1 reply to this topic

[CHEMeng88]

May I ask under what circumstances should we choose cone bottom up or cone bottom down design for tanks? Presently, I have a Mogas tank which is to be rebuilt as the tank shells are badly corroded. It had a cone bottom up design. I have heard that a cone bottom up design will reduce the effectiveness of water draw off causing high amount of water to remain in areas of the tank which cannot be removed. This will cause Mogas to be hazy in appearance. Thus a cone bottom down is preferred. However, I would like to seek your opinions/experiences here to allow me to make a better judgement to decide the tank bottom design.Thank you!

[kkala]

http://www.cheresour...k-draw-off-sump can be useful in clarifying the query.
http://www.cheresour...rude-dewatering could be useful to some extent.
I understand that cone up bottom is more common today than cone down. Construction of drainage is judged more difficult in the latter case, since the drain pipe starts from the bottom center (long drain pipe). However cone down can be applied, especially in not quite big tanks of light petroleum products (like mogas = automotive gasoline). See examples in first web reference, post No 6.
Problems of incomplete water removal in bottom up tanks with sumps have not been heard of here. Cone down bottom can also have a central sump.
Since tank in reference had been constructed with cone up bottom, it might be easier to remain so from construction view point (will foundations / sumps be new?).

Edited by kkala, 11 July 2012 - 12:23 PM.