of Appendix P is recommended only for tanks in excess of 120 feet (36.6 meters) in diameter. How will these Addendum 1 changes affect TANK? The material data base will be revised to reflect the new materials, and remove the old FE materials. This new data base will


Para. it must confirm that the tank will remain structurally sound during the entire next period of operation.COADE Mechanical Engineering News designed using API-650 or its predecessor.. API-653 does not specify the exact inspection procedures that must be followed nor the quantity of data that must be collected. Minimum acceptable thickness.3. Therefore. These are the tank components that directly affect the structural integrity and liquid storage capability of the tank. The most common form of deterioration that must be addressed is corrosion. 1995 The portion of the shell that corresponds to the normal operating liquid level may corrode more than the rest of the shell due to the liquid/vapor interface. evaluation of tank shell integrity must consider the required shell thicknesses (which vary with elevation on the shell) and the actual thicknesses measured. Inspection and Engineering Evaluation An API-653 inspection program addresses four main components of the tank: the roof. plate distortion or corrosion). SheD Integrity Evaluation API-653 provides procedures for calculating the minimum required shell course thicknesses and acceptance criteria for both uniforinIy corroded and pitted areas of the shell.. whereas other areas may have experienced significant corrosion. You must assume that the corrosion will continue as the tank remains in operation. API-12C. A large amount of corrosion in this area. may also be caused by rainwater accumulation due to poor tank pit drainage. G = The highest specific gravity of the tank contents. assume that portions of the tank shell have thinned due to corrosion. for any shell course. weld defects) and other forms of deterioration (e. For example: April. I in. ft. 2. H = Height from the bottom of the most severely corroded area in each shell course to the maximum design liquid level. within the required allowable stresses.g. It only specifies what must be inspected and the acceptance criteria.3 of API-653). in. Even a small leak is unacceptable. evaluation of the shell thickness inspection data must confirm that each portion of the shell has sufficient corrosion allowance remaining for the entire next period of operation. This engineering evaluation must go beyond confirming that the tank is structurally sound at the time of inspection. and foundation.g. including water if the tank may be hydrotested in the future. Large areas of the shell may not have corroded at all. and may vary by position around the tank circumference. Nominal tank diameter. One side of the tank may corrode more than the rest due to the prevailing wind direction.6D(H -1)6 SE Where: tmin ::::. For example. API-653 goes beyond merely requiring that the main tank components be inspected. An API-653 evaluation of the shell thickness requires confirmation that the shell will not thin to an unacceptable level before it is inspected again. API-653 requirements go beyond those that are necessary to prevent a brittle fracture. The minimum required shell plate thickness will normally be calculated using the following equation (Ref. 8 . shell. The actual measured thicknesses will vary by tank course. in diameter: tmin = 2. the shell is normally not uniformly corroded in its entirety. ft. It requires that an engineering evaluation be made of the inspection data to ensure that the structural condition of the tank meets specified acceptance criteria. Cannot be less than O. However. or even by specific location within a given tank plate.  Therefore. D::::. bottom. by elevation within the course. Shell Inspection The tank shell must be visually examined for obvious flaws (e. API653 presents requirements that are intended to prevent a tank failure due to brittle fracture. but on the outside. Ensuring that a tank will not leak before the next inspection is more than just ensuring that it will not fail-eatastrophically. While corrosion may be uniform over large areas of the shell. API-653 requires that existing tanks be periodically inspected to ensure that they are structurally sound.  Sludge and wax deposits may accumulate at the tank bottom near the shell and cause more corrosion in the lower portion of the bottom course than elsewhere. and shell wall thickness measurements must be made to evaluate the remaining thickness of the shell. as long as the tank is no larger than 200 ft. and will not leak before the next opportunity for inspection. This article focuses only on uniformly corroded areas.

If nothing else.000 psi if the plate material is unknown.000 psi.0 if a corroded area that is being evaluated is far enough away from the welds. The values of the allowable stresses also differ from those that are in API-650 for the same material specifications. E = The original weld joint efficiency used in the tank design. "S" varies with shell course and is the same for both the stored liquid case and the hydrotest case.426T for the bottom or second courses. The reason for this low value is that even as late as 1970.  As previously mentioned. calculating the 9 .0 (Le.80Y or 0. However. However. the initial inspection data that you receive may not show how close the corroded area is to the welds.  "H" is measured from the bottom of the most severely corroded area in each shell course.88Y or 0. this equation can only be used if the tank diameter is no greater than 200 ft. a tank may have been designed and constructed five years ago using A-516 Orade 70 plate for the shell (Y 38. The information that you really want is the following:  "0" must consider both the specific gravity of the stored liquid and whether the tank will be hydrotested in the future.. the evaluation must be made using the variable design point method of API-650.000 psi and T = 55. Note that "E" can be assumed to be equal to 1. That is because this equation is based on the One-Foot shell thickness calculation method of API-650.. This is obviously a very simple equation.472T for all other courses. without additional information. APJ-650 uses the same material allowable stress regardless of the course that is being checked. Use E = 0. "Y" is the specified minimum yield strength of the plate or 30. it differs from API-650. with the distance as defined by API-653. We will now look at some things to be careful of. but this can deceive you into thinking that a complete shell evaluation is simpler than it really is. the tank cannot be filled to its original design fill height even if no corrosion at all has occurred (assuming that no excess thickness was provided in the original design). However to maximize the permitted fill height of the stored liquid. do not worry about the welds) if you are evaluating a corroded area that is far enough away from the welds. and it uses a higher allowable stress for the hydrotest case. "T" is the smaller of the specified minimum tensile strength of the plate or 80. Y = 30. Calculating the minimum required thickness for each shell course (and in corroded regions) is really a means to an end. Hydrotesting is required if major repairs or alterations are needed. Unfortunately. the evaluation must be made using the conservative assumption that the corrosion is at the bottom of the course in question. Note also that API-653 permits a shell integrity evaluation even if the shell material specification is unknown. In these respects. not necessarily from the bottom of the course. For larger diameter tanks. This is a more complicated.000 psi). s = Maximum allowable stress.1995 minimum required thickness for both the stored liquid and water is acceptable. if all the tank records are lost and the materials cannot be confirmed. tanks may have been designed with this low weld joint efficiency (depending on the shell weld detail and inspection specified). this emphasizes the importance of recordkeeping.7 if the "E" used in the original design is unknown.000 psi if the plate material is unknown. this can be an extreme penalty to pay if the actual joint efficiency was much higher than this.COADE Mechanical Engineering News April. or the smaller of 0.000 psi). iterative calculation procedure (but use of COADE's TANK program makes it simple). Note that the Variable Design Point Method may be used for smaller diameter tanks if desired. or 55. Then an acceptable fill height for each liquid can be back-calculated based on the measured thicknesses.e. "E" must be assumed to be 0. Therefore. Putting this in perspective. • =  • The evaluation must be made for every shell course.7 if the original E is unknown. E = 1.000 psi and T = 70. The smaller of O. This can be a large penalty if the shell was actuall y fabricated using higher strength steel. Here again. when inspection data are provided for evaluation. with the assumption that the shell material is low in strength (i. psi. you often just get the minimum thickness or a range of thicknesses measured in each course with no indication of the elevations within the course where the measurements were made.

.....•.......... considers deterioration)...•........) Tank Nominal Diameter I..............• (ft... Shell Evaluation Example ¥Ve'll now put all these words t(l a practical test using the TANK Program.......•..........e..........000 · OOOD O UNKNOWN Weight of Attachments & Structures .......•. (ft.. 00000 3...... therefore.. It is your job to decide if the tank can remain in service at the desired design fill height.....) Shell Course 1/6 Corresion Allowance teA] . (lb.................) Shell Course 1/ 2 Corrosion Allowance (CA] ........... API-653 forces you to use E == 0.. Assume that a shell thickness inspection has just been done of the external floating roof... The design fill height for the tank is 56 ft...... (ft...................... On Allowance [CA) •................ Since there arc no original records....000 ......) Shell Course If 5 Height .. The API-653 evaluation must consider all loads that can be applied (i... 375DO Example Problem Unknown Material ....) Shell Course I! 8 Thickness ....ODO O .. This tank was built 10 year:.......125 in....D] ...............D DODO 8....•........ ) Shell Course g 3 CorrosiOn Allowance [CA] ....•..... Shell Design Stress LSd] ••............... (V-variable.. 87500 · 00000 8....e.....................  ¥Vhat are the maximum permitted tank fill heights for both the stored liquid and for any future hydrotest? Note that future corrosion allowance must be considered even for the hydrotest case when doing an API-653 evaluation...•.... ....) Shell Course If 5 CorrosiOn Allowance [CA] ......•........'hat shell weld inspection was done or the weld joint efficiency used in the design............ I.... ) Shell Course 1/ 7 Corrosion Allowance [CA] ........................... 65 3D A 15.00 64.•.i".................•............. you do not know for sure ~............. (in.............. or AJ .. Wind Velocity ..... OODO O e........•........•.) She 11 Materi a 1 ...................... only one area of corrosion was found in the bottom shell course.. you must use the API-653 default material yield and tensile strengths..... ) Shell Course 11 2 Height ....... AP [ Oes i gn Code { 650 or 653 ) ....) Shell Course If 5 Thickness .) Liquid Specific Gravity [G] •..•...................8. crude oil storage tank shown in Figure I..... From the thickness measurements made.....) ..) Shell Course g 4 Corrosion Allowance [CA] ...... (ft..••../sq................ 1995 Several things are going against you in this problem...OOO OL 1250 . O-one foot.. ("in... The inspection data only gave the minimum thickness measured and did not say exactly what elevation in the bottom course the minimum thickness was at........•... Figure 2 shows the initial input data used for this problem..........·in...) Shell Course g 7 Height ....... . 37500 .) Distance down to Top Wind Girder............•.... A-Appendix A) Run Objective (Q-design... thick........0000 ......0000 ...) Shell Ccurse I! 8 Corrosion Allowance [CA] ............... (in..... and this corrosion extends for a maximum vertical distance of 40 in............. (F ) Design Pressure at Top .......•.. (in.. but all the design and fabrication records have been lost...) Shell Course II 4 Height............ OOOO D 8.................... (in.......... (in. 800DO ....... O. you must assume that the entire corroded area is at the bottom of the coilrse and that it is all 1...........7 00000 1 0 ... which assumes that the tank is hydrotested right after it has been built and the plates arc all at their new thicknesses...../sq................. (ft..•...n. Therefore......•.... (ft......./sQ............) Shell Course 11 3 Hei ght .......) Shell Course 1/ 2 inickness ............7 5000 .COADE Mechanical Engineering News  How much corrosion allowance do I have left at the relevant elevations in the shell?  How long can the tank stay in operation based on the available corrosion allowances? 2....•...... (ft. 0000 ... 0000 1............. The shell material is unknown.•.•.....1250 · OOOD O 8......•. (ft.....) Shell Course II 4 Thickness ........ Therefore..... (in................... (lb....••..125 in..... 62500 ............. ('in. API-653 addresses the actual condition of existing tanks (i...........•••....... .) Shell Course 1/8 Height................. DODO .) She 11 Course 11 3 Thi ckness ..........•..... and the original nominal course thicknesses are as shown in the figure ( based on the thickness measurements made). must consider future hydrotests)...............•......... and the specific gravity of the crude oil is 0..............•...•.......... (ft...........) Shell Course fI 6 Height .......) JOint Efficiency (App A or 653) [E] .. (ft........... Shell Course g 1 Height .0 0000 8. OODO ............................... (i n........ ago...•.......................... (ft...................... API-650 is a design standard..... DO B Figure 1 Figure 2 Input Data for Case 1 B...............................................•...000 56. (in....7... (in....... A-analyze) ...) Shell Course 1/ 6 Thickness ...) She 11 Course 1/ 7 Thi ckness ......... (mph ) Num~er of Shell Courses ..................) Tonk Shell Height [HTK) ..•. 3. (in.................... ('j n.......•..) Shell Course g 1 Thickness ................. The minimum thickness reported in this corroded area was 1......... No corrosion was noted elsewhere in the shell....•..............•.......3750 0 .... 70000 IDO........•........ (......•. and Figure 3 shows the portion of the output that is relevant for our purposes....'E == 0......................) Design Liquid Level [H] ....... which differs from an API-650 design evaluation......) She 11 Course g 1 -Corros...iIL) Shell Hydro Test Stress (St] ..... Design Method (V......•...... ...... (ft.•.. (l b.......... ... (lb.............00000 · 00000 175................. DODO .•... Design Temperature ...... and does not consider future hydrotests. April.................. (i n.......0000 0 8................................ ...... (in...............

r:-Illure h¥ droll'. However.30046 . /h it slands now.0431 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 .23478 . 1'¥otc that the hottol11 C<lIHse limits the pcnnillcd fill h~'ight of crudc nil to 51.9765 0 . it could nol have been designed per Appendix A.3039 . You also have 1.) (ft.3039 .69 fl.16 429 ..l (ft.37500 .000 8.0000 .I!l allowance in lTIlh and ¥i is the eorru:.l' ¥¥ ould he limited (0 an evcnlowcr 11l:ighl.) (I n.1250 1.0 as long as the tank wa~ nOI designed in accordance with Appendix A.0 be sure that the lank is nol filled with water beyond its limiling height. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1.14022 .00000 Figure 3 Output Data for Case I The first pass evaluation shows that you ha¥e a couple of problems.81893£-0 .2207 1.10000 1.10150  .e. Now let". see how u~ing E = 1. Since this lank's shell is thickcr than 1. 552 41.37558 . If the particular site i:-..962 15.62500 .690 51. ) USER (i n..3 7558 . Therl'fore. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 51.26194£·01  49114E .2e of API·653 requires that when till' corrosion ralC is known (as in this case) the maximum ~hcll inspection inten'almust he the smalln of RCAn~ or 15 YC.2 in. 3.97650 . 17527 ..l) fl.) (i n.57 589 .e evaluation resul1~ in order to arrive at an al'ceplahk operating interval beforl~ the next inspection. ) (I n.2207 1.954 25. 4 and 6 arc also no good although no corrosion at all was found. and the Sth edillOn of API650 was in effeci at that lime.721 19. where ReA is the remaining eOr!'OSI(.77619 .0 I . e¥en if yo II decidc to rcr~m th~' botlnrn coursc .000 24. Ag.. and redo the calculations 10 arrive . and you still haVc' to reduce this further to aeCtlunt for future corwsion until the next inspection. S778lE· 03 . 37500 MiN TJ (deg F  .776 19 .202 19.0431 .93798E-O . ) (i n. /¥bo do not ignorl' the hydrotest fill hcightlimits thatrhc upper coursc' would impose.0 affects the concJusion:-.jin nOle that future cOr!'osiofl mU:-. This lank wa~ built I () ycar~ ago..78120 . calculate the required corrosion allowan<.e.3.37500 .:llihicknc<s d~II'1. limiting its fill height) even if no dcterioration is found. it can be safdy assumed Ihatthc design weld joint efficiency was 1.peclion and e¥'al¥lation first.721 41.t1. 4.74538£01 .87500 . then you can just dctermine the desired inspection inlnv. future cllrro~i()n lIlust hceonsidered in conjunction with the:-.000 40.17888 .11 final fill height limitations. more diswrbing is that Courses 2. 977 15.¥ NA NA NA NA API-653 THICKNESS/CORROSION RESERVES Retiring Thickness Remaining Corrosion Design Test Design Test (i n.econd pan of Ihc output ~ho¥'. 57589 .17527 . An I¥ppendix A design would only apply iflhe maximum shell plall~ thicknc>s was 1/2 in. 1 1 . ) 1 1.460 71 .000 16. The cOllclusiun~ that ¥¥ crt' prescnted do not C¥ll1Silkr any futurc corrosion Ih<ll wOlild lake plan: during the next period nfoperation since Ihe input did not include a con"(lsjon allowance.946 30. tlw nu¥im11111 permitted fill hcights ba"ed tllllhc sh.19973 . It would probahly he preferable to do a bit morc in.1250 . 00000 1. "rich" in tank capacity. Howeycr.1 also be considered for the hydrotest case.000 32. representing a capacity reduction of almost XCk. The remaining shell thickness in the bottom course is not sufficient foreitherthe design liquid or the hydrotest watcr(nOle (he negative available corrosion allowances).95657E-O ..78120 .442 32. the tank cannot be filled ¥'vith crude oiltn a height of more than 51.j 1. Therefore as long as there is st ill an API-()50 nameplate on (he tank (cnnfinning that it ¥Vas designed and erected in accordance with API650 at the time) it would he reasonable to use E= 1.6209 6 .721 19.000 48. Staning with the 7th edition of API-650. Note lhal Para. 1995 The .ion rate In mils per SHELL COURSE THICKNESS DATA Thickness Values for Three Cases COURSE DESIGN TEST ( in.0000 l 1 J .1 4022 .5258 1.46071 .683 38.62096 . 552 35.5258 1.977 15.37500 NA NA NA N.(.690 44.75000 . YOll have a couple of decisions to 111<ll-.lrs.3 7500 SHELL COURSE ALLOWED FLUID HEIGHTS Fluid Heights for Three Cases COURSE DESIGN TEST REQUIRED (ft.) ycaL At thi~ poim. This clearly illustrates the imparlance of maintaining tank records since an API-653 ev~t1uation could force downrating a tank (i.977 56.12904 .552 rl.0 for the API-6S} evaluation (which still conforms to the intent or API-653).30 046 .3.10000 1. Figure 4 pnl¥'idcs the output rur this case.40082 .COADE Mechanical Engineering News April.:c in order to achieve tbis interval.

1 of API-653). Recalculating the required inspection interval yields the following result: Shell Inspection Interval = 0.00 6 0 Figure 4 22. Paras.79 32.00 3 0 43.43467 .39 483 .0681) = 0.21228 .00 1 0 58.30 250 . First calculate the corrosion rate.3.) (in. ) . (Based on the bottom course). There may be situations where the site cannot take the time to make the repair now and needs to get the tank back into service. At this point.1. ) (ft.414 63. usually targeting for at least 10 years or more.1. You can now determine the required inspection interval based on these results and see if this suits your inspection. it's worth pointing out one more thing before concluding this example.2.Minimum Measured Thickness)N ears of Operation N Using the previous results. 1.3. 1.0. Let's now assume that the following additional inspection data have been obtained: API-653 THICKNESS/CORROSION RESERVES Retiring Thickness Design Test (in.25.147 in. 745 27.215 in.) . N = (Original Thickness . Operating companies wantto maximize their inspection intervals.37 500 HEIGHTS REOUIRE D (ft.) (in.2768 5 . N. It is possible to use the TANK program to calculate the fill height limitations assuming the needed corrosion allowance until the next inspection. there now is a (1. however. ) 1. however.39 16. maintenance. 745 58.025 = 1.00 1 0 50.404 54. 12 . API-653 permits that the measured shell thicknesses be "averaged".32250 .COADE Mechanical Engineering News April.2705 4 .221 88 .3.00 1 0 36.2 0666 . 2.l25 in.98 151E·01 . but we can easily see that this second criterion does not govern here. and that the evaluation be made considering both the average and minimum thicknesses in the corroded region (Ref.5433 4 .93 48.546 84 .92 40. This change in "E" has made a big difference. 26290 .00 9 0 22. 00000 Remaining Corrosion Design Test (in.745 27.147/2 x 0.2.91 272 . 32816 .39 8.125. there is actually a corrosion allowance left even for the hydrotest case.414 73. 1.574 27. Therefore the maximum shell inspection interval is calculated as follows: Shell Inspection Interval = RCAI2N Shell Inspection Interval = 0. 16468 . result in the following measurements: 1. At this point. 37500 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Fluid Heights for Three Cases TEST (ft.00 22.000 Case 26Output Unknown 0 . you might choose to repair the shell in order to achieve complete flexibility for future hydrotesting.14 years This is better than before but not great.) . The minimum remaining corrosion allowance is 0. Five thickness measurements.057 in.56925E-O l .125)/10 = 0.19145 .2 and 2.1995 This says you have to inspect the shell again in just over a year in order to still operate the tank at its maximum fill height without repairing the corroded area.85446 .93 56.40 312 . 1. based on the maximum corrosion that has occurred.lyear.25231 . There is no advantage to rmding out how close the corrosion is to the welds in this case since we are already using E = 1.375 . corrosion allowance remaining.00 000 SHELL COURSE ALLOWED FLUID COURSE DESIGN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 73.025 in. 68355 .0 000 6 • • The worst portion of the corroded area really does start at the bottom of the course.057/2 x 0.65 24. equally spaced per API653 criteria.3153 3 . This yields an average thickness of 1. and operations planning needs. in this case) is at least 60% of the required thickness plus the needed corrosion allowance.215 . Note that the complete API653 evaluation of this case would also require checking that the minimum measured thickness (1.E=1.11210 . it probably would be worthwhile to ask the inspectors to go out and take more thickness measurements in the corroded area to better define the extent of the corrosion and the actual elevation that it starts at.39 Material .068 1 . 21032 .489 45. This corrosion rate is quite severe. The evaluations that have been made thus far were based on the minimum thickness that was measured.3.7 3017 .025 = 2. This is still not an attractive conclusion.9 years = (1.1226 9 .

574 7 36.43174 .681 31.2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9730 API-653 THICKNESS/CORROSION RESERVES Retiring Thickness Remaining Corrosion Design Test Design Test (in.670 8.7363 8. .244 85 .25 in.50 089 . . 28452 . The output summarized in Figure 6 is for the exact same case as in Figure 5 but assumes that you found data that indicates that the entire shell was fabricated from A .CA = 0.1319 8.000 40.27685 .future articles to discuss these and other topics.1 8111 . This corrosion allowance is then used as input data and the fill-height limits can be calculated.54 334 .) • 19389 .328 16 .115 50. this may lead you to conclude that it is not necessary to make any repairs now.CA 0. ) (ft.981 51E-Ol .000 4 39. and using detailed stress analysis to evaluate locally corroded regions.25 in.8366 6 .000 32.154 48.9148 9.000 1 Figure 6 Case 4 Output A-SI6 Gr. Maybe the tank contractor still had the original design information for the tank. within the Computation Control section of the program configuration menu) .0 In looking at Figure 6.670 8.COADE Mechanical Engineering News In this case.1319 8.000 6 10. shell thickness evaluations for riveted tanks.26190 .) 63.659 27.3750 0 .) (In.0000 0 .00000 SHELL COURSE ALLOWED FLUID HEIGHTS Fluid Heights for Three Cases COURSE DESIGN TEST REQUIRED (ft. There is now only a minimal fill height limitation even for the hydrotest case.000 5 30.40 071 . Figure 5 Case 3 Output Unknown Material .000 7 10.025) 0. Note that when you run this case.011 24.25231 . 00000 .945 32.2 1032 . 13263 .4 0312 .370 88 .3 0250 .E = = 1.4556 7 .90 483E-Ol .) (ft. assume that you want to place the tank back into service and inspect it again in five years.442 50.000 8.2122 8 .3 2770 .E = 1.14692 .36054 .) .0000 .504 12 .516 Grade 60 plate.85446 . 60 Plate .3750 0 SHELL COURSE ALLOWED FLUID HEIGHTS Fluid Heights for Three Cases REQUIRE COURSE DESIGN TEST D (ft. We are planning to write .546 84 . ) (ft. 24237 . 11210 .97907 .78326 . Depending on the circumstances.23593 . 26290 7 8 .6693 3 .0 As you can see from Figure 5.24 911 .3 7163 .43467 .210 56.9148 46.3750 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 .2 2188 . This article discussed several things to be considered when doing a shell thickness evaluation in accordance with API-653 and illustrated these using an example. using the TANK program to check corroded areas at elevations that are above the bottom of a course.12269 .745 9.352 39.34 929 . .762 55.) (ft.7363 16.000 2 62. For this situation.7363 .9127 2 .e.31 533 .1995 = API-653 THICKNESS/CORROSION RESERVES Retiri Desi (in.2883 4 .0000 8 10.1319 8 48. you can clearly see the difference that the material specification makes. April.527 22. using the Variable Design Point Method.683 55 .0681 . ) 1 68. 57.20 666 .00000 .659 29.2 5337 ..32250 .322 2 3 4 5 6 45.630 15 .9148 9.37500 .) (in.692 56.000 24.191 45 .3948 3 . Items that were not discussed include evaluation of pitting. the tank can remain in service for five years (actually more) at the design fill height of crude oil without repairs as long as hydrotest is not a consideration during this time period.7 3017 .11310 .25 in.209 24. The results are shown in Figure 5.000 16.0 0000 1.681 40.000 3 49.058 36. you must reset theT ANK program defaultto consider the corroded hydrotest case for an API-653 evaluation (i.0000 0 The last thing that is worth noting is the impact that the "weak material" assumption has on the evaluation.396 8.670 8.) (in. you need a corrosion allowance of (5 x 2 x 0. 16468 .