×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

API 650 11th Edition û 5.11.2 Unanchored Tanks

API 650 11th Edition û 5.11.2 Unanchored Tanks

API 650 11th Edition û 5.11.2 Unanchored Tanks

(OP)
MDL is a  moment about the shell-to-bottom joint from the weight of the shell and roof supported by the shell. Is this weight to be considered in corroded condition or new tank weight?

Thanks.


 

RE: API 650 11th Edition û 5.11.2 Unanchored Tanks

I believe you can use the as-designed shell thickness under the assumption that corrosion would be localized and not general thinning of the steel.

RE: API 650 11th Edition û 5.11.2 Unanchored Tanks

I agree with IFRs.  I think this is also something that should be made more clear in the standard.  And it's not clear to me if this was actually the intent of the writers, or just the result of poor wording or oversight.

See the definition of Dead Load in 5.2.1.  Also note the usage of "nominal" (= "as-built") roof thickness in App. F, sections F.1.2, F.4.1, F.4.2, etc.

Note that when calculating uplift forces on anchor bolts, the corroded thicknesses are used.

RE: API 650 11th Edition û 5.11.2 Unanchored Tanks

Dear SANGCALG Hello/Good Afternoon,

May I, Just add slightly from a somewhat different perspective of corrosion.

Since Corrosion is most usually oxidation(i.e.oxygen is added and weight slightly increased per unit area;with the exception if it is peeled-off/ removed.)

Whereas usually it stays-on& should be witnessed clinging and associated on to the surfaces; therefore most probably this weight increase

And consequent possible momentum factor increase on this account is not considered greatly affecting from an overall perspective by the Standard related personnel.

Hope this gives some explanation to your query.I believe!

Best Regards
Qalander(Chem)

RE: API 650 11th Edition û 5.11.2 Unanchored Tanks

(OP)
Thank you all for your input. For anchored tanks it is specifically corroded weight and hence I had a confusion. The same concept is also implied in appendix V. It is the uncorroded thickness unless the corrosion is uniform and all over.
 

RE: API 650 11th Edition û 5.11.2 Unanchored Tanks

In the wind stability calculations, the as-built thickness is used also, and there again, it is assuming that average thickness is not affected much, just localized thinning.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources