Bref08 c07s01 ch5 1997

Note: This is a reference cited in AP 42, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Volume I
Stationary Point and Area Sources. AP42 is located on the EPA web site at www.epa.gov/ttn/
chief/ap42/
The file name refers to the reference number, the AP42 chapter and section. The file name
"ref02_c01s02.pdf" would mean the reference is from AP42 chapter 1 section 2. The reference
may be from a previous version of the section and no longer cited. The primary source should
always be checked.
AP42 Section: 7.1
Background Chapter 5
Reference: 8
Title: Hydrocarbon Emissions Floating Roof Petroleum Tanks
Engineering Science, Inc., prepared for Western Oil and Gas

Association,
Los Angeles, CA,
January 1977
HYDROCARBON
EMISSIONS FROM
FLOATING ROOF
PETROLEUM TANKS
ENGINEERING-SCIENCE, INC.
HYDROCARBON E M I S S I O N S FROM
FLOATING-ROOF STORAGE TANKS
PREPARED FOR
THE WESTERN OIL AN0 GAS ASSOCIATION
609 SOUTH GRANO AVENUE
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 91107
JANUARY 1917
SUBMITTED BY
ENGINEER ING-SCI ENCE, I N C .
150 NORTH SANTA ANITA AVENUE
ARCAOIA. CALIFORNIA B l O O B
ENQINEERINQ-SCIENCE -
FOREWORD
The r e l a t i o n s h i p of hydrocarbon emissions t o t h e photochemical

o x i d a n t p o l l u t i o n problcms of many urban a r e a s of t h e United S t a t e s
i s n o t w e l l understood. S t i l l , many r e g u l a t o r y a g e n c i e s have taken
t h e p o s i t i o n t h a t hydrocarbon e m i s s i o n s from a l l s o u r c e s should be
reduced in o r d e r t o minimize t h e e x t e n t of t h e o x i d a n t problem.
With r e g a r d t o hydrocarbon e m i s s i o n s from f l o a t i n g - r o o f storage

t a n k s , t h e only b a s i s a v a i l a b l e t o t h e r e g u l a t o r y a g e n c i e s f o r esti-
mating such e m i s s i o n s a t t h e p r e s e n t t i m e is a document published by
t h e American Petroleum I n s t i t u t e i n February, 1962 e n t i t l e d , "API -
B u l l e t i n on Evaporation Loss From Floating-Roof Tanks" and i d e n t i f i e
a s MI-2517. The Western O i l and Gas A s s o c i a t i o n undertook t h i s
i n v e s t i g a t i o n t o measure a c t u a l hydrocarbon l o s s e s from s e v e r a l t a n k s
and t o determine whether o r n o t t h e API e q u a t i o n p r o p e r l y e s t i m a t e d
hydrocarbon e m i s s i o n s from f l o a t i n g - r o o f storage tanks; these o b j e c t i v e s
were m e t . I t i s hoped t h a t t h i s r e p o r t w i l l s e r v e a s a u s e f u l guide
t o the regulatory agencies - and t o o t h e r s - i n determining t h e need
f o r and t h e d i r e c t i o n of f u t u r e r e s e a r c h concerning hydrocarbon
e m i s s i o n s from f l o a t i n g - r o o f storage tanks.
i
ENOINEERINO-SCIENCE -
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The Western Oil and Gas A s s o c i a t i o n (WOGA) c o n t r a c t e d w i t h

Engineering-Science, Inc. (ES), f o r t h i s e v a l u a t i o n of hydrocarbon
emissions from f l o a t i n g - r o o f s t o r a g e t a n k s in J u l y , 1976. Chairmen
of WOGA committees who conceived and approved t h i s p r o j e c t were:
D r . C a r l e t o n B. S c o t t , Chairman, WOGA Environmental Conservation

Committee (ECC), Union Oil Company of C a l i f o r n i a .
M r . W i l l i a m B. Harrell, Chairman, WOGA P r o j e c t Coordinating

Subcommittee, Mobil Oil C o r p o r a t i o n .
While t h e ECC h a s o v e r a l l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r WOGA's environmental

programs, s p e c i f i c p r o j e c t s such a s t h i s one a r e c a r r i e d o u t under
t h e d i r e c t i o n of appointed t a s k groups of e n g i n e e r s and s c i e n t i s t s .
each p o s s e s s i n g q u a l i f i c a t i o n s in some phase of t h e s u b j e c t under
consideration. WCGA d i r e c t e d and monitored t h i s p r o j e c t through t h e
f o l l o w i n g s p e c i a l l y appointed t a s k f o r c e :
Name Organization
P e t e r E. J o n k e r , Chairman Union Oil Company of C a l i f o r n i a
W i l l i a m J. P o r t e r Chevron U.S.A. Incorporated
D r . Robert L. R u s s e l l Union Oil Research
P e t e r L. Mehta A t l a n t i c R i c h f i e l d Company
E a r l K. Dewey, Jr. . C o n t i n e n t a l Oil Company
J e r r y Adams F l e t c h e r O i l R e f i n i n g Company
John A. Glaser Gulf Oil Company, U.S.
Richard A. O ' H a r e S h e l l Oil Company
Gordon J. Good Standard O i l Company of Ohio
Robert M. Stoneham Texaco, I n c o r p o r a t e d
Hayden H. J o n e s Union Oil Company of C a l i f o r n i a
ii
T h e s u c c e s s f u l completion of t h i s p r o j e c t was p a r t i a l l y ensured

by t h e unbiased e f f o r t s and open d i a l o g u e of s e v e r a l e n g i n e e r s and
s c i e n t i s t s from t h e a i r p o l l u t i o n c o n t r o l a g e n c i e s . Open meetings
were h e l d monthly t o d i s c u s s p r o g r e s s and a l l i d e a s voiced by t h e s e
p a r t i c i p a n t s were f u l l y c o n s i d e r e d w i t h i n t h e limits of e s t a b l i s h e d
t i m e and budget c o n s t r a i n t s . The following o r g a n i z a t i o n s were re-
p r e s e n t e d a t d i f f e r e n t t i m e s and by d i f f e r e n t i n d i v i d u a l s throughout
t h e c o u r s e of t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n :
Environmental P r o t e c t i o n Agency
Research T r i a n g l e Park, North C a r o l i n a
Environmental P r o t e c t i o n Agency
Region I X , San F r a n c i s c o
C a l i f o r n i a A i r Resources Board
Sacramento, C a l i f o r n i a
Southern C a l i f o r n i a A i r P o l l u t i o n C o n t r o l D i s t r i c t
Los Angeles, C a l i f o r n i a
San Diego A i r P o l l u t i o n C o n t r o l D i s t r i c t
San Diego, C a l i f o r n i a
Suggestions and i d e a s a l s o were provided by:
American Petroleum I n s t i t u t e
Committee on E v a p o r a t i v e L o s s Measurements
Washington, D.C.
Supporting Engineering-Science, I n c . in s p e c i a l t e c h n i c a l a r e a s
were:
DK. W. L. F a i t h , Consulting Engineer

San Marino, C a l i f o r n i a
A n a l y t i c a l Research L a b o r a t o r i e s
Monrovia, C a l i f o r n i a
The P r o j e c t Manager f o r t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n w a s M r . A. L. Wilson,

and t h e T e c h n i c a l DirectOK w a s M r . M. Dean High, Vice P r e s i d e n t ,
Engineering-Science, Inc. To a l l who c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h i s s t u d y and
p r e p a r a t i o n of t h i s r e p o r t , Engineering-Science, Inc. extends i t s
sincere appreciation.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FOREWORD i
ACKNOWLEDGMENT ii
CHAPTER I EXECUTIVE S W R Y 1-1
CHAPTER I1 CONCLUSIONS 11-1
CHAPTER I11 INTRODUCTION 111-1
Background 111-1
Objective 111-2
Scope 111-3
Methodology 111-5
CHAPTER I V STATIC STORAGE HYDROCARBON WISSION
MEASUREMENTS 1v-1
Sample C o l l e c t i o n Procedure 1v-2
Laboratory Procedure 1v-3
E v a l u a t i o n of P o t e n t i a l S t r a t i f i c a -
t i o n in t h e Tanks 1v-9
E f f e c t s of Water, Temperature and
Flashing Time 1v-14
Exclusion of C e r t a i n Tanks 1v-15
D e n s i t y Measurements 1v-15
CHAPTER V CORRELATION OF EMISSIONS WITH MEASURED
PARAMETERS v-1
General v-1
Comparisons w i t h API Equation v-3
C o r r e l a t i o n With Measured Parameters V-6
CHAPTER V I FURTHER DISCUSSION OF SIGNIFICANT
PARAMETERS v1-1
CHAPTER V I 1 BEST AVAILABLE SEAL TECHNOLOGY v11-1
General v11-1
Survey of A v a i l a b l e S e a l s v11-2
Primary S e a l s v11-2
Secondary S e a l s v11-8
S e a l and Tank A c c e s s o r i e s VII-12
Survey of I n s t a l l e d S e a l s w i t h
Respect t o Gap S i z e VII-19
D i s c u s s i o n of R e s u l t s VII-28
CHAPTER V I 1 1 RECOMMENDATIONS VIII-1
CHAPTER I X BIBLIOGRAPHY 1x-1
APPENDICES UNDER SEPARATE COVER
ENQINEERINQ-SCIENCE PI-
LIST OF FIGURES
-
No. Title
1-1 D e s c r i p t i o n of 1 3 Floating-Roof Tanks Used 1-2

in t h e Study (Excludes Union No. 5 and 3
Crude O i l Tanks)
IV-1 Example Density-Evaporation Curve, Arco #134, IV-7

September 8 , 1976.
IV-2 Summary of Tank T e s t (Union) IV-10
IV-3 Summary of Tank T e s t (Texaco) IV-11
IV-4 Change in Stock D e n s i t y w i t h T i m e IV-16
IV-5 Change in Stock D e n s i t y w i t h Time IV-17
IV-6 Change i n Stock D e n s i t y w i t h Time IV-18
IV-7 Change i n Stock D e n s i t y w i t h Time IV-19
v- 1 Comparison of API C a l c u l a t e d and Measured v-5

Emission Rates
v-2 Hydrocarbon Emission Rate a s a Function of v-7
Reid Vapor P r e s s u r e and Tank Diameter
v-3 Hydrocarbon Emission Rate a s a Function of V- 8
Average Wind Speed and Average Ambient Temperature
v-4 Hydrocarbon Emission Rate a s a F u n c t i o n of v-9
S e a l Gap Arga and Number of Gaps
v-5 Hydrocarbon Emission Rate Compared t o Age of v-10
Primary S e a l
V-6 Standard 192-Comparison of Wind Speed and Stock V-13
Temperature t o Change i n D e n s i t y
VII-1 Weight A s s i s t e d M e t a l l i c Shoe S e a l VII-3

VII-2 SR-7 Horton F a b r i c S e a l ( R e s i l i e n t Type) VII-5
f o r Horton F l o a t i n g Roofs
VII-3 PDM Tubeseal System VII-6
VII-4 Kisses1 - VII-7
VII-5 Thetachron Tank VII-9
VII-6 Secondary Wiper S e a l VII-10
VII-7 U l t r a f l o t e Wiper VII-11
VII-8 P a c i f i c E r e c t o r s Mini Bag VII-13
VII-9 Atlas Mini Bag VII-14
VII-10 T r i c o Mini Bag VII-15
VII-11 T r i c o Wiper VII-16
VII-12 Maloney Secondary Tank S e a l VII-17
VII-13 S p r i n g A s s i s t e d Mechanism VII-18
ENQINEERING-SCIENCE -
LIST OF TABLES
-
No. -
Title
111-1 D e s c r i p t i o n of Floating-Roof Tanks Used f o r

Study 111-4
IV-1 T e n t a t i v e Method f o r Determining Evaporation

Losses by Change i n S t o c k D e n s i t y 1v-4
D e n s i t y and S p e c i f i c G r a v i t y of L i q u i d s by
Bingham Pycnometer IV-4 .
IV-2 Example Depth S t r a t i f i c a t i o n R e s u l t s iv-12
IV-3 A Comparison of D e n s i t y Measurements Wide
Mouth B o t t l e s Versus Small Mouth B o t t l e s 1v-13
IV-4 F i e l d Measurement Summary (Arco) iv-21
IV-5 F i e l d Measurement Summary (Exxon) 1v-22
IV-6 F i e l d Measurement Sununary (Gulf) 1v-23
IV-7 F i e l d Measurement Summary (Lion) 1v-24
IV-8 F i e l d Measurement Sumnary (Mobil) 1v-25
IV-9 F i e l d Measurement Summary ( S h e l l ) 1v-26
IV-10 F i e l d Measurement Summary ( S h e l l ) 1v-27
IV-11 F i e l d Measurement Summary (Standard) IV-28 :
IV-12 F i e l d Measurement Summary (Standard) 1v-29
IV-15 F i e l d Measurement Summary (Standard 1v-32
IV-16 F i e l d Measurement Summary (Texaco) 1v-33
IV-17 F i e l d Measurement Sumnary (Texaco) 1v-34
IV-18 F i e l d Measurement Summary (Union) 1v-35
IV-21 Measured Emission Rate 1v-38
v-1 S t a n d i n g S t o r a g e Loss Emissions Summary v-2

v- 2 API-2517 C a l c u l a t e d Versus Observed Hydrocarbon
Emissions v-4
v-3 Comparison of Measured Gaps Versus Allowable Gaps
on T e s t Tanks V-14
VI-1 Comparison. of Engineering-Science F i e l d Test

V a r i a b l e s t o AFT-2517 Equation V a r i a b l e s v1-2
VII-1 Performance of S e a l s on Floating-Roof Tanks (W) VII-20

VII-2 Performance of S e a l s on Floating-Roof T h k s (R) VII-24
CHAPTER I
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
.. .
ENGINEERING-SCIENCE -
CHAPTER I
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
For t h e p a s t 1 5 y e a r s o r s o , AF'I B u l l e t i n 2517 has been used t o

estimate hydrocarbon l o s s e s from f l o a t i n g - r o o f storage tanks. In
r e c e n t y e a r s , much a t t e n t i o n has been focussed on t h e s o u r c e s of
hydrocarbons and t h e r e g u l a t o r y a g e n c i e s have pushed a l l s o u r c e s f o r
a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e b e s t a v a i l a b l e c o n t r o l technology. In t h e c a s e of
floating-roof t a n k s , no r e c e n t measurement d a t a e x i s t e d on t h e hydro-
carbon l o s s e s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h d i f f e r e n t t a n k s , s e a l s , s t o c k c o n t e n t s ,
o r weather parameters.
T h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n was i n i t i a t e d p r i m a r i l y t o p r o v i d e c u r r e n t
hydrocarbon emission d a t a on f u l l - s i z e s t o r a g e t a n k s in C a l i f o r n i a .
Seventeen t a n k s were o r i g i n a l l y made a v a i l a b l e b u t only 13 t a n k s con-
t a i n i n g d i s t i l l a t e p r o d u c t s were e v a l u a t e d f o r t h e d u r a t i o n of t h e
project. A p i c t o r i a l d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e s e 1 3 t a n k s and some of t h e
major parameters which a r e commonly a s s o c i a t e d w i t h hydrocarbon l o s s e s
from f l o a t i n g - r o o f t a n k s are i l l u s t r a t e d in F i g u r e 1-1. Work was
i n i t i a t e d i n J u l y 1976 and concluded i n January 1977.
To d e t e r m i n e hydrocarbon l o s s e s , ES followed a procedure i n

API B u l l e t i n 2512 which r e l a t e d hydrocarbon l o s s t o s t o c k d e n s i t y
change. The method r e l i e s on t h e f a c t that hydrocarbon compounds t h a t
e v a p o r a t e most q u i c k l y from t h e t a n k w i l l be l i g h t ends and t h e s t o c k
d e n s i t y w i l l , t h e r e f o r e , i n c r e a s e as t o t a l volume d e c r e a s e s . Samples
of t h e s t o c k were c o l l e c t e d a t p e r i o d i c i n t e r v a l s and d e n s i t y d e t e r -
m i n a t i o n s were conducted i n t h e l a b o r a t o r y . The f l a s h i n g p o t e n t i a l
of t h e petroleum s t o c k s used i n t h i s s t u d y was s u f f i c i e n t l y l a r g e so
as t o overshadow a l l o t h e r p o s s i b l e e r r o r s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h b o t h f i e l d
and l a b o r a t o r y p r o c e d u r e s . , S e v e r a l m o d i f i c a t i o n s t o t h e g e n e r a l API
p r o c e d u r e had t o be accomplished. Once t h e f l a s h i n g problem was con-
t r o l l e d , t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n p r o g r e s s e d smoothly.
A u x i l i a r y t a s k s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h i s p r o j e c t included l a b o r a t o r y
and p i l o t s c a l e t e s t i n g , s u r v e y s of seal technology, and review of t h e
I- 1
FIGURE I -
x
W x x x
oz x x x
3 x x x x
M x x
M x x x x x x
W
a
o
x X
~~
x x
x x x
x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x
0 0 0
Y ) O O O O
NY.-N'-J
0 0 0 0 0
c c c c c
0 - 0 0 0
N - 0 0
- N
x
x
x x
I x
x x x x
x x - x x x
x
x
Y X L m m m m m m m
3 m - N n - m w -
x x
r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
X Y Y c c c c c c c c
P
0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
x x f - N ' - J W V ) Y ) C
L
x
x
x
x X
I
x
. x
x
x
X I
x X I
x X X I
x x x x x X x
I- 2 ENGINEER ING-SC IENCE , INC.

API e q u a t i o n f o r e s t i m a t i n g hydrocarbon l o s s e s .
R e s u l t s of t h e f i e l d i n v e s t i g a t i o n showed t h a t average hydrocarbon

e m i s s i o n s from 1 3 s t a t i c f l o a t i n g - r o o f t a n k s were about 50 p e r c e n t
of t h e q u a n t i t y t h a t would be e s t i m a t e d by u s e of API B u l l e t i n 2517.
S e v e r a l t a n k , roof and s e a l d e s i g n parameters a s w e l l a s s e v e r a l

weather parameters were recorded d u r i n g t h e s t u d y and s t a t i s t i c a l
c o r r e l a t i o n s were conducted t o t r y t o determine t h e s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i -
a b l e s which a f f e c t e d emission r a t e s . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , some v a r i a b l e s
such a s s t o c k temperature i n t h e r i m s p a c e , r i m s p a c e s u r f a c e a r e a ,
t i g h t n e s s of t h e apron between t h e roof and shoe s e a l s , e t c . , were
n o t measured d u r i n g t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n . As might be expected, no
c o r r e l a t i o n s were p a r t i c u l a r l y e v i d e n t ; f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h w i l l be
r e q u i r e d t o c l e a r l y understand t h e mechanisms r e s p o n s i b l e f o r hydro-
carbon l o s s e s .
Hydrocarbon emissions from 9 of t h e 1 3 t e s t e d t a n k s showed s u r -

p r i s i n g l y similar emissions even though major d i f f e r e n c e s were noted
between Reid vapor p r e s s u r e of t h e s t o c k s , s e a l t y p e , seal gaps,
wind speed and o t h e r parameters. S e a l gap s i z e was found t o b e of
no more importance t h a n many o t h e r parameters. I n one example, two
v e r y similar t a n k s c o n t a i n i n g t h e same t y p e of product had thp same
emission rate, a l t h o u g h one had t w i c e t h e gap s i z e
P a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t d u r i n g t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n was focussed on
d e t e r m i n i n g t h e b e s t a v a i l a b l e seal technology. Two s u r v e y s were
conducted. The f i r s t survey e v a l u a t e d commercially a v a i l a b l e s e a l s
through i n d i v i d u a l companies. The second survey addressed seal gap
s i z e a c t u a l l y measured a t d i f f e r e n t roof l e v e l s f o r some 200 t a n k s
i n Southern C a l i f o r n i a .
Many seal d e s i g n s were found t o be commercially a v a i l a b l e b u t

t h e r e were no emission t e s t d a t a a v a i l a b l e t o demonstrate t h e c o s t
e f f e c t i v e n e s s of t h e d e s i g n s f o r r e d u c i n g hydrocarbon emissions.
The t a b u l a t i o n of gap s i z e d a t a f o r 200 t a n k s showed t h a t t u b e

s e a l s f r e q u e n t l y have s m a l l e r gap s p a c e s t h a n primary shoe seals and
t h a t s e a l gap s i z e could be reduced by u s e of secondary seals.
1-3
CHAPTER I 1
CONCLUS IONS
CHAPTER 11
CONCLUSIONS
1. The b a s i c API method of d e t e r m i n i n g hydrocarbon l o s s e s from

petroleum d i s t i l l a t e p r o d u c t s by measuring t h e s t o c k d e n s i t y
change (API-2512) was demonstrated t o be a v e r y r e l i a b l e pro-
cedure. However, t h e i n s t r u m e n t a t i o n and methodology developed
d u r i n g t h e c o u r s e of t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n need t o be i n c o r p o r a t e d
i n t o any r e - w r i t e of t h e API procedure. The API procedure w a s
found n o t s a t i s f a c t o r y f o r measuring s t a n d i n g l o s s e s from c r u d e
o i l s t o r a g e tanks.
2. Measured hydrocarbon l o s s e s from 13 f l o a t i n g - r o o f storage tanks,

a l l l o c a t e d i n C a l i f o r n i a and a l l c o n t a i n i n g petroleum d i s - "
t i l l a t e s , were i n g e n e r a l below t h e q u a n t i t i e s e s t i m a t e d by
t h e MI-2517 e q u a t i o n . The emission l o s s of t h e 13 t a n k s over
t h e d u r a t i o n of t h e test p e r i o d averaged about one-half of t h e
q u a n t i t y e s t i m a t e d by API-2517. All measurement procedure de-
c i s i o n s w e r e decided on t h e c o n s e r v a t i v e l y h i g h s i d e .
3. Four f l o a t i n g - r o o f t a n k s w i t h primary t u b e seals and z e r o o r very

small gap s i z e showed t h e same o r d e r of magnitude f o r hydrocarbon
l o s s e s as s i x t a n k s s t o r i n g s i m i l a r p r o d u c t s w i t h primary shoe
s e a l s having c o n s i d e r a b l y more gap space. Two i d e n t i c a l r i v e t e d
t a n k s w i t h t h e same t y p e of primary shoe s e a l s , t h e same s t o c k ,
and l o c a t e d side-by-side i n t h e same tank farm, had t h e same
emission rate even though t h e t o t a l gap a r e a on one t a n k was
i n t e n t i o n a l l y i n c r e a s e d t o more t h a n d o u b l e t h e gap a r e a on t h e
second tank. It would a p p e a r t h a t some o t h e r parameters a r e
o v e r - r i d i n g t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e of gap s i z e w i t h r e s p e c t t o hydro-
carbon l o s s e s .
4. A s u r v e y of a wide v a r i e t y of s e a l s on 200 t a n k s i n Southern

C a l i f o r n i a showed t h a t no s e a l d e s i g n would e l i m i n a t e a l l gaps
on f l o a t i n g - r o o f tanks.
11-1
CHAPTER 1 1 1
I NTROOUCT I ON
CHAPTER 111
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
Hydrocarbon emissions from f l o a t i n g - r o o f tanks a r e c u r r e n t l y

e s t i m a t e d by u s e of a n e q u a t i o n from a n American Petroleum I n s t i t u t e
(API) b u l l e t i n . The d a t a base f o r t h i s b u l l e t i n c o n s i s t e d of 60 t e s t s
conducted p r i m a r i l y between 1933 and 1942. Two t e s t s were r u n on
c r u d e o i l ; 58 were r u n on g a s o l i n e . The l o s s measurement was determined
i n 57 of t h e t e s t s by t h e change i n vapor p r e s s u r e . Three-fourths of
t h e tests were run on r i v e t e d t a n k s and t h e l a r g e s t t a n k t e s t e d was 145
f e e t i n diameter.
R e s u l t s of t h e s e s t u d i e s were p u b l i s h e d i n 1962 by t h e American

Petroleum I n s t i t u t e i n t h e i r API B u l l e t i n 2517. The r e p o r t included
a n e q u a t i o n f o r e s t i m a t i n g hydrocarbon l o s s e s from f l o a t i n g - r o o f tanks.
The U.S. P u b l i c H e a l t h S e r v i c e ( p r e d e c e s s o r t o EPA) h a s used t h e
e q u a t i o n and published i t i n t h e i r e m i s s i o n s f a c t o r p u b l i c a t i o n , AP-42.
A i r p o l l u t i o n c o n t r o l a g e n c i e s a t a l l l e v e l s of government have s i n c e
used t h e e q u a t i o n t o e s t i m a t e hydrocarbon e m i s s i o n s from f l o a t i n g - r o o f
petroleum s t o r a g e t a n k s .
Use of t h e e q u a t i o n by t h e r e g u l a t o r y a g e n c i e s has r e c e n t l y r e s u l t e d
i n t h e conclusion t h a t floating-roof t a n k s were r e s p o n s i b l e f o r a
s i g n i f i c a n t p o r t i o n of t h e hydrocarbon emission i n v e n t o r i e s i n many
A i r Q u a l i t y C o n t r o l Regions and t h a t f u r t h e r c o n t r o l was r e q u i r e d .
Under t h e r e c e n t New Source Review r u l e s , estimates of hydrocarbon
e m i s s i o n s from proposed new tanks have caused c o n s t r u c t i o n of some
of t h e s e t a n k s t o be blocked.
The opinion h a s been voiced by some i n d u s t r y s c i e n t i s t s t h a t t h e

API e q u a t i o n does n o t t a k e i n t o a c c o u n t improvements made i n t h e b a s i c
d e s i g n of f l o a t i n g - r o o f t a n k s and roof s e a l s o v e r t h e p a s t s e v e r a l
y e a r s a n d t h e r e f o r e a c t u a l e m i s s i o n s could be much less t h a n e s t i m a t e d
by t h e API e q u a t i o n . On t h e o t h e r hand, t h e opinion has been voiced
by some r e g u l a t o r y o f f i c i a l s t h a t b e t t e r c o n t r o l technology should be
111-1
ENGINEERING-SCIENCE Eq -
a p p l i e d t o f u r t h e r reduce f l o a t i n g - r o o f t a n k hydrocarbon emissions
r e g a r d l e s s of t h e i r r e l a t i v e magnitude.
The Chicago Bridge and I r o n Company (CBI), a t i t s P l a i n f i e l d .

I l l i n o i s , r e s e a r c h f a c i l i t y undertook a t e s t program i n A p r i l 1976 f o r
t h e Standard O i l Company of Ohio (SOHIO) t o examine t h e mechanisms of
hydrocarbon emission l o s s e s from f l o a t i n g - r o o f t a n k s and t o o b t a i n an
improved hydrocarbon emission loss c a l c u l a t i o n procedure. Using t h e
e q u a t i o n i n API B u l l e t i n 2517, emission e s t i m a t e s of hydrocarbon l o s s e s
from a typical f l o a t i n g - r o o f t a n k were many t i m e s h i g h e r t h a n t h e CBI
estimates.
Laboratory t e s t s were conducted by s t a f f of Chevron U.S.A. Incor-

p o r a t e d t o e v a l u a t e hydrocarbon l o s s e s from open t o p c o n t a i n e r s w h i l e
v a r y i n g t h e dead a i r space above t h e l i q u i d hydrocarbons. Tentative
c o n c l u s i o n s were t h a t v e r y l i t t l e hydrocarbon vapors were l o s t
t o t h e atmosphere when dead s p a c e above t h e l i q u i d approached 30 i n c h e s
as commonly found i n f l o a t i n g - r o o f tank shoe seal d e s i g n s .
The a g e of t h e emission t e s t d a t a o r i g i n a l l y developed by API

and i t s q u e s t i o n a b l e a p p l i c a t i o n t o t o d a y ' s technology, t h e i n i t i a l
r e s u l t s of t h e C B I test program f o r SOHIO, and p r e l i m i n a r y l a b o r a t o r y
r e s u l t s by t h e s t a f f of Chevron U.S.A. I n c o r p o r a t e d , a l l suggested
t h e u r g e n t need f o r a r e - e v a l u a t i o n of hydrocarbon l o s s e s from f l o a t i n g -
roof t a n k s .
OBJECTIVE
The o r i g i n a l o b j e c t i v e of t h e t e s t i n g program was t h r e e - f o l d :
(a) Determine hydrocarbon e m i s s i o n s from f l o a t i n g - r o o f tanks a s

a f u n c t i o n of seal gap s i z e , vapor p r e s s u r e , wind v e l o c i t y ,
and o t h e r important v a r i a b l e s ;
(b) Determine what c o n s t i t u t e d b e s t a v a i l a b l e seal technology

and t h e e s t i m a t e d hydrocarbon emissions from use of t h a t
technology; and,
(c) Compare hydrocarbon e m i s s i o n s from e x i s t i n g f l o a t i n g - r o o f

t a n k s w i t h hydrocarbon emissions e s t i m a t e d t o r e s u l t from
u s e of b e s t a v a i l a b l e s e a l technology.
111-2
ENQINEERINQ-SCIENCE IES]-
-
SCOPE
The f i e l d p o r t i o n of t h i s p r o j e c t w a s l i m i t e d t o measuring hydro-

carbon l o s s e s from 1 7 f l o a t i n g roof tanks l o c a t e d in Los Angeles and
San F r a n c i s c o . No fixed-roof t a n k s were i n c l u d e d i n t h e s t u d y . The
p r o j e c t s i z e and d u r a t i o n were l i m i t e d by t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y of t a n k s .
Most t a n k s were made a v a i l a b l e f o r t e s t i n g i n August 1976 and were
r e t u r n e d t o s e r v i c e in January 1977. During t h e t e s t i n g p e r i o d , a
l a y e r of hydrocarbon product was f l o a t e d on water i n most of t h e tanks
and no product was added. The e v a l u a t i o n w a s t h e r e f o r e s p e c i f i c f o r
e s t i m a t i n g s t a n d i n g l o s s e s ; working l o s s e s were n o t e v a l u a t e d .
The e v a l u a t i o n of b e s t a v a i l a b l e s e a l technology w a s based on two

surveys. The f i r s t survey a d d r e s s e d t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y o f commercial
seals through i n d i v i d u a l companies, both manufacturers and u s e r s . The
second s u r v e y a d d r e s s e d s e a l gap s i z e a c t u a l l y measured f o r some 200
t a n k s i n Southern C a l i f o r n i a .
Laboratory experiments were conducted by ES t o p r o v i d e i n s i g h t

i n t o important v a r i a b l e s a f f e c t i n g hydrocarbon e v a p o r a t i o n rates.
P i l o t scale t e s t s , performed by Chicago Bridge and Iron Company,

were observed and d a t a were e v a l u a t e d f o r p o t e n t i a l i n p u t t o t h e
r e l a t i o ' n s h i p s observed i n t h e ES f i e l d tests. P i l o t s c a l e tests were
conducted f i r s t f o r t h e Standard Oil Company of Ohio (SOHIO) and
l a t e r f o r t h e Western Oil and Gas A s s o c i a t i o n .
Of t h e 17 f u l l - s i z e d t a n k s made a v a i l a b l e f o r t h i s f i e l d sampling
p r o j e c t , t h r e e of t h e t a n k s c o n t a i n e d c r u d e oil; t h e remaining 1 4 tanks
c o n t a i n e d a d i s t i l l a t e p r o d u c t r a n g i n g from naphtha t o j e t f u e l
(Table 111-1). A l l t a n k s m e t the f o l l o w i n g c o n d i t i o n s :
(a) Roof l e g openings were s e a l e d ;
(b) Emergency roof d r a i n s were a t least 90 p e r c e n t covered;
(c) S l o t t e d gauging d e v i c e s were equipped w i t h a f l o a t i n g -

t y p e Plug;
(d) Roof guide openings were c l o s e d ; and
(e) A l l t a n k gauging or sampling d e v i c e s were covered, except

a t t h e t i m e of sampling.
111-3
ENGINEERING-SCIENCE t%jd-
I n o u
h h I n
m m
d r l d
.
m
0
In
m
rl
m U Q
u m N
m m m
r l 4 r l
al
.
D
3
w
e
al Y
rl E
I
H
H
H z z a l
d d U
w
4w
5 5 5
al al al
U U Y
01 al
$ 2 2
d
d
d 2 d
m o u
o 4
m m
0
0
rl
111-4
METHODOLOGY
Samples of t h e t a n k c o n t e n t s were c o l l e c t e d a t about two-week

i n t e r v a l s and s t o c k depth and t e m p e r a t u r e were recorded. Sampling
and t e m p e r a t u r e measurements were g e n e r a l l y performed according t o t h e
methods d e s c r i b e d on pages 28 t o 34 o f API B u l l e t i n 2512 ( J u l y 1 9 5 7 ) .
Density of t h e c o l l e c t e d samples was determined by use of a Mettler-Paar
D i g i t a l P r e c i s i o n Density Meter, Model DMA-50. Hydrocarbon l o s s e s
were t h e n determined by u s i n g t h e change o f d e n s i t y method s e t f o r t h
in API B u l l e t i n 2512.
Types of hydrocarbons e m i t t e d were determined by gas chromato-
g r a p h i c a n a l y s e s on samples o b t a i n e d w i t h a bomb in t h e gap between
t h e roof and w a l l .
REPORT ORGANIZATION
The two c h a p t e r s p r e c e d i n g t h i s I n t r o d u c t i o n i n c l u d e Summary and
Conclusions o f t h e s t u d y . The n e x t f o u r c h a p t e r s d e s c r i b e f i e l d
test r e s u l t s , c o r r e l a t i o n s t u d i e s , c a l c u l a t i o n of hydrocarbon l o s s e s ,
and b e s t a v a i l a b l e seal technology. Recommendations and r e f e r e n c e s
conclude t h e r e p o r t . A s e p a r a t e r e p o r t of Appendices c o n t a i n s a l l
raw test d a t a .
111-5
._ .. . q
CHAPTER IV
S T A T I C STORAGE HYDROCARBON
EMlSS ION MEASUREMENTS
ENGINEERINQ-SCIENCE -
CHAPTER IV
STATIC STORAGE HYDROCARBON EMISSION MEASUREMENTS
The basic requirement of this investigation was to determine

the hydrocarbon evaporation loss rate for petroleum stocks during
static storage in floating-roof tanks. While hydrocarbon vapors do
escape from floating-roof tanks, the volume flow rate is too low to measure
by any conventional means. The standard source testing method would be
to measure volumetric flow rate and pollutant concentration and then
calculate the pollutant mass flow rate; such procedures cannot be used
for floating-roof tanks. Another measurement procedure would be to locate
continuous hydrocarbon monitors downwind from the tank and rely on dis-
persion calculations to derive a source emission rate. Major potential
errors associated with assigning dispersion coefficients would probably
yield very unreliable estimates of the emission rate.
Since direct measurement of the loss rate was not possible, ES

utilized an indirect measurement procedure published in an American
Petroleum Institute Bulletin,Tentative Methods of Measuring Evaporation
Loss from Petroleum Tanks and Transportation Equipment, API Bulletin 2512,
July 1957, pages 28-34, and entitled "Tentative Method for Determining
Evaporation Losses by Change in Stock Density." This method relies on
a
the fact that hydrocarbon compounds that evaporate most quickly from the
tank will be the "light ends" and, therefore, the stock density should
increase after the "light ends" have evaporated. The vapors are usually
comprised of hydrocarbon compounds that range from methane to hexane
(C1 - Cg), and petroleum stocks usually contain compounds that range from
C1 - C13. For gasoline, the ratio of the vapor density (in liquid form)
to that of the stock can be estimated by using the density of pentane (C5)
and octane (Cg), and is typically 0.85. Thus, evaporation results in less
volume of stock in the tank but the volume that does remain has a higher
density than it did initially. The measurement technique, then, is
simply to determine by laboratory analyses the relationship between
density change and the weight change of each petroleum stock under in-
vestigation. Once this relationship (a density-evaporation curve) is
established, stock in the tanks can be sampled to determine initial and
subsequent densities. Increases In stock density are then related to
IV-1
ENQINEERINGSCIENCE -
the specific stock's density-evaporation curve to calculate the weight
of stock loss.
API Bulletin 2512 also suggested a technique to shorten the weathering

time required to see a significant change in stock density and to ensure
that the desired accuracy could be achieved. The suggested technique was
utilized for most tanks in this investigation. It involved floating a
small layer (two to four feet) of stock on water. This resulted in de-
creasing the volume of the stock that could evaporate and increased the
relative change in density over a short time period. Therefore. a shorter
time span was required to measure a given change in stock density.
SAMPLE COLLECTION PROCEDURE
The twelve tanks located in Southern California were sampled on a

nominal bi-weekly sampling schedule while the five tanks in Northern
California were sampled once every four to five weeks. The field sampling
began i n late July 1976 and continued through late December 1976.
On each visit, several grab samples of the stock were collected by

water displacement using a sample thief. The samples were obtained by
submerging an 8-ounce narrow neck glass sample bottle filled with water
to the desired position in the stock. The sample bottle was then in-
verted to allow the stock to displace the water. The sample bottle was
then uprighted, withdrawn from the stock, capped immediately and stored
on ice.
In the field sampling procedure, the most significant potential error

was "flashing" of the lighter ends of the petroleum distillate from the
sample bottle before density measurements could be completed. The average
density of the stock had to be measured with an accuracy of 0.00003 g/ml
in order to achieve the desired confidence in the loss calculations out-
lined in API-2512. The "flashing" potential of the petroleum stocks used
in this study was sufficiently large so as to overshadow all other pos-
sible errors associated with both field and laboratory pfocedures. This
potential dictated several procedural modifications as the study progressed.
The initial field sampling procedure used 16-ounce wide-mouth bottles to
obtain the grab samples. Aluminum foil was placed over the mouth of the
jar prior to replacing the cap after the sample had been collected. The
IV-2
. . .
samples were s t o r e d on i c e and d e l i v e r e d t o t h e l a b o r a t o r y and then
. .
t r a n s f e r r e d t o o t h e r sample c o n t a i n e r s p r i o r t o d e n s i t y a n a l y s i s . These
procedures 'allowed an u n a c c e p t a b l e amount of f l a s h i n g and leakage. Sub-
s e q u e n t l y , 8-ounce narrow-mouth b o t t l e s were used and samples were n o t
t r a n s f e r r e d t o o t h e r sample c o n t a i n e r s p r i o r t o t h e d e n s i t y determination.
A s a q u a l i t y c o n t r o l check, a l l samples were d e l i v e r e d t o t h e

l a b o r a t o r y w i t h no i n d i c a t i o n of t h e s p e c i f i c f l o a t i n g - r o o f tank o r sample
p o r t on t h e b o t t l e s . The only n o t a t i o n was a random i d e n t i f i c a t i o n number.
D u p l i c a t e samples were given t o t h e l a b o r a t o r y i n random o r d e r . A field
notebook was k e p t w i t h s p e c i f i c i n s t r u c t i o n s f o r a n a l y s e s of each sample.
A s i g n e d copy of t h e i n s t r u c t i o n s was g i v e n t o t h e l a b o r a t o r y w i t h each
s e t of samples. A s e q u e n t i a l set numbering system was developed t o
e n s u r e a c r o s s check between t h e f i e l d notebook and sample b o t t l e i d e n t i -
f i c a t i o n numbers.
LABORATORY PROCEDURE
The v o l a t i l e n a t u r e of t h e petroleum s t o c k s a l s o r e q u i r e d changes

i n t h e l a b o r a t o r y procedures. The AF'I t e n t a t i v e method suggested t h a t a
Bingham pycnometer method (ASTM D-1217-54) be u s e d t o determine t h e
d e n s i t y of each g r a b sample and t h a t t h e d e n s i t y - e v a p o r a t i o n curve b e
o b t a i n e d by a b u b b l e r a p p a r a t u s t h a t i n c r e a s e d t h e rate of e v a p o r a t i o n .
I n i t i a l l a b o r a t o r y a n a l y s e s showed t h a t t h e d e n s i t y of w a t e r and pure
hydrocarbon compounds could be measured t o w i t h i n t h e p r e s c r i b e d
a c c u r a c i e s of 0.00002 g/ml r e p r o d u c i b i l i t y u s i n g t h e suggested Bingham
pycnometer method. However, only 0.00050 g/ml r e p r o d u c i b i l i t y could
b e o b t a i n e d f o r t h e petroleum s t o c k s used i n t h i s s t u d y under t h e most
s t r i n g e n t l y c o n t r o l l e d experiments. S e v e r a l m o d i f i c a t i o n s were made t o
t h e pycnometer i n c l u d i n g u s i n g 100 m l w i t h a graduated neck r a t h e r than
t h e 25 ml v e s s e l s . However, no s a t i s f a c t o r y r e s u l t s were obtained.
A p o s s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h e d i f f i c u l t i e s encountered may be t h a t
MI-2512 a t t e m p t e d t o apply a wider scope of t h e s t o c k d e n s i t y change
method t h a n i t was o r i g i n a l l y i n t e n d e d by t h e ASTN committee. Table
I V - 1 shows a q u o t a t i o n o u t of each document t h a t d e s c r i b e s t h e general
scope of each method. The r e s t r i c t i o n of t h e method i n ASTM D-1217-54
t o "pure hydrocarbons o r petroleum d i s t i l l a t e s b o i l i n g between 1 9 4 and
IV-3
TABLE I V - 1
TENTATIVE METHOD FOR DETERMINING EVAPORATION LOSSES

BY CHANGE I N STOCK DENSITY
API BULLETIN 2512 - JULY 1957

PART 11, SECTION D , p. 28
SCOPE
T h i s method is designed t o measure e v a p o r a t i o n loss by t h e change

i n d e n s i t y of a s t o c k d u r i n g s t o r a g e in any t a n k or v e s s e l . Stock
withdrawals can be t o l e r a t e d d u r i n g a t e s t b u t any s t o c k a d d i t i o n v o i d s
the t e s t . The method is n o t s u i t a b l e for pure compounds, very narrow-
b o i l i n g f r a c t i o n s , or for l i q u i d s w i t h a vapor p r e s s u r e g r e a t e r than
0.9 atmospheres a t t e s t c o n d i t i o n s .
\
DENSITY AND SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF LIQUIDS
BY BINGHAM PYCNOMETER
ASTM DESIGNATION: D 1217-54
SCOPE
1. (a) T h i s method i s i n t e n d e d f o r t h e measurement of t h e d e n s i t y

of p u r e hydrocarbons or petroleum d i s t i l l a t e s b o i l i n g between 1.94 and
230°F (90 and 1 1 0 0 t h a t can be handled i n a normal f a s h i o n as a l i q u i d
a t t h e s p e c i f i e d t e s t t e m p e r a t u r e s of 68 and 7
'F (20 and 25C). The
method w a s developed e s p e c i a l l y f o r t h e r e f e r e n c e f u e l s n-heptane and
iso-octane and is designed t o p r o v i d e v a l u e s having a n accuracy of
0.00003 g p e r m l .
(b) The method p r o v i d e s a c a l c u l a t i o n procedure f o r conversion

of d e n s i t y t o s p e c i f i c g r a v i t y .
IV-4
ENGINEERING-SCIENCE (ESI-
2300 F t h a t can be handled i n a normal f a s h i o n a s a l i q u i d a t t h e s p e c i -
f i e d t e s t t e m p e r a t u r e s , " i s not c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e p a r t i c u l a r petroleum
s t o c k s u s e d i n t h i s s t u d y (mostly g a s o l i n e and crude o i l ) . The example
c a l c u l a t i o n and d e n s i t y e v a p o r a t i o n curves p r e s e n t e d i n API-2512
imply t h a t t h e method was s u c c e s s f u l l y a p p l i e d a t one t i m e . Therefore,
r a t h e r t h a n s t a t i n g t h a t t h e t e c h n i q u e suggested i n API-2512 is n o t
c o r r e c t , t h i s e x p e r i e n c e may only i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e r e q u i r e d s k i l l s could
n o t be gained w i t h i n a s h o r t t i m e frame t o a d e q u a t e l y perform t h e t e s t s .
Whatever t h e f i n a l r e s o l u t i o n may b e , t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of ASTM D-1217-54
t o g a s o l i n e and crude o i l s h o u l d b e c a r e f u l l y e v a l u a t e d b e f o r e being
used i n any o t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n r e q u i r i n g s t r i n g e n t accuracy.
Other methods of d e t e r m i n i n g d e n s i t y of g a s o l i n e and similar s t o c k s

t o t h e d e s i r e d accuracy were s u b s e q u e n t l y i n v e s t i g a t e d . The Mettler-Paar
D i g i t a l P r e c i s i o n Density Meter, DMA-50, was s e l e c t e d a s being t h e most
advantageous method f o r d e t e r m i n i n g t h e petroleum s t o c k d e n s i t y t o t h e
d e s i r e d accuracy. The measuring p r i n c i p a l of t h e DMA-50 depends upon
t h e v a r i a t i o n of t h e n a t u r a l frequency of a t u b u l a r o s c i l l a t o r f i l l e d
w i t h t h e petroleum s t o c k . The DMA-50 i s c a l i b r a t e d by determining t h e
frequency of o s c i l l a t i o n f o r a i r and b i - d i s t i l l e d water a t a known t e m -
perature. The known d e n s i t i e s of a i r and water a t t h e t e s t temperature
a r e t h e n used t o determine t h e c a l i b r a t i o n c o n s t a n t f o r t h e t u b u l a r
oscillator. It is e s s e n t i a l t o know t h e temperature a t which t h e d e n s i t y
measurements are o b t a i n e d t o w i t h i n +O.0lo C i f f i f t h p l a c e d e n s i t i e s
are t o b e determined. With t h e DMA-50 t h e r e p r o d u c i b i l i t y h a s been w i t h i n
-
+0.00002 g/ml f o r a l l petroleum s t o c k s i n t h i s s t u d y except c r u d e o i l .
The t h r e e f l o a t i n g - r o o f t a n k s t h a t c o n t a i n e d c r u d e o i l (Standard 412. 497,
and 2140) were dropped from t h e s t u d y s i n c e even t h e modified methodology
c o u l d n o t o b t a i n b e t t e r t h a n +O.OOlOO g/ml r e p r o d u c i b i l i t y . Field
sampling problems a l s o e x i s t e d w i t h t h e c r u d e o i l t a n k s .
I n t h e l a b o r a t o r y t h e sample b o t t l e i s r e t r i e v e d from c o l d s t o r a g e ,
t h e cap is removed and r e p l a c e d immediately by a cap w i t h a small h o l e .
The DMA-50 t e f l o n sample i n l e t t u b e i s immediately p l a c e d through t h e
h o l e mid-way i n t o t h e sample b o t t l e . Approximately 10 m l of sample i s
withdrawn and passed d i r e c t l y through t h e t u b u l a r o s c i l l a t o r . The
o s c i l l a t o r r e q u i r e s only 0.7 m l of sample, t h e r e f o r e , t h e 10 ml sample
IV-5
e n s u r e s t h a t a "mid-stream'' a l i q u o t is obtained. The frequency p e r i o d
i s determined and a n o t h e r sample a l i q u o t i s withdrawn a s a check. If
more t h a n a +0.00002 frequency d i f f e r e n c e i s observed, a n o t h e r a l i q u o t
i s measured.
W i t h d i l i g e n t a t t e n t i o n g i v e n t o sample c o l l e c t i o n , h a n d l i n g , s t o r a g e ,
i n s t r u m e n t c a l i b r a t i o n , and temperature c o n t r o l , i t was observed t h a t
t h e DMA-50 would a c c u r a t e l y r e p e a t t h e d e n s i t y measurements t o w i t h i n
-
+0.00002 g/ml. P u r e hydrocarbon compounds (hexane and benzene) were
used t o check t h e accuracy of t h e DMA-50 when u s i n g a i r and w a t e r as t h e
c a l i b r a t i o n mediums. The d e n s i t i e s of t h e pure compounds were determined
u s i n g t h e Bingham pycnometer method f o r f i v e r e p l i c a t e samples.
The DMA-50 c o n s i s t e n t l y gave d e n s i t y measurements t o w i t h i n +0.00002
g/ml o f t h e d e n s i t i e s o b t a i n e d u s i n g t h e 100 m l Bingham pycnometer.
T h e o c i g i n a l API method of d e t e r m i n i n g t h e s t o c k d e n s i t y by u s i n g
a pycnometer r e q u i r e s t h a t t h e s t o c k be t r a n s f e r r e d from t h e sample b o t t l e
t o t h e pycnometer w i t h a long n e e d l e s y r i n g e . Using t h e DMA-50 t o
d e t e r m i n e t h e d e n s i t y , where l i q u i d i s syphoned d i r e c t l y from t h e sample
b o t t l e i n t o t h e t u b u l a r o s c i l l a t o r , reduced t h e p o s s i b l e e r r o r s s i g n i f i -
cantly. Simple experiments w i t h t h e DMA-50 i n d i c a t e d t h a t some g a s o l i n e s
could n o t be t r a n s f e r r e d from t h e sample b o t t l e t o t h e pycnometer even
a t t e m p e r a t u r e s as low as 400 F w i t h o u t i n c r e a s i n g t h e d e n s i t y by
0.00100 g/ml o r more.
The methodology suggested i n API-2512 t o determine t h e d e n s i t y -

e v a p o r a t i o n c u r v e involved u s i n g a b u b b l e r a p p a r a t u s t o determine t h e
change i n weight a s s o c i a t e d w i t h a s p e c i f i c change i n d e n s i t y . The
petroleum s t o c k s used i n t h i s s t u d y were s u f f i c i e n t l y v o l a t i l e t o
a l l o w t h e d e n s i t y e v a p o r a t i o n c u r v e s t o be determined by j u s t allowing
t h e sample b o t t l e cap t o remain o f f f o r s e l e c t e d p e r i o d s of t i m e . After
each t i m e interval, the w e i g h t change and d e n s i t y were recorded. The
d e n s i t y e v a p o r a t i o n p r o c e d u r e i s a d e l i c a t e test i n t h a t small percentage
weight changes must b e determined w i t h an a n a l y t i c a l balance. Figure I V - 1
shows a d e n s i t y e v a p o r a t i o n c u r v e f o r ARC0 134. Four of t h e twelve
s p a t i a l l y d i s t r i b u t e d samples were used t o determine t h e d e n s i t y evapora-
t i o n curve. The i n i t i a l d e n s i t i e s of t h e samples were n o t t h e same
IV-6
FIGURE I V -
EXAMPLE OENS TY - EVAPORAT ON CURVE

ARC0 # I 3 4 - SEPTEMBER 8 1976
0.73300
0.73200
0.73100
-E 0.73000
\
M
*
-
I-
0.72800
0.72700
0.72600
0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
WEIGHT LOSS, %
IV-7 ENG I NEER I NG-SC I ENCE , I NC.

because each had l o s t a d i f f e r e n t amount of hydrocarbon vapor f o l l o w i n g
t h e removal of approximately 10 m l of s t o c k f o r a n a l y s i s w i t h t h e den-
s i t y meter. Even when t h e i n i t i a l d e n s i t i e s were s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t ,
no l a r g e change i n t h e s l o p e w a s observed. T h i s indicated t h a t the
d e n s i t y change i n c r e a s e s d i r e c t l y w i t h i n c r e a s i n g weight l o s s , a t l e a s t
i n t h e f i r s t t h r e e p e r c e n t of t h e observed weight loss. A least
s q u a r e s technique w a s used t o d e t e r m i n e t h e s l o p e of t h e d e n s i t y evapora-
t i o n curves. The s p e c i f i c s l o p e f o r each s t o c k was t h e n used t o d e t e r -
mine t h e weight loss a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e observed d e n s i t y change over
t h e "weathering" t i m e span. The appendices l i s t a l l l a b o r a t o r y
r e s u l t s used t o develop each d e n s i t y e v a p o r a t i o n curve.
V a r i a t i o n s in s t o c k d e n s i t y o b t a i n e d from v a r i o u s g r a b s a m p l e s
were c o n s i d e r e d t o r e s u l t from " f l a s h i n g " of l i g h t ends r a t h e r t h a n
from random a n a l y s i s e r r o r . S i n c e f l a s h i n g would r e s u l t i n h i g h e r
d e n s i t y v a l u e s , t h e major random e r r o r i n each sample series should be
t o make c e r t a i n d e n s i t y v a l u e s h i g h e r t h a n t h e a c t u a l d e n s i t y . To o f f -
s e t t h i s p o s s i b l e random e r r o r , t h e t h r e e lowest d e n s i t y measurements
o b t a i n e d from t h e twelve s p a t i a l samples were always used as t h e b e s t
estimate of t h e average s t o c k d e n s i t y . The average d e n s i t y determined
by u s i n g t h e minimum t h r e e d e n s i t i e s u s u a l l y d i f f e r e d from t h e average
of t h e twelve samples by o n l y 0.00001 or 0.00002 g/ml.
EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL STRATIFICATION I N THE TANKS
S e v e r a l samples were c o l l e c t e d t o determine i f t h e r e were a n y

h o r i z o n t a l or v e r t i c a l s t r a t i f i c a t i o n i n t h e tanks which would s i g -
n i f i c a n t l y a f f e c t t h e d e s i r e d accuracy of t h e average s t o c k d e n s i t y .
Whenever p o s s i b l e , twelve sampling p o r t s were s e l e c t e d f o r each f l o a t -
ing-roof tank s o t h a t each sample r e p r e s e n t s approximately t h e same
volume of s t o c k . These p o r t s were u s u a l l y l e g s u p p o r t s l e e v e s t h a t
extended from one t o two f e e t i n t o t h e s t o c k . A t l e a s t one sample
w a s o b t a i n e d a t mid-depth of t h e petroleum s t o c k from each p o r t .
D u p l i c a t e samples were o f t e n t a k e n from each p o r t t o t e s t r e p e a t a b i l i t y
of t h e sampling method. Since i n i t i a l t e s t s showed no measurable
h o r i z o n t a l s t r a t i f i c a t i o n , twelve mid-point grab samples were o b t a i n e d
on a l l t a n k s throughout t h e s t u d y p e r i o d . V e r t i c a l g r a b samples were
o b t a i n e d f o r each t a n k a t l e a s t once d u r i n g t h e s t u d y . These samples
were u s u a l l y t a k e n o u t of t h e normal sampling p o r t s r a t h e r than t h e
l e g support sleeves. The l e g s u p p o r t s l e e v e s a r e narrower and extend
f u r t h e r i n t o t h e s t o c k than t h e sampling p o r t s l e e v e s and a r e t h e r e f o r e
more l i k e l y t o c o n t a i n a s t a g n a n t l i q u i d . R e s u l t s showed t h a t f o r an
i n d i v i d u a l t a n k , v e r t i c a l s t r a t i f i c a t i o n , i f i t does o c c u r , i s w e l l
below t h e p r e c i s i o n of t h e d e n s i t y measurements and should n o t a f f e c t
t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n of t h e average d e n s i t y in t h e tank. A s an example,
F i g u r e s IV-2 and IV-3 p r e s e n t d a t a c o l l e c t e d for Union 100514 and
Texaco 80210 on September 1 7 , 1976. No h o r i z o n t a l or v e r t i c a l
s t r a t i f i c a t i o n can be seen t h a t would be l a r g e r t h a n t h e e r r o r s d u e
t o sampling and a n a l y s i s .
It should be recognized t h a t t h e sampling p o r t s were g e n e r a l l y

d i s t r i b u t e d i n t h e t a n k w i t h few l o c a t i o n s b e i n g n e a r e r t h a n t h r e e f e e t
t o t h e tank wall. One can h y p o t h e s i z e t h a t i f s t r a t i f i c a t i o n d i d occur
i t would be more pronounced n e a r t h e l i q u i d and a i r i n t e r f a c e a l o n g
the tank w a l l . However, t h e o b j e c t i v e s of t h i s p r o j e c t were l i m i t e d
t o measuring t h e average s t o c k d e n s i t y i n i t i a l l y and a t t h e end of t h e
"weathering" p e r i o d . Any s t r a t i f i c a t i o n t h a t may occur n e a r t h e r i m
s p a c e may a f f e c t hydrocarbon e m i s s i o n s b u t i t would n o t s i g n i f i c a n t l y
FIGURE IV-2
SUMMARY OF TANK TEST
N
PLANT U N I O N
TANK NO. 100514
04
84 OATE SEPT. 17. 1976
85 STOCK DEPTH 74.5'
O I A . OF TANK 137'
.82
+ 85
* A L L NUMBERS I N O I C A T E
THE LAST 110 OlGlIS
OF THE 5 t h PLACE
OENSITV A S .737._ E . m l .
OENSITY MEASUREMENTS SPECIAL DENSITY MEASUREMENTS

NO. OF SAMPLES I7 LOCATION . OENSITY
DEPTH 3' SP I' ,13184
MAXINUN *.73788 SP 3' 13782
MEAN ,73784 SP 5' ,73184
MININUN ,13181 SP 3' ,73784
STD. D E V I A T I O N .00002 SP 3' ,73785
AVERAGE OF M I N I M U M THREE ,73782
STOCK TEMPERATURE ( O F )
NO. OF PORTS 13
NAXINUY SURFACE 89.9
N l N l N U N SURFACE 71.5
MAXIMUM M I D 6 8 . 5
M I N I N U N M I 0 68. I
*HAXlNUM NID-DEPTH D E N S I T Y
ENGINEERING-SCIENCE, INC
IV-10
FIGURE 1’4-3
SUMMARY OF TANK TEST
U PLANT TEX A C O
TANK NO. 80210
DATE SEPT. 1 7 . 1976
STOCI( OEPTH 4 5 . I ”
011. OF TANK 120’
*ALL NUMBERS l N O l C A T E
THE L A S T 110 D I G I T S
OF THE 5 t h PLACE
DENSITY AS . 6 5 6 _ _ U m l .
DENS I TY MEASUREMENTS SPECIAL DENSITY MEASUREMENTS

NO. OF SAMPLES 15 LOCAT ION DEPTH DENS I TY
OEPTH 1.5’ SP 7 I’ ,65608
MAXIMUM *.65606 SP 22” .65602
MEAN .65602 SP 37” ,65602
MINIMUM ,65600
S T O . OEVIATION .00002
AVERAGE OF MINIMUM THREE ,65600
STOCK TEMPERATURE ( O F )
NO. OF PORTS 13
MAXIMUM SURFACE 74. I
MINIMUM SURFACE , 73.0
MAXIMUM MI0 7 0 . 0
MINIMUM MI0 70.0
‘MAX IMUM MI 0-OEPTH DENS IT V ,
ENGINEER1 NG-SCI ENCE , INC

IV-11
ENQINEERINQ-SCIENCE [Esl-
i n f l u e n c e t h e average d e n s i t y a s determined from t h e twelve s p a t i a l l y
d i s t r i b u t e d samples. Table I V - 2 l i s t s s e v e r a l examples of t h e s t r a t i -
f i c a t i o n t e s t s which i n d i c a t e t h e t y p i c a l range n o t i c e d d u r i n g t h e
field testing. Because of t h e i n i t i a l problems encountered i n sample
c o l l e c t i o n , h a n d l i n g and l a b o r a t o r y a n a l y s e s , c e r t a i n portions of t h e
d a t a a r e much more r e l i a b l e than o t h e r s . There a r e two d a t e s when
s i g n i f i c a n t changes in procedures were i n c o r p o r a t e d which improved
t h e r e l i a b i l i t y of t h e d a t a tremendously. On August 20, 1976, a l l
sample t r a n s f e r s were ceased and s t a r t i n g on September 1 7 , 1976,
small-mouth sample b o t t l e s were used f o r a l l sample c o l l e c t i o n
e x c e p t f o r t h e crude o i l s t o c k . The u s e of t h e small-mouth b o t t l e s
s i g n i f i c a n t l y reduced t h e v a r i a b i l i t y between d e n s i t i e s measured
throughout t h e tank. Table IV-3 l i s t s some r e p r e s e n t a t i v e comparisons
between d a t a d e r i v e d from samples t a k e n a t t h e same depth from t h e
same sampling p o r t . The d e n s i t i e s determined u s i n g t h e wide-mouth
b o t t l e s were always s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r than t h e d e n s i t i e s o b t a i n e d -
u s i n g small-mouth b o t t l e s , which i n d i c a t e d t h a t more l i g h t ends
e v a p o r a t e d w i t h t h e use of wide-mouth bot.tles. For t h i s reason, no
d e n s i t y d a t a c o l l e c t e d p r i o r t o September 1 7 , 1976 were used t o e s t i -
mate t h e a b s o l u t e change in a v e r a g e s t o c k d e n s i t y d u r i n g t h e s t u d y p e r i o d .
TABLE IV-2
EXAMPLE DEPTH STRATIFICATION RESULTS
Spatial Depth V a r i a t i o n
Variation S u r f a c e Minus Bottom
Tank Date (10-5 g/ml) (10-5 g/ml)
Union 100514 9/17/76 5 0
Texaco 80210 9/17/76 6 +6
Exxon 1757 9/24/76 14 +8
Gulf 80005 10/28/76 11 +14
ARC0 134 10/28/76 4 +8
Union 100514 11/11/76 20 +1
Union 330 12/03/76 3 +1
IV-12
. .
I
ENQlNEERlNGSClENCE /ES( -
TABLE IV-3
A COMPARISON OF DENSITY MEASUREMENTS

WIDE MOUTH BOTTLES VERSUS
SMALL MOUTH BOTTLES*
Density (g/ml) Maximum Ap

Tank Date Wide Small (g/W
S h e l l 47 10/13/76 0.73917 0.73887 .00031

0.73911 0.73806
0.73907
Standard 9464 10/12/76 0.77721 0.77693 ,00041

0.77701 0.77604
0.77693 0.77680
Standard 192 10/12/76 0.69304 0.69273 .00031

0.69287
0.69281
Union 5 12/14/76 0.73865 0.73857 .00008

0.73865 0.73858
* A l l samples f o r each t a n k were c o l l e c t e d from one

p a r t i c u l a r sampling p o r t .
1.V-13
ENQINEERING-SCIENCE IES]-
EFFECTS OF WATER, TEMPERATURE AND FLASHING TIME
Simple l a b o r a t o r y experiments were conducted t o e v a l u a t e t h e i n f l u e n c e

of c e r t a i n v a r i a b l e s on t h e d e n s i t y measurements. The use of w a t e r in
t h e t a n k s w a s q u e s t i o n e d a s t o t h e p o s s i b l e change i t would have on t h e
d e n s i t y measurements. Water was purposely l e f t in a few sample b o t t l e s
t a k e n from a tank. The samples were shaken t o e n s u r e more c o n t a c t of t h e
water and g a s o l i n e . The d e n s i t y of each was determined a f t e r b e i n g s t o r e d
f o r a t l e a s t t h r e e days. No n o t i c e a b l e v a r i a t i o n in t h e d e n s i t y was ob-
s e r v e d between t h o s e samples c o n t a i n i n g w a t e r and t h o s e n o t c o n t a i n i n g
water. Temperature of t h e s t o c k has been r a i s e d as a p o s s i b l e reason f o r
d e n s i t y v a r i a t i o n due t o a i r d i s s o l v i n g i n t o t h e s t o c k . The d e n s i t y of
hexane w a s determined a t room t e m p e r a t u r e , t h e n t h e hexane w a s h e a t e d t o
90° F and t h e d e n s i t y w a s t h e same as a t room temperature. The sample
hexane was t h e n cooled from 90° F t o 400 F and l e t s t a n d f o r t h r e e hours.
No measurable change in d e n s i t y w a s observed. During f i e l d sampling,
approximately 15 seconds l a p s e from t h e t i m e a sample b o t t l e is withdrawn
from t h e s t o c k t o t h e t i m e t h e cap is p l a c e d on t h e b o t t l e . Questions
were r a i s e d as t o t h e amount of f l a s h i n g t h a t could o c c u r d u r i n g t h e
time p e r i o d . G a s o l i n e was p l a c e d in a sample b o t t l e a t room temperature.
The cap was removed and t h e d e n s i t y w a s determined. The cap w a s l e f t o f f
f o r 1 5 seconds and no change in d e n s i t y w a s n o t i c e d . The cap was then
l e f t o f f f o r 30 seconds and a g a i n no change i n d e n s i t y was n o t i c e d . It
w a s concluded t h a t t h e f l a s h i n g t h a t o c c u r s d u r i n g t h e t i m e i t t a k e s t o
p l a c e t h e cap o n , t h e sample b o t t l e does n o t e f f e c t t h e d e n s i t y w i t h i n
the accuracy r a n g e of t h e d e n s i t y meter.
IV-14
EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN TANKS
Three c r u d e o i l tanks (Standard 412, 497, and 2140) a r e shown in
Tables IV-12. 1 3 , and 1 4 b u t a r e n o t considered f u r t h e r in t h i s study
s i n c e v e r y u n r e l i a b l e r e s u l t s were o b t a i n e d . Inconsistent results f o r
t h e crude o i l may have been caused by handling problems in t h e l a b o r a t o r y
procedure or by t h e f a c t t h a t a r e s i d u e w a s formed in each tank between
t h e o i l and w a t e r i n t e r f a c e . Moreover, as s t o c k temperature decreased
d u r i n g t h e s t u d y , t h e crude oil became very v i s c o u s , and s t r a t i f i c a t i o n
may have occurred. Analyses of t h e hydrocarbon l o s s e s from t h e s e tanks
showed mostly methane and e t h a n e s o t h e i r importance may be less s i g n i f -
i c a n t from an a i r p o l l u t i o n p o i n t of view t h a n t h e g a s o l i n e s t o r a g e tanks.
Union 5 (Table IV-18) is a l s o n o t d e s c r i b e d f u r t h e r s i n c e a l a r g e

random v a r i a t i o n of s t o c k d e n s i t y was n o t i c e d from one sampling p o r t
t o another. Density d a t a from Union 5 were i n c o n s i s t e n t and c o l l e c t e d
samples d i d n o t a d e q u a t e l y r e p r e s e n t t h e s t o c k s i n c e t h e l e g s u p p o r t
sleeves reached n e a r l y t o t h e g a s o l i n e and water i n t e r f a c e .
DENSITY MEASUREMENTS
The a c t u a l f i e l d n o t e s h e e t s and l a b o r a t o r y a n a l y s i s s h e e t s are
l i s t e d in t h e appendices of Volume 2. T a b l e s I V - 4 through IV-20
( F i e l d Measurement Summary), a t t h e end of t h i s Chapter, summarize t h e
p e r t i n e n t d a t a f o r each f l o a t i n g - r o o f tank. The d e n s i t i e s l i s t e d in
t h e F i e l d Measurement Summary s h e e t s a r e f o r t h o s e samples t a k e n
h o r i z o n t a l l y throughout t h e t a n k a t mid-depth of t h e s t o c k . The column
l a b e l e d "MIN. 3 AVERAGE" r e p r e s e n t s t h e b e s t estimate of t h e t r u e average
stock density.
F i g u r e s IV-4 through IV-7 are g r a p h i c a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s of t h e

d e n s i t y change d u r i n g t h e "weathering" p e r i o d . The s c a t t e r about
a smooth c u r v e o r s t r a i g h t l i n e t h a t could be drawn between t h e d a t a
p o i n t s i n FiguresIV-4 through IV-7 t e n d s t o be a measure of t h e
day-to-day sampling and a n a l y s i s e r r o r r a t h e r than a r a p i d change in
density. A c l o s e examination f o r t h e d e n s i t i e s measured f o r t h e week
ending October 29, 1976 shows t h a t t h e measured d e n s i t i e s of six s t o c k s
decreased. These t a n k s were: ARC0 134, Gulf 80005, S h e l l 47 and S h e l l
48, and Standard 192 and Standard 9464. A d e c r e a s e in s t o c k d e n s i t y is
IV-15
F.IGURE IV-'
CHANGE I N STOCK DENSITY WITH TIME
73600
13500
-E
k 73400
ul
-
0
I
73300
r
-
I-
v)
z
Y 76500
0
Y
0
0
I- 76400
v)
16300
16200
DAY~ONTH
IV-16 ENGINEERING-SCIENCE, INC

FIGURE I V -
CHANGE I N STOCK OENSITY WITH TIME
74000
73900
73800
73100
74100
74000
73900
13800
ST0 192
69100 I
IV-17 ENGINEERING-SCIENCE, INC.

FIGURE I V -
CHANGE I N STOCK DENSITY WITH T I M E
^-I
74100
74000
73900
T X 20010
73800
OAY/MONTH
IV-18
FIGURE IV-7
CHANGE I N STOCK DENSITY WITH T I M E
In
-
I
0
DAY/MONTH
DAY/’MONTH
IV-19 ENGINEER ING-SC I ENCE, INC

contrary to the fact that as evaporation occurs, the density increases.
Subsequent data points for each of the six tanks suggest that the
above mentioned densities were erroneous. The six tanks were sampled,
two tanks each day, on October 2 6 , 2 7 , and 28. Laboratory analyses were
performed on October 28 or November 1. No other tanks were sampled
between October 26 and 28 nor were any other samples analyzed in the
laboratory on October 28 o r November 1. A s previously discussed, all
expected errors result in measured densities which are higher than the
true densities. Therefore, the six data points mentioned above should
be treated as suspect.
The emission rate estimate is based upon the density-evaporation

curve and the change in density over the weathering period. The change
in density was estimated using linear regression and an examination of
the beginning and end point densities. In some cases, a choice would
have to be made between the t w o techniques. In each of those cases,
the higher of the two density changes was used to estimate the emission
rate. The intent was to estimate the upper limit emission rate rather
than a lower one. Table IV-21 lists the number of days estimated change
in density, slope of the density evaporation curve, and estimated
emissions f o r each of the thirteen tanks.
IV-20
t , .
"1
ENGINEERING-SCIENCE ES
',
..
-2-
=I
Y
U
L
0
Y
0
>
c
I I'J- 2 1
I
..
Y Y Y
O O Y O Y
0 0
Y e c
p:
A = w o w 0
a - 2 - 2
Y O W O Y 0
Y) Z S U E v
!
ENGINEERING-SCIENCE rEs]-
IV-23
A/
c1
c
L
1
. .
!
!
' I
TV-24
-2-
zv-2s
ENGINEERING-SCIENCE PI-
L -
m VI-
IV-26
111-27
..
IV-28
Es
"1
ENGINEERING-SCIENCE
-2-
I IV-29
. .
-
Y
Q
4
*c
E
-Z-
YI
IV-30
1 ENGINEERING-SCIENCE -
I
!
e !
5 I
,
-
L
i 0 D
L L Y
0
f
I-
f
I- I-
IV-31
Ee
Y
r
: .n
E 3
c
5
5
:
a
I\'-32
h
..
IV-33
i
I
-2-
e
I
-
c
P
IV-74
-2-
IV-35
-2-
-
)1
c
:
a.
=
Y
0 .
IV-36
-2-
0
z z
P
‘of
YI
IV-37
ENGINEERING-SCIENCE IES]-
m l . o m 0 m l . m r D m m u r D
m m r . \ o m m u m m u m m
3 U N
m U 0 rD U m 0 0 m 0 m U N
m U 3 N m m N m rl ro
l
. N U u m 0 rD U o\ 0
l
. rD m m m m o\ co m m
U
0 U
m
0
N
x
N
rl
rD
m U rl
m 0
2
N
3
m
0
0
0
m
N
0
0
U
71
u
71
U
z 0
oc
0
rn
m
0
0
rl
W U m m 0 0
c
W G
d
d
71
me
0
2
U U
m g 0
3
a
CI
0
d
4
e
3 U U
cn cn c
$ w3 d
e
3
d
0
3
CHAPTER V
CORRELAT I ON OF EM1 SS IONS

W I T H MEASURED PARAMETERS
i
ENQINEERINQ-SCIENCE (ESI-
CHAPTER V
-
CORRELATION OF EMISSIONS WITH MFASUKED PARAMETERS
GENERAL
The hydrocarbon emissions were measured f o r t h i r t e e n t a n k s a s

d i s c u s s e d in Chapter I V . In t h i s Chapter, t h e measured emissions w i l l
be compared t o t h e W I equation f o r e s t i m a t i n g l o s s r a t e s and a l s o t o
c e r t a i n parameters t h a t were measured d u r i n g the s t u d y p e r i o d . All
p e r t i n e n t parameters needed f o r t h e APT e q u a t j o n were measured. How-
e v e r , i t is n o t r e a s o n a b l e t o assume t h a t all parameters t h a t may
a f f e c t t h e a c t u a l emissions were measured o r c a l c u l a t e d . For i n s t a n c e ,
on shoe s e a l s , t h e p i l o t p l a n t s t u d i e s performed by C S I have j u s t
r e c e n t l y shown t h a t t h e c o n d i t i o n of t h e f a b r i c apron above t h e vapor
s p a c e between t h e shoe and t h e pontoon, has t h e g r e a t e s t i n f l u e n c e
on emission r a t e s f o r t h e s c e n a r i o s t h e y have c o n s i d e r e d . This
parameter was n o t considered a t t h e beginning of t h i s s t u d y and w a s
never measured o t h e r t h a n a b r i e f v i s u a l i n s p e c t i o n . However, i t i s
r e a s o n a b l e t o assume t h a t t h e f a b r i c on newer seals may be in b e t t e r
r o n d i t i o n than t h e f a b r i c on o l d e r seals. The age of t h e shoe seals
a r e known and w i l l be d i s c u s s e d a s a p o s s i b l e i n d i c a t o r of o t h e r non-
measured parameters.
It should be s t r e s s e d t h a t w i t h o n l y t h i r t e e n t a n k s a s b a s i c d a t a
p o i n t s , and c o n s i d e r i n g t h e l a r g e number of p o s s i b l e parameters t h a t
may a f f e c t t h e emission r a t e s , o n l y g e n e r a l c o n c l u s i o n s r e g a r d i n g
trends a r e possible.
T a b l e V-1 l i s t s t h e t a n k s and summarizes what are thought t o be

t h e most important of t h e measured parameters. Most of t h e t a n k s
c o n t a i n e d g a s o l i n e w i t h a Reid vapor p r e s s u r e of 9 p s i . The t a n k
d i a m e t e r s ranged from 55 t o 153 f e e t . Most t a n k s had shoe s e a l s . The
measured s e a l gap s p a c e between t h e t a n k s h e l l and s e a l ranged from
z e r o t o 8.6 s q u a r e f e e t . The number of gaps ranged f r m zero t o 72.
The shoe s e a l s were i n s t a l l e d between 1951 and 1968 and t h e t u b e s e a l s
were i n s t a l l e d between 1962 and 1976. The measured emissions ranged
from n e a r l y z e r o t o 265 pounds p e r day.
v- 1
m o m o o o o o U h 0 0 0
m o p . m o m o ~ N U 0 0 0
.... .....
m o m m r l u h o o u o o m
G d d a i o r l m o oooo\o
v-2
ENGlNEERlNQ-SCIENCE -
COMPARISONS WITH API EQUATION
The American Petroleum Institute in their API Bulletin on Evaporation
Loss Prom Floating-Roof Tanks, API Bulletin 2517, February 1962, outlines a
suggested procedure for estimating standing-storage loss from floating-roof
tanks. The recommended equation is
where:
L - standing-storage evaporation loss, in barrels per year.
Kt
Y
- a tank-type factor which changes as follows:
Kt - 0.045 for welded tank with pan or pontoon roof, single or
Kt
Kt
-- double seal.
0.11 for riveted tank with pontoon roof, double seal.
0.13 for riveted tank with pontoon roof, single eeal..
-
Kt * 0.13 for riveted tank with pan roof, double seal.
Kt 0.14 for riveted tank with pan roof, single seal.
D - tank diameter, in feet [For tanks 150 ft or less in diameter,

use D1*5; for tanks larger than 150 ft in diameter,
use 1501'5 (=)I
D
P - true vapor pressure of the stock at its average storage

temperature, in pounds per square inch absolute.
V, -- average wind velocity, in miles per hour.

Ks
Ks
Ka
--
a recommended eeal factor:
1.00 for tight-fitting seals.
1.33 for loose-fitting seals.
K - a recommended factor distinguishing between gasoline and
-- crude oil storage:

Kc
K
1.00 for gasoline.
0.75 for crude oil.
- -
C
R a recommended paint factor for color of shell and roof:

P
K 1.00 for light gray or aluminum.
P
K * 0.90 for white.
P
v-3
The above e q u a t i o n was a p p l i e d t o a l l t h i r t e e n t a n k s i n t h i s s t u d y .
F i g u r e V-1 shows t h e c o r r e l a t i o n o f measured emissions and t h o s e calcu-
l a t e d u s i n g t h e API e q u a t i o n . T a b l e V-2 l i s t s t h e two emission rates f o r
each tank. Nine tanks e m i t less t h a n t h e API e s t i m a t e d emissions and
f o u r t a n k s emit more t h a n t h e API estimated emissions. The emission esti-
mate f o r Texaco 20010 is v e r y c l o s e t o t h e observed emission r a t e .
However, o v e r a l l t h e observed e m i s s i o n rates were approximately 58 p e r c e n t
of t h e c a l c u l a t e d emission r a t e s . I t would appear t h a t t h e API 2517
e q u a t i o n O v e r s t a t e s t h e magnitude of t h e emissions and does n o t adequately
r e p r e s e n t t h e i n f l u e n c e of s p e c i f i c parameters.
TABLE V-2
API 2517 CALCULATED VERSUS OBSERVED HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS
Hydrocarbon Emission Rate ( b b l s / y e a r )

API 2517
Tank Calculated Observed
ARC0 510 55
Exxon 30 87
Gulf 131 - 0
Lion 128 175
Mobil 49 60
S h e l l 47 237 55
S h e l l 48 237 57
S t a n d a r d 192 362 445
S t a n d a r d 9464 35 56
T W c o 20010 34 33
TexAco 80210 145 43
Union 330 132 84
Union 100514 433 286
v- 4
~~
FIGURE V-1
\ -
0
0
\ 0
0
m
-
ENGINEER1 NG-SCIENCE, IN[
v- 5
CORRELATION WITH MEASURED PARAMETERS
F f g u r e s V-2 through V-4 show t h e c o r r e l a t i o n of measured emission and
c e r t a i n measured parameters t h a t a r e thought t o be i m p o r t a n t t o t h e
p r o d u c t i o n of hydrocarbon e m i s s i o n s . Because of t h e many parameters
i n v o l v e d , c a u t i o n should b e used i n e v a l u a t i n g o n l y one parameter a t a
time; however, i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o g a i n i n s i g h t i n t o t h e p o s s i b l e e f f e c t
one v a r i a b l e may have on t h e emission r a t e s . As shown, t h r e e t a n k s have
emission r a t e s much h i g h e r than t h e o t h e r s . Standard 192, Union 100514
and Lion 428 emission r a t e s were from two t o f i v e times h i g h e r t h a n a l l
t h e o t h e r tanks. Measured parameters such as wind s p e e d , Reid vapor
p r e s s u r e , s t o c k temperature of s i z e of t h e seal gaps i n d i v i d u a l l y do n o t
appear t o t o t a l l y account f o r t h e t h r e e h i g h e r e m i s s i o n s . As mentioned
e a r l i e r , t h e r e c e n t C B I s t u d i e s have shown t h a t t h e t i g h t n e s s of t h e
vapor s p a c e under t h e f a b r i c s e a l on m e t a l l i c shoe seals i s a v e r y important
variable. No tears were v i s u a l l y observed f o r t h e Standard 192 tank.
A p r e s s u r e test may b e r e q u i r e d t o make t h e f i n a l judgment concerning t h i s
f a c t o r f o r Standard 192. I t is i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t t h e primary
seal on Standard 192 was i n s t a l l e d i n 1951 and r e p r e s e n t s t h e o l d e s t
primary s e a l i n t h i s s t u d y . The n e x t o l d e s t s e a l i s Union 100514 (1952).
F i g u r e V-5 shows t h e measured emission r a t e s v e r s u s t h e y e a r t h e primary
seal w a s i n s t a l l e d on each t a n k . A v i s u a l i n s p e c t i o n w a s made of t h e
f a b r i c apron of t h e o t h e r shoe seals and a l l had a p p a r e n t h o l e s i n t b e
fabric.
The C B I p i l o t t a n k s t u d y o f f e r s an e x c e l l e n t o p p o r t u n i t y t o e v a l u a t e
t h e i n f l u e n c e of one v a r i a b l e w h i l e h o l d i n g a l l o t h e r v a r i a b l e s c o n s t a n t .
The p i l o t scale s t u d i e s on a twenty-foot tank have shown t h a t t h e e m i s -
sions v a r y almost d i r e c t l y w i t h vapor p r e s s u r e which seems t o a g r e e w i t h
traditional theoretical considerations. However, s e v e r a l tests would
i n d i c a t e t h a t c e r t a i n v a r i a b l e s t h a t have p r e v i o u s l y been c o n s i d e r e d
t o d i r e c t l y impact t h e e m i s s i o n s may n o t be very important.
The d a t a on shoe seals, f o r example, show t h a t when t h e gap area i s

i n c r e a s e d by a f a c t o r of two t h e emission a c t u a l l y tended t o remain t h e
same or d e c r e a s e . I n t h e above example, t h e f i r s t gap area was comprised
of two gaps each 0.5 i n c h wide and two f e e t long. The second gap a r e a
was comprised of two gaps each 1 . 0 i n c h wide and two f e e t long. The r i m
V- 6
FIGURE V-
HYDROCARBON E M I S S I O N RATE AS A FUNCTION

- O F R E I D VAPOR PRESSURE AND TANK DIAMETER
275
250
225
zoo
175
150
125
IO0
75
50
25
0
0 2 6 8 10 12 I4 16 I8
R E I D VAPOR PRESSURE, p s i
0 20 40 . 60 80 100 I20 I40 160 180
TANK DIAMETER, f t .
ENGINEER ING-SCI ENCE, INC

v-7
FIGURE V-

OF_ AVERAGE WIND SPEEO AND AVERAGE AMBIENT TEMPERATURE
75 I I
U M 330
50 UOBl L 7 EXXON
ARC0 w
STO 5464
25
smL 18 -01x 20010
0 GULF
0 2 6 8 IO 12 14 16 18
AVERAGE WIND SPEED, mph
275
250
225
200
175
150
125
IO0
75
50
25
0
40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 65
AVERAGE AMBIENT TEMPERATURE O F
v-8 ENGINEERING-SCIENCE. INC.

FIGURE V-4

- OF SEAL GAP AREA AND NUMBER OF GAPS
z
0
m
a
4
0
=
0
n
=-I
0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 0.0 7.0 8.0 9
SEAL GAP AREA, f t 2
W
I-
U
a
z
0
r n
a
U
0
0
a
0
=-
I
v-9
FIGURE V-'
0
0
0
0
k7
n
0
0
n -
0
y1
0
z
0
y1
0
deP/sql ' 3 1 V M NOISSIW3 NOBYV30MOAH
v-10
ENGINEER ING-SCIENCE. INC
. .
I
s p a c e temperature w a s h e a t e d t o ZOO F above t h e b u l k l i q u i d temperature
and i n s t e a d of t h e emissions i n c r e a s i n g a s one might expect due t o t h e
i n c r e a s e i n vapor p r e s s u r e , t h e e m i s s i o n s tended t o d e c r e a s e or remain
t h e same. Perhaps t h i s i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e "noise" l e v e l of t h e t e s t
procedure i s below t h e range of t h o s e two v a r i a b l e s . A significant
i n c r e a s e i n emissions was n o t i c e d when t h e gap a r e a was i n c r e a s e d by a
f a c t o r of e i g h t . The gap was 0 . 5 i n c h w i d e and t h i r t y f e e t long (halfway
around t h e circumference) i n t h e above example f o r t h e shoe seal.
Secondary s e a l s tended t o d e c r e a s e t h e emissions f o r t h e C B I tests. All
of t h e p r e l i m i n a r y p i l o t t e s t s on shoe s e a l s tended t o show t h a t t h e
e m i s s i o n s i n c r e a s e d w i t h t h e amount of d i l u t i o n a i r blown through t h e
test chamber. T h i s would i n d i c a t e t h a t wind speed c e r t a i n l y a f f e c t s t h e
e m i s s i o n s ; however, t h e e x a c t r e l a t i o n s h i p i s d i f f i c u l t t o determine due
t o r e l a t i n g t h e d i l u t i o n a i r f l o w r a t e t o wind speed. Similar r e s u l t s
were found w i t h t u b e s e a l s . In f a c t , i t would appear t h a t a t i g h t
f i t t i n g (no gap) t u b e s e a l would have h i g h e r emissions t h a n a t i g h t
f i t t i n g (no gap) shoe s e a l . Furthermore, t h e same gap s p a c e area f o r a
t u b e seal would y i e l d h i g h e r e m i s s i o n s t h a n f o r t h e same gap s p a c e a r e a
f o r a shoe s e a l .
While t h e C B I d a t a are much more u s e f u l t h a n t h e f i e l d sampling

d a t a t o show dependency upon one v a r i a b l e , i t i s of i n t e r e s t t o s e e i f
similar t r e n d s e x i s t i n t h e f i e l d d a t a . I f a l l of t h e t h i r t e e n t a n k s
are c o n s i d e r e d , even t h o s e w i t h o l d seals and obvious f a b r i c epron problems,
it would appear t h a t emission may be i n f l u e n c e d by Reid vapor p r e s s u r e ,
s t o c k t e m p e r a t u r e , wind speed and t o some e x t e n t , gap s i z e . However, if
the t h r e e o l d e r t a n k s , two of which have obvious f a b r i c h o l e s are
d e l e t e d , t h e n no c o n c l u s i o n s can r e a l l y be drawn t h a t would imply t h a t
t h e e m i s s i o n s a r e r e l a t e d s u b s t a n t i a l l y t o Reid vapor p r e s s u r e , s t o c k
t e m p e r a t u r e , wind speed o r gap s i z e . I t i s a p p a r e n t t h a t one p a r a l l e l does
exist between the f i e l d experiment and t h e p i l o t p l a n t t e s t . If t h e
Lion, Standard 192, and Union 100514 t a n k s a r e n e g l e c t e d , t h e n t h e two
h i g h e s t emitters (of t h e t e n remaining t a n k s ) had t u b e seals on welded
tanks w i t h no n o t i c e a b l e gaps. The lowest emission rate w a s found on
G u l f 80005. I t has t h e newest s h o e s e a l (1968) b u t had 23 gaps t h a t
t o t a l e d 0.56 f t L and o b s e r v a b l e openings In t h e f a b r i c apron. However,
v-11
EN~INCERIN~.S~IENCE -
t h e vapor p r e s s u r e f o r Gulf 80005 was a l s o one of t h e lowest i n t h e
study. -
I n g e n e r a l , i t does appear t h a t t h e f i e l d d a t a and t h e p i l o t t e s t
d a t a do a g r e e very w e l l i n t h a t t i g h t f i t t i n g shoe s e a l s and t i g h t f i t t i n g
tube seals would l o s e approximately t h e same amount of s t o c k . Further,
i t would appear t h a t t u b e seals, w h i l e d e c r e a s i n g t h e gap s i z e s i g n i f i -
c a n t l y under most c o n d i t i o n s , do n o t o f f e r a n advantage o v e r shoe seals
a s a p o l l u t i o n c o n t r o l device.
The s i m p l e l a b o r a t o r y experiments conducted d u r i n g t h i s s t u d y tend

t o confirm t h a t t u b e s e a l s should b e more s u s c e p t i b l e t o wind c o n d i t i o n s
t h a n shoe seals. C B I a l s o found t h a t wind is more of a f a c t o r f o r t u b e
seals.
The C B I p i l o t t e s t s tend t o show t h a t emission r a t e h a s a s t r o n g

dependency on wind speed and t r u e vapor p r e s s u r e i f a l l o t h e r v a r i a b l e s
a r e held constant. I f t h i s i s t r u e , one would expect t h a t as t h e ambient
wind speed d e c r e a s e d and t h e s t o c k temperature d e c r e a s e d ( a f f e c t i n g t r u e
vapor p r e s s u r e ) t h e n t h e emission rate would a l s o d e c r e a s e f o r a p a r t i c u -
l a r tank. If t h e emission rate d e c r e a s e d t h e n t h e r a t e a t which t h e
average s t o c k d e n s i t y i n c r e a s e s would n o t remain c o n s t a n t . For a l l t a n k s
in t h i s s t u d y , t h e wind speed and s t o c k temperature have d e c r e a s e d d u r i n g
t h e s t u d y p e r i o d b u t t h e rates a t which t h e d e n s i t i e s i n c r e a s e d have
appeared t o remain c o n s t a n t .
F i g u r e V-6 is a p l o t f o r S t a n d a r d 192 ( t h e h i g h e s t e m i t t e r ) comparing

t h e changes in d e n s i t y w i t h t h e observed s t o c k t e m p e r a t u r e s , and ambient
wind speed. As s h a m , t h e wind speed d e c r e a s e d from a two week average
of 8.9.mph a t t h e end of September t o o n l y 4 . 5 mph a t t h e end of
December. The s t o c k temperature d e c r e a s e d from 690 F t o 60' F. However,
t h e rate of i n c r e a s e in d e n s i t y seems t o have remained c o n s t a n t .
I t s h o u l d be s t r e s s e d t h a t the i n f l u e n c e t h a t only one v a r i a b l e has

on the emission rate of a f l o a t i n g - r o o f tank i s a t best, d i f f i c u l t t o
P
ascertain. A c o n t r o l s t r a t e g y t o reduce t h e e m i s s i o n s , if r e q u i r e d , should
c o n s i d e r parameters o t h e r t h a n seal gap s i z e . T a b l e V-3 l i s t s a l l of t h e
s e v e n t e e n t a n k s i n t h e s t u d y and shows t h e i r compliance s t a t u s w i t h Rule
463 as of January 1 5 , 1975. Five tanka are in compliance and twelve are
v-12
FIGURE V-l
- STANDARD 192
COMPARISON OF WIND SPEED AND STOCK TEMPERATURE
TO CHANGE I N D E N S I T Y
:I
4
6.0
5.0
4.0
0.69400
0.89300
0.69200
17 24 1 6 15 22 29 5 12 19 26 3 10 17 24 31
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER
0 A Y /MONTH
ENGINEERING-SCIENCE. INC.
v- 13
rl
rl
2
Y
U
3
al
5
U
U
m
U
C
0
0
U
0
C
a
d
5
4
m'
al
m
al
5
v l v l o o o m m 3
4 4
....... ....
VI
O O N h v l v l v l h r l O ~ O O h O v l O
4 4
d
c5
00
g
4
m
al
o o m ~ a m m m v l o a o o ~ o h a
m Nr. N N U r l N r.Nd4
4
$
U
rn
.rl
'El
al
c
a.
m
m h w v l 0 0 v l 0 0 u 0 0 v l a 0 m U
vl r l h m m m 4 0 ~ m m ~ m m m ~
4 rl 4 4 4 4 4 4 5
z
Y
a
al
I,
M
g al
d
U
L
E
0
9
C
d 0
w .rl
d
U
c
h
5
5 ..
H al
U
Y 0
3 z
H I
v-14
not. Only those tanks with tube s e a l s m e t t h e gap s i z e r u l e . Similar
tanks that d i d not meet the r u l e had emission r a t e s lower than the
f i v e i n compliance.
V-15
CHAPTER V I
FURTHER OlSCUSSlON
OF S I GNI F ICANT PARAMETERS
CHAPTER V I
FURTHER DISCUSSION OF SIGNIFICANT PARAMETERS
Table V I - 1 p r e s e n t s f o r comparison a l i s t of v a r i a b l e s o r f a c t o r s
included in t h e API-2517 e q u a t i o n f o r emission l o s s from f l o a t i n g - r o o f
t a n k s and in t h e ES c o r r e l a t i o n stqidy of f i e l d t e s t d a t a . The API
e q u a t i o n is d e f i n e d i n Chapter V . There were no pan-type r o o f s i n
t h e ES f i e l d s t u d y , and t h e API s t u d y d i d n o t i n c l u d e double-deck t y p e
roofs. T h e r e f o r e , i t i s n o t known i f any e f f e c t on emission loss can
be a t t r i b u t e d t o d i f f e r e n c e s between pan, pontoon, o r double-deck
roofs.
In t h e ES s t u d y , t a n k c o n s t r u c t i o n , roof t y p e , and s e a l t y p e were

r e p r e s e n t e d a s c a t e g o r i e s f o r c o r r e l a t i o n purposes. In t h e API
e q u a t i o n , t h e e f f e c t s of t h e s e f a c t o r s were combined i n a v a r i a b l e ,
k t , f o r which numerical magnitudes were given depending on t h e com-
b i n a t i o n of t a n k , r o o f , and s e a l t y p e f o r a s p e c i f i c t a n k . Also,
t h e API p r e d i c t i o n e q u a t i o n does n o t d i s t i n g u i s h t u b e o r shoe t y p e
s e a l s , and does n o t e x p l i c i t l y t r e a t s e a l gap a r e a o r number of s e a l
gaps a s an emission r a t e v a r i a b l e . It does, however, i m p l i c i t l y in-
c l u d e t h e e f f e c t in a c o n s t a n t , f o r o l d o r new s e a l s , and i n t h e
ks
k variable.
t
One of t h e main d i f f e r e n c e s , t h e n , between t h e API p r e d i c t i o n
e q u a t i o n and t h e ES f i e l d experiment d a t a c o r r e l a t i o n s t u d i e s i s t h a t
ES examined t h e new f i e l d measured d a t a t o e v a l u a t e any d i r e c t q u a n t i -
t a t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p between seal gap numbers o r area and emission l o s s
independent of t y p e of roof and s e a l , whereas t h e AF'I e q u a t i o n assumes
i m p l i c i t l y t h a t gap a r e a s are always more f o r o l d seals, o r r i v e t e d
t a n k s with a s i n g l e seal on i t s r o o f . However, t h e AF'I e q u a t i o n
a l s o i m p l i c i t l y assumes t h a t t h e e m i s s i o n loss from any p a r t i c u l a r
t a n k / r o o f / s e a l t y p e combination is independent of s e a l gap area s i n c e
t h e v a l u e s of k and k t a r e f i x e d once t h e age f a c t o r and t a n k / r o o f /
S
seal combination are s p e c i f i e d .
VI-1
TABLE VI-1
COMPARISON OF ENGINEERING-SCIENCE FIELD

TEST VARIABLES TO API 2517 EQUATION VARIABLE
Engineering-Science Field Test API 2517

Study Emission Loss Correlating Emission Loss Equation
Variable or Factor* Variable or Factor
1. Roof Type (Pontoon - double deck) k ,function (pan

t
- pontoon)
2. Roof Color Paint Factor, K
P
3. Tank Diameter, D (ft) D (It)
4.,Seal Type ( shoe, tube orother k function (single seal -
t’ double seal)
2
5 . Seal Gap Area (ft ) k
S’
function (new - old)
6. Number of Seal Gaps -
7 . Reid Vapor Pressure ,RVP True Vapor Press., pv(psia)
or True Vapor Pressure (psia) k function (gasoline -
C’ crude oil)
8. ASTM Dist. Curce Slope
9. Average Stock Temperature (OR) -
10. Emission Rate (lb/day, bbls / year) L (bbls / year)
Y
11. Average Ambient Temperature (OR ) -
12. Average Maximum Hour Temperature (OR)
13. Average Day Temperature Range, AT (OR) -
14. Average Ambient Pressure (in. Hg) 14.7 (psia)
15. Average Wind Speed (mph) VW (mph)
16. Average Maximum Hour Wind Speed (mph) -
17. Average % Cloud Cover -
** Tank Type ( Welded - Riveted) k-t’ function (welded -
riveted)
* As numbered on summary data sheets.

** Not numbered on data sheets.
VI-2
~
T h e r e f o r e , a l t h o u g h t h e measured emission l o s s f o r t h e 1 3 s t o r a g e
t a n k s can be compared t o t h e e m i s s i o n l o s s p r e d i c t e d by t h e AF'I
e q u a t i o n , i t i s n o t f e a s i b l e t o make a d i r e c t comparison of t h e q u a n t i -
t a t i v e e f f e c t of each v a r i a b l e o r f a c t o r o r t o a s s e s s t h e accuracy of
t h e v a l u e s a s s i g n e d t o exponents or k f a c t o r s i n t h e API e q u a t i o n .
I n g e n e r a l , however, t h e ES l a b o r a t o r y experiments on g a s o l i n e
e v a p o r a t i o n r a t e s , and t h e C B I j S O H I O p i l o t tank and o t h e r t a n k t e s t s
show t r e n d s of i n c r e a s i n g e m i s s i o n r a t e s a s wind speed and s e a l gap
area a r e increased.
I n t h e c a s e of t h e ES f i e l d t e s t s t u d y d a t a , m u l t i p l e l i n e a r
r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s were conducted u s i n g s t a n d a r d computerized s t a t i s -
t i c a l programs (CORRE/STPRG) t o examine t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p of t h e
measured o r observed v a l u e s of t h e v a r i a b l e s l i s t e d i n Table V I - 1 to
t h e measured emission r a t e s . I n b r i e f , t h e s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s program
conducts a m u l t i p l e s t e p w i s e l i n e a r r e g r e s s i o n (STPRG) i n a f a s h i o n
t h a t o r d e r s t h e v a r i a b l e s from greatest t o l e a s t c o r r e l a t i o n . The
program was e x e r c i s e d i n t h e l o g a r i t h m i c mode t o produce a power
f a c t o r r e l a t i o n s h i p of t h e type:
Y = a x blx b2 b3--__
-
1 2 x3
where Y i s t h e dependent v a r i a b l e and x l , x2, e t c . , a r e indepen-
dent variables. T h i s form was s e l e c t e d s i n c e i n t h e MI-2517 e q u a t i o n ,
t h e emission r a t e (Ly) w a s a f u n c t i o n of P O a 7 , and Vw 0.7 .
The r e s u l t s of t h e r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s were t h a t f o r t h e measured
f i e l d d a t a from t h e 1 3 g a s o l i n e s t o r a g e t a n k s , t h e emission rates
were more c o r r e l a t e d w i t h t h e v a l u e s of wind speed, RVP, ASTM
d i s t i l l a t i o n f a c t o r , gap a r e a (Ag), and s t o c k temperature t h a n w i t h
number of g a p s , t a n k d i a m e t e r , and t h e o t h e r v a r i a b l e s . I n o r d e r of
h i g h e r t o lower c o r r e l a t i o n f o r t h e f i r s t f i v e v a r i a b l e s :
1, = f (Vw, RVP, gap a r e a , ASTM d i s t i l l a t i o n f a c t o r , s t o c k f e m p e r a t u r c )

Y
VI-?
I t is c o n s i d e r e d t h a t i t might be a s a p p r o p r i a t e t o compute TVP
o r P f o r u s e i n t h e c o r r e l a t i o n a n a l y s i s i n s t e a d of RVP and t h e ASTM
d i s t i l l a t i o n factor. In t h a t c a s e , t h e c o r r e l a t i o n o r d e r of t h e most
s i g n i f i c a n t sets of t e s t v a r i a b l e v a l u e s i s :
The m u l t i p l e c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t f o r t h i s s e t i s approximately
0.8. However, a n a c c u r a t e mathematical r e l a t i o n s h i p f o r t h e s e v a r i a b l e s
i n t h e form o f :
is n o t o b t a i n e d s i n c e t h e s t a n d a r d e r r o r of t h e r e g r e s s i o n c o e f f i c i e n t
( t h e b exponents in t h i s c a s e ) f o r each v a r i a b l e i s s i g n i f i c a n t (due
t o t h e d a t a s c a t t e r ) and due t o power f a c t o r format o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p ,
considerable uncertainty results. This uncertainty i s a r e s u l t not
o n l y of t h e d a t a s c a t t e r b u t of t h e r e l a t i v e l y s m a l l number of t e s t
t a n k s (13) compared t o t h e number of v a r i a b l e s (15).
I n a d d i t i o n , t h e r e s u l t i n g e x p r e s s i o n cannot be compared d i r e c t l y
t o t h e API e q u a t i o n s i n c e A h e r e i s a continuous v a r i a b l e expressed
g
i n an experimental r e l a t i o n s h i p t o L whereas i n t h e API e q u a t i o n ,
Y'
t h e gap f a c t o r i s i m p l i c i t l y assumed t o be a f i x e d l i n e a r v a l u e f o r
each t a n k l r o o f l s e a l combination.
T h e B a t t e l l e r e p o r t f o r t h e EPA ( s e e Bibliography) concluded t h a t

t h e API-2517 s t a n d i n g s t o r a g e loss e q u a t i o n was of q u e s t i o n a b l e accuracy.
More s p e c i f i c a l l y , a s t a t i s t i c a l e v a l u a t i o n of t h e API wind speed and
vapor p r e s s u r e d a t a s c a t t e r i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e exponents of 0.7 f o r
both t h e V and vapor p r e s s u r e f a c t o r s could n o t be confirmed w i t h i n
W
reasonable certainty l i m i t s .
The API emission l o s s e q u a t i o n was developed from d a t a compiled

on s t o r a g e t a n k s 20 t o 40 y e a r s ago. Its applicability f o r estimating
l o s s e s from s t o r a g e t a n k s e x i s t i n g today is i n q u e s t i o n i n view of
the previous discussion. The d i r e c t comparison of measured emission
VI-4
r a t e s t o t h o s e p r e d i c t e d by API-2517 was shown in F i g u r e V-1.
I g n o r i n g t h e c a s e of t h e Gulf O i l t a n k , t h e API e q u a t i o n p r e d i c t e d
l o s s e s r a n g i n g from o n e - t h i r d t o n i n e times t h e l o s s e s measured by ES.
In seven c a s e s , t h e API p r e d i c t i o n was s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r , and i n
f o u r c a s e s , i t was s i g n i f i c a n t l y less. From t h i s r e s u l t , and without
a d d i t i o n a l d a t a , i t is c o n s i d e r e d t h a t t h e API e x p r e s s i o n i s n o t i n
t h e form t h a t w i l l produce r e a s o n a b l y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e e s t i m a t e s of
emission l o s s e s . A d d i t i o n a l l y , t h e i n c o n s i s t e n c y of t h e API p r e d i c t i o n s
compared t o t h e ES measured e m i s s i o n s make i t d i f f i c u l t t o i d e n t i f y
and e v a l u a t e p o t e n t i a l c a u s e s f o r t h e d i f f e r e n c e s . It remains u n c l e a r
whether a n e m i s s i o n l o s s r e l a t i o n s h i p can be expressed i n t h e form of
t h e API e q u a t i o n , or, i n view of t h e o r d e r of r e l a t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n
between t h e key f a c t o r s as i n d i c a t e d by t h e ES c o r r e l a t i o n a n a l y s e s ,
how t o develop w i t h less u n c e r t a i n t y t h e c o e f f i c i e n t s or exponents
f o r t h e v a r i a b l e s which should be i n c l u d e d in t h e emission l o s s e s t i -
mation e x p r e s s i o n . T h e r e f o r e , no f u r t h e r a t t e m p t s were made t o
develop a n emission l o s s e q u a t i o p by s t a t i s t i c a l c o r r e l a t i o n a n a l y s e s
or a n a l y t i c a l t e c h n i q u e s .
An e x p r e s s i o n f o r t h e e v a p o r a t i o n r a t e of v o l a t i l e l i q u i d s i n t o
a i r h a s been d e r i v e d in t h e form:
NA = e v a p o r a t i o n r a t e p e r u n i t l i q u i d s u r f a c e a r e a .
DAB = d i f f u s i v e l y c o n s t a n t f o r l i q u i d A.
P,T,R = a i r p r e s s u r e , t e m p e r a t u r e , and gas c o n s t a n t .
z = stagnant a i r s p a c e h e i g h t .
PB2 = a i r p a r t i a l p r e s s u r e a t t o p o f c o n t a i n e r .
PB1 = a i r p a r t i a l p r e s s u r e a t s u r f a c e of l i q u i d .
VI-5
u s i n g n-pentane v e r s u s a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e petroleum l i q u i d :
2
Dm = 0.075 cm 2 / s e c = 6 . 2 9 f t I h r .
PAl = 6 . 8 p s i a (Pnl = 7 . 9 p s i a )
PB2 = 1 4 . 7 p i a
Then, NA =
4.65~10-~ lb
(.
- molelhr
).
z 2
ft
Assuming t h e molecular weight o f g a s o l i n e i s approximately 55 ' l b /

lb-mole, t h e z f o r tube s e a l s i n a floating-roof t a n k i s about two
f e e t , and t h e l i q u i d s u r f a c e exposed i n t h e r i m s p a c e i s one-half feet
w i d e , then f o r a 100-foot d i a m e t e r t a n k :
L = 4*65x10-4x 55 x 100 B x 112 x 24 = 48 l b l d a y

Y 2
T h i s r e s u l t i s w i t h i n a r e a s o n a b l e range of t h e v a l u e s of
measured e m i s s i o n s from t h e 1 3 t a n k s (20 t o 265 l b / d a y f o r t a n k diam-
e t e r s ranging from 55 t o 153 f e e t ) . T h e r e f o r e i t i s considered t h a t
f u r t h e r e v a l u a t i o n of t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e t h e o r e t i c a l e v a p o r a t i o n
e q u a t i o n t o t h e r e a l t a n k s i t u a t i o n may prove t o be of v a l u e .
VI-6
CHAPTER V I I
BEST AVAILABLE SEAL TECHNOLOGY
.
.
.
CHAPTER V I 1
BEST AVAILABLE SEAL TECHNOLOGY
GENERAL
P r i o r t o World War 11, most c r u d e o i l and petroleum p r o d u c t s w i t h

vapor p r e s s u r e s l e s s than 11 o r 1 2 p s i a were s t o r e d i n fixed-roof tanks.
However, t h e r e was some f l o a t i n g - r o o f technology a s e a r l y a s t h e 1920's.
It had been developed p r i m a r i l y t o conserve product. Floating roofs
are g e n e r a l l y up t o a f o o t or more s m a l l e r i n diameter than t h e i n s i d e
of t h e t a n k t o a l l o w f o r v a r i a t i o n s i n t h e diameter of t a n k caused by
s e t t l i n g , wind load, d i f f e r e n t i a l expansion, r i v e t heads, b u t t s t r a p s ,
l a p welds, c o r r o s i o n , e t c . Bulges i n tank s h e l l s a r e p a r t i c u l a r l y
p r e v a l e n t i n t a n k s 100 f e e t or g r e a t e r i n diameter.
Two g e n e r a l t e c h n i q u e s are used t o s e a l t h e a n n u l a r s p a c e between t h e

f l o a t i n g roof and t h e t a n k s h e l l . When f i r s t i n t r o d u c e d a l l f l o a t i n g -
roof t a n k s had metal shoe s e a l s which p r e s s e d a g a i n s t t h e t a n k s h e l l and a
f l e x i b l e f a b r i c covered t h e space between t h e roof r i m and t h e top of
t h e shoe s e a l . More r e c e n t l y t u b e s e a l s ( f a b r i c covered foam o r l i q u i d
f i l l e d f a b r i c ) has been used t o s e a l t h e a n n u l a r space.
The o b j e c t i v e of t h i s t a s k w a s t o determine by s u r v e y s t h e b e s t
a v a i l a b l e s e a l technology f o r f l o a t i n g - r o o f tanks, particularly f o r
upgrading e x i s t i n g tankage where n e c e s s a r y . Major emphasis was placed
on seal technology (both primary and secondary) f o r pontoon-type and
double deck open f l o a t i n g - r o o f tanks. Both crude o i l and d i s t i l l a t e
t a n k s were s t u d i e d . Two types of s u r v e y s were conducted.-
The f i r s t survey of a v a i l a b l e t a n k seals c o n s i s t e d of p e r s o n a l

i n t e r v i e w s by t e l e p h o n e and correspondence w i t h b o t h manufacturers
and users of f l o a t i n g - r o o f t a n k s and w i t h t a n k e r e c t i o n c o n t r a c t o r s ,
c o n s u l t i n g e n g i n e e r s , and governmental a i r p o l l u t i o n c o n t r o l e n g i n e e r s .
Various b r o c h u r e s and r e p o r t s of m a n u f a c t u r e r s and u s e r s y i e l d e d in-
formation of v a l u e a s d i d a t t e n d a n c e a t s e v e r a l v a r i a n c e h e a r i n g s
concerning seal technology. In a few c a s e s , p e r s o n a l v i s i t s were made
t o i n s t a l l a t i o n s of i n t e r e s t . Names of o r g a n i z a t i o n s and p e r s o n s
i n t e r v i e w e d or p r o v i d i n g i n f o r m a t i o n a r e l i s t e d i n Appendix E.
VII-1
In t h e second s u r v e y , i n s t a l l e d t a n k s e a l s were reviewed w i t h
r e s p e c t t o gap s i z e . Over 200 t a n k s i n t h e South Coast A i r Basin
were analyzed. A d a t a s h e e t f o r each t a n k , showing i n s p e c t i o n r e s u l t s
a t each roof l e v e l , a p p e a r s i n Appendix F.
SURVEY OF AVAILABLE SEALS
Primary S e a l s
Primary s e a l s a r e designed t o prevent vapor l o s s from exposed

l i q u i d i n t h e a n n u l a r space between t h e r i m of t h e f l o a t i n g - r o o f and
t h e tank s h e l l , u s u a l l y a b o u t e i g h t i n c h e s . They may be mechanical
or t u b e t y p e .
The mechanical s e a l s a r e v e r t i c a l shoes ( m e t a l p l a t e s about 30-36

i n c h e s i n v e r t i c a l dimension) connected by b r a c e s t o t h e f l o a t i n g - r o o f
around i t s e n t i r e circumference. The shoes a r e h e l d a g a i n s t t h e t a n k
w a l l by v a r i o u s t y p e s of s p r i n g s o r weighted l e v e r s . The open space
between t h e top of t h e shoe and t h e rim of t h e roof i s c l o s e d by a
s u i t a b l e coated f a b r i c . Thus t h e only p o r t i o n of t h e l i q u i d i n t h e
t a n k which i s exposed t o t h e atmosphere i s t h a t between t h e shoe and
the tank w a l l . In a p e r f e c t l y round, smooth s u r f a c e t h e gap between
t h e shoe and t h e t a n k s h e l l i s almost n i l . In a c t u a l t a n k s i m p e r f e c t i o n s
on t h e t a n k w a l l (e.g.. weld seams, r i v e t heads, b u t t s t r a p s , s o l i d
build-ups such as wax) o r t h e l a r g e r imperfect a r e a s ( b u l g e s , d e n t s ,
out-of-roundness r e s u l t i n g from s e t t l i n g , wind, thermal s t r a i n , e t c . )
r e s u l t i n a n i n c r e a s e i n gap s i z e f o r v a r y i n g d i s t a n c e s around t h e
circumference of t h e tank. A l l major t a n k manufacturers supply
mechanical shoes of v a r i o u s d e s i g n s . A t y p i c a l d e s i g n i s shown i n
F i g u r e VII-1.
The t u b e seal i s a f l e x i b l e t u b e u s u a l l y f i l l e d w i t h l i q u i d o r a
compressible s o l i d foam. The t u b e s a r e h e l d between t h e r i m of t h e
roof and t h e t a n k s h e l l u s u a l l y a t o r above t h e l i q u i d l e v e l s o t h a t
they completely f i l l t h e a n n u l a r s p a c e . The weight of t h e l i q u i d of t h e
r e s i l i e n c e of t h e foam i s such t h a t t h e s e a l can adapt i t s e l f t o wide
changes i n t a n k dimensions and even f i l l i n t o some e x t e n t a t l e a s t ,
around p r o t r u d i n g r i v e t s and s h e l l i m p e r f e c t i o n s .
VII-2
. FIGURE V I I -
WEIGHT ASSISTED METALLIC SHOE SEAL
.. VII-3
ENGINEER ING-SCIENCE , I N C .
. ENQINEERINQ-SCIENCE m]-
S e a l s o f f e r e d by t h e major t a n k manufacturers vary c o n s i d e r a b l y
i n design d e t a i l . The s e a l i t s e l f i s u s u a l l y a r e i n f o r c e d f a b r i c
( e . g . , nylon) coated w i t h s y n t h e t i c e l a s t o m e r , r e s i s t a n t t o a b r a s i o n
and hydrocarbons. When a l i q u i d is used i n s i d e t h e t a n k t u b e i t is
commonly a petroleum d i s t i l l a t e or s i m i l a r m a t e r i a l t h a t w i l l not
contaminate t a n k c o n t e n t s i n c a s e of a puncture.
The foam s e a l most o f t e n is a n open-celled polyurethane foam.

Nearly a l l t a n k manufacturers o f f e r one or more t y p e s of foam s e a l s .
They vary i n d e n s i t y , c o m p r e s s i b i l i t y , shape (round, hexagonal,
o c t a g o n a l , e t c . ) and d i a m e t e r (up t o 1 4 i n c h e s ) . B a s i c a l l y , t h e foam
seal may be c o n s i d e r e d a s a doughnut o r hoop-like l o g h e l d between t h e
rim of t h e f l o a t i n g - r o o f and the t a n k s h e l l , e i t h e r p a r t i a l l y immersed
i n t h e l i q u i d i n t h e t a n k or in t h e vapor space j u s t above t h e l i q u i d .
T y p i c a l d e s i g n s are shown i n F i g u r e s V I I - 2 and VII-3.
Major t a n k m a n u f a c t u r e r s o f f e r i n g primary t u b e s e a l s in Southern

California include: Chicago B r i d g e and I r o n Company, American Bridge
D i v i s i o n of U.S. S t e e l , P i t t s b u r g h - Des Moines S t e e l Company, and
GATX Tank E r e c t o r Corporation.
S e v e r a l o t h e r m a n u f a c t u r e r s o f f e r or have developed s p e c i a l d e s i g n s
of primary seals similar t o t u b e seals. Chiyoda Chemical Engineering
and C o n s t r u c t i o n Company, I n c . o f f e r s a vapor s e a l i n g d e v i c e b u i l t
i n t h e shape of a p a i r of l i p s and c a l l e d "Kisseal" ( F i g u r e VII-4).
The d e v i c e is made of p o l y u r e t h a n e foam bonded t o a cover s h e e t of
rubber-reinforced nylon w i t h a n a c r y l i c a d h e s i v e . The shape of t h e '
seal a l l o w s it t o a c t as a d o u b l e seal w i t h r e s p e c t t o small w a l l
deformations. The manufacturer claims t h a t whereas foam l o g s may
p a r t i a l l y f a i l by s p l i t t i n g when t h e a n n u l a r space narrows, t h e d e s i g n
of t h e "Kisseal" m i t i g a t e s such a c t i o n . The "Kisseal" has been in u s e
in welded t a n k s i n t h e O r i e n t f o r t e n y e a r s b u t h a s n o t been used on
r i v e t e d tanks. No i n s t a l l a t i o n s in t h e United S t a t e s are known.
During a n i n t e r v i e w w i t h r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of Chiyoda, it w a s l e a r n e d
t h a t t h e c h i e f a t t r i b u t e of t h e s e a l , long l i f e , is due t o d e s i g n of
t h e s e a l which m i t i g a t e s compressive f o r c e s , and thereby promotes
VTT-L
FIGURE VII-2
SR-7 HORTON FABRIC SEAL

( R E S I L I E N T TYPE)
FOR HORTON FLOATING ROOFS
WEATHER SHIELD-
HANGER BAR-
CURTAIN SEAL-
SEAL ENVELOPE -
SEAL SUPPORT-
RING
RESILIENT
URETHANE FOAM-
ENGINEER ING-SC IENCE, INC.

VII-5
~~ ~
FIGURE VII.
~
=E
W
c
v)
>
v)
l!
LQ3
. .. . ..
I
0
n
ENGINEERING-SCIENCE, INC
VI1-h
E N G I N E E R I N G S C IENCE, INC.
VII-7
ENQINEER~NQ-SCIENCE [ESI-
I
r e t e n t i o n of e l a s t i c i t y . However, i n s p e c t i o n of t e n t a n k s i n t h e
O r i e n t by company p e r s o n n e l i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e s e a l d i d n o t meet t h e
C a l i f o r n i a A i r Resources Board c r i t e r i o n of no gaps g r e a t e r t h a n one-
e i g h t h i n c h on e i g h t of t h e 10 t a n k s examined. I n s t a l l a t i o n c o $ t of
t h e seal i n t a n k s i n t h e United S t a t e s is expected t o be two t o t h r e e
times t h a t of domestic t u b e s e a l s .
The ThetaChron D i v i s i o n of Joseph Weissenbach and A s s o c i a t e s h a s

d e s c r i b e d a system f o r modifying a f l o a t i n g - r o o f t a n k t o e l i m i n a t e
vapor l o s s e s . The t a n k is f i t t e d w i t h a f a b r i c t o p designed t o with-
s t a n d wind f o r c e s t h a t might o t h e r w i s e blow i t o f f . The f l o a t i n g - r o o f
is f i t t e d w i t h an e l a s t o m e r i c diaphragm s k i r t which e s s e n t i a l l y r e p l a c e s
t h e t a n k w a l l ( F i g u r e VII-5). The s p a c e between t h e o u t s i d e of
t h e impervious s k i r t and t h e t a n k s h e l l is f i l l e d w i t h e t h y l e n e g l y c o l .
No commercial t a n k of t h i s d e s i g n h a s y e t been b u i l t .
Secondary S e a l s
I n o r d e r t o p r e v e n t contamination of product by r a i n and d u s t

smaller secondary s e a l s have been developed.
Wiper-type. The s i m p l e s t t y p e of secondary seal is t h e c l o t h

wiper a t t a c h e d t o t h e t o p of t h e primary seal o r t h e top of t h e
floating-roof r i m and e x t e n d i n g t o t h e t a n k w a l l t o wipe o f f
adhering l i q u i d . A diagram of a wiper w i t h three p i e c e s of f a b r i c
is shown i n F i g u r e "11-6.
Other t y p e s of wiper seals b e i n g t e s t e d i n Southern C a l i f o r n i a

are:
Ultraflote. The u l t r a f l o t e wipe ( F i g u r e VII-7) h a s been used

f o r some time a l o n g w i t h i n t e r n a l f l o a t i n g - r o o f s (used in covered
t a n k s t o reduce b r e a t h i n g l o s s e s ) . I t is made of a s p e c i a l l y
formulated p o l y v i n y l c h l o r i d e s h e e t . The end b o l t e d t o t h e
b r a c k e t e x t e n d i n g from t h e primary shoe is b u i l t up from t h e
i n s i d e w i t h a foam material. The wiper is non-abrasive and works
on g u n n i t e d s u r f a c e s . I t is n o t recomended on r i v e t e d t a n k s .
VII-8
FIGURE VII-
I
\
I t
I 1
ENGINEER INC-SCIENCE. IN(

VII-9
SECONDARY WIPER SEAL
FIGURE VII-
-
Y
0
v)
L
z
a I-
W
n A A
- Y
9
W
I-
O
-1
LL
U
z
I-
-1
3
-I
Y
=
-
w
n
L Y
8
0
Y
ENGINEERING-SCIENCE, IN[
VII-11
Mini-Bag. There a r e s e v e r a l t y p e s of mini-bag s e a l s . All a r e
small v e r s i o n s of primary foam tube s e a l s . They may be a t t a c h e d
t o t h e t o p of t h e mechanical shoe or t o the r o o f . Foam l o g s a r e
3 t o 4 inches i n diameter. Examples a r e shown i n F i g u r e s V I I - 8 ,
9 , and 10.
T r i c o Wiper. T h i s i s a f l e x i b l e wedge wiper a t t a c h e d t o a b r a c k e t

b o l t e d on t h e primary shoe and impinging almost p e r p e n d i c u l a r l y
on t h e w a l l ( F i g u r e VII-11).
Maloney S e a l . The Maloney s e a l i s a f l e x i b l e w i p e r h e l d a g a i n s t

t h e t a n k w a l l by means of a s p r i n g . T h e r e f o r e , i t e x e r t s con-
siderable pressure. A diagram of t h e Maloney s e a l i s shown i n
F i g u r e VII-12. T h e seal w i l l m a i n t a i n c o n t a c t w i t h t h e tank
w a l l , even when t h e shoe is 2 1 / 2 i n c h e s from t h e w a l l .
S e a l and Tank A c c e s s o r i e s
When a welded tank i s new and in good c o n d i t i o n , p r o p e r l y i n s t a l l e d

shoe s e a l s show a good f i t and few i f any gaps. In t i m e , however, t h e
mechanism f o r c i n g t h e seal a g a i n s t t h e t a n k w a l l may d e t e r i o r a t e due
t o c o r r o s i o n and build-up o f s o l i d s allowing t h e shoe t o back away
from t h e t a n k w a l l . To c o r r e c t t h i s problem, some u s e r s i n s t a l l
e x t e r n a l s p r i n g s on t h e r i m of t h e roof t o h e l p t h e t o p of t h e shoe t o
s t a y i n c o n t a c t w i t h t h e t a n k w a l l ( F i g u r e VII-13). Too much p r e s s u r e ,
of c o u r s e , may d e s t r o y any c o a t i n g on t h e i n s i d e w a l l .
No p r a c t i c a l amount of p r e s s u r e on a m e t a l l i c shoe w i l l c l o s e gaps

caused by r i v e t heads i n r i v e t e d t a n k s . Accordingly, a t t e m p t s have
been made t o smooth t h e t a n k w a l l around r i v e t heads and b u t t straps
by f i l l i n g in t h e s p a c e s between t h e heads and e l i m i n a t i n g a b r u p t
changes in t h e s u r f a c e of t h e t a n k w a l l . Among f i l l e r s t h a t have been
used are g u n n i t e , epoxy r e s i n s , and g l a s s f i b e r r e s i n m i x t u r e s . All
have t h e i r l i m i t a t i o n s and problems.
Weather guards and weather s h i e l d s a r e o f t e n i n s t a l l e d over

primary shoe and t u b e s e a l s . T h e s e t h i n m e t a l p l a t e s which are p i v o t e d
from t h e roof p r o t e c t any l i q u i d t h a t may be exposed by l a r g e gaps from
UV l i g h t and wind c u r r e n t s b u t do l i t t l e t o l i m i t gap s i z e . A t times,
VII-12
FIGURE V I I -
z
-
0
I-
U
w
w
-1
w
\
\
I-
I
o
W
I
a
W
I
I
I
M
I
0
A
I
=
Y
> I
-- =;I
0
z
-
u
-
0
a
m I I-
4
>
Y
L
-4 -1
Y Y
I
M
I-
z
=
0
L
I
I A
V
I
ENGINEERING-SC IENCE, IN1

VII-13
FIGURE V I I .
-3
4
rn
-
;c
-
0
I-
>
W
2
W
w
M
ENGINEER ING-SC IENCE, IN1

VII-1P
FIGURE VII-l
u
0
z
-
0
c
U
>
W
2
W
W
-
a
v)
-
4I
r
z
-
0
c
U
>
W
_1
t Y
c
z
0
oz
U
VII-15
FIGURE VII-1
I
2
2
Y
-
I
M
L
z
c
ENGINEER ING-SC IENCE, INC.

VII-16
MALONEY SECONDARY TANK SEAL
XISTING CLAMP
EXISTING PRIMARY SEAL
ENGl NEER ING-SC I ENCE, INC.

VII-17
FIGURE V I I - 1
S P R I N G A S S I S T E D MECHANISM
.. ENGINEERING-SCIENCE, IN[
VII-18
ENQINEERINQ-SCIENCE [asI -
t h e y have been considered by some as secondary s e a l s , b u t t h e i r e f f e c -
t i v e n e s s in reducing gap s i z e is poor.
SURVEY OF INSTALLED SEALS WITH RESPECT TO GAP S I Z E
T e s t d a t a on more than 200 t a n k s were obtained from v a r i o u s oil

companies i n t h e South Coast A i r Basin ( A t l a n t i c - R i c h f i e l d , Douglas,
G u l f , Mobil, S h e l l , S t a n d a r d , Texaco, and Union). S e l e c t i o n of tanks
and s e a l s t o be t e s t e d , methods of i n s p e c t i o n , and of r e p o r t i n g r e s u l t s
were made by each company i n d i v i d u a l l y . I n s p e c t i o n frequency v a r i e d
from o n l y one roof l e v e l up t o more than 20 d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s p e r tank.
Some i n s p e c t o r s r e p o r t e d gap measurements in ranges of 118" t o less
t h a n 1/4", 114" t o 3/8", 318" t o 112". 112" and above, and m a x i m u m
gap s i z e . A l l companies r e p o r t e d d a t a in such form t h a t i t could be
a r r a n g e d t o show gap measurements in two c a t e g o r i e s : (1) 118" o r more
b u t less t h a n 1 / 2 " , and (2) 112" o r more. A summary of t h e d a t a is
shown in Table V I I - 1 ( f o r welded t a n k s ) and Table V I I - 2 (for riveted
tanks). Only t h e average of t o t a l gap l e n g t h s (average f o r t h e
numbers of roof l e v e l s where i n s p e c t i o n s were made) is r e p o r t e d in t h e
T a b l e s in o r d e r t o a v o i d over-complicating them. Observations con-
c e r n i n g s p e c i f i c i n s p e c t i o n s a r e also shown. Asterisks beside tank
numbers in t h e Tables r e f e r t o t h o s e i n s p e c t i o n s where o b s e r v a t i o n s
are p a r t i c u l a r l y p e r t i n e n t .
The i n d i v i d u a l s h e e t s in Appendix F were d e r i v e d from t h e inspec-

t i o n r e p o r t s submitted by t h e v a r i o u s companies, and p u t i n t o a
uniform format for c l a r i t y . Where i n s p e c t i o n s were made o n l y a t one
level, the i n d i v i d u a l s h e e t w a s n o t i n c l u d e d , b u t t h e r e s u l t s a r e
shown in Tables V I I - 1 and VII-2. Some of t h e r e p o r t s i n c l u d e inspec-
t i o n s made by ARB and APCD p e r s o n n e l ; o t h e r s do n o t . The i n s p e c t i o n s
made by t h e a g e n c i e s are n o t i d e n t i f i e d in t h i s r e p o r t .
Tank i d e n t i f i c a t i o n numbers are meaningful o n l y t o t h e a u t h o r s of

t h i s report. They were so a r r a n g e d and s e l e c t e d so t h a t anonymity of
t h e data was p r e s e r v e d .
Examination of Table V I I - 1 ( f o r welded tanks) r e v e a l s t h a t o n l y

one t a n k w i t h a shoe seal and no secondary s e a l would meet a c r i t e r i o n
VII-19
i
TABLZ V I I - 1
PERFORMANCE OF SEALS ON FLOATING-ROOF TANXS
IAv. p e r Lev.)
Tank Diam. Primary Secondary Levels -l/a:'- 112" &
Iden. Service (feet; Seal Seal Tested i/2" Over
B-1 C.O. 160 Shoe Looped 19 3.1 0

Fabric
B-2 C.O. 140 Foam None 16 24.5 24,. 4
Log
R-l* Gas 60 Tube None 9 4.1 4.1
R- 2 Av. Gas 60 Tube None 9 3.2 .56
R- 3 Av. Gas 60 Shoe Mini- 7 5.7 0
Tube
R-4 Av. Gas 60 Tube None 7 1.0 0
R-5" Av. Gas 60 Shoe Mini- 12 0.1 0
Bag
R-6 c5-c 6 100 Shoe Maloney 10 0 0
R-7 Reformate 150 Tube None 13 3.5 0.4
R- 8 Reformate 100 Shoe None 4 41.3 0.25
R-9 Gas 138 Tube None 13 0.2 0
R-10 C.O. 100 Tube None 3 4.7 0
R-11 Gas 119 Tube None 8 0.6 0.03
R-12 C.O. 100 Shoe None 12 62.0 8.0
R-13 EFU 150 Tube None 14 0 0
R-14 Pentane 67 Shoe Elaloney 4 2 0
R-15 Hexane 90 Shoe Maloney 3 0 0
R-16 C.O. 155 Shoe None 6 62.3 9.3
R-17 Gas 110 Tube None 7 0.5 0.01
R-18* Gas 110 Shoe Maloney 5 17.2 0.6
R-19 Gas 110 Shoe Mini- 4 1.3 1.0
Bag
R-20 C.O. 220 Shoe None 15 72.6 13.3
L-1 C.O. 221 Tube None 21 64.0 18.7
L-2 C.O. 227 Tube None 24 76.7 23.5
L-3 C.O. 242 Tube None 3 0 0
L-4 C.O. 230 Shoe None 15 93.7 13.3
L-5 C.O. 230 Shoe None 14 115.3 14.9
L-6 C.O. 230 Shoe None 17 228.9 9.2
L-7 C.O. 260 Tube None 4 0.03 0
L-8 C.O. 260 Tube None 4 4 0
L-9 C.O. 200 Tube None 7 15.6 2.0
M-1 Gas 54.5 Tube Weather- 4 13.1 0
Guard
M- 2 Gas 54.5 Shoe None 4 0.4 0.5
M- 3 Gas 54.5 Tube Weather- 3 1 3.3
Guard
VII-20
ENGINEERING-SCIENCE [Es 1 -
TABLE V I I - 1
PERFCREUCZ OF SEALS ON FLOATING-ROOF TANKS !e)

'rleided Tanks
Feet of Gap
(&I. p e r Lev.:
Tank Dim. Frimary' Secondary Leveis 118"- 112" &
Ident. Service (fect) Sea1 Seal Tested 3.12'' Sver
M- 4 Gas 54.5 Tube Weather- 4 5.8 0.4

Guard
M-5 Diesel 21.5 Shoe None 3 7.5 0
M- 6 C.O. 60 Shoe Wiper 2 34 2.9
M- 7 C.O. 90 Shoe Wiper 2 162 71
M-8 C.O. 90 Shoe Wiper 2 142 55.9
H- 1 Gas 120 Tube None 8 0.34 0.3
H-2 Gas 150 Tube None 6 0 0
H-3 Recov. 80 Shoe None 1 7.2 0
Oil
H-4 Gas 120 Tube None 7 2.2 0
H-5* Gas 120 Shoe None 2 .13 0.04
H-5 Gas 120 Tube None 2 0 0.08
H-6 Gas 117 Tube None 7 10.1 3.4
H-?(a) Gas 117 Tube None 3 0 0
H-7(b) Gas 117 Shoe None 3 3.3 0.9
H-8 Gas 117 Shoe None 2 11.4 5.4
H-8(b) Gas 117 Tube None 6 0 0
H- 9 Ga 8 120 Shoe None 2 3.8 0
H-10 Gas 120 Tube None 5 0 0.07
H-11 Gas 120 Shoe None 9 8.3 0
H-12 Gas 120 Shoe None 2 15.3 0
H-l3(R)* Gas 117 Tube None 4 13.2 11.1
H-13(W)* Gas 117 Tube None 4 0 0
P-1 C.O. 117 Shoe None 3 10.8 31
P-2 Gas 120 Shoe None 3 14.0 0
P-3 Gas 122 Tube None 3 0.9 0.01
P-4 'Jet A 122 Tube None 3 2.4 0.001
P-5 Gas 96 Shoe None 3 18.4 7.7
P-7 Av. Gas 60 Shoe None 3 11.8 0.47
P-8 Rec. Gas 48 Shoe None 3 14.1 0.7
P-9 Gas 120 Shoe None 2 36.2 0.1
P-10 Gas 30 Tube None 4 .08 0.2
P-11 Sour Water 75 Shoe None 3 10.1 0.9
P-12 C.O. 195 Tube None 5 0.4 0
P-13 C.O. 160 Tube None ' 4 0.3 0
P-14" Rec. O i l 45 Tube None 3 89 3.1
P-15 Rec. O i l 25 Tube None 3 5 0.4+
P-16 Gas Oil 80 Tube None 3 0.5 Dt
P-17 Gas 100 Shoe None 3 42.0 7.5
P-18 Alkylate 36 Tube None 3 4.7 0.8
VII-21
ENGINEERING-SCIENCE IES]-
TABLE V I I - 1
PERFC.W?CE OF SEALS ON FLOATING-ROOF TAhXS (Cont.)
Welded Tanks
Feet of Gap
(Av. per Lev.)
Tank Xam. Primary Secondfry Levels :/a”-. 1 / 2 “ 6
Ident. Service (feet) Seal Seal Tested 112‘‘ Over
P-19 Alkylate 100 Shoe None 4 11 0.2

c-1 Av. Gas 95 Shoe Ultra-Type 3 0 0
(EX)
c-2 Gas 140 Shoe Blade (Ex) 1 5.6 6.7
c-3 Gas 140 Shoe Foam S e a l 4 0.9 0
c-4 Gas 140 Shoe Ultra-Type 3 3 0
(Ex)
c-5 Gas 30 Tube None 1 0 0
C-6 Gas 86 Tube None 2 0.05 3.4
c- 7 Gas 78 Tube None 3 2.7 0 .
C-8 C.O. 78 Shoe None 1 3.3 0.2
c-9 Gas 94 Shoe None 1 12.1 0
c-10 Jet 120 Tube None 1 0 0
c-11 Naphtha 110 Shoe None 1 27.2 0
c-12 Sour Water 1 4 0 Shoe Wiper 1 2.2 33
C-13 Gas 140 Shoe Wiper 1 1.5 0
C-14 C.O. 140 Shoe None 1 2.1 0.6
T-1 Naphtha 90 Shoe None 1 59.4 46.8
T-2 Naphtha 90 Tube None 1 0 0
T-3 Naphtha 120 Shoe None 1 53.1 8.3
T-4 Gas 120 Tube Weather 1 55.8 77.4
Shield
T-5 Gas 120 Tube Weather 2 17.2 0.7
Shield
T-6 Naphtha 120 Shoe Weather 2 0 0
Shield
T- 7 Gas 120 Tube Weather 3 8.8 0.6
Shield
T-8 Alkylete 120 Tube Weather 1 4.6 0
Shield
T-9 Reformer 150 Shoe None 1 94 12
Feed
T-10 Reformate 150 Shoe None 1 102.9 4.6
T-11 JP-4 150 Shoe None 1 56.9 0.5
T-12 Reformate 1 5 0 . Tube None 1 0 0
T-l3(a) Gas 120 Tube None 2 7.0 6.2
T-13(b) Gas 120 Tube Maloney All 0.1 0
T-14 Resid. 120 Shoe None 1 5.7 0
Stk.
T-15 Recov. o i l 90 Shoe None 1 0 0
T-16* Gas 120 Shoe None 3 3.4 0.07
VII-22
TABLE V I I - 1
PERFOREMCE OF SEALS CN FLOATING-WOF TANKS (Cont .)
Welded Tanks
Feet of Gap
(Av. per Lev.)
Tank Ciam. Primary Secondary Levels l/P- i:2" &
Iden. Service (feet) Seal Seal Tes:ed 1/2" Cver
-
T-17 Gas 120 Tube None 1 2.2 0
T-18 Gas 120 Shoe Weather 1 1.4 0
Shield
T-19 Recov. O i l 52 Shoe Wiper 1 1.7 0.2
T-20 Av. Gas 60 Tube None 3 7.1 2.5
T-21 Av. Gas 60 Tube None . 2 .9 0
T-22 Ga s 120 Tube None 3 1.2 0
T-23 Recov. O i l 60 Tube None 3 1.4 0
T-24 Gas 90 Tube None 2 5.3 17.2-
T-25 Gas 70 Shoe None 2 28 1.3
T-26 Gas 150 Tube Weather 4 3.5 0
Shield
T-27 Reformate 120 Tube Weather 1 0 0
Shield
Y-l* JP-4 60 Foam None 7 4.1 30.4
Log
y-2* JP-4 60 Foam None 2 0 0
Log
Y-3 JP-4 90 Foam None 5 0 2.9
Log
Y-4" Gas O i l 86 Foam None 6 12.3 56.8
Log
Y-5 C.O. 150 Liquid- None 4 0 8
Filled
Fabric
VII-23
CNOlNtERINO-SCIENCE PI-
TABLE UII-2
P E R F O W W E O F SELLS ON FLOATING-ROOF TANKS
Riveted Tanks
Feet of Gap
(Av. p e r Lev.)
Tank Diam. Primary Secondary Levels 113"- 112" &
Iden. Service (Feet) Seal Seal Tested 112" Cver
A- 1 C.O. 135 Shoe Viper 18 23.55 8.1

K-1 Benzene 36 Tube None 3 0.75 0
K- 2 Naphtha 60 Shoe Mini-Bag 16 0.24 0
K- 3 Recov. 115 Shoe None 4 47.5 7.5
Oil
K-4 Gasoline 115 Shoe Mini-Bag 5 5.1 0
K- 5 Benz-To1 115 Shoe Mini-Bag 3 4.2 2.7
K-6* Benz-To1 115 Shoe Mini-Bag 4 29.3 3.5
K-7* Benz-To1 115 Shoe Mini-Bag 2 19.0 3.3
K-8 Alkylate 120 Shoe Mini-Bag 8 0 0-
K- 9 Gasoline 115 Shoe None 2 15.5 3.0
K-10 Reformate 115 Shoe Mini-Bag 5 12.3 C
K-11 C.0. 115 Shoe None 3 146.7 4.7
F-1 Gasoline 144 Shoe None 4 86.7 147.9
F-2 G a s o l i n e 144 Shoe None 4 31.2 30.2
F-3 G a s o l i n e 120 Shoe Wiper 4 130 45.4
F-4 G a s o l i n e 120 Shoe Wiper 4 148.9 27.1
F-6 G a s o l i n e 120 Shoe Wiper 4 89.8 14
F-7 Varied 120 Shoe Wiper 3 60.8 17.1
F-9 Gasoline 120 Shoe Wiper 4 70.3 45.6
F-9.1 G a s o l i n e 120 Shoe Wiper 4 45.1 65.8
F-10 C.O. 144 Shoe None 3 201.8 58.9
F-11 C.O. 144 Shoe None 3 138.7 38.7
F-12 C.O. 144 Shoe None 3 200.'2 40 .O
F-13 C.O. 144 Shoe None 3 73.2 198.3
F-14 C.O. 144 Shoe None 3 188.4 43.6
F-15 C.O. 14C. Shoe None 3 106.7 56 . 4
F-16 C.O. 168 Shoe None 3 115.8 242.2
F-17 C.O. 168 Shoe None 3 91.9 56.7
F-18 C.O., 168 Shoe None 3 136.4 50.7
F-19 C.O. 168 Shoe None 2 90.7 69 .O
F-20 C.O. 168 Shoe None 2 115.1 67.6
F-21 C.O. 168 Shoe None 2 173.8 94.8
s-l* Gasoline 50 Shoe Foam 4 4 7. 3.9
s-2 Rec. O i l 36 Shoe None 3 11.7 14.3
s-3 C.O. 117 Shoe None 3 1 5 8 .O 0
s-4 C.O. 117 Shoe None 3 67 . 3 Unknown
s-5 G a s o l i n e 117 Shoe None 4 85 .o 3.9
S-6 G a s o l i n e 117 Shoe None 2 61 . j 0
VII-24
(E61-
c
LNQINEERINQ-SCIENCE
TABLE V I I - 2
PERFORMANCE OF SEALS ON FLOATING-ROOF TANKS (Cont.)
Riveted Tanks
Feet of Gap
(Av. p e r Lev.)
Tank Diam. Primary Secondary Levels 118"- 112" &
Iden. Service (Feet) Seal Seal Tested 112'' Over
5-7 Gasoline 117 Shoe None 3 64.8 1.2

S-8 Rec. O i l 117 Shoe None 2 27 0
s-9 Gasoline 117 Shoe None 2 11.8 0
s-10 Gasoline 117 Shoe None 2 10.5 1.9
s-11 Gasoline 117 Shoe None 2 27 6.5
5-12* Av. Gas 79 Shoe Foam Tube 5 3.1 0.8
S-13 Av. Cas 60 Tube None 4 -3.3 10
5-14" Av. Gas 35 Shoe Foam Tube 4 2 17.5
S-15 Gasoline 117 Shoe None 3 50 4.3
S-16 Gasoline 117 Shoe None 4 79 9.
S-17 Gasoline 117 Shoe Loop ' 4 20 4.5
s-18 Rec. Oil 45 Shoe None 3 21 0.7
x-1 Gasoline 144 Shoe F,inger (Ex.) 1 36.2 0
X- 2 Gasoline 144 Shoe Multi-Finger 2 4 5.8
(EX.)
x-3 Jet 60 Shoe None 1 39.6 52
x-4 Av. G a s 60 Shoe Wiper 1 44.4 7.2
x-5 Av. Gas 60 Shoe None 1 46 0
X-6 Av. Gas 60 Shoe Wiper 1 13.5 0
x-7 Av. Gas 60 Shoe Wiper 1 7.2 0.3
x- a Jet ,117 Shoe Wiper 1 0 2
x-9 Jet 117 Shoe Wiper 1 0 0
x-10 Gasoline 120 Shoe Wiper 1 38.2 0
x-11 Gasoline , 1 2 0 Shoe Wiper 1 97.9 0
x-12 G a s o l i n e 144 Shoe Wiper 1 25.5 0
X-13 G a s o l i n e 144 Shoe None 1 3 248
X-14 C.O. 144 Shoe None 1 87.1 0.2
X-15 C.O. 144 Shoe None 1 15.4 0.2
X-16 C.O. 144 Shoe None 1 21 0
X-17 C.C. 144 Shoe None 1 5.5 0.2
x-ia C.O. 144 Shoe None 1 0 0
x-19 C.O. 144 Shoe None 1 5.5 4
.v-1 Recov. O i l 96 Shoe Sone 1 a6.5 14.8
V- 2 C.O. 117 Shoe None 1 159 12.2
v-3 C.C. 117 Shoe Hone 1 2 4.2
V-4 C.C. 117 Shoe Xper 1 54.2 1.7
v- 5 C.O. 117 Shoe None 2 33.5 20.3
V- 6 G a s o l i n e 117 Skoe Uiper 2 31 0.6
V-7X ?.esid. 120 She !Jith/W. 0. 2 123.7 59.6
Kini-Tube 1 0
v- s C.O. 144 Shoe None 1 28.9 0.8
TABLE V I I - 2
PERFORMANCE CF SEALS ON FLOATING-RO@F TANKS (Cont.)
Riveted Tanks
Feet of Ga?
(Av. p e r Lev.)
Tank Diam. Frimary Secondary Levels 1:8"-' li2" &
Iden. Service (feet) Seal Seal Tested 1:2" Over
v-9* C.O. 144 Shoe WithlW.0. 2 214.6 2.5

Mini-Tube 63.4 51.7
v-10 C.O. 144 Shoe None 1 167.7 0
v-11 C.O. 144 Shoe None 1 140.4 3.9
v-12 Alkylate 120 Shoe Wiper 37.7 2.1
V-13 Gasoline 27 Shoe None 40.4 0.8
V-14 Gasoline 23 Shoe Wiper 0.9 0
v-15 Gas Solv. 27 Shoe None 49.0 4.2
V- 16 Gas Solv. 27 Shoe None 36.4 1.3
V-17 Gas Solv. 27 Shoe Wiper 13.7 1..8
v-18 Gasoline 27 Tube None 0 0
v-19 Additive 30 Shoe Wiper 6.9 0 -
v-20 Gasoline 30 Shoe None 64.3 0.4
v-21 Gasoline 30 Shoe None 48.5 1.9
v-22 Gas Solv. 30 Shoe Wiper 6.4 0
V-23 Gas Solv. 30 Shoe Wiper 1 1.9 0
VII-26
CNGINLERINQBCILNCL -
of "no gap g r e a t e r than 1/8-in." T h i s was Tank 15 and i t had been
i n s p e c t e d o n l y a t one roof l e v e l . A f t e r an e x t e r n a l s p r i n g was a t t a c h e d
t o T-16. It met t h e c r i t e r i o n , b u t a g a i n , only a one-level i n s p e c t i o n
was made. S e v e r a l o t h e r t a n k s came c l o s e , b u t even t h e s e had gaps in
excess of 1/2-inch.
When t a n k s w i t h primary s h o e s e a l s were provided w i t h c e r t a i n sec-

ondary s e a l s , improvement was n o t e d b u t t h e data a r e obviously l i m i t e d .
Secondary s e a l s of f a b r i c - p r o t e c t e d foam brought t h e t a n k s w i t h primary
shoe s e a l s i n t o a low-gap regime. The Maloney secondary s e a l and t h e
e x p e r i m e n t a l u l t r a - t y p e s e a l a l s o showed promise. Ordinary wiper s e a l s ,
however, d i d l i t t l e good.
The primary t u b e s e a l performed much b e t t e r i n meeting t h e no-gap r u l e

Ehan t h e m e t a l l i c shoe seals. For t a n k s i n c l e a n s e r v i c e provided w i t h
primary t u b e seals, t h e number and s i z e of gaps found by i n s p e c t i o n were
much l e s s t h a n w i t h shoe s e a l s , a l t h o u g h q u i t e a few were in excess of
1/2-inch. Of t h e primary t u b e seals t h a t f a i l e d b a d l y , most were i n s t a l l e d
on c r u d e o i l t a n k s . Weatherguards o r w e a t h e r s h i e l d s d i d n o t improve t h e
performance of primary t u b e s e a l s .
Examination of T a b l e V I I - 2 ( f o r r i v e t e d t a n k s ) shows t h a t only

t h r e e of t h e t a n k s had primary foam-tube s e a l s . A l l of t h e r e s t had
primary m e t a l l i c shoe s e a l s . T h i s r e f l e c t s t h e low l i f e expectancy
of t u b e seals due t o wear and t e a r of t h e f a b r i c envelope as r u s t and
o t h e r d e p o s i t s b u i l d up around r i v e t heads, b u t t s t r a p s , and o v e r l a p p i n g
courses.
Only one r i v e t e d t a n k (K-8) showed no gaps i n e x c e s s of 1/8-inch a t

any l e v e l t e s t e d . However, t h i s t a n k is l i n e d w i t h g u n n i t e and no r i v e t s
are p r o t r u d i n g t o create s e a l gaps; t h u s i t e f f e c t i v e l y r e p r e s e n t s a
s u r f a c e area similar t o t h a t of a welded tank. Other r i v e t e d tanks f i t t e d
w i t h primary shoe s e a l s and mini-bag ( s m a l l foam logs) secondary seals
showed a minimization of gap s i z e , b u t t h e gaps u s u a l l y i n c l u d e d some i n
e x c e s s of 1/2-inch. As was t h e c a s e w i t h welded t a n k s , t h e u s e of sec-
ondary wipe s e a l s does n o t appear t o add a n y t h i n g t o gap minimization.
The t h r e e t a n k s w i t h primary t u b e s e a l s o n l y were a l l small.

Only one showed no gaps, and t h i s was measured a t one l e v e l only.
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
T h i s d i s c u s s i o n of f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g s e a l performance i s based
p a r t l y on t h e t e s t d a t a p r e s e n t e d in Tables V I I - 1 and V I I - 2 , and
p a r t l y on t h e experience of f l o a t i n g - r o o f tank m a n u f a c t u r e r s , e r e c t o r s ,
and u s e r s . The d i s c u s s i o n i s d i r e c t e d s o l e l y t o t h e minimization of
seal gaps and c a r r i e s no c o n n o t a t i o n a s t o hydrocarbon l o s s by evapor-
ation.
The d a t a l i s t e d i n Tables V I I - 1 and V I I - 2 showed t h a t i n p r a c t i c e

floating-roof t a n k s w i t h m e t a l l i c shoes a s primary s e a l s d i s p l a y gaps
of v a r i o u s l e n g t h s along t h e t a n k circumference and up t o s e v e r a l
i n c h e s between t h e s e a l and t h e s h e l l . The dimensions of t h e s e gaps
are r e l a t e d t o s e v e r a l real-world f a c t o r s t h a t should be understood
t o a s s e s s b e s t a v a i l a b l e s e a l technology.
The number and s i z e of t h e gaps depend on t h e symmetry and con-.

d i t i o n of t h e t a n k s h e l l , t h e s t a b i l i t y of t h e r o o f , and t h e c o n d i t i o n
of t h e m e t a l l i c shoe and i t s o p e r a t i n g mechanism, a l l of which a f f e c t
t h e c l e a r a n c e between t h e seal and t h e s h e l l . I f each of t h e s e f a c t o r s
is e s s e n t i a l l y as designed, t h e r e s h o u l d be no gap exceeding, perhaps,
1/8-inch.
D e s p i t e good d e s i g n , t h e r e a r e a v a r i e t y of c o n d i t i o n s t h a t may
develop a s f i e l d c o n d i t i o n s v a r y and time p a s s e s . For i n s t a n c e , i f
t h e t a n k becomes out-of-round (e.g., t e n d i n g toward egg-shape) even
t e m p o r a r i l y , or becomes bulged o r d e n t e d , t h e shoe must have t h e
c a p a b i l i t y of conforming t o t h e new contour i f l a r g e r gaps a r e t o be
avoided. Tank "out-of-roundness'' may r e s u l t from d i f f e r e n t i a l s e t t l i n g
of t h e f o u n d a t i o n o r t h e ground under t h e f o u n d a t i o n , from thermal
stresses ( d i f f e r e n t i a l h e a t i n g by t h e sun), or from wind p r e s s u r e .
Bulges may r e s u l t from thermal o r p h y s i c a l stresses d u r i n g e r e c t i o n .
Tanks of l a r g e diameter a r e more prone t o t h e s e v a r i a t i o n s than smaller
tanks. Tanks up t o 260 f e e t in d i a m e t e r were i n v e s t i g a t e d d u r i n g t h e
c u r r e n t study.
VII-28
If the roof shifts to one side of the tank or another, the shoe
seal must be capable of accommodating the large gap that forms on one
side of the tank, and must do this fairly uniformly. Roof shifting
often results from twisted roof poles or roof drains with stack swivel
joints that tend to pull the roof off-center, particularly at lower
levels. Even if the tank is perfectly round and the roof doesn't
shift, any imperfection in the tank wall such as rivet heads, butt-
straps, beaded welds, guide bars, or a build-up of corrosion products,
carbon, or heavy wax will hold the shoe sufficiently away from the
wall to produce gaps. Bulges or dents in addition to surface imper-
fections accentuate gap development.
With all of the foregoing factors tending toward changing the

condition and even the dimensions of the tank over the years, it is
not surprising that gaps develop.
To mitigate some of these problems, the foam seal was developed.

Theoretically, the foam seal will adjust itself to unevenness in the
surface of the tank shell, even to areas between rivet heads. The
less dense the foam and the softer its plastic cover is, the more
readily it will fit itself to small imperfections in the wall surface.
On the other hand, the plastic envelope must be hard enough and thick
enough to withstand abrasion and cutting; the foam must be sufficiently
dense to withstand compression and retain elasticity. So a compromise
results and the foam seal loses some of its potential for perfect
sealing and some of its potential for long life. When a foam tube
seal fails it is either because it becomes torn and allows the foam
to become oil-soaked, or high compressive forces destroy its elasticity.
A tendency to form wrinkles as it is forced out-of-round leads to gap
formation.
To cover up any gaps that occur in the primary seal, one may
install a secondary seal, hoping the gap in the two seals may not
line up vertically. A good secondary seal should be either softer or
harder than the primary seal with the hope that the different type of
closure will add to the overall effectiveness of the dual seals. The
secondary seal should also have the potential to reach out further than
the primary seal and thus cover up large gaps.
VII-29
The most common types of secondary seals are the foam or liquid
filledtube seals, the solid "high pressure" seal, and the clinging
wiper seal-. The secondary tube seal is usually considerably smaller
(less diameter) than the primary Lube seal, and may have a softer
envelope. The smaller diameter, the greater softness and the greater
!,throw" (potential to extend further than the primary seal) make it
effective when used in conjunction with either a shoe or tube seal as
the primary one. It is, of course, subject to the same tearing, and the
potential to wrinkle and form gaps as the primary tube seal.
Solid secondary seals include the spring-loaded Maloney seal and

the solid elastomer seal of the ultra-type. Both of these seals
function by the extra pressure they exert on the tank wall, their
ability to fit into smaller tank bulges, and their greater "throw".
Although the pressure exerted is an advantage to the seal, it is also
a defect in that it may catch on protrusions such as rivet heads and
be ripped off, particularly when the roof is ascending; it may also
destroy any coating on the tank wall. Hence, the Maloney seal does not
appear to be adapted to riveted tanks.
The wiper seal has the advantage of long "throw" and some of the
softness properties of the tube seal. It probably is somewhat
cheaper.
"Best available seal technology" implies inclusion of economic

factors such as original cost, maintenance costs, and seal life in its
determination. Insufficient information was available to make this
general decision.
The age, construction, and condition of floating-roof tanks

varies greatly. It must be emphasized therefore, that the best method of
minimizing gaps for one tank is not necessarily the best for another.
Riveted tanks display gaps of the same magnitude as the dimensions of

surface protrusions (e.g., rivet heads, butt straps, course overlaps)
when they are impinged upon by even the most effective primary seal.
Secondary foam tube or similar seals will minimize the number and
size of gaps that line up vertically in a riveted tank. Whether o r
not riveted tanks may be modified (by gunnite or other coatings)
VII-30
sufficiently to eliminate gaps has not been demonstrated. The best
methodology for minimizing seal gaps in riveted tanks appears to be a
primary shoe seal plus a secondary tube ( o r similar) seal. In order
to meet gap minimization regulations even with this "best" methodology,
exemptions for protrusions inherent in tank construction (rivet heads,
etc.) are required.
Perfectly round (or nearly s o ) welded tanks in clean service

may meet a "no gap greater than 1/8-inch" criterion with primary shoe
or tube seals only. Many welded tanks with primary seals only, or a
combination of primary and secondary seals may show "no gaps greater
than 1/8-inch" at many roof levels and still show limited gaps up to
l/Z-inch at a few other levels. This is apparently due to stresses
that developed during erection, or by environmental changes during
use. The best method of minimizing seal gaps f o r welded tanks appears
to be either a primary shoe or tube seal plus a secondary seal of the
tube o r pressure type. Even so, gaps up to one-half inch may appear
at some roof levels depending on the configuration of the specific tank.
VII-3 1
CHAPTER V I I I
RECOMMENDAT IONS
?
?
-,
. .
, . .
..
. . . '.
.
i
.
:
CHAPTER V I 1 1
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Seal gap s i z e should not b e over-emphasized a s t h e c o n t r o l l i n g

v a r i a b l e ( t o t h e e x c l u s i o n of o t h e r v a r i a b l e s ) t h a t may a f f e c t
hydrocarbon emission r a t e s from f l o a t i n g - r o o f s t o r a g e tanks.
F u r t h e r r e s e a r c h should be conducted t o i d e n t i f y t h e r e l a t i v e
importance of t h e many p o t e n t i a l v a r i a b l e s . Such r e s u l t s would
p o i n t t h e d i r e c t i o n f o r developing new c o n t r o l technology.
2. Best a v a i l a b l e s e a l technology should not be d e f i n e d without

having s u f f i c i e n t emission d a t a t o v e r i f y t h e r e d u c t i o n in
e m i s s i o n s a t t r i b u t a b l e t o t h e u s e of a g i v e n s e a l on a s p e c i f i c
application. Without emission measurements d a t a , c o n c l u s i o n s
~
may be drawn t h a t would r e q u i r e emphasis on t h e wrong parameters

t o reduce hydrocarbon e m i s s i o n s .
3. The API Method f o r measuring hydrocarbon l o s s e s from f l o a t i n g -

roof s t o r a g e t a n k s (MI-2512) should be modified t o i n c l u d e
sampling and a n a l y t i c a l procedures s i m i l a r t o t h o s e developed
during t h i s investigation.
4. The API Method f o r e s t i m a t i n g , by c a l c u l a t i o n , t h e hydrocarbon

l o s s e s from f l o a t i n g - r o o f s t o r a g e t a n k s (API-2517) should be
reviewed and updated t o r e f l e c t c u r r e n t technology i n t a n k , r o o f ,
and s e a l d e s i g n s . The updated b u l l e t i n should i n c l u d e d a t a on
double-deck f l o a t i n g r o o f s and v a r i o u s t y p e s of secondary s e a l s .
VIII-1
CHAPTER IX
B I EL IOGRAPHY
LNOINEERINQ-SCIENCE -
CHAPTER IX
BIBLIOGRAPHY
"Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors AP-42," U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, February 1976.
"Evaporation Loss from Floating-Roof Tanks," API Bulletin 2517,

February 1962.
"Evaluation of Methods for Measuring and Controlling Hydrocarbon Emissions

from Petroleum Storage Tanks," Report to U . S . Environmental Protection
Agency by Battelle, Columbus Laboratories, Columbus, Ohio, November 1976.
"Floating Roof Emission Test Program," Report to Standard Oil Company

(Ohio) by Chicago Bridge & Iron Company, November 1976.
Gray, Douglas C. "Solvent Evaporation Rates," American Industrial Hygiene

Association Journal, November 1974.
Gilbert, Theodore E. "Rate of Evaporation of Liquids into Air." JOUKnd

of Paint Technology, November 1971.
"Mobil Oil Corporation - Floating Roof Tank Evaporative Loss Study,"

Preliminary Report to California Air Resources Board Workshop, December
17, 1976.
"Revision of Evaporative Hydrocarbon Emission Factors." Report to U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency by Radian Corporation, Austin, Texas,
August 1976.
"Standard Method of Test for Density and Specific Gravity of Liquids by

Bingham Pycnometer," ASTM Designation: D-1217-54, American Society for
Testing of Materials.
Standard Oil Company of California, Western Operations, Inc. Report

for Public Hearing, June 25, 1976 to California Air Resources Board.
"Storage of Volatile Liquids," Chicago Bridge and Iron Company Monograph.
"Tentative Methods of Measuring Evaporative Loss from Petroleum Tanks and

Transportation Equipment," API Bulletin 2512, July 1957.
"WOGA/CBI Floating Roof Emission Test Program" - Interim Report to

Western Oil and Gas Association by Chicago Bridge and Iron Company,
January, 1977.
IX-1

Bref08 c07s01 ch5 1997

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Bref08 c07s01 ch5 1997

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Note: This is a reference cited in AP 42, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Volume I

Title: Hydrocarbon Emissions Floating Roof Petroleum Tanks

Engineering Science, Inc., prepared for Western Oil and Gas

Los Angeles, CA,

The r e l a t i o n s h i p of hydrocarbon emissions t o t h e photochemical

With r e g a r d t o hydrocarbon e m i s s i o n s from f l o a t i n g - r o o f storage

The Western Oil and Gas A s s o c i a t i o n (WOGA) c o n t r a c t e d w i t h

D r . C a r l e t o n B. S c o t t , Chairman, WOGA Environmental Conservation

M r . W i l l i a m B. Harrell, Chairman, WOGA P r o j e c t Coordinating

While t h e ECC h a s o v e r a l l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r WOGA's environmental

T h e s u c c e s s f u l completion of t h i s p r o j e c t was p a r t i a l l y ensured

Suggestions and i d e a s a l s o were provided by:

DK. W. L. F a i t h , Consulting Engineer

The P r o j e c t Manager f o r t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n w a s M r . A. L. Wilson,

1-1 D e s c r i p t i o n of 1 3 Floating-Roof Tanks Used 1-2

IV-1 Example Density-Evaporation Curve, Arco #134, IV-7

v- 1 Comparison of API C a l c u l a t e d and Measured v-5

VII-1 Weight A s s i s t e d M e t a l l i c Shoe S e a l VII-3

111-1 D e s c r i p t i o n of Floating-Roof Tanks Used f o r

IV-1 T e n t a t i v e Method f o r Determining Evaporation

v-1 S t a n d i n g S t o r a g e Loss Emissions Summary v-2

VI-1 Comparison. of Engineering-Science F i e l d Test

VII-1 Performance of S e a l s on Floating-Roof Tanks (W) VII-20

For t h e p a s t 1 5 y e a r s o r s o , AF'I B u l l e t i n 2517 has been used t o

To d e t e r m i n e hydrocarbon l o s s e s , ES followed a procedure i n

I- 2 ENGINEER ING-SC IENCE , INC.

R e s u l t s of t h e f i e l d i n v e s t i g a t i o n showed t h a t average hydrocarbon

S e v e r a l t a n k , roof and s e a l d e s i g n parameters a s w e l l a s s e v e r a l

Hydrocarbon emissions from 9 of t h e 1 3 t e s t e d t a n k s showed s u r -

Many seal d e s i g n s were found t o be commercially a v a i l a b l e b u t

The t a b u l a t i o n of gap s i z e d a t a f o r 200 t a n k s showed t h a t t u b e

1. The b a s i c API method of d e t e r m i n i n g hydrocarbon l o s s e s from

2. Measured hydrocarbon l o s s e s from 13 f l o a t i n g - r o o f storage tanks,

3. Four f l o a t i n g - r o o f t a n k s w i t h primary t u b e seals and z e r o o r very

4. A s u r v e y of a wide v a r i e t y of s e a l s on 200 t a n k s i n Southern

Hydrocarbon emissions from f l o a t i n g - r o o f tanks a r e c u r r e n t l y

R e s u l t s of t h e s e s t u d i e s were p u b l i s h e d i n 1962 by t h e American

The opinion h a s been voiced by some i n d u s t r y s c i e n t i s t s t h a t t h e

The Chicago Bridge and I r o n Company (CBI), a t i t s P l a i n f i e l d .

Laboratory t e s t s were conducted by s t a f f of Chevron U.S.A. Incor-

The a g e of t h e emission t e s t d a t a o r i g i n a l l y developed by API

The o r i g i n a l o b j e c t i v e of t h e t e s t i n g program was t h r e e - f o l d :

(a) Determine hydrocarbon e m i s s i o n s from f l o a t i n g - r o o f tanks a s

(b) Determine what c o n s t i t u t e d b e s t a v a i l a b l e seal technology

(c) Compare hydrocarbon e m i s s i o n s from e x i s t i n g f l o a t i n g - r o o f

The f i e l d p o r t i o n of t h i s p r o j e c t w a s l i m i t e d t o measuring hydro-

The e v a l u a t i o n of b e s t a v a i l a b l e s e a l technology w a s based on two

Laboratory experiments were conducted by ES t o p r o v i d e i n s i g h t

P i l o t scale t e s t s , performed by Chicago Bridge and Iron Company,

(a) Roof l e g openings were s e a l e d ;

(b) Emergency roof d r a i n s were a t least 90 p e r c e n t covered;

(c) S l o t t e d gauging d e v i c e s were equipped w i t h a f l o a t i n g -

(d) Roof guide openings were c l o s e d ; and

(e) A l l t a n k gauging or sampling d e v i c e s were covered, except

Samples of t h e t a n k c o n t e n t s were c o l l e c t e d a t about two-week

STATIC STORAGE HYDROCARBON EMISSION MEASUREMENTS

The basic requirement of this investigation was to determine

Since direct measurement of the loss rate was not possible, ES

API Bulletin 2512 also suggested a technique to shorten the weathering

SAMPLE COLLECTION PROCEDURE

The twelve tanks located in Southern California were sampled on a

On each visit, several grab samples of the stock were collected by

In the field sampling procedure, the most significant potential error