Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ASM E 1998
IPC1998-2022
This Technical Paper is intended to provide general information with regañí to the subject matter covered. It should be understood that it does not
purport to be comprehensive and that the information m ay not apply to specific factual situations. [For more information concerning the subject matter,
please contact Terry A. Gallagher.]
Ft = Fr + Ff + Fd (3)
Lt = L s + Lw + Lh (1) r* (Pv /P a)
[l + ( l - ( P v /P a) f 5]2
Ff = [(NnKn)+ (Nf2Kn)+ ■ +(NfkKfk)] (V where: Nfc is the number o f fixed-roof support columns; and Fc is the
effective column diameter.
The product annual net throughput, Q, pertains to the volume o f
where: Nn is the number o f deck fittings o f a particular type; Kf, is the product that is associated with lowering the product level within the
deck-fitting loss factor for the particular type o f deck fitting; and i is working height, Hw. The product annual net throughput, Q, can be
the deck-fitting type number (i = 1, 2 ,..., k). related to the annual number o f tank turnovers, N „, by Equation 11 :
Deck-fitting loss factors, Kf, are listed in API MPMS, Chapter
19.2 [3] for different types o f deck fittings, along with the typical Q = (0.140) D2HwN w (11)
number o f specific types o f deck fittings for different diameter
floating-roof tanks. The deck-fitting loss factors are dependent upon Combining Equations 9 and 11, we obtain Equation 12, which
the ambient wind speed for EFRTs. may be used for determining the annual withdrawal loss, L^.
Deck-fitting loss factors also depend upon the construction
details o f the fitting. For example, some deck fittings may be available Lw( l b / y r ) = (0.132)DHwC,W|FwN w ( 12)
with or without gaskets. Deck-fitting loss factors are listed in API
MPMS, Chapter 19.2 [3] for a variety o f construction details for each
fitting, along with an indication o f what details are in typical use.
3.3 Heel Turnover Loss
Fully-controlled deck fittings are those where the most effective
The heel turnover loss. Lh, occurs when the floating roof is
evaporative loss control features have been incorporated in the fitting.
landed on its roof legs and the product heel is drained and later filled
to refloat the floating roof, as was described in Section 1.2.
When the product heel is drained, some portion o f the product
3.1.3 Total Deck-Seam Loss Factor. The total deck-seam
will cling to: (1) the inside surface o f the tank shell; (2) the bottom
loss factor, Fd, accounts for the evaporative loss that occurs from
surface o f the floating roof; and (3) the top surface o f the tank bottom.
seams on internal floating roofs and may be calculated from
It has been suggested [4] that a heel withdrawal loss be calculated for
Equation 8:
each heel turnover in a manner similar to that used to determine the
withdrawal loss described above in Section 3.2. This type o f heel
Fd = K d S d D 2 (8) withdrawal loss, however, has been found [6] to be a very small loss
contribution because it is based on the assumption that the product
where: Kd is the deck-seam loss factor; and Sd is the deck-seam length clingage factor, Q , for the tank bottom is the same as that for the tank
factor. shell. When the product heel has been drained, however, it is typical
The deck-seam loss factor, Kd, and deck-seam length factors, Sd, to have areas on the tank bottom that contain small residual pools o f
are listed in API MPMS Chapter 19.2 [3] for different types o f deck liquid product. Under the conditions where these tank bottom pools
seams. Since the total deck-seam loss factor, Fd, is proportional to the remain, it is more appropriate to assume that a heel breathing loss
square o f the tank diameter, D, the evaporative loss contribution from occurs as the product remaining in these bottom pools evaporates into
the deck seams can be significant for large diameter tanks. the heel vapor space.
Under these conditions, the heel turnover loss. Lh, is the sum of Substituting Equations 15 and 16 into Equation 14, and assuming
the heel breathing loss. Lhb, and the heel filling loss. Lhf, as shown by that T, = 520 °R, we obtain Equation 19, which may be used to
Equation 13: determine the annual heel breathing loss, Lhb:
where: Kfp is the heel filling product factor, Kfs is the heel filling
where Vb, Wv, Khe and are calculated from Equations 15 through saturation factor; and Nh is the number o f heel turnovers. The heel
18, respectively. filling product factor, Kfp, is 1.0 for refined products and single
component products, and is 0.75 for crude oil products [2].
The heel filling saturation factor, KfS, applies only to the
Heel Vapor Space Volume. Vh heel filling loss, Lhf, and is different than the heel breathing saturation
factor, ]()„, which applies only to the heel breathing loss, Lhb. The
heel filling saturation factor accounts for the degree o f saturation in
Vh = ^ -D 2Hh (15) the air-vapor mixture that is expelled from the heel vapor space during
a heel filling operation and is currently the subject o f an ongoing API
study. As a preliminary estimate, this factor may be estimated from
API MPMS Chapter 19.1 [2] as 1.0.
Product Vapor Density. Wv
Substituting Equations 15 and 16 into Equation 20 and
assuming that T, = 520 °R, we obtain Equation 21, which may be used
w „=Ä (16) to determine the annual heel filling loss, Lhr:
RT,
ATV APV
K be = ( I 7) 3.4 Heel Turnover Loss Com parisons
(Pa -P v )
Equations 2, 12, 19, and 21 were used to determine the standing
storage loss, Ls, withdrawal loss, heel breathing loss, Lhb, and heel
filling loss, L^, respectively, for a range o f assumed conditions.
Heel Breathing Saturation Factor.
3.4.2 Standing Storage Loss Rate. L ,. Figures 5 through 8 3.4.5 Heel Filling Loss Per Heel Turnover. Figure 11
present the standing storage loss rate, Ls (lb/day), based on Equation 2 presents the heel filling loss per heel turnover, Lw (lb/heel turnover),
for the assumed conditions listed above, for tank diameters, D (ft), for an EFRT or IFRT based on Equation 21 for the assumed
from 50 ft to 300 ft. Figures 5 and 6 apply to an EFRT for wind conditions listed above, for tank diameters, D (ft), from 50 ft to 300 ft,
speeds from 2 to 14 mi/hr, and Figures 7 and 8 apply to an IFRT. The and for heel heights, Hh (ft), from 0.5 ft to 7 ft. The annual heel filling
annual standing storage loss is the product o f the standing storage loss loss is the product o f the heel filling loss rate, Lhr (lb/heel turnover),
rate, Ls (lb/day), and the annual standing storage time, t, (days). and the annual number o f heel turnovers, N h (heel tumovers/yr).
a>i
5
A
O
09
3
V)
Figure 5 Standing Storage Loss Rate o f a CB&I EFRT w ith an A verage-Fitting M echanical-Shoe Prim ary Seal
and a Rim -M ounted Secondary Seal2
OC
»CO
O
S
2
3
en
Figure 6 Standing Storage Loss Rate o f a CB&I EFRT w ith a Tight-Fitting M echanical-
Shoe Prim ary Seal and a Rim -M ounted Secondary Seal2
Figure 7 Standing Storage Loss Rate o f a CB&I IFR T w ith A verage-Fitting Rim Seals, a S elf-
Supporting Fixed R oof and a W elded S teel C ontact Floating Roof2
R im S e a l S ystem
45
40
3 35
a
30
OC
B 25
B
O
_1
«u> 20
hos_
10
a
eg
in
5
0
50 100 150 200 250 300
Figure 8 Standing Storage Loss Rate o f a CB&I IFRT w ith Tight-Fitting Rim Seals, a S elf-
Supporting Fixed R oof and a W elded Steel C ontact Floating Roof2
1 / \ ( s i
I A m iyi'FH tinf S o b a p J TigM-Fittmt SeA « d 1
J l i M i i i f l f J Dafc F ittn p { n f l^ - C M n U D a k f ittia p J |
i
QAimari Staving Storage Loss\
■Amual VVRMaml Loss
oraanng u n s r
11
RBng Loss J
!
Ms* *3 ft
r — i
Î
■
m M Ms*-2ft
B a Hsal "2ft
B
t
t] LlD
w <03n
L O i » i □ D
HHl-OSO
u u
Figure 13 Total Annual Product Loss Contributions for a 100 ft dia. IFRT2
TABLE 1 - Summary of Total Annual Loss for an EFRT
Description Units Case 1 Case 5 Case 3 Case 4 CaseS Case 6
FLOATING ROOF TANK DESCRIPTION i ll
• Emission Controls ••• Average Average Average Tight Tight Tight
• Heel Height ft 5 2 03 5 2 03
WITHDRAWAL LOSS
• Withdrawal Loss per Tank Turnover Ib/tanktum. 7.24 7.24 7.24 724 7.24 724
• Annual Tank Turnovers tanktum /yr 26 26 26 26 26 26
A nnual Withdrawal Loss Ib/yr 188 188 188 188 188 188
WITHDRAWAL LOSS
• Withdrawal Loss per Tank Turnover Ib/tanktum. 724 7.24 7.24 724 7.24 724
• Annual Tank Turnovers tankturo/yr 26 26 26 26 26 26
A nnual W ithdrawal Loss Ib/yr 188 188 188 188 188 188
Figure 16 Flexible Floating-R oof Drain System Figure 18 IFR T w ith Em ission C ollection System
with In-Tank Sum p
5 CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES
• Product Heel Represents Trapped Inventory. The product heel 1. American Petroleum Institute, May 1993, “Welded Steel
reduces the tank net working capacity and represents a dead asset. Tanks for Oil Storage,” API Standard 650, Ninth Edition,
• Reducing the Heel in Floating-Roof Tanks Improves Product Washington, D.C.
Inventory. As a result o f reducing the product heel in floating-roof
2. American Petroleum Institute, October 1991, “Evaporative
tanks, the volume of non-working or trapped inventory is reduced.
Loss From Fixed-Roof Tanks,” API Manual o f Petroleum
This improves the operating revenues for the tank owner or operator.
• Heel Turnover Losses Can Be Significant for Drain-Dry Measurement Standards, Chapter 19.1, (API Publication 2518), First
Operations on a Floating-Roof Tank. The heel filling loss is the largest Edition, Washington, D.C.
component of the heel turnover loss, and can significantly exceed both 3. American Petroleum Institute, April 1997, “Evaporative Loss
the standing storage loss and the withdrawal loss. From Floating-Roof Tanks,” API Manual o f Petroleum Measurement
• Heel Turnover Losses May Be Required In Annual Loss Standards, Chapter 19.2, (Combined API Publications 2517 and
Estimates. For example, the USEPA has indicated that they intend to 2519), First Edition, Washington, D.C.
soon include a loss estimate procedure for heel turnover losses in 4. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, May 10, 1996,