Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract
This section of the manual addresses the basic design requirements for atmospheric
storage tanks. Company and industry specifications are discussed as well as the data
required before sizing and designing a new tank. Information is provided
concerning the impact of seismic and wind forces on the design of tanks. It also
provides tank construction techniques for keeping the tank within the tolerances of
Company and industry specifications.
Contents Page
Fig. 500-1 Weld Joints in Cylindrical Tank Shell From API 650, Figures 3.1 and 3.2. Courtesy of the American Petro-
leum Institute
Fig. 500-2 Schematic of “One-Foot” Method for Cylindrical Tank Shell Design
The maximum allowable design stress that can be used with the one-foot method is
2/3 of the yield strength of the steel being used, with the restriction that the design
stress cannot exceed 2/5 of the tensile strength These restrictions shall apply to all
courses. The lower value shall be used. The restrictions based on tensile strength
have the effect of reducing the design stress for each shell course when some steels
with tensile strengths above approximately 60,000 psi are used. An element of
conservatism is thereby introduced into the critical shell-to-bottom joint when tanks
are designed for high stress levels.
Thickness calculations must be made for each shell course for both the specific
gravity of the liquid being stored and the hydrostatic test. The formulas in API 650,
Paragraph 3.6.3.2 should be used. For hydrostatic test conditions, the maximum
allowable design stress that can be used by this method is 3/4 of the yield strength
of the steel being used, with the restriction that the design stress cannot exceed 3/7
of the tensile strength. The lower value shall be used.
Basically, these formulas are for the hoop stress in a cylinder under internal
pressure, where the hydrostatic pressure one foot above the lowest circumferential
seam of a shell course is substituted for the internal pressure. If a tank is being
designed for the storage of several alternate liquids, the design calculations should
be made for the liquid with the highest specific gravity.
The minimum thickness required for each shell course is the greater of that
calculated for 1) the operating conditions and 2) the hydrostatic test conditions. For
operating conditions the corrosion allowance is then added to the calculated
thickness. No corrosion allowance is added to the thickness calculated for
hydrostatic test conditions. Also, a higher stress is allowed for the hydrostatic test
(approximately 10%, see Table 3-2, API 650). The operating conditions usually
determine the shell thicknesses that are required.
Variable Design Point Method. With this method (API 650, Paragraph 3.6.4) the
engineer computes a more exact location for the maximum stress in each shell
course by giving consideration to shearing forces at the circumferential seams and
consequent elastic deflections. This more complex procedure requires first
calculating preliminary shell course thicknesses by use of the one-foot method, to
determine the points of maximum stress in each shell course. Similar to the one-foot
method, thickness calculations must be made independently for both the design and
hydrotest conditions for each shell course, and the greater value is the minimum
thickness required.
Thinner shell courses are normally obtained by designing with the variable design
point method, which reduces materials and construction costs. Furthermore, this
method can permit the design and construction of larger diameter tanks.
The variable design point method has separate design procedures for the first
(bottom), second, and upper shell courses. See Appendix K of API 650, which gives
an example of the use of the variable design point method for the design of a tank.
The thicknesses of the upper shell courses are determined with an iterative
procedure that involves:
1. calculating preliminary shell thicknesses using the one-foot method
2. estimating the point of maximum stress in each shell course depending on the
relative plate thicknesses of adjoining shell courses
3. calculating a new shell thickness on the basis of the hydrostatic pressure at the
estimated point of maximum stress
This sequence of calculations is repeated, substituting the newly calculated shell
thicknesses. This process further refines the estimated point of maximum stress until
there is no significant change in the calculated plate thickness. Three iterations are
usually sufficient. The resulting minimum plate thicknesses for each of the upper
shell courses are usually thinner than those calculated with the one-foot method,
because the more accurately estimated point of maximum stress in each upper shell
course is usually greater than the conservative one-foot assumption.
Optional Design for Small Tanks. Appendix A to API 650 provides a lower cost
alternative for the design of small tanks with shell thicknesses no greater than
½ inch including corrosion allowance. The design methodology is essentially the
same as the one-foot method, with two significant exceptions: 1) the maximum
allowable design stress that can be used is 21,000 psi; and 2) the joint efficiency for
vertical welds is reduced to 0.85 or 0.70 due to reduced radiographic inspection
requirements.
Appendix J to API 650 contains design requirements similar to Appendix A, except
that it specifically applies to shop fabricated tanks no greater than 20 feet in
diameter, with no restriction on plate thickness. Radiographic inspection can be
eliminated if weld joint efficiency is reduced to 0.70.
API Specification 12D provides for the construction of field welded tanks with a
capacity up to 10,000 bbl for the storage of production liquids. These tanks are
essentially predesigned for standard dimensions up to 55 feet in diameter and 24
feet high. No separate design calculations are required. API Specification 12F is
similar in concept but applies to standardized shop welded tanks with a maximum
size of 15.5 feet in diameter and 24 feet high. The required design and construction
details of these two specifications are minimal, and no radiographic inspection is
required to verify construction quality. Therefore, these specifications should be
used only when the service conditions and location of the tank do not require the
significantly greater assured reliability obtained by using API 650.
Shell Openings
API Standard 650 provides standardized designs for shell openings (API 650,
Paragraph 3.7.5, 3.7.6, and 3.7.7) including manways, nozzles, and flush-type
fittings. Figures 3-4A, 3-5, and 3-7 of API 650 show the major design details for
these openings. All essential dimensions (for reinforcement plates, flanges, and
welds etc.) are tabulated in API 650 for the range of opening sizes in common use.
The shell plates for flush-type fitting assemblies are required to be 1/16 to 1/8 inch
thicker than the adjacent shell plates in the lowest shell course. Other designs for
manways and nozzles are permitted, if they provide equivalent strength and are
agreed to by the tank purchaser. Section 700 discusses the different types of
openings and their uses.
Reinforcement and Weld Details. Reinforcement and the weld details of shell
openings strongly affect tank reliability. The concept for reinforcement is: the cross-
sectional area of the hole cut in the shell must have an equal area of reinforcement
around the opening. The cross-sectional area of the hole is measured for the
opening’s vertical diameter, and all of the reinforcement must be within twice the
vertical diameter of the hole in the shell from the centerline of the opening. The
required reinforcement is usually provided by a reinforcing pad, but excess
thickness in the tank shell or neck of the fitting can be included in the calculation of
reinforcement area. Insert-type reinforcement (i.e., thicker plate butt welded into the
shell that provides both the minimum shell thickness and area of reinforcement) can
also be used.
Reinforcement of flush-type fittings is especially important, and additional design
criteria are given in API 650. The bottom reinforcing plate is particularly critical,
because it also serves as the highly stressed shell-to-bottom joint. The required
thickness for the bottom reinforcing plate is shown in Table 3-10 of API 650. For
nozzles not covered in Table 3-10, a special formula is used to calculate the
minimum thickness of the bottom reinforcing plate (see API 650 3.7.7.6). This
formula takes the design fill height of the tank into consideration.
API 650 advises that external loads on connections to shell openings should be
considered when designing the reinforcement of openings. Appendix P of API 650,
Allowable External Load on Tank Shell Openings, can be used to do this. It is
preferable to keep external loads, such as those resulting from piping connections,
as low as practicable. When significant external loads cannot be avoided, Appendix
P requirements should be invoked.
The minimum requirements in API 650 for weld details for shell openings are
illustrated in Figure 3-4B of API 650. Most important is that full penetration welds
are required to attach the connections to the shell, unless insert-type reinforcement
is used. However, reinforcing pads are attached to the shell and fitting neck with
fillet welds. It is also important to adhere to the minimum size requirements for all
of the welds, to be certain that the connections to the openings have sufficient
strength. In addition, the openings should be located such that the periphery of their
reinforcing pads are at least 6 inches from any butt welded seams in the shell, or
greater where required by API 650 Section 3.7.3. All reinforcing pads welded to
plate should be provided with a vent hole for welding.
Small connections should use weld bosses or half couplings per API 650, Figure 3-5.
Thermal Stress Relief. API 650 Section 3.7.4 requires thermal stress relief of
• All flush-type fittings.
• All connections to 12-inch or larger openings in shell plates greater than 1 inch
thick.
Shell Joints
Weld joints in the tank shell were shown in Figure 500-1. For discussion of the
shell-to-bottom joint, see Section 220; for roof-to-shell joint, Section 420.
weight of the roof. The joint is designed by calculating the total required area at the
joint for a maximum stress of 20,000 psi. The formula in Paragraph F.5 of Appendix
F, API 650 is used to make this calculation. In the formula ’A’ is the total cross-
sectional area at the joint. It includes the portions of the roof and shell crosshatched
in Figure F-2, in addition to the compression ring.
Failure Pressure. The roof-to-shell joint is required to have a failure pressure lower
than the maximum design pressure (API 650, Appendix F, Paragraph F.6). In this
manner, the roof-to-shell joint will fail before uplift of the tank can occur, and
failure of the shell-to-bottom joint accompanied by release of the tanks contents is
prevented. A roof-to-shell joint meeting this criterion is called a “frangible joint.”
Failure of the roof-to-shell joint is expected to occur when the stress exceeds the
yield strength of the material. It is assumed that yielding will occur when the stress
in the joint reaches 32,000 psi, which is 60% higher than the stress at the design
pressure. The failure pressure is calculated by the formula in Paragraph F.6 of
Appendix F of API 650.
For large tanks having roofs with shallow slopes, it is recommended that the
maximum design pressure not exceed 80% of the calculated failure pressure.
Emergency venting must be provided if the calculated failure pressure exceeds the
maximum design pressure.
For a discussion of the shell-to-bottom joint, see Section 220.
Fig. 500-4 A U.S. Producer’s April 1988 Prices for Steel Plates by Quality Grouping
ASTM Maximum Cost Relative
Specification(1) Thickness, Inch to A283C(2)
Rimmed A-36 ½ 1.02
A-283C 1½ 1.00
A-131A ½ 0.84
(A-285C) 1½ 1.09
Semi-Killed A-36 ½ to 1½ 0.49 to 0.93
A-131B 1 0.85
Fully-Killed, FGP A-131C 1½ 0.92
(A-516-70) 1½ 1.18
Normalized A-131C 1.09
(A-516-70) 1.37
(A-537A,C1) 1.16
(1) ASTM numbers in parenthesis are pressure vessel quality steel. Normally not used for tankage except
where required for toughness.
(2) A283C was chosen as the base case, so its ratio is 1.00. The ratios are from base prices and do not
include many extras, such as odd thickness, tonnage, etc.
In general, unless the fluid to be stored in the tank is highly corrosive, requiring
special materials consideration, tanks should be built from ASTM Grade A283 or
A131 steel plates. If better low temperature impact properties are desired in the tank
materials because of the geographic location, ASTM Grade A516 is a good
candidate steel because of its lower transition temperature.
Resistance to tipping is provided by 1) the shell weight, 2) the weight of the tank
contents next to the shell and 3) the compressing on the opposite side of the shell by
the foundation.
Earthquakes can also damage tanks in these ways:
• Sloshing in full or nearly full tanks can cause floating roofs to ride over the
shell resulting in major seal damage; or may damage fixed roofs by impinge-
ment of the contents on the roof.
• Torsional rotations of floating roofs can damage the gage well and rolling roof
ladder.
• The uplifting of a tank may damage nozzles and piping attached to the tank if
sufficient flexibility is not provided in the piping.
Tank Proportioning
Seismic design of tanks starts with tank proportioning. A wider, shorter tank (lower
height-to-diameter ratio) has superior tipping resistance over a tall, narrow tank.
Unanchored tanks will generally be limited to the height-to-diameter ratios in the
different seismic zones as shown earlier in Figure 100-1. The seismic zones are
defined in Appendix E of API 650 (also Section 100 of the Civil and Structural
Manual).
Tanks with greater height-to-diameter ratios than suggested may require substan-
tially thicker shells to compensate for higher loadings or require anchoring. Both of
these options may be impractical to construct.
In addition to proportioning, it is necessary to design a thick enough bottom plate
(or annular ring) to optimize the amount of the tank contents which can resist uplift.
The thicker bottom plate will in turn reduce the high local compressive loads that
can cause buckling. The design procedure is thoroughly covered in Appendix E of
API 650.
Bottom Plate Thickness. If the tank is not stable, the bottom plate near the tank
shell can be thickened to increase the hold-down weight of the tank contents in
accordance with the restrictions of API 650 E.4.2. Thickening the bottom plate only
near the shell creates an annular ring. The minimum width and thickness of the
annular ring is determined in Paragraph E.4.2.
Shell Thickness. It is Company practice to use the new tank steel weight based on
actual, installed plate thicknesses in calculating the overturning and resisting
moments defined in Paragraphs E.3.1 and E.5.1. The new tank wall thicknesses, less
the corrosion allowance, are used only to check shell compression in accordance
with Paragraph E.5.3. It is generally more economical to change tank proportions
rather than to thicken the tank shell to increase the holddown weight.
Roof column. The roof column design procedure is given in TAM-MS-967.
Fig. 500-5 Seismic Design Example (1 of 4) Derived from API 650, Appendix E. Courtesy of the American Petroleum
Institute
This example follows API 650 Appendix E.
Given:
Tank diameter 40 feet
Tank height 24 feet (three 8-foot courses)
Seismic zone 4
Soil Type S3
Tank material A283 Gr C, Fy = 30 ksi
Cone roof weight 20,000 lbs. (50% supported by shell)
Specific gravity 0.95
Corrosion allowance 0.125 inches
Importance factor 1.0
Site factor/coefficient 1.5
Metal thicknesses:
Shell Course 1 and 2 0.25 inches (includes corrosion allowance)
Shell Course 3 0.1875 inches (includes corrosion allowance)
Bottom 0.25 inches (excludes corrosion allowance)
1. Check height-to-diameter ratio (see Figure 100-1). Because H/D = 0.6, the tank probably will not meet seismic
requirements. Note: The liquid level is assumed to be the same height as the tank shell in this example.
2. Calculate the overturning moment (M) due to seismic forces applied to the bottom of the shell:
M = ZI(C1WsXs + C1WrHt + C1W1X1 + C2W2X2)
(Eq. 500-1)
where:
Z = Zone coefficient = 0.4 for Zone 4
Fig. 500-5 Seismic Design Example (2 of 4) Derived from API 650, Appendix E. Courtesy of the American Petroleum
Institute
I = Importance factor = 1.0
C1 = Lateral force coefficient = 0.60
Ws = Weight of shell = 28,200 lb
Xs = Height from bottom of shell to center of gravity of shell = 11.3 ft
Wr = Weight of roof supported by shell + weight at snow load speci- = 10,000 lb
fied by owner
Ht = Total height of shell = 24 ft
H = Maximum design liquid level = 24 ft
Wt = Weight of contents = 1,788,000 lb
W1 = Weight of effective mass of tank contents which
move in unison with tank shell:
For D/H = 1.7, W1/WT = 0.62
W1 = 0.62 WT = 1,108,560 lb
X1 = Height from bottom of tank shell to centroid of lateral force
applied to W1:
For D/H = 1.7, X1/H = 0.375
X1 = 0.375H = 9 ft
C2 = Lateral force coefficient:
k = 0.585
T = kD1/2 = 0.585(40)1/2 = 3.70
S = Site factor) = 1.5
C2 = 0.75 S/T = 0.304
W2 = Weight of effective mass:
For D/H = 1.7, W2/WT = 0.37
W2 = 0.37WT = 661,560 lb
X2 = Height from bottom of tank shell to centroid of lateral
force applied by W2:
For D/H = 1.7, X2/H = 0.636
X2 = 0.636 H = 15.3 ft
Results:
M = 3,817,000 ft-lb using above figures.
3. Calculate resistance to overturning. wL = Maximum weight of the tank contents which can be used to resist
the shell overturning moment.
w L = 7.9 t b F by GH
(Eq. 500-2)
For tb = 0.25 inches
Fig. 500-5 Seismic Design Example (3 of 4) Derived from API 650, Appendix E. Courtesy of the American Petroleum
Institute
wLmax = 1.25(.95)(24)(40) = 1140 lb/ft
Since wLmax < wL, wLmax controls. Therefore, WL = 1140 lb/ft.
4. Calculate tank stability.
Find total distributed shell weight. wt = weight of the tank shell and the portion of the fixed roof supported by
the shell.
28, 200lb 10, 000lb
w t = --------------------- + --------------------- = 224 + 80 = 304 lb/ft
π ( 40ft ) π ( 40ft )
(Eq. 500-3)
M 3, 817, 000
------------------------------- = ---------------------------------------- = 1.65 > 1.57
2 ( 40 ) ( 304 + 1140 )
D ( w t + wL )
(Eq. 500-4)
Tank is unstable. The tank could either be anchored or be proportioned to eliminate the need for anchorage.
(Note the large influence that wL has on tank stability.)
5. Change tank diameter and bottom shell course thickness and recheck stability. Increase diameter such that
H/D = 0.5
24
D = ------ = 48ft
0.5
(Eq. 500-5)
Roof weight changes to 29,000 lb.
Change bottom shell course thickness to 0.3125 inches.
where:
Ws = 36,900 lb
M = 5,067,700 ft/lb
wt = 245 + 96 = 341 lb/ft
wLmax = 1.25(.95)(24)(48) = 1368 lb/ft < 1633 lb/ft
Therefore, wL = 1368 lb/ft
M 5, 067, 700
------------------------------- = ------------------------------------------ = 1.287 < 1.57
2 2
D ( wt + w L ) ( 48 ) ( 341 + 1368 )
(Eq. 500-6)
Tank is stable.
Fig. 500-5 Seismic Design Example (4 of 4) Derived from API 650, Appendix E. Courtesy of the American Petroleum
Institute
6. Check compression in shell (see API 650 E.5.1 Figure E-5)
b + wL
------------------- = 3.6
wt + wL
(Eq. 500-7)
Solving for b,
where:
b = Maximum longitudinal compressive force = 4,780 lb/ft
t = .3125 - .125 = .1875 in. = shell thickness for shell stress design
From API 650 E.5.3:
fa = maximum longitudinal compressive stress
b 4, 780lb 2
------- = ---------------------- = 2124 lb/in.
12t 12 ( .1875 )
(Eq. 500-8)
2 2
GHD ( .95 ) ( 24 ) ( 48 ) 6 6
-------------- = ----------------------------------- = 1.49 × 10 > 10
2 2
t (.1875)
(Eq. 500-9)
Therefore:
6
10 t 2 2
F a = ---------- = 3906 lb/in > 2124 lb/in
D
(Eq. 500-10)
Because fa < Fa, shell thickness is okay.
7. Check next course in accordance with API 650 E.5.4 and the procedure in TAM-MS-967.
8. Check center column in accordance with Section E.8.4 of TAM-MS-967.
9. Check bottom plate thickness to see if annular ring is required. (See API 650 E.4.1) Since this wL (1633 lb/ft) is
greater than the limiting wL (1368 lb/ft) the ¼ inch thick bottom is adequate and no annular plate is required.
Anchoring Tanks
For small tanks (generally up to 4000-bbl capacity) it may be desirable to anchor the
tank at its base in order to safely increase the height-to-diameter ratio of the tank.
Typically, the tank would be anchored to a concrete ringwall that weighs enough to
develop the force in the anchors. Alternatively, uplift piles may be provided to
develop the anchor resistance.
Anchoring larger tanks (over 4000 bbls) is usually undesirable. The force required
to anchor such tanks is very large, requiring a massive ringwall or a very large
number of uplift piles. The cost for anchoring may exceed the cost of the tank itself.
It may not even be feasible to construct an adequate anchor system. If feasible,
anchoring of large tanks should be done only as a last resort where there is
insufficient room to provide the storage capacity required with a properly
proportioned unanchored tank.
When anchoring a tank, the overturning moment (see API 650 Appendix E for
calculations) must be resisted by all components of the anchoring system: the
anchor bolts, anchor chairs, foundation, and the soil. Proper seismic design should
have sufficient ductility for good performance. The failure mode should be the
component that causes the least threat to safety and the least damage to the
structure. The anchor bolts, therefore, are typically designed to be the “weak link”
in the anchorage system; the other components being designed for higher loads than
the design forces.
First, so that the bolt yields before the chair or its attachment yields, the chair should
be designed for the bolt yield strength as specified by API 650 E.6.2.1. and shown
in the following equation:
P design = P BY = A BT F Y
(Eq. 500-11)
where:
PBY = bolt yield capacity
ABT = tensile stress area of bolt (in2)
= 0.7854(d-0.9742/N)2
d = nominal bolt diameter (in)
N = number of threads per inch
FY = yield tensile stress of bolt material (33000 psi for A-307 material
or reinforcing steel (psi)
The bolt must also yield well before the bolt pulls out of the concrete. Section 241
and Appendix B in the Civil and Structural Manual presents the requirements for
ductile anchor bolt designs in greater detail.
To reduce the concentrated stresses occurring at anchor locations, use individual
chairs or a continuous ring. Although continuous rings distribute the concentrated
stresses better than individual chairs, they must be continuous around the entire
tank, which is difficult if there are obstructions. Hence individual anchor chairs are
most often used.
Anchor chair and continuous ring designs are covered in AISI E-1, Volume II, Part
VII, which is referenced in API 650 Appendix E. Some recommended changes to
the chair design are as follows:
• Allowable shell stress should follow API 650 Chapter 3 instead of the 25ksi
recommended.
• The design load is the yield strength of the bolt, as stated earlier.
• The minimum eccentricity is increased up to 1¾ inches + d/2, where d is the
bolt diameter. For post-installed bolts, d is the diameter of the drilled hole. This
will allow for the bolt or drilled hole to miss the tank's bottom plate (the chime)
which usually projects 2 to 3 inches from the tank’s shell.
• The minimum spacing between vertical stiffeners is increased to the bolt's
diameter plus two inches. This increase allows for welding on the inside of the
vertical stiffeners which is recommended for corrosion control.
• The top plate width should be one third of the chair's height, h. For tall chairs,
ignore this recommendation as it is impractical.
H 1⁄2
d = 1.124ZIC 2 T tanh 477 ----
2
D
(Eq. 500-12)
where:
C2 = Lateral earthquake coefficient for convective forces, from
API 650 Appendix E, E.3.3.2
d = Height of sloshing wave above mean depth, ft
D = Tank diameter, ft
H = Maximum filling height of tank, ft
I = Essential facilities factor, usually 1.0, should not exceed 1.25
T = Sloshing wave's natural period of first mode
= kD1/2 (see API 650 E.3.3.2)
Z = Seismic zone coefficient
Other possible options include but are not limited to: 1) anchoring the tank (for
relatively small tanks), 2) reducing the safe filling height, 3) replacing the bottom
shell course with thicker plate or 4) replacing the tank.
Adding vertical steel stiffeners to the tank shell is not recommended. There has been
no experience with a stiffened tank shell in an earthquake. Even with an unstiffened
shell, the distribution of forces in the shell due to earthquake is not well understood.
Adding stiffeners on a comparatively thin shell may result in high local stress which
could negate any advantage sought by providing the stiffeners.
Fig. 500-6 Top Wind Girder Design Example (1 of 2) From API 650, Figures 3.9. Courtesy of the American Petroleum
Institute
Z = 0.0001 D2 H2
where:
D = tank diameter, ft
H2 = height of tank shell, ft Fig. 500-7 Top Wind Girder and Handrail Layout From API
650, Figures 3.20. Courtesy of the American
Petroleum Institute
Z = required minimum section modulus
Z = 0.0001 (130)2 (48)
= 81.1 in.3
Note The above equation is based on wind velocity off 100 miles per hour. If a wind velocity other than 100 mph
is specified by the purchaser, the minimum section modulus will be represented in this example and the interme-
diate wind girder design example by Zv . To find Zv , multiply the right side of the equation by (v/100)2 where v=wind
velocity in miles per hour.
2. Correct for wind velocity.
2
Z v = 81.1 --------
90 3
= 65.7in.
100
(Eq. 500-13)
Fig. 500-6 Top Wind Girder Design Example (2 of 2) From API 650, Figures 3.9. Courtesy of the American Petroleum
Institute
From Figure 3-20 detail e of API 650;
Fig. 500-8 Intermediate Wind Girder Design Example (1 of 3) From API 650, Figures 3.9. Courtesy of the American
Petroleum Institute
Given:
Open top tank
Tank diameter 180
Tank height 48 feet
Design wind 102 mph
Height between bottom 44.5 feet
and wind girder
Shell course thickness
No. 1 0.960 inches
No. 2 0.760 inches
No. 3 0.600 inches
No. 4 0.443 inches
No. 5 0.313 inches
No. 6 0.313 inches Fig. 500-9 Tank Shell Course Dimensions
1. Calculate the maximum height of the unstiffened shell, H1 (see API 650 Section 3.9.7.1):
3
H = 600000t ---
t
1 D
(Eq. 500-15)
where:
t = .313 inches
Fig. 500-8 Intermediate Wind Girder Design Example (2 of 3) From API 650, Figures 3.9. Courtesy of the American
Petroleum Institute
D = 180 feet
0 .313 3
H′ 1 = 600000 ( 0 .313 ) ------------- = 13.6ft
180
(Eq. 500-16)
2. Correct for wind velocity.
2 2
H 1 = H′ 1 -------- = 13.6 --------
100 100
= 13.1ft
V 102
(Eq. 500-17)
3. Calculate the transformed width of each shell course below the top wind girder (see API 650 Section 3.9.7.2a).
.313 5
W tr = 8 --------- = 0.5ft
1 0.96
5
W tr = 8 ---------
.313
= 0.9ft
2 .76
5
= 8 ---------
.313
W = 1.6ft
tr 3 .60
.313 5
W tr = 8 --------- = 3.3ft
4 .443
.313 5
W tr = 12.5 --------- = 12.5ft
5 .313
(Eq. 500-18)
4. Sum the transformed widths of each course.
Since the height of the transformed shell is greater than the maximum height (H1) of an unstiffened shell, an
intermediate wind girder is required.
5. Determine intermediate wind girder location. For equal shell stability, locate wind girder at the midpoint of the
transformed width (see API 650 Section 3.9.7.3).
½ Wtr = 9.4 feet. Since this transformed width is less than Wtr5, then the intermediate wind girder would be
located on course No. 5, 9.4 feet below the top wind girder.
6. Determine need for any other wind girders below the intermediate wind girder using the same procedure.
The distance between the top of the intermediate wind girder and the bottom of the shell course to which it
will be attached
= 16 - 3.5 - 9.4 = 3.1 feet.
7. Recalculate transformed widths. Transformed widths remain the same except for Wtr5, which is now 3.1 feet,
The sum of the transformed widths is now 9.4 feet (½ of Wtr).
Fig. 500-8 Intermediate Wind Girder Design Example (3 of 3) From API 650, Figures 3.9. Courtesy of the American
Petroleum Institute
8. Compare shell heights.
Since the transformed height is less than the maximum height of the unstiffened shell, no additional wind
girders are required (see API 650 3.9.7.3).
Total transformed width, Wtr = 18.8 feet.
102 2
Zv = -------- 30.5in = 31.7in
3 3
100
Select section with this much section modulus. Figure 3-20 in API 650 will give assistance in selection of a section.
End of Intermediate Wind Girder Design Example
between the shell and floating roof and, therefore, gives better sealing and less
maintenance of the seal. The key to constructing a truly round and plumb tank is to
ensure that the top edges of the shell courses are level, especially the edge of the
first course.
542 Leveling
Leveling the top of the first course is critical for shell roundness. The smaller the
degree of variation from level, the more perfectly round the tank will be, and the
remainder of the shell will be easier to erect. The shell level should be checked after
the plate is tack welded or dogged in place. The level of the top of the first course
may be corrected by wedges placed between the tank steel bottom and foundation.
The level of the remainder of the courses should also be checked. Squared plates
will reduce out-of-level problems.
543 Welding
Peaking and Banding
API 650, paragraphs 5.5.4. and 5.5.5, cover “peaking” and “banding.” These terms
refer to the distortion or dimpling of shell plate and seams inward or outward.
Ideally, the welding of shell horizontal and vertical seams should be done with
alternating weld bead inside and outside to avoid peaking and banding. The weld
joint should be closely checked by use of a straight edge on horizontal seams and by
a board cut to the exact tank radius on the vertical seams. If peaking or banding is
detected, no further welding should be done on that seam until a procedure is
developed that will not worsen the condition.
Improper shop forming of the shell plates and inadequate cribbing of the rolled
plates during shipping and storage can also contribute to peaking and banding.
Tank Diameter
The tank diameter is checked by measuring the tank circumference as each course is
erected. “Hourglass” or “barrel” shaped shells are not an unusual occurrence. This
problem is prevented by adhering stringently to the gap specification between
plates, checking individual plate lengths, and using scribed points for lineup at the
top edge of the shell course plate being installed. Often the last plate on a course
being installed is designated to be trimmed to fit in the field to adjust for errors. At
other times weld spacing is used.
ciency can be increased to 0.75 by full fillet lap welding both sides of the lapped
seam plus seal welding of the rivets. This is a difficult, costly procedure and
normally not justifiable unless the alternative is to retire the tank.
Sealing of Riveted Seams. Sometimes leaking seams are repaired by applying a
sealant. This repair, which will not upgrade joint efficiency, is covered in
Specification TAM-MS-7.