International Pipeline Conference — Volum e I

ASM E 1998

IPC1998-2022

FLOATING-ROOF TANK HEEL REDUCTION OPTIONS

AND HEEL TURNOVER EMISSIONS

Terry A . Gallagher Christian R. Desjardins

R oyce J. Laverman Horton C B I, Lim ited
C hicago B ridge & Iron Com pany N .V . Bow V a lle y S qu are 4
1501 North Division S treet # 6 0 0 , 2 5 0 6th A venue S W
P lainfield, Illinois, U S A 6 0 5 4 4 -8 9 8 4 C alg ary, A lb erta, C a n a d a T 2 P 3H 7
Telephone: (8 1 5 ) 4 3 9 -6 0 0 0 Telephone: (4 0 3 ) 2 6 4 -1 3 3 3
Fax: (8 1 5 ) 4 3 9 -6 0 1 0 Fax: (4 0 3 ) 2 6 6 -2 4 5 3

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.]

ABSTRACT Kd = Deck-seam loss factor (lb-mole/ft yr)

The net working capacity o f floating roof tanks is the product Kf = Deck-fitting loss factor (lb-mole/yr)
inventory that is stored between the maximum and minimum Kfp = Heel filling product factor (dimensionless)
operating levels of the floating roof. The product that remains in the Kf, = Heel filling saturation factor (dimensionless)
tank when the floating roof is at its minimum operating level is Khc = Heel vapor expansion factor (dimensionless)
residual inventory, referred to as the product heel. This trapped K, = Rim-seal loss factor (lb-mole/ft yr)
inventory is a valuable product asset that is not part of the tank net K, p = Standing storage product factor (dimensionless)
working capacity. This paper describes considerations that must be Lh = Heel turnover loss (lb/yr)
made when lowering the minimum operating level o f floating roofs, Lhb = Heel breathing loss (lb/jr)
both for new and retrofit tank applications, and presents methods of Lhf = Heel filling loss (lb/yr)
achieving these improvements. L, = Standing storage loss (lb/yr)
Some tank turnover operations require that the floating roof be L, = Total evaporative loss (lb/yr)
landed and the tank drained dry. Tank turnover operations include L, = Withdrawal loss (lb/yr)
those where it is important to avoid cross contamination o f products. Mv = Product vapor molecular weight (lb/lb-mole)
Recent studies have shown the importance of the emissions that Nfc = Number of fixed roof support columns (dimensionless)
occur during heel turnover operations. This paper describes a method Nfi = Number of deck fittings o f a particular type (i=l,2,...,k)
for determining the heel turnover emissions and presents abatement (dimensionless)
options for controlling these emissions. Nh = Number of heel turnovers (heel tum./yr)
Nw = Number o f tank turnovers (tank tum./yr)
P = Vapor pressure function (dimensionless)
NOMENCLATURE P, = Atmospheric pressure (psia)
Q = Product clingage factor (bbl/1000 ft2) Pv = Product vapor pressure (psia)
D = Tank diameter (ft) APV = Heel daily vapor pressure range (psia)
Fc = Effective column diameter (ft) Q = Product annual net throughput (bbl/yr)
Fd = Total deck-seam loss factor (lb-mole/yr) R = Ideal gas constant (10.731) (psia ftVlb-mole °R)
Ff = Total deck-fitting loss factor (lb-mole/yr) Sd = Deck-seam length factor (ft/ft2)
Fp = Property factor (lb/lb-mole) T| = Temperature o f the heel liquid product (°F)
Fr = Total rim-seal loss factor (lb-mole/yr) ATV = Heel daily vapor temperature range (°F)
F, = Total floating-roof loss factor (lb-mole/yr) t,, = Annual heel turnover time (days/yr)
Fw = Fixed-roof support column factor (dimensionless) t, = Annual standing storage time (days/yr)
Hh = Heel height (ft) Vh = Heel vapor space volume ( ft3)
H* = Working height (ft) W, = Product liquid density (Ib/gal)
Kbj = Heel breathing saturation factor (dimensionless) Wv = Product vapor density (lb/ft3)

Copyright © 1998 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/24/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 1 INTRODUCTION
The net working capacity o f floating-roof tanks is the product
inventory that is stored between the maximum and minimum
operating levels o f the floating roof. The product that remains in the
tank when the floating roof is at its minimum operating level is
residual or trapped inventory called the product heel. Lowering the
minimum operating level of the floating roof increases the tank net
working capacity and reduces associated vapor emissions.
For example, if the minimum operating level of the floating roof
were lowered from 5 ft to 0.5 ft in a 100 ft diameter tank, this would
increase the net working capacity by about 6,300 bbl. If the product
were valued at $25/bbl, this would convert trapped inventory into an
additional $157,500 of working inventory.
In terminal operations it is desirable to operate the tank drain-dry,
where the product heel is drained and later refilled during tank
Figure 1 Floating-Roof Tank Capacities
withdrawal and refilling operations. This avoids contaminating one
product with another during product changing operations. However,
these types o f operations have large associated atmospheric emissions
that must be considered, as well as potential damage to the tank
bottom, floating roof or its supports when the floating roof is
frequently landed on its roof supports.
This paper presents practical options which may be used to
reduce the product heel in floating-roof tanks. Reducing the product
heel increases die net working capacity and can significantly reduce
the total evaporative emissions from o f a floating-roof tank.
Section 2 describes floating-roof tank features which affect
reduced heel operations.
1=0 ItäifeEö
Section 3 describes the potential for reduction in evaporative
emissions from reduced tank heel operations.
Section 4 describes tank heel reduction options. Figure 2 Heel Turnover Operation

1.2 Heel Tum gver Loss

1.1 Floating Roof Operating Limits
Floating-roof tanks are used to store volatile products whose
vapor pressure does not exceed about 11 psia. These types o f tanks
incorporate a roof that floats on the surface o f the liquid product and
rises or falls as product is added or withdrawn from die tank.
Figure 1 is an elevation section through a floating-roof tank. This
figure illustrates that the vertical movement of the floating roof is
normally within the working height, which extends from the minimum
operating level to the maximum operating level. The net working
capacity of the tank is the volume that is contained in the tank
between the minimum and maximum operating levels of the floating
roof. The freeboard is the tank volume above the floating roof when it
is at its maximum operating level. The heel is the tank volume below
the floating roof when it is at its minimum operating level. The
maximum operating level is typically established by the tank overflow
level. The minimum operating level is typically established by the
need to provide clearance to tank internals such as internal piping,
shell-mounted mixers, floating-roof drain systems, etc.
When the floating roof reaches its minimum operating level, it is
resting on its deck legs, or roof supports, and the floating-roof bleeder
vent is open to relieve any excess vacuum or pressure that may occur
in the heel vapor space as the product heel is emptied or filled.
U.S. Federal environmental regulations (e.g., 40CFR60,
Paragraph 60.112b(aX 1X>ii)) currently require: “The roof shall be
floating on the liquid at all times (i.e., off the roof leg supports) except
during initial fill until the roof is lifted off leg supports and when the
tank is completely emptied and subsequently refilled. The process of
filling, emptying, or refilling when the roof is resting on the leg
supports shall be continuous and shall be accomplished as rapidly as
possible.”
Figure 2 illustrates a heel turnover operation. This operation has
three processes, as described below:
• Heel Emptying Process During the heel emptying process, the
product level in the heel space is lowered by withdrawing product As
the heel product level is lowered, air is drawn into the heel vapor
space through the bleeder vent In most heel turnover operations, all o f
the product heel is withdrawn during a heel emptying process,
resulting in a “drain-dry” tank condition. However, “drain-dry”
operations can only realistically be achieved with refined products.
Most crude oil tanks have residual sludge buildup to contend with
during heel turnover operations. Since the heel emptying process is
typically o f short duration, and since air is continually drawn into the
heel vapor space, there is no associated evaporative loss with this
process.

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/24/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 • Heel Breathing Process After the heel emptying process, the
floating-roof tank sits idle until the tank is later refilled with product.
During this idle period, the heel breathing process occurs.
The heel breathing process is similar to the breathing process of a
fixed-roof tank. As a result o f the daily ambient heating and cooling
processes, the air-vapor mixture in the heel vapor space expands and
contracts. During the daily ambient heating process, some of the air-
vapor mixture is expelled through the breather vent, resulting in
evaporative loss. This evaporative loss is called the “heel breathing
loss", as further described in Section 3.3.1.
During the daily ambient cooling process, air is drawn into the
heel vapor space through the bleeder vent and tends to become
saturated with product vapor from any remaining product that is
clinging to the tank shell and the bottom side of the floating roof, as
well as from any standing pools of liquid product or sludge that
remain on the tank bottom.
• Heel Filling Process During the heel filling process, the
product level in the heel space is raised by filling with liquid product.
The entering liquid product displaces the air-vapor mixture through
the bleeder vent, resulting in evaporative loss. This evaporative loss is
called the “heel filling loss”, as further described in Section 3.3.2.
1.3 Evaporative Em issions from Heel Turnover Operations
The American Petroleum Institute (API) published a new
document in April 1997 entitled, "Evaporative Loss From Floating-
Roof Tanks," Chapter 19.2 o f the Manual for Petroleum Measurement
Standards [3]1. This new publication combines and updates the
evaporative loss estimation procedures for external floating-roof tanks
(EFRTs), internal floating-roof tanks (IFRTs), and covered floating-
roof tanks (CFRTs). Evaporative emissions which occur during heel
turnover operations (i.e., heel turnover losses) are not yet included in
this publication.
The heel turnover loss, Lh, is currently the subject of an ongoing
API study. It is anticipated that the US EPA will require that heel
turnover losses be included in the annual evaporative loss estimates
for existing and new floating-roof tanks [4]. An analysis by CB&I
shows that the heel turnover loss. Lj, is the sum of the heel breathing
loss. Lhb, and the heel filling loss. Lhr, which apply to operations when
the floating roof has landed and the product level is below the
minimum operating level of the floating roof. A comparison of the
heel turnover losses from the various floating-roof tanks is presented
in Section 3.4 of this paper.
2 FLOATING-ROOF TANK FEATURES
2.1 Floatinq-R oof Tank Types
The types of floating-roof tanks for which there are loss
calculation procedures published by the API are:
• External Floating-Roof Tanks (EFRTs)
• Covered Floating-Roof Tanks (CFRTs)
• Internal Floating-Roof Tanks (IFRTs)
1 Numbers in brackets refer to references listed at the end of this
paper.
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/24/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
The basic components of a floating roof include: (a) a floating
deck; (b) an annular rim seal attached to the perimeter o f the floating
deck; and (c) deck fittings that penetrate the floating deck for
operational purposes.
2.1.1 External Floatinq-R oof Tanks. External Floating-
Roof Tanks (EFRTs) are vertical cylindrical vessels which do not
have a fixed roof over the top of the tank, but which utilize an external
floating roof that rests on the product liquid surface. The external
floating roof is typically constructed of welded steel plates. Minimum
requirements for the design of external floating roofs are given in API
Standard 650, Appendix C [1].
External floating roofs are typically o f two general types:
• Pontoon Floating Roofs
• Double-Deck Floating Roofs
External floating roofs are typically of welded construction, and
the deck seams are thus not a source o f evaporative loss.
2.1.2 Covered Floatinq-R oof Tanks. Covered Floating-
Roof Tanks (CFRTs) are typically the result of retrofitting an EFRT
with a fixed roof at the top of the tank shell. This effectively converts
the EFRT to an internal floating-roof tank, but retains the heavier type
of floating roof construction that is typical of a floating roof built in
accordance with API Standard 650, Appendix C [1], Some CFRTs
utilize a self-supporting aluminum dome fixed roof, which is of bolted
construction and is typically intended to protect the floating roof from
the weather, but not provide vapor tightness.
2.1.3 Internal Floatinq-R oof T anks. Internal Floating-Roof
Tanks (IFRTs) are vertical cylindrical vessels which have a fixed roof
over the top of the tank and incorporate a roof that floats on the
surface of the product. The minimum requirements for the design of
internal floating roofs are given in API Standard 650, Appendix H [1],
The fixed roof may be either “column-supported" (i.e., with support
columns in the tank) or “self-supporting” (i.e.. without support
columns).
Internal floating roofs are of two general types:
• Welded Internal Floating Roofs
• Bolted Internal Floating Roofs
Bolted internal floating roofs are constructed by joining sheets or
panels of deck material utilizing a mechanical means, such as bolting.
The bolted deck seams are an additional source of evaporative loss on
these types of internal floating roofs.
2.2 Im pact on Tank Product Heel Reduction
The three general types of floating-roof tanks that were described
above include one or more of the following tank appurtenances:
• Floating-roof rim seals
• Floating-roof deck legs
• External floating-roof deck drains
• Shell-mounted product mixers
• Floating suctions
• Internal piping
• In-tank product heaters
 Figures 3 and 4 illustrate how these appurtenances can limit the
low landing position of a floating roof and thus must be considered
when designing a floating-roof tank for reduced product heel
operations. The goal is to use cost-effective details which permit the
floating roof to land on (or near) the tank bottom. Several tank heel
reduction options are presented in Section 4.
Figure 3 Floating-Roof Tank Appurtenances
Figure 4 Floating-Roof Tank Appurtenances
3 EVAPORATIVE EMISSIONS
The total evaporative loss. L„ from a floating-roof tank is the
sum of the standing storage loss. L*, the withdrawal loss. Lw and the
heel turnover loss. Lh, as shown in Equation 1:
Lt = L s + Lw + Lh (1)
The standing storage loss, L„ and withdrawal loss, L „ apply
to operations when the floating roof is above the minimum operating
level, whereas the heel turnover loss, Lh, applies to operations when
the product level is below the minimum operating level o f the floating
roof. It is necessary to sum the separate losses during these different
periods of operating time to determine the annual total evaporative
loss, L,.
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/24/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
The heel turnover loss. Lj,, is currently the subject o f an ongoing
API study. A preliminary analysis by CB&I shows that the heel
turnover loss, L„, is the sum of the heel breathing loss. Lhb, and the
heel filling loss. L^, which apply to operations when the floating roof
has landed and the product level is below the minimum operating
level of the floating roof.
3.1 Standing Storage Loss
The standing storage loss, Ls, occurs from the rim seals, deck
fittings, and deck seams when the floating roof is operated within its
working height The standing storage loss rate, L„ may be determined
from Equation 2 [3]:
Ls( lb / yr) = F,Fp ( 2)
To determine the annual standing storage loss, it is necessary to
multiply the standing storage loss rate in lb/yr from Equation 2 by the
ratio of the annual standing storage time, t, (days) to 36S.
Equation 2 involves the product o f two terms:
First Term, Total Floating-Roof Loss Factor. Ft
The first term pertains only to floating-roof construction parameters
(e.g., rim seal system type, deck fitting types, and deck seam
construction type) and environmental parameters (e.g., ambient wind
speed). The total floating-roof loss factor, Fp may be determined from
Equation 3:
Ft = Fr + Ff + Fd (3)
where: Fr is the total rim-seal loss factor; Ff is total deck-fitting loss
factor; and Fd is the total deck-seam loss factor.
Second Term. Property Factor. Fp
The second term pertains only to the properties of the product.
The property factor, Fp, may be determined from Equation 4:
Fp = P*MvKsp (4)
where: P* is the vapor pressure function; My is the vapor molecular
weight; and K^, is the standing storage product factor. This product
factor is 1.0 for refined products and single-component products, and
is 0.4 for crude oil products [3].
The vapor pressure function, P*, is defined by Equation S:
r* (Pv /P a)
[l + ( l - ( P v /P a) f 5]2
where: Pv is the product vapor pressure at the bulk liquid temperature;
and Pa is atmospheric pressure.
Tables 1 and 2 o f Reference 5 list the property factor, Fp, of
selected petrochemicals and petroleum liquids at product temperatures
o f 60 °F, 80 °F and 100 °F, at an atmospheric pressure of 14.7 psia.
 3.1.1 Total Rim -Seal Loss Factor. The total rim-seal loss
factor,. Fr, can be determined from Equation 6:
Fr = K rD (6)
where: is the rim-seal loss factor and D is the tank diameter.
Rim-seal loss factors, K„ are listed in API MPMS, Chapter 19.2
[3] for different types o f rim seal systems, and are dependent upon the
rim seal fit (i.e., tight-fitting or average-fitting) and the ambient wind
speed for EFRTs.
Tight-fitting rim seals are those where the rim-seal gap (i.e., the
gap between the tank shell and the rim seal) does not exceed 1/8 in. at
any location around the rim seal. Average-fitting rim seals are those
where the variation o f the gap around the seal is similar to that which
resulted from a field-tank gap survey o f over 400 floating-roof tanks
[3]-
3.1.2 Total Deck-Fitting Loss Factor. The total deck­
fitting loss factor, Fr, can be determined from Equation 7:
Ff = [(NnKn)+ (Nf2Kn)+ ■ +(NfkKfk)] (V
where: Nn is the number o f deck fittings o f a particular type; Kf, is the
deck-fitting loss factor for the particular type o f deck fitting; and i is
the deck-fitting type number (i = 1, 2 ,..., k).
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
number o f specific types o f deck fittings for different diameter
floating-roof tanks. The deck-fitting loss factors are dependent upon
the ambient wind speed for EFRTs.
Deck-fitting loss factors also depend upon the construction
details o f the fitting. For example, some deck fittings may be available
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.
Fully-controlled deck fittings are those where the most effective
evaporative loss control features have been incorporated in the fitting.
3.1.3 Total Deck-Seam Loss Factor. The total deck-seam
loss factor, Fd, accounts for the evaporative loss that occurs from
seams on internal floating roofs and may be calculated from
Equation 8:
Fd = K d S d D 2 (8)
where: Kd is the deck-seam loss factor; and Sd is the deck-seam length
factor.
The deck-seam loss factor, Kd, and deck-seam length factors, Sd,
are listed in API MPMS Chapter 19.2 [3] for different types o f deck
seams. Since the total deck-seam loss factor, Fd, is proportional to the
square o f the tank diameter, D, the evaporative loss contribution from
the deck seams can be significant for large diameter tanks.
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/24/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
3.2 W ithdraw al Loss
The withdrawal loss. L„, results when product is withdrawn from
a floating-roof tank. As the floating roof level decreases, product
clings to the inside surface o f the tank shell and to the vertical support
columns o f the fixed roof, if used in a CFRT or IFRT. When the
floating roof passes downward and exposes these areas, the volatile
portion o f the product clingage evaporates rapidly, resulting in
evaporative loss. The withdrawal loss, L „ may be determined from
Equation 9 [3]:
L - = p .9 4 3 Q C ,W ,F .) (9)
where: Q is the product annual net throughput; C, is the product
clingage factor; W, is the product liquid density; and Fw is the fixed-
roof support column factor, which is given by Equation 10:
( 10)
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
product that is associated with lowering the product level within the
working height, Hw. The product annual net throughput, Q, can be
related to the annual number o f tank turnovers, N „, by Equation 11 :
Q = (0.140) D2HwN w (11)
Combining Equations 9 and 11, we obtain Equation 12, which
may be used for determining the annual withdrawal loss, L^.
Lw( l b / y r ) = (0.132)DHwC,W|FwN w ( 12)
3.3 Heel Turnover Loss
The heel turnover loss. Lh, occurs when the floating roof is
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
will cling to: (1) the inside surface o f the tank shell; (2) the bottom
surface o f the floating roof; and (3) the top surface o f the tank bottom.
It has been suggested [4] that a heel withdrawal loss be calculated for
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
withdrawal loss, however, has been found [6] to be a very small loss
contribution because it is based on the assumption that the product
clingage factor, Q , for the tank bottom is the same as that for the tank
shell. When the product heel has been drained, however, it is typical
to have areas on the tank bottom that contain small residual pools o f
liquid product. Under the conditions where these tank bottom pools
remain, it is more appropriate to assume that a heel breathing loss
occurs as the product remaining in these bottom pools evaporates into
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:

L k - Lhb + Lhf (13)

Lhb(lb / yr) = (0.000141) D2H hPvM vK heK bsth (19)

3.3.1 Heel B reathing Loss. The heel breathing loss, Lhb, is

the evaporative loss o f product vapor that results from the thermal
expansion and contraction o f the air-vapor mixture in the heel vapor
space that is caused by the daily ambient heating and cooling
processes. API MPMS, Chapter 19.1 [2] presents the loss equation for
determining the breathing loss from the vapor space o f fixed-roof
tanks. That equation may also be applied to the heel vapor space, as
described below.
The heel breathing loss. Lbb, may be determined from Equation
14 [2]:
3 .3 .2 Heel Filling Loss. The heel filling loss. Lbf, occurs
during a heel refilling operation, when the entering product displaces
the air-vapor mixture from the heel vapor space. API MPMS, Chapter
19.1 [2] presents a loss equation for determining the filling loss o f a
fixed-roof tank. That equation may also be applied to the heel filling
loss, as described below.
The heel filling loss. Lhr, may be determined from Equation 20
[2]:

Lhf = VhWvKfpKfsN h (20)

Lhb (lb/yr) = 365 VhWvKbeKbs (14)

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,

Lhf(lb / yr) = (0.000141)D2HhPvM vK ft)K fsN h (21)

Heel Vapor Expansion Factor.

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.

K b s = --------- i--------- (18) 3.4.1 Assum ed C onditions.

l + 0.053PvH h Product Conditions:
• Gasoline product
To determine the annual heel breathing loss, it is necessary to • 10 psi product Reid vapor pressure
multiply the heel breathing loss rate in lb/day (i.e., divide Equation 14 • 60 °F product storage temperature
by 365) by the annual heel turnover time, t,, (days), which is the • 5.18 psia product true vapor pressure
annual total time that the tank stands idle between heel emptying and • 6.1 lb/gal product liquid density
heel filling processes. • 64 Ib/lb-mole product vapor molecular weight

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/24/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Ambient Conditions: 3.4.3 W ithdraw al Loss Per Tank Turnover. L«. Figure 9
• 60 °F average daily ambient temperature presents the withdrawal loss per tank turnover, Lw (lb/tank turnover),
• 20 °F average daily ambient temperature range for an EFRT or IFRT based on Equation 12 for the assumed
• 10 mi/hr ambient wind speed conditions listed above, for tank diameters, D (ft), from 50 ft to 300 ft,
• 14.7 psia atmospheric pressure and for working heights, Hw (ft), from 10 ft to 100 ft. The annual
Operating Conditions: withdrawal loss is the product o f the withdrawal loss per tank,
• 26 tank turnovers per year turnover, Lw (lb/tank turnover), and the annual number o f tank
• 26 heel turnovers per year
turnovers, Nw (tank tumovers/yr).
• 60 ft working height
• 5 ft, 2 ft and 0.5 ft heel height
Tank Construction Conditions:
• External floating-roof tank (EFRT) or internal floating-roof 3.4.4 Heel B reathing Loss Rate. Figure 10 presents the
tank (1FRT) with a self-supporting fixed roof heel breathing loss rate, Lhb (lb/day), for an EFRT or IFRT, based on
• Mechanical-shoe primary seal and rim-mounted secondary seal Equation 19 for the assumed conditions listed above, for tank
• 50 ft to 300 ft tank diameter range diameters, D (ft), from 50 ft to 300 ft, and for heel heights, Hh (ft),
• Typical deck fittings or fully-controlled deck fittings from 0.5 ft to 7 ft. The annual heel breathing loss is the product o f the
• Uncontrolled slotted guidepole fitting or fully-controlled heel breathing loss rate, Lhb (lb/day), and the annual heel turnover
slotted guidepole fitting time, tf, (days/yr).
• Average-fitting rim seals or tight-fitting rim seals

3.4.2 Standing Storage Loss Rate. L ,. Figures 5 through 8
present the standing storage loss rate, Ls (lb/day), based on Equation 2
for the assumed conditions listed above, for tank diameters, D (ft),
from 50 ft to 300 ft. Figures 5 and 6 apply to an EFRT for wind
speeds from 2 to 14 mi/hr, and Figures 7 and 8 apply to an IFRT. The
annual standing storage loss is the product o f the standing storage loss
rate, Ls (lb/day), and the annual standing storage time, t, (days).
3.4.5 Heel Filling Loss Per Heel Turnover. Figure 11
presents the heel filling loss per heel turnover, Lw (lb/heel turnover),
for an EFRT or IFRT based on Equation 21 for the assumed
conditions listed above, for tank diameters, D (ft), from 50 ft to 300 ft,
and for heel heights, Hh (ft), from 0.5 ft to 7 ft. The annual heel filling
loss is the product o f the heel filling loss rate, Lhr (lb/heel turnover),
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

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/24/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 OC
»CO
O

S
2
en

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

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/24/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 R im S e a l S ystem

45

40

3 35
a

30

OC
B 25
B
O
_1
«u> 20
hos_
tn 15

10
a

eg
in
5

0
50 100 150 200 250 300

Tank Diam eter, D (ft)

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

Figure 9 W ithdraw al Loss per Tank Turnover o f an EFRT o r IFRT2

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/24/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Heel Breathing Loss Rate, L«b, (Ib/day)

Figure 10 Heel Breathing Loss Rate o f an EFRT o r IFRT2

Heel Filling Lose per Heel Turnover, Lhp (Ib/heel turnover)

Tank Diameter, D (ft)

Figure 11 Heel Filling Loss per Heel Turnover o f an EFRT o r IFRT2

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/24/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 3.4.6 Total Annual Product Loss. Figures 12 and 13
present the annual total loss, L, (Ib/yr), for an EFRT and IFRT,
respectively, for the assumed conditions listed in 3.4.1, for a tank
diameter of 100 ft, for heel heights of 0.5 ft, 2 ft and 5 ft. These are
identified as Cases 1 through 12 on Figures 12 and 13, and in Tables 1
and 2.
Tables 1 and 2, and Figures 12 and 13 show the following:
• The annual heel filling loss can be the largest component of the
annual total loss. Table 1 shows, for example, that for an EFRT with
average-fitting seals and a 5 ft heel (Case 1), the annual total loss is
95,491 lb/yr, o f which 60,580 Ib/yr are the heel filling loss.
• The annual heel filling loss can be significantly reduced bv
reducine the heel height. Table 1 shows, for example, that the annual
heel filling loss reduces from 60,580 lb/yr (Case 1) to 6,058 lb/yr
(Case 3) as the heel height is reduced from 5 ft to 0.5 ft.
• The annual total loss can be significantly reduced bv using
tight-fitting rim seals, fully-controlled deck fittings and a low heel
height. Table 1 shows, for example, that the annual total loss can be
reduced from 95,491 lb/yr (Case 1) to 10,660 lb/yr (Case 6), an 89
percent reduction, by using tight-fitting rim seals, fully-controlled
deck fittings and a low heel height o f 0.5 ft.

Figure 12 Total Annual Product Loss Contributions for a 100 ft dia. EFRT2

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

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/24/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 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

STANDING STORAGE LOSS

• Standing Storage Loss Rate Ib/day 91.56 91.56 91.56 10.75 10.75 10.75
• Standing Storage Days days/yr 339 339 339 339 339 339
A nnual Standing Storage Loss Ib/yr 31,039 31,039 31,039 3,644 3344 3344

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

HEEL BREATHING LOSS

• Heel Breathing Loss Rate lb/day 141.7 86.8 29.6 141.7 86.8 29.6
• Heel Turnover Days days/yr 26 26 26 26 26 26
A nnual H eel Breathing Loss Ib/yr 3,684 2357 770 3,684 2357 770

HEEL FILLING LOSS

• Heel Filling Loss per Heel Turnover Ih/heeltum. 2333 933 233 2333 933 233
• Annual Heel Turnovers heelturo/yr 26 26 26 26 26 26
A nnual H eel F illing Loss Ib/yr 60,580 24358 6,058 60380 24358 6358

TOTAL ANNUAL LO SS Ib/yr 95*491 57,742 38,055 ~ ~ SSJSS~ 30357 10360

Notes : (1). Loss results based on the following conditions:

• Product Conditions: Gasoline; 10 psi RVP; 5.18 psia TVP; 64 Ib/lb-molc vapor molecular weight.
»Tank Conditions: 100 ft dia.; mechanical-shoe primary seal; rim-mounted secondary seal, 60 ft working height.
»Ambient Conditions: 10 mi/hr wind speed; 60 °F ambient temp.; 20 °F ambient temperature range.

TABLE 2 - Summary of Total Annual Loss for an IFR T

Description Units Case“ CaseS Case 9 Case IS C asell Case 12

FLOATING ROOF TANK DESCRIPTION ( 11
• Emission Controls — Average Average Average Tight Tight Tight
• Heel Height ft 5 2 0.5 5 2 0.5

STANDING STORAGE LOSS

• Standing Storage Loss Rate lb/day 3.30 3.30 3.30 1.76 1.76 1.76
• Standing Storage Days days/yr 339 339 339 339 339 339
A nnual Standing Storage Loss Ib/yr 1,119 1,119 1,119 597 597 597

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

HEEL BREATHING LOSS

• Heel Breathing Loss Rate Ib/day 141.7 86.8 29.6 141.7 86.8 29.6
• Heel Turnover Days days/yr 26 26 26 26 26 26
A nnual H eel Breathing Loss Ib/yr 3384 2357 770 3384 2357 770

HEEL FILLING LOSS

• Heel Filling Loss per Heel Turnover Ih/heeltum. 2330 933 233 2330 933 233
• Annua] Heel Turnovers heeltum /yr 26 26 26 26 26 26
A nnual H eel F illing Loss Ib/yr 60380 24358 6,058 60380 24358 6,058

TOTAL ANNUAL LO SS Ib/yr 65371 27322 8,135 65,049 27300 7313

Notes : (1). Loss results based on the following conditions:

• Product Conditions: Gasoline; 10 psi RVP; 5.18 psia TVP; 64 Ib/lb-mole vapor molecular weight.
• Tank Conditions: 100 f t dia.; mechanical-shoe primary seal; rim-mounted secondary seal, 60 ft working height
• Ambient Conditions: 60 °F ambient temp.; 20 °F ambient temperature range.

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/24/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 4 TAN K H E E L RED UCTION OPTIONS
Floating-roof tanks have been in operation since the first external
floating roof was introduced in 1923 near Chicago, Illinois.
Throughout history, tanks have been designed to maximize the net
DECK LEGS IN
working capacity o f the tank by landing the floating roof at the lowest LOW POSITION
practical height Standard details have been developed over the years PRODUCTSUMP
that permit a typical floating roof to be landed with an average product PRODUCT HEEL
heel height between 3 and 4 feet PRODUCT
Figures 3 and 4 show how typical floating-roof tank design CONNECTION
details can limit the low roof landing position. The goal for reduced
heel operations is to reduce the roof landing position to that which
corresponds to the lowest practical product heel (e.g., 6 inches) or to
reduce the evaporative losses associated with heel turnover operations.
Selecting the best heel reduction option(s) for either a new tank
or a retrofit installation involves the consideration o f many factors.
This often involves a site-specific detailed engineering analysis to
produce the most cost-effective solution. The following sections Figure 14 IFR T with Heel Reduction Using
describe some o f the methods that have proven to be effective in Internal Sump
reducing the product heel in floating-roof tanks.

position is quickly limited to approximately 52 in., allowing 6 in.

clearance from the blade to the floating roof pontoon bottom plate.
4.1 Tank Piping
Two design options are available to reduce or eliminate the
Tank piping that impacts the low roof landing position can
impact o f shell-mounted mixers.
include piping used for product filling, product withdrawal, water
• Pontoon Modifications External floating-roof designs can be
draw-off, floating suctions, product heating and floating roof drains.
either double-deck or single-deck designs using a perimeter ring of
The most common configuration for much o f this piping is to have it
pontoons. In both cases the pontoons in the areas o f the shell mounted
penetrate the tank shell as close to the tank bottom as permitted by the
mixers can be modified with recessed openings or pontoon notches to
chosen design code.
provide clearance for the mixer blades. Pontoon notches can be used
Installation details for piping larger than 6 in. dia. will need to be
for new floating roofs or may be added to existing floating roofs after
modified if the low roof landing position is to be significantly
a thorough design review o f the existing pontoon configuration. Low
reduced.
roof landing positions as low as 3 feet are attainable with pontoon
Large diameter piping (i.e., 24 in. dia. and larger) that is used for
notches (see Figure IS).
product filling or withdrawal can be replaced with multiple smaller
penetrations by adding a manifold system. Improved distribution of
product flow into the tank is an added benefit with a manifolded fill
line. A similar configuration can be used for product withdrawal (i.e.,
PONTOON
pump suction) lines. Alternatively, the shell penetration may be
replaced with an internal sump and an under-bottom connection (see
Figure 14). Any changes to the product withdrawal piping can impact
the performance o f the product sendout pumps. H ie design should
include a review o f the entire product withdrawal piping system,
including the affect on available NPSH to the product pumps.
Piping for water draw-off systems is typically o f a smaller
diameter and can generally be configured to minimize their impact on
the low roof landing position.

4.2 Shell-Mounted Product Mixers

Many products require periodic mixing while in storage. Mixing
can be used to reduce product stratification or to enhance the
distribution o f additives in a refined product Shell-mounted mixers
that are used in floating-roof tank applications are commonly installed
through 24 in. dia. shell manholes. Mixers o f this type include • Alternate Mixing Systems Shell-mounted mixers may be
multiple bladed propellers which may be up to 3 feet in diameter. A replaced with a system based on product recirculation. The type of
24 in. dia. shell nozzle installed in accordance with API 630 [1] would system selected depends on the type o f product, the size o f the tank,
have a centerline height o f 30 inches above the bottom. Add to this the and the reason for the mixing operation. For example, large diameter
clearance required for the propeller, and the low landing crude oil storage tanks use mixers in an attempt to keep sediment and

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/24/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 water in suspension and reduce stratification of the product. Smaller
diameter storage tanks for refined products such as gasoline may use
mixers to enhance additive blending operations.
Recirculation based systems may include internal rotary jet
mixers or internal recirculation manifolds. This equipment can be
designed to provide the fluid velocities and flow distribution required
to keep solids in suspension in crude oil tanks or to ensure adequate
blending operations in refined product tanks. It should be noted that
large rotary jet mixers can require about the same amount o f clearance
as a typical shell-mounted mixer. However, recirculation manifolds
may be designed to provide the required mixing properties and permit
a significantly lower roof landing position.
The design of any recirculation based mixing system must
consider the effects that high fluid velocities may have on the floating
roof appurtenances such as roof supports, roof drains and rim seals.
4.4 Heel Vapor Recovery
Figures 17 and 18 illustrate the use of heel vapor recovery. Heel
vapor recovery involves the collection and treatment of product
vapors that are displaced when the product heel is filled after a drain-
dry operation [7]. These vapors may be collected through the interior
of a guidepole or a fixed-roof support column (i.e., for an IFRT),
where perforated openings are placed in the wall of the pole or column
below the minimum operating level of the floating roof. The vapor
collection system may be connected to a vapor treatment system, such
as a thermal oxidation system. A vapor holder that incorporates a
diaphragm may be required to help balance the rate of vapor collection
with the capacity o f the vapor treatment system.

4.3 Floating R oof Drains

External floating roofs are equipped with a drainage system to
ensure that any water that accumulates on the floating roof is removed
in a controlled manner. A floating roof drain may be an assembly of
rigid pipe interconnected by swivel joints or the drain may be
fabricated from a section of flexible pipe. In either case, the floating
roof drain will transport water from the floating-roof sump(s) to a
shell nozzle and must permit unrestricted travel of the floating roof.
Floating roof drains should be designed to provide positive
gravity drainage o f water with the roof in all operating positions. In
general, the floating roof drain will require a minimum landing
position of between 2 to 3 feet, depending on the size o f the floating
roof and the diameter of the drain.
There are several design options available which will permit a Figure 17 IFR T w ith Heel Vapor Recovery
floating roof to land without any restriction from the floating-roof
drain assembly. Some o f the issues that must be considered are the
size and type o f floating roof, drain sump detail, type of drain, and the
type and condition o f the tank foundation. Figure 16 offers one
possible solution.

Figure 16 Flexible Floating-R oof Drain System Figure 18 IFR T w ith Em ission C ollection System
with In-Tank Sum p

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/24/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 5 CONCLUSIONS
• Product Heel Represents Trapped Inventory. The product heel
reduces the tank net working capacity and represents a dead asset.
• Reducing the Heel in Floating-Roof Tanks Improves Product
Inventory. As a result o f reducing the product heel in floating-roof
tanks, the volume of non-working or trapped inventory is reduced.
This improves the operating revenues for the tank owner or operator.
• Heel Turnover Losses Can Be Significant for Drain-Dry
Operations on a Floating-Roof Tank. The heel filling loss is the largest
component of the heel turnover loss, and can significantly exceed both
the standing storage loss and the withdrawal loss.
• Heel Turnover Losses May Be Required In Annual Loss
Estimates. For example, the USEPA has indicated that they intend to
soon include a loss estimate procedure for heel turnover losses in
future revisions of their Report AP-42 [8]. Annual operating loss
estimates for floating-roof tanks will increase due to the addition of
heel turnover losses.
• Reducing the Minimum Operating Level of the Floating Roof
Increases the Tank Net Working Capacity. Reduces Cross-
Contamination of Products, and Reduces Heel Turnover Losses. As a
result of reducing the minimum operating level of the floating roof,
the tank net working capacity is improved. By reducing the product
heel in floating-roof tanks, the amount of cross-contamination of
different products is reduced during product changing operations.
Also, if the tank is operated drain-diy, the heel turnover losses are
significantly reduced.
• Practical Options are Now Available to Permit Low Heel
Operation of New or Retrofit Floating-Roof Tanks. Practical methods
have been developed to equip floating-roof tanks so that the floating
roof is able to operate to a very low position without landing on its
supports. A detailed engineering analysis is necessary to select the
best option for a particular tank. Modifications to the tank to allow
floating roof operation at very low levels without landing the roof is
recommended in lieu of frequently landing the floating roof.
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/24/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
REFERENCES
1. American Petroleum Institute, May 1993, “Welded Steel
Tanks for Oil Storage,” API Standard 650, Ninth Edition,
Washington, D.C.
2. American Petroleum Institute, October 1991, “Evaporative
Loss From Fixed-Roof Tanks,” API Manual o f Petroleum
Measurement Standards, Chapter 19.1, (API Publication 2518), First
Edition, Washington, D.C.
3. American Petroleum Institute, April 1997, “Evaporative Loss
From Floating-Roof Tanks,” API Manual o f Petroleum Measurement
Standards, Chapter 19.2, (Combined API Publications 2517 and
2519), First Edition, Washington, D.C.
4. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, May 10, 1996,
“User’s Guide to TANKS Storage Tank Emissions Calculation
Software, Version 3.0,” Electronic Bulletin Board, Questions and
Answers on TANKS Computer Program, “Emptying.”
5. Laverman, R.J., Gallagher, T.A. and Schoemer, W.S.,
“Evaporative Loss From Floating Roof Tanks,” Paper Presented at
Energy Week 1997, Conference on Pipelines, Terminals and Storage,
Houston, Texas [CB&I Technical Publication Number CBT-5643].
6. Ferry, R.L. and Kissell, J.R., September 25, 1995, “New
Equation Estimates Emissions From Tank Turnovers,” Oil & Gas
Journal.
7. Thomassen, A., “Vapor Collection and Destruction From
Drain-Dry Petroleum Storage Tanks at Pipeline Input Station,” Paper
Presented at the 12th Annual Operating Conference of the
Independent Liquid Terminals Association, Houston, Texas, June 22-
23, 1992.
8. Environmental Protection Agency, March 1996,
“Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors,” U.S. EPA Report
No. AP-42, Section 7.1, “Organic Liquid Storage Tanks.”