Questions about a stainless steel tank,input appreciated

Date 05-14-2013 18:55

If I remember well, brine is the name of a sodium chloride solution.
If so, the answer is: Definetely no!!! Stainless steel doesn't withstand ion chloride. It promotes a kind of corrosion called "stress corrosion cracking".
The best material for a tank containing sodium chloride is rubber lined carbon steel. The steel has mechanical resistance whereas the rubber lining will resist corrosion.

Giovanni S. Crisi
Sao Paulo - Brazil

By aevald

Date 05-14-2013 19:25

Hello NMWELDING, with what Prof. Crisi has responded with, I wonder if a rubber bladder would be a better way of transporting the materials that you are working with. In my area they use these bladders to transport the glues used in the manufacture of plywood. They are of a very heavy walled construction and generally just strap down onto a regular flatbed trailer once they have been filled. they use hi-volume pneumatic diaphragm pumps to fill/disperse the contents. I am going to attach an image of one that I found on Google, it's not quite what they use in my area, but you'll get the idea. Good luck and best regards, Allan

By dbigkahunna (****)

Date 05-14-2013 20:26

The interior of the tank could be lined with a good quality epoxy. The coating would need to be flexible but have good adhesion and be abrasive resistant.
Stay away from the bozo's pedaling polyuria. They are claiming this stuff is good for everything including replacing Viagra. Every time I talk to a polyuria salesman I feel like I need a shower.

By G.S.Crisi (****)

Date 05-14-2013 22:19

Curt,
ASME VIII says that no paint of any kind can be considered as a replacement to a lining.
It is true that truck tanks do not fall under ASME VIII, but the Code has a reason for this statement.
A paint coating won't have the working life a rubber lining has.

Giovanni S. Crisi

By dbigkahunna (****)

Date 05-15-2013 12:27

Respectively Sr Cristi,
Thousands of rail cars are coated with epoxy with satisfactory service.
To install a rubber liner in a truck hauling brine water would be to costly. The installed liner would approach the cost of a new trailer. A good epoxy lining could be installed for a reasonable cost and would provide a reasonable service life as the trailer is not heated. The trick will be to select the proper lining to withstand the flex in the trailers and have good resistance against the brine.
My heartburn with polyuria is the way it is being sold. I heard the same garbage the polyuria salesmen are using years ago with fiberglass reinforced linings. The only difference is the fiberglass people knew the trade. Today the polyuria salesman only know customers have heard how good it is and want to buy it.
Polyurea has its place, but it is not for every coating application every time.

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 05-15-2013 07:17

Many Moons ago, I worked for American La France... They make fire trucks of various sizes and applications... we were charged with completing warranty repairs on their 304L Stainless stl. 50, 750 and 1000 gallon water tanks which were used to prime the pumps in the fire trucks for the New York City Fire Department as well as many different fire department surrounding the Great NY metro region and quite a few trucks from up & down the eastern part of the USA...

These tanks had baffles in them to control the sloshing of the water in side the tanks while the trucks were en route to a call... The problem was that these tanks were not designed properly to handle all of the various dynamic loads & stresses water of the amounts listed above as it moved around in the tank as well as the tank itself being exposed to to loads that flexed the crap out of those tanks which were no mounted into the trucks on vibration isolators & dampeners that could counteract such changes of various dynamic stresses that literally tore those tanks apart over time in as little as 2 to 3 years... In other words the tanks were not only designed poorly, they were also mounted to the trucks improperly which would also cause premature failures in the form of cracks that were usually of the SCC type...

Well the savvy engineers @ La France came up with a fix that turned out to be nothing more than band aids on some widely open wounds to stop the bleeding and the size & amount of wounds were too much to fix with "Band-aid" approach! :roll:

I say this because the so-called "Fix"that the engineers came up with lasted only another two or three more years if they were lucky, and if they were over three years after the so-called "Fix" was applied to a tank before it started to leak again, the tanks were no longer covered under warranty which I thought was close to being criminal...

So how did these fire department eventually permanently fix these water tanks??? They decided to retro-fit their trucks with fiberglass tanks instead and the problems they had were no longer an issue! So go Fiberglass if you're not satisfied with the design and condition of the tank your customer wants to use... I mean the majority of underground gasoline tanks all over the USA have been replaced from steel to fiberglass and they weren't even exposed to dynamic loads & stresses which is another thing to consider. :twisted:

Good luck with which ever route you take Rio.

Respectfully,
Henry

By dbigkahunna (****)

Date 05-15-2013 12:34

With these trailers they haul 130 bbls of 9-12 pound brine water. That is around 65000 pounds with 12 pound brine. Depending on where you are the load may be limited to 95 bbls.
You cannot transport on a public road with a fiberglass tank. They will not meet DOT requirements. In the case with a fire truck hauling water and the amount being somewhat nominal, less than 1000 gallon, and it is a emergency response vehicle, there may be an exception.
I have never seen a fiberglass tank used in the oilfield on a truck. I would guess one would last oh 30 minutes on a typical oilfield lease road. Then you have the quality issues with spun fiberglass on thick applications.

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 05-16-2013 08:23

Maybe so D but, have you ever driven in NYC? some of the roads will definitely give access roads in the patch a run for the money! :eek:

Oh btw, did you ever hear of FRP lined tank transport vessels? Because here's an example of one company out of Texas that uses them and they hold approx. 54K gallons:

http://www.altomtransport.com/equipment-page/frp-lined-tank/

Here's a company that makes all types of tank transport equipment including FRP(Fibreglass Reinforced Plastic) tanks also:

http://www.hayslti.com/Transport_Tankers.html

Here's a company out of Oz (Australia) that makes custom water transport tanks made out of fibreglass, Aluminum, Mild steel & stainless and some FRP lined tanks also:

http://www.peakengineering-transport-services.com.au/watertanks.htm

There are quite a few fire departments that use these tankers to transport chemicals in liquid form to fight specialized fire where a large capacity tank is required for certain types of fires in industrial situations where plain old water would not be recommended sg I beg to differ with you ... The tanks in the pumper trucks that were replaced are FRP lined also and yet when they were retro-fitted, the tanks themselves which were made out of Stainless stl. still had to be repaired prior to the application of the FRP lining

This is the Government Regs out of Alberta's oil patch and they do use fibreglass lined FRP which means : Fibreglass Reinforced Plastic tanks for transport for corrosive liquids:

http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType272/Production/transporttanks.pdf

Finally, the DOT does allow FRP lined tanker transport trailers to be driven under special permits as opposed to standardized permitting and I found an interesting article written in the Bulk Transporter Magazine where they talk about FRP lined tankers and refer toa catastrophic accident which happened in 2009 that I believe you'll find interesting to read Dbk. :eek:

Here's the link:

http://bulktransporter.com/fleet/cargo-tanks/frp-tanks-0201/

Well that's all for now D! Good discussion for sure. :lol:

Respectfully,
Henry

By NMWELDING (**)

Date 05-15-2013 14:44

Thanks for all responses. I talked to the owner about this,and he says he will have one made from mild steel. The old one had which I think was an epoxy coating,but seemed to flake off in spots on the interior. This company has also epoxy coated oil stock tanks to lengthen their life. I do not know which epoxy they used in the past,as it adhered to the metal well. The epoxy they use now flakes off in places. I do not not if it is a different product or if it is applied wrong. Thanks for all input.

By dbigkahunna (****)

Date 05-16-2013 02:11

Flaking off and it is less than 2 years is a surface prep issue not the coating.
A typical 130 bbl transport properly prepared and coated would cost 4-6K maybe a little higher out here where the boom is on.

By NMWELDING (**)

Date 05-16-2013 02:31

The tank being replaced was only 5 years old and it was coated with an epoxy of some sort. It was coated when it was new. This company also coats treaters and stock tanks with an epoxy. They have done this for as long as I know. They told me in the last few years though the epoxy for some unknown reason does not do its job,it will in time flake off,where years ago that didn't happen. Most of the time it is done when the treater or tanks are new,sometimes they will touch up a spot. I am wondering if the product has changed,maybe a poorer quality. Thanks for any input.

By dbigkahunna (****)

Date 05-17-2013 00:58

It is the prep. There are a lot of new workers that will do 1/2 a$$ work. If they do not get the profile and the mill scale removed the coating will fail. Have seen more coating failures the last year than I have seen in 5. All were surface prep issues.
Have seen a couple where a low temp hardener was used and the tank product was changed which the coating was not resistant to with the low temp hardener.

By NMWELDING (**)

Date 05-17-2013 02:26 Edited 05-17-2013 02:35

Ok,thanks,I will talk to the owner about this. It sounds like it could very likely be the prep. Also I wanted to mention that for the last ten years,the steel we use,whether plate or pipe in many applications here in the oilfield does not last nowhere near as long as the steel that was purchased and used back in the 80's and 90's. It corrodes or eats through much faster. We are starting to keep track what country it comes from. Is steel quality really that bad? Thanks for input. One more thing that surprised me was where a local company brought over to our place a pipe loop of a series of nipples and tees and nineties that were threaded fittings that needed to be leakproof. They could not tighten any of the connections to stop them from leaking. They had me weld them up. They were made in China. Where could a person get fittings that will actually tighten? Thanks again.

By dbigkahunna (****)

Date 05-17-2013 11:56

I do not think it is so much the steel as all the new chemicals and combination of chemicals that is being used in the oilfield. In the old days the producers would not coat the tank interiors and could get 10-15 years of service before failure. Now sometime it is months. Steel has not changed. When you have GrA36 made today, it is pretty much the same thing as GRA36 made 30 years ago.
The problem today is with the poor quality control of the manufacturing/erection and proper prep of surfaces before coating along with the soup that is being used in the fracing process, the industry is seeing new levels of corrosion. This is another item for the short sighted oil industry. The producer expects the contractor to provide qualified personnel applying the correct material to result in a satisfactory product. Few companies invest in inspectors, and few contractors will spend the money to be sure the workers are properly trained and understand what they are doing. And if you are coating a tank and the blaster gives the surface a sweep blast when a white is required and no one checks on them, the owner has a failure. And if it happens after a year, well, so sorry, not our problem.
I keep shaking my head and seeing in 5-7 years the train wrecks that are going to happen. And what is sad is how the oil industry will get another black eye. This time it will be well deserved. The people in charge flat do not care. They can have the CEO's stand 5 feet deep talking about how they are the leader in safety and quality.
Safety is easy. You can beat up contract workers and intimidate your own employees to keep a idiot from smashing their fingers.
The quality part is the hard one. Poor quality and quality control is usually delayed. The people in charge are promoted and gone. The garbage that is installed was done very safely. But is still garbage.
I look at it as job security. Seeing what the upstream companies do makes me realize the value of what I know. They upstream people are NOT investing in the quality aspect now. It will bite them on the butt in a few years. Today they do not care. When you have 100 dollar oil it will cover a lot of sins. When it starts leaking and blowing up, the sheeple will go up in arms and bring down the thunder of the regulators. Then there will be the crying and wailing from upstream of how the bad ole gobermnet is beating up on them.
Bullshift, They are bringing it on themselves.

By Superflux (****)

Date 05-18-2013 08:15

Sea Water system I worked on was 95% Copper- 5% Nickel.
NA/CL (salt) = CL which is bad juju for Stainless... Just saying, might be time to call in the metallurgists and material science pro's.

By G.S.Crisi (****)

Date 05-18-2013 15:20

You're right, chloride ion is harmful to stainless steel because it produces a type of corrosion called "stress corrosion cracking", so when chlorides are present stainless steel is not indicated.
The alloy you're talking about is called "cupronickel" and it may contain variables quantities of nickel, provided the nickel % is always less than the copper %.

Giovanni S. Crisi