1987•OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information)Requires access

Acoustic emission leak detection in above-ground storage tanks

W.M. Harding

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

The integrity of above-ground storage tanks is vital to a company's profitability, particularly in the petrochemical and chemical industries. Unfortunately, on these structures, conventional inspection techniques, such as visual testing and still gaging, are inaccurate, time-consuming, and costly. Conventional tank inspection methods have two pitfalls. First, they have limited sensitivity. Very often, still gaging inspection is significantly affected by temperature variances, the operator's visual interpretations, or mechanical errors. At best, still gaging has a liquid level error factor of +-0.125 in. (3.175 mm). In a large tank, that leaves room for a significant stock loss. Second, the tanks scheduled for integrity checks aren't always the tanks with problems. A company's maintenance staff can spend weeks on still gaging and internal inspections, only to find no problems in those tanks. In the meantime, an uninspected tank could be leaking.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The integrity of above-ground storage tanks is vital to a company's profitability, particularly in the petrochemical and chemical industries. Unfortunately, on these structures, conventional inspection techniques, such as visual testing and still gaging, are inaccurate, time-consuming, and costly. Conventional tank inspection methods have two pitfalls. First, they have limited sensitivity. Very often, still gaging inspection is significantly affected by temperature variances, the operator's visual interpretations, or mechanical errors. At best, still gaging has a liquid level error factor of +-0.125 in. (3.175 mm). In a large tank, that leaves room for a significant stock loss. Second, the tanks scheduled for integrity checks aren't always the tanks with problems. A company's maintenance staff can spend weeks on still gaging and internal inspections, only to find no problems in those tanks. In the meantime, an uninspected tank could be leaking.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The integrity of above-ground storage tanks is vital to a company's profitability, particularly in the petrochemical and chemical industries. Unfortunately, on these structures, conventional inspection techniques, such as visual testing and still gaging, are inaccurate, time-consuming, and costly. Conventional tank inspection methods have two pitfalls. First, they have limited sensitivity. Very often, still gaging inspection is significantly affected by temperature variances, the operator's visual interpretations, or mechanical errors. At best, still gaging has a liquid level error factor of +-0.125 in. (3.175 mm). In a large tank, that leaves room for a significant stock loss. Second, the tanks scheduled for integrity checks aren't always the tanks with problems. A company's maintenance staff can spend weeks on still gaging and internal inspections, only to find no problems in those tanks. In the meantime, an uninspected tank could be leaking.

Key concepts: Storage tank, Underground storage tank, Leak detection, Leak, Profitability index, Petrochemical, Engineering, Visual inspection

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Acoustic emission leak detection in above-ground storage tanks — Research Paper | ScholarLens