2d. Murray Hill Water Tower Repainting: Preparation of Plans & Specs.0
I MEMORANDUM
1
1
u
I I
CITY OF °2
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager
Action by C.i`y
N 'CIbint lo
FROM: Charles Folch, Director of Public Works S.. iIT'; ..d k" c:>sncil
DATE: January 2,1996
SUBJ: Authorize Preparation of Plans and Specifications for Murray Hill Tower
Repainting Project No. 95 -3 F
Attached is the certified inspection report of the ` ay Hill water tower as performed by AEC
Engineering during the fall of 1995. AEC is con d d one of the top firms in the region to
perform this type of inspection service. Some the r -suits of the inspection did not come as a
surprise to city staff; however, there were a fv other lams that did.
The inspection of the Murray Hill water tcrAr consisted l,
below water level) and an exterior examation of the strd6
exterior of the tower was last coated iwI673, the exterior c
be removed in its entirety and replaced with an epoxy /ureth
the lead content of the exterior coating was high enough to
current state regulations. As such; the removal of this pain t
current local, state and federal environmental regulations re
abatement provisions to�elurunate generatul haz r ous w
�T 1 0 � 5 , 1 _01
exterior paint remova and reGOnditioNg operation to e p7
..� � MA
To put it anothef1�� a p as tic curt m
ain int enc ed' ilie£e
chips removed from tfie�cture.
both an internal floatdown (abo and
ture and paint coating. Since the
dating is not repairable and needs to
e coating system. As anticipated,
beclassified as a lead -based paint per
must be performed and comply with
*'M
gat lead paint removal and
ste short, this will require that the
ace within a full containment device.
tithe tower tdtntaih of the paint
AEC recommends that this work be conductedvlthan thetiet to 12 months to prevent further
deterioration of the metal structure. In additio ""'environmental regulations regarding lead-
based paint continue to become more restrictiv d more costly with each passing year. To give
an example of this rapid cost escalation, it is es ' that the cost to perform this type of repair
work on the Murray Hill tower back in 1990 would have been approximately one -third of the cost
that it will be today.
When the 1995 Utility Expansion Fund No. 710 budget was being prepared and approved, staff
did not have the benefit of the knowledge and information such as that contained in the AEC
report to base budgetary requests on. Thus, based on contract information on similar tower
repairs in the region, a best estimate of $100,000 in contractual work was requested and approved
Don Ashworth r
January 2, 1995
Page 2 '
with the 1995 budget to perform the Murray Hill water tower repainting operation. The work
was intended to be completed during 1995; however, city staff had reservations with performing ,
this work prior to having the new water supply Well No. 7 on line within the city's high- pressure
zone. The Murray Hill tower is critical in maintaining water pressure and fire flow protection in
the northwest part of the city. Thus, staff did not feel comfortable with shutting down the tower '
for a 30 to 45 -day period without having the new Well No. 7 on line.
The delay in conducting this work one year will likely not result in a cost reduction as is evident '
from AEC's engineer's estimate of $143,000. Acknowledging that this is an estimate and that
competitive bidding of the work may prove to be more favorable, it is still anticipated that the
contractual costs will likely exceed the amount approved in the 1995 budget. Staff has made a ,
review of the 1995 Sewer and Water Expansion Fund No. 710 remaining balance and has
determined that there are some remaining dollars from other repair work which were not
expended during 1995 and could be "earmarked" and carried forward along with the original '
budgetary amount to cover the anticipated costs required to conduct this needed repair work.
During the interim, staff has also contacted the city's water supply system consultant ( Bonestroo) ,
to review the long -term merits of investing these significant repair dollars into the Murray Hill
tower (see attached memo). Bonestroo's memorandum is quite clear that the reconditioned
Murray Hill tower will provide service to the City for a significant length of time provided that it ,
is maintained and repainted every 15 to 20 years and that this water tower will be a needed
structure for the high- pressure zone for the long term. ,
Based on the fact that this water tower will be needed for the long -term service of the high -
pressure zone of the city's water supply system and the fact that there are remaining dollars ,
available in the 1995 Utility Expansion Fund No. 710 to fully fund the estimated repair costs to
the Murray Hill tower and given the fact that environmental regulations will continue to escalate
the cost to perform this work in the future, it is therefore recommended that the City Council '
approve the Murray Hill elevated water tank inspection report dated October 31, 1995 by AEC
Engineering, Inc., authorize AEC to prepare the plans and specifications necessary for the repair
work, authorize the advertisement for project bids, and approve that the necessary dollars '
remaining available in Sewer and Water Expansion Fund No. 710 for 1995 be carried forward to
cover this work anticipated to be completed in 1996.
Attachments: 1. AEC Engineering, Inc report dated October 31, 1995. '
2. Memorandum from Bonestroo dated December 15, 1995.
c: Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer
'
p � Y g
Jerry Boucher, Utility Superintendent ,
Bob Kollmer, AEC Engineering, Inc.
Finance Director's Comments: The Murray Hill Tower Project was included in the 1995 budget ,
and funds are available.
Pam Snell (1 -6 -96)
n
1 TO:
Charles Folch, LPG
FROM: Mark Rolfs
DATE: December 15, 1995
RE: Murray Hill Tower Repaint
I ���
ti;r-- IJ J
14 Bonestroo
OEM Rosene
" Anderiik &
Associates
Engineers & Architects
St. Paul • Milwaukee
We have reviewed the above referenced report from AEC Engineering and offer the following
comments:
1. The Tower appears to be in generally good condition, and therefore is probably worth
repainting on that merit alone. If properly maintained, (i.e. painted at 15 -20 year
intervals) the tank should last another 80 years.
2. The
recommendations in the report seem reasonable. However, the cost estimate for the
interior structural and coating repairs seems low. If the work can be done for the
'
estimated amount, it is probably worth doing. If it is going to cost significantly more
than $17,000 to do that work, then it could probably be omitted.
'
3. We agree with the assessment that the regulations for disposing of spent abrasives is
likely to get more stringent in the future. It would therefore be advantageous to remove
the current exterior coating while we can still dispose of it at a reasonable cost.
Although the Lead content of the exterior coating is high, the Chromium content does
not appear to be a problem. Therefore the spent abrasives should be able to pass the
TCLP test with the addition of Blastox to the blast media.
'
4. The high pressure zone was reviewed to check for the necessity s y of the Murray Hill
'
Tower in both the near term and long term. The following observations are offered:
* For the Short Term the Murray ill T ower y o er provides the only storage on the High
Pressure Zone. If we were to abandon this tank, then the best alternatives to this
pressure source would be to build the new Elevated Storage Reservoir
located
shown on the Comp Plan or to modify the supervisory section of Pumphouse No.
3 so that the variable frequency drive could be controlled to maintain pressure on
'
the high zone. We do not feel that these alternatives are better than keeping the
Murray Hill Tower.
u
City of Chanhassen I
Murray Tank Repaint Memo Page 2
* For the long term, the total storage required on the high zone portion of the
system is met with the combination of the Murray Hill Tower and a new 500,000
gallon Elevated Tank shown in the Comp Water Study. An alternative to this '
would be to build a bigger elevated tank in the future to handle the total required
storage at the new elevated tank site.
* From a maintenance standpoint we feel that it would be best to have two elevated '
tanks in the High Pressure Zone. This way, one tank can be taken out of service
while the other tank is being painted. If only one tank is in service, then pressure '
must be maintained by pumping ( as will be the case if we repair the Murray Hill
Tower at this time) .
We therefore recommend that the Murray Hill Tower remain a permanent part of the '
High Pressure Zone and that repairs be carried out in substantial compliance with the
recommendation contained in AEC's report with the possible exception of the comments
made previously. This repair should be delayed until the modifications to Pumphouse
No. 3 are completed and Pumphouse No. 7 is on -line.
End of Memo
D
F5 FU
09
E,11511eill- Ow ask i.
ELEVATED WATER TANK
INSPECTION REPORT
200,000 GALLON
SINGLE PEDESTAL SPHEROID
MURRAY HILL TOWER
CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
AEC PROJECT NO. 95502-314
by
AEC ENGINEERING INC.
400 First Avenue North
Suite 400
Minneapolis, MN 55401
(612) 332-8905
(612) 334-3101 [fax]
I hereby certify that this inspection
report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly
Registered Professional Engineer under
the laws of the State of Minnesota,
Registration #22537 Dated-WILZE-25-
' City of Chanhassen, Minnesota
200,000 Gallon Single Pedestal Spheroid
' AEC Project No. 95502 -314
TABLE OF CONTENTS
' T
Title Page ....................... i
i
Tableof Contents ........................................................................................ .
ii
1 .0 T
............................... i
..............................1
2 .0 S
Summary ........................................................................................... ..............................2
2.1 Structural Evaluation .............................................................. ..............................2
2 .2 Coating Evaluation ................................................................ ............................... 2
2.3 Repair and Reconditioning Cost Estimate ............................. ..............................3
2 .4 Remaining Tank Life .............................................................. ..............................3
' 3
3.0 R
Recommendations ............................................................................ ..............................4
3 .1 Interior Structural ................................................................... ..............................4
' 3
3.2 Interior Wet Coating .............................................................. ..............................5
3.3 Cathodic Protection System .................................................. ..............................5
3 .4 Interior Dry Coating ............................................................... ..............................5
3 .5 Exterior Structural .................................................................. ..............................5
' 3
3.6 Exterior Coating ..................................................................... ..............................5
3 .7 Site ....................................................................................... ............................... 6
6
' 4
4.0 I
Inspection and Evaluation Methods .................................................. ..............................7
4 .1 Scope .................................................................................... .
..............................7
4 .2 Evaluation Techniques ........................................................... ..............................7
5 .0 E
Engineer's Cost Estimate ................................................................... .............................10
Appendix A: Photographs
pp otog aphs
' Appendix B: Paint Chip Lead Test Results
Appendix C: Surface Preparation Requirements
I Page ii
1
�I
�I
U
City of Chanhassen, Minnesota
200,000 Gallon Single Pedestal Spheroid
AEC Project No. 95502 -314
1.0 TANK DATA
AEC Project No.: 95502 -314 AEC Proposal No 55031095
Customer: City of Chanhassen. Minnesota Phone: (612) 937 -1900
Street /City /State /Zip: 690 Coulter Drive. P.O. Box 147. Chanhassen. MN 55317
Customer Contact: Charles Folch
Tank Owner: Same as above Phone: (612) 474 -2086
Tank Owner Contact: Jerry Boucher
Owner's Tank Designation: Murray Hill
Tank Description: Single Pedestal Spheroid
Tank Location (Street /City /State /Zip): 2230 Melody Hill Road. Chanhassen. MN
Purpose of Inspection: Tank examination and interior & exterior coating evaluation
Date of Inspection: October 12. 1995
Inspected By: Robert E Kollmer. NACE International No 1291
Type of Inspection: AEC Standard Existing Steel Water Storage Tank Inspection
Manufacturer: P.D.M. Construction Date: 1973
Serial No.: 22703 Design Code: AWWA D100
Capacity: 200.000 Gallon
Type of Construction: Welded Yes Riveted N/A
Number of Support Columns: One
Tank Diameter: Forty Feet (40 ft.)
Height: Overall 137' Shell /Balcony N/A
Height to: HWL 132' LWL 102'
Type of Access to Tank Interior: Interior ladders to the roof manway
Tank Construction Drawings: None available
Previous Inspection Records: Yes -AEC Inspection Report. MN901. Nov. 89
EXISTING COATING INFORMATION
Date Last Coated
Coating Contractor
Surface Preparation
Paint System
Paint Manufacturer
Lab Lead Test Paint Chips
Interior Dry
EXTERIOR
1973
Unknown
Unknown
Alkyd
Unknown
Yes
Page 1
City of Chanhassen, Minnesota
200,000 Gallon Single Pedestal Spheroid
AEC Project No. 95502 -314
2.0 SUMMARY
2.1 Structural Evaluation
Based on the inspection data, it appears that some miscellaneous structural
modifications and repairs are required.
2.2 Coating Evaluation
2.2.1 Lead Content Analysis
The total lead content of the exterior coatings was analyzed. The
results in Appendix D indicate a 2.6 to 2.7 percent lead content for the
exterior dry coating. Per current State regulations the exterior coating is
classified as lead based paint. Removal of lead based paint must be
performed in accordance with applicable local, State and Federal
regulations. Reconditioning specifications must include provisions for
full containment as well as provisions to prevent hazardous waste
generation.
2.2.2 Interior Coating
Overall, the interior coating is in good condition with only one percent
failure below the high water level (HWL). The coating is repairable and
should be repaired within six to twelve months. See photos in
Appendix A.
2.2.3 Exterior Coating
F1
It appears that the tank was last coated in 1973. The exterior coating
is classified as a lead base paint. Due to age, chalking, and
deterioration, the entire exterior coating is not repairable and should be
removed and replaced within six to twelve months with an
epoxy /urethane coating system, similar to those manufactured by the
Tnemec Company. See photos in Appendix A.
The current regulations for lead paint removal are stringent and are
expected to become more so. Consideration should be given to
removing the lead base paint before the regulations become more
restrictive.
Page 2
' City of Chanhassen, Minnesota
200,000 Gallon Single Pedestal Spheroid
AEC Project No. 95502 -314
' 2.3 Repair and Reconditioning Cost Estimate
The cost of structural repairs and of simultaneously repairing the interior coating
and replacing the exterior coating, including the containment and removal of the
lead base paint is estimated at $143,100.00.
This estimate is based on current pricing. In order to obtain competitive bids
the project should be bid nine to twelve months prior to the scheduled start
date.
' An experienced tank coating contractor with the proper crew and equipment
should be able to complete the project in three to four weeks.
' 2.4 Remaining Tank Life
Based on the inspection data, it appears that, if the recommended structural
' repairs and coating replacement are completed within the next two to three
years, and inspected regularly, the tank is satisfactory for continued service.
n
The tank and the coating should be first inspected within the warranty period
and every three to five years thereafter. The new interior and exterior coating, if
applied and maintained properly, should last 15 to 20 years with only minor
repairs.
1 Page 3
' City of Chanhassen, Minnesota
200,000 Gallon Single Pedestal Spheroid
' AEC Project No. 95502 -314
3.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
The photographs referred to in this section are in Appendix A. The surface preparation
' requirements for all repairs as well as the requirements for welding are described in
Appendix C. The exterior paint chip lead and chromium test results are in Appendix B.
Based on the evaluation of the inspection data, the following are our
recommendations:
'
3.1 Interior Structural
3.1.1
Seal weld the inside of the dollar plate butt - joint. See photo 2.
'
3.1.2
To prevent possible structural damage from the exterior containment
system, fillet weld the lapped plate joint between the roof plates and
the upper shell section. See photos 3 and 4.
'
3.1.3
Replace the 24 -inch round gasket on the manway in the drywell tube.
See photo 5.
3.1.4
Remove all erection bracket scab marks below the HWL by air arc
gouging, cutting torch, or grinding. There are approximately
'
86 erection bracket scab marks. Repair the tank surface by welding
and grinding. See photos 6 through 8. This will require approximately
29 man hours.
'
3.1.5
Grind off all weld spatter below the HWL. See photos 7 and 8. This
will require approximately ten man hours.
'
3.1.6
Replace the existing electrical service with a new 100 amp service.
The new electrical service should be installed in a weatherproof
enclosure and have a minimum of six circuits and at least four outlets.
See photo 9.
' 3.1.7 Repair the non - operating light fixtures on the interior of the dry riser.
3.1.8 Repair the hole in the overflow pipe at the condensate ceiling opening.
' See photos 10 and 11.
3.1.9 Replace the damaged condensate ceiling drain pipe. See photo 12.
' 3.1.10 Remove and replace the damaged access tube stiffener ring.
I Page 4
' City of Chanhassen, Minnesota
200,000 Gallon Single Pedestal Spheroid
AEC Project No. 95502 -314
3.2 Interior Wet Coating
3.2.1 Overall, the interior coating is in good condition with only one percent
' coating failures. See photos 13, 14 and 15. The coating is repairable
and should be repaired within six to twelve months.
3.2.3 After structural repairs are completed, the entire reservoir surfaces
should be spot abrasive blasted and the coating repaired with a
light- colored polyamide epoxy system, similar to the Tnemec Series 20
I Pota -Pox Epoxy.
3.3 Cathodic Protection System
3.3.1 The reservoir does not have a Cathodic Protection system. Although it
is considered an inexpensive form of interior coating protection, it may
not be required if the coating is applied properly. The cost of a
' Cathodic Protection System is not included in the Engineer's Cost
Estimate.
3.4 Interior Dry Coating
3.4.1 The coating is in good condition but has minor coating failures. The
' coating should be repaired within six to twelve months. See photos
16, 17 and 18.
3.5 Exterior Structural
3.5.1 Replace the existing overflow pipe screens with a corrosion - resistant,
heavy -gauge #4 mesh screen.
3.6 Exterior Coating
3.6.1 It appears that the tank was last coated in 1973. Due to age, chalking,
deterioration, and lack of inter -coat adhesion, the entire exterior
coating is not repairable and should be removed and replaced within
six to twelve months with an epoxy /urethane coating system, similar
to those manufactured by the Tnemec Company. See photos
19 through 24.
3.6.2 The coating contains a high level of lead compounds. Removing it
using conventional open air dry abrasive blasting methods will create
environmental problems. Reconditioning specifications must be
designed to comply with current environmental regulations for full
containment, lead paint removal and abatement, provisions to
eliminate generating hazardous waste and proper disposal of waste
generated.
I Page 5
' City of Chanhassen, Minnesota
200,000 Gallon Single Pedestal Spheroid
AEC Project No. 95502 -314
3.7 Site
3.7.1 The area around the tank should be re- graded to prevent standing
' water around the support columns and wet riser foundation. The top
of the foundations should be at least six inches above grade. See
photos 25 and 26. The cost of this item is not included in the
' Engineer's Cost Estimate.
G
I Page 6
' City of Chanhassen, Minnesota
200,000 Gallon Single Pedestal Spheroid
' AEC Project No. 95502 -314
' 4.0 INSPECTION AND EVALUATION METHODS
4.1 Scope
' 4.1.1 The tank was evaluated on the interior and exterior in conformance
with the following:
' a. AEC Engineering Proposal No. 55031095.
' b. General guide lines of AWWA Standard D101, "Inspecting and
Repairing Steel Water Tanks, Standpipes, Reservoirs, and
Elevated Tanks for Water Storage."
' c. AEC "Procedures for Inspection of Existing Steel Water Storage
Tanks" dated October 14, 1992.
' 4.1.2 The inspection of the base metal and of the coating on all interior and
exterior surfaces was limited to areas accessible without scaffolding or
special rigging. In addition, where possible, the base metal and the
' coating on the interior wet surfaces were examined from a rubber raft
while the tank was being drained.
4.1.3 Tank plate thickness readings were taken at random locations of the
liquid containing shell, and the overall structural condition of the tank
was observed.
4.1.4 No structural analysis was done to determine if the tank design
complies with the AWWA D100 -84 Standard for "Welded Steel Tanks
' for Water Storage." However, any observed non - conformance to the
AWWA D100 -84 standard is noted in this report.
t 4.1.5 Although compliance with OSHA regulations was not a part of this
inspection, any unsafe conditions or violations of current OSHA
regulations which were observed are noted in this report.
' 4.2 Evaluation Techniques
' 4.2.1 Site
The tank site was visually examined for proper drainage away from the
' tank and for conditions affecting access and exterior reconditioning.
In addition, the following tank site information was obtained, as
applicable. Site dimensions: distance to fence(s), power lines, owner
' buildings, public property, private property/buildings,
school /playgrounds, public parks and other property.
I Page 7
City of Chanhassen, Minnesota
200,000 Gallon Single Pedestal Spheroid
AEC Project No. 95502 -314
4.2.2 Foundations
The tank concrete foundation was visually examined for cracks,
spalling, condition of grout, indications of distress /settlement, and
elevation above grade.
4.2.3 Tank Plate Thickness
Plate thickness measurements were taken using ultrasonic methods
(UTM). The readings were taken using a digital readout Nova D -100
Ultrasonic Thickness Gage Serial No. UT008 which has a dual element
probe (transducer). The probe's transmitter element sends a short
ultrasonic pulse to the material. The pulse reflected as an echo from
the opposite, parallel receiver element, subsequently returns to the
probe's receiver element. This round trip time is directly related to the
material's thickness.
4.2.4 Coating Thickness
Interior and exterior coatings, where accessible, were tested in
accordance with Steel Structures Painting Council SSPC- PA2 -82
'Measurement of Dry Film Thickness with Magnetic Gages," using
PosiTector -2000 Type 2, fixed probe, magnet flux gages.
4.2.5 Coating Adhesion
n
Adhesion testing of the coating to the steel was performed by ASTM
D3359: Shear Adhesion Test, Measuring Adhesion by Tape Test. In
addition, a subjective coating adhesion evaluation was performed
using a pen knife.
4.2.6 Coating Cure
The cure of the interior wet coating was cure evaluated by the
manufacturer's recommended field method.
Page 8
t City of Chanhassen, Minnesota
200,000 Gallon Single Pedestal Spheroid
' AEC Project No. 95502 -314
' 4.2.7 Coating Serviceability
The estimated remaining coating life or serviceability evaluation was
' performed using a wide variety of inspection' instruments such as dry
film thickness gauge, pen knife, Tooke gauge, adhesion tester(s), and
30x microscope.
' The instrument inspection was combined with a thorough, total, close
visual inspection of all accessible areas of the interior coating for
' holidays (misses), skips, runs, sags, surface contaminants, overspray,
dry spray, poor coating cohesion, inter -coat delamination, loss of
adhesion to the substrate, condition of the steel underneath the
coating, and any other objectionable defects for the service required.
4.2.8 Coating Lead Content Analysis
Samples were taken of the various types of coatings present on the
interior and exterior surfaces. These coatings were tested in
conformance with ASTM D -3335 Standard Test Methods for
' Concentrations of Lead in Paint. A copy of the Laboratory Analysis is
included in Appendix B.
I Page 9
' City of Chanhassen, Minnesota
200,000 Gallon Single Pedestal Spheroid
AEC Project No. 95502 -314
5.0 ENGINEER'S COST ESTIMATE
Based on an estimated construction schedule of four weeks, we recommend the
' following cost estimate.
5.1 Interior Structural Repairs $ 9.100.00
' 5.2 Interior Wet Coating Complete Repair $ 7.500.00
Type of Coating - Epoxy System
' 5.3 Interior Dry Coating Complete Repair $ 6.150.00
Type of Coating - Epoxy System
' 5.4 Exterior Structural Repairs $ 100.00
' 5.5 Exterior Coating* Complete Replacement $ 100.750.00
Type of Coating - Epoxy /Urethane System
5.6 Engineering Specifications and Inspection Fee $ 19.500.00
' 5.7 Estimated Total Cost $ 143.100.00
' *Includes cost for containment and lead paint removal.
AEC ENGINEERING, INC.
' Repo written by:
Robert E. Kollmer
Coating Systems Supervisor
NACE Certified Coatings Inspector No. 1291
' Report certified by:
Jo P. Longnecker" P. E.
Structural Engineer
I of31 /9 c
' Date
1
' Page 10
1
i
1
7
APPENDIX A
PHOTOGRAPHS
r
1
Photo No. 1
Overall view of water tower.
Photo No. 2
Roof dollar plate butt joint seam and minor coating failures around the welds.
Photo No. 3
Rust staining from the roof to shell plate overlap seam.
Photo No. 4
Rust staining from the roof to shell plate overlap seam.
F
Photo No. 5
Bowl manway.
Photo No. 6
Coating failure on an erection scab.
11
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
V
.. S
Photo No. 7
Erection scab marks and excessive weld spatter.
Photo No. 8
Erection scab marks and excessive weld spatter.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Photo No. 9
Electrical panel in the bottom bell.
Photo No. 10
Severe corrosion of the overflow pipe at the junction of the condensation ceiling.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
at
�i
Photo No. 11
Severe corrosion of the overflow pipe at the junction of the condensation ceiling.
z
k "'1g'a4F
tN S
s A vet..�,ry
}
Photo No. 12
Corroded hole in the condensation ceiling drain pipe.
Photo No. 14
Coating failures on the drywell tube.
Photo No. 13
Coating failure at an old erection scab mark.
1
Photo No. 15
Coating failures on the weld of the overflow weir box.
y • Jf S ��
t i
1 J -- i.; ^ c ,1t• - �}�� �„�! rit �' IF
Y f ` 7
Photo No. 16
Coating failures around the condensation ceiling drain pipe opening.
c
z
}„
1115
A l
,R
t
y t
>r z
h f
4
C � 3 'l c S fN
I ff
0 l h
lb
•• �(
mj
C ' f
•c
sr`
t N
V
T .:
1
Photo No. 19
Coating failures on the exterior roof plates.
C
Photo No. 20
Coating failures on the exterior roof plates.
I
Photo No. 21
Coating failures on the exterior bowl plates.
Photo No. 22
Coating failures on the exterior bowl plates.
1
Photo No. 24
Coating failures on the exterior bottom bell plates.
Ati ''
1
`p ....♦ _ • s.,
`' �
V7
ee
Photo No. 23
Coating failures on the exterior bottom bell plates.
Photo No. 24
Coating failures on the exterior bottom bell plates.
lob", jib
tom` s
4!7
"
1 , Oil-
1
1
1
i
APPENDIX B
PAINT CHIP LEAD TEST RESULTS
CORROSION • CONTROL • CONSULTANTS • AND LABS, INC.
ANALYTICAL LABORATORY REPORT
Wednesday, October 18, 1995
CLIENT: AEC Engineering
400- 1 st Ave. N. Suite 400
Minneapolis, MN 55401
DATE RECEIVED:
10/16/95
DATE COMPLETED:
10/17/95
P.O.# / PROJ. #:
95502 -314
INVOICE #:
10583
SAMPLE HISTORY
SAMPLED BY: Robert Kollmer DATE SAMPLED: 10/12/95
JOB LOCATION: Chanhassen, MN, 200 MG DESCRIPTION: paint chips
Pedestal
METHOD: ASTM D3335
OPERATING
Lab DETECTION Flagged
Number Sample Identification ELEMENT RESULT LIMIT Data
11886 95502- 314 -A: Ext. Bottom Bell Lead
2.7% 0.0039
Chromium 0.085% 0.00098 %
11887 95502- 314 -B: Ext. Roof Lead 2.6% 0.0039 %
Chromium 0.092% 0.00098 %
* Below Detection Limit
TEST REVIEWED BY:
4403 DONKER CT. • KENTWOOD, MI 49512 -4054 • 616 - 940 -3112 • FAX: 616 - 940 -8139
APPENDIX C
SURFACE PREPARATION REQUIREMENTS
i
o ihn i x cc
' National Association of Corrosion Engineers
Standard
NACE Standard RP0178 -91
Item No. 53041
Recommended Practice
Fabrication Details, Surface Finish Requirements,
and Proper Design Considerations for
Tanks and Vessels to be Lined
for Immersion Service
The National Association of Corrosion Engineers WCE) Issues this standard In conformance with the
best current technology regarding the specific subject. This standard represents a consensus of those
Individual members who have reviewed this document. Its scope. and provisions. It is Intended to Old
the manufacturer. the consumer. and the general public. Its acceptance does not In any respect
preclude anyone. whether he has adopted the standard or not. from manufacturing. marketing.
purchasing. or using products. processes. or procedures not In conformance with this standard.
Nothing contained in this NACE standard is to be construed as granting any right. by implication or
otherwise, to manufacture. sell, or use M connection with any method. apparatus. or product covered
by letters Patent, or as indemnifying or protecting anyone against liability for infringement of Letter:
Patent. This auuWard.represents minimum requirements and dxxM in no way be interpreted as a
restriction on the use of better procedures or materials. This standard Is not intended to apply in all
cases relating to the subject. Unpredictable circumstances may negate the usefulness of this standard
in specific instances. NACE assumes no responsibility for the Interpretation or use of this standard by
other parties and accepts responsibility for only those official NACE interpretations issued by NACE
in accordance with its governing procedures - and policies which preclude the Issuance of
interpretations by individual volunteers.
Users of this standard are responsible for reviewing appropriate health, safety. and regulatory
documents and for determining their applicability In relation.to this standard prior to use. This NACE
standard may not necessarily address all safety problems and hazards associated with the use of
materials. operations. and /or equipment detailed or referred to within this document
I
CAUTIONARY NOTICE NACE standards are subject to periodic review and may be revised or
withdrawn at any time without prior notice. The user is cautioned to obtain the latest edition. NACE
requires that action be taken to reaffirm, revise. or withdraw this standard no later than two years from
the date of initial publication. Purchasers of MACE standards may receive current information on all
standards and other NACE publications by contacting the NACE Customer Service Department. P.O.
Box 218340. Houston. Texas 772188340 (telephone 713/4920.535).
Reaffirmed March 1991
Revised 1989
Approved 1978
National Association of Corrosion Engineers
P.O. Box 218340
Houston. Texas 772184340
713/4920535
Copyright 1991. National Association of Corrosion Engineers
1
I RPol78 -91
Standard
.Recommended Practice
Fabrication Details, Surface Finish Requirements,
' and Proper Design Considerations for Tanks and
Vessels to be Lined for Immersion Service
' Contents
' F Generaai ...... .. .. .. .. .. ...........................
i....... ....�........................... ...................... �...1
2 Design Requirements .......... ............................... ............................2
3. Fabrication Requirements. ............3
' 4. Surface Finish Requirements..--....— ........»....... ».3
Appendix A - Fabrication Details, Surface Finish Requirements, and
Proper Design Considerations for Metal Tanks and Vessels
' to be Lined for Immersion Service ................................ ..............................4
Appendix Suggested Responsibilities ...................................... ..............................9
Appendix C - Generic and Graphic Descriptions of Various Degrees
' of Surface Finishing of Welds That May be Specified
In Preparation for Lining of Tanks and Vessels ....»»». ..» ..........................10
11
RP017 &91
Foreword
When specifying tanks for immersion service that are to be
internally lined to control corrosion and /or prevent product
contamination. special design. fabrication details. and surface
fin dit requirements must be taken into consideration to obtain
the desired performance of these linings..
To prevent product contamination and to extend the service life
of the vessel. Nnings are often applied to bring the corradvity of the
product on the vessel to a point that Is low enough to be of no
significance. As the corradvity of the product increases. the dsagq
of the vessel becomes more cdtkal. relative to the performance of
the lining. Where a tank is to be lined for contamination prevention
purposes only, certain compromises may . be economically
Nstiflable without sacrificing the lining performance.
This revision of NACE Standard AP0178 -78 was prepared by
NIKE Task Group T-60-V. a component of Unit Committee T-6O
on Surface Preparation for Protective Coatings. and Is Issued under
the auspices of Group Committee T-6 on Protective Coatings and
fJrrings. The original SP0178 -78 was prepared In 1978 by Task
Group T.sAr29 of Unit Committee T-6A on Coating and Lining
Materials for knnvm;Ion Service in collaboration with Unit
Coma ttee T-61-1 on Application and Use of Coatings for
Mr4spheric Swvioe (currently titled Coating Materials for
Atmospheric Service) and was Issued under the auspices of Croup
Committee T-6 on Protective Coatings and Linings.
MACE Pubiication TPC 2. *Coatings and Linings for
khrnersioh SerAw. should be used as a guide for alt areas of
responsibility regarding coatings.
This standard Is Issued to present recommended practices for
the design, fabricatim and surface finish of meld tanks and
vessels that are to be lined for corrosion resistance and to prevent
- product contamination. These recommended practices are
considered necessary by lining suppliers. applicators, and users of
such tanks through thek experiences with them.
Explanation Is given as to how the suggested practices govern
the quaftty of lining applications. Appendix A shows both good and
bad design practices on tanks. while Appendix B contains a list of
suggested responsibilities for the coating applicator to ensure the
bed protective coating available. Appendix C Is a visual and written
description of the degree of surface preparation of weld$ in tanks
and vessels prior to lining. (Please note: The visual comparator
referenced in Appendbr G ipustrates various degree of surface
finishing for welds prior to coating or lining. Welds in duded on
the visual comparator Include full seam welds, skip welds, butt
welds lap welds etc The visual comparator is av ailable from
MACE Headquarters. For more Information con tact the
Customer Service Department PO, Box 21:1340. Hous TX
7721 Also We that the written description _ of the
various degrees of surface preparation of welds in t he
- �aendfz of this standard takes precedence over the ar a p hics
which are only pictorial representations of welds and a rinding
finishes and are in no way intended to be representativ o the
integrity of the welds and over the companion visual
comp arator NOR IS THE 'AS IS' ORIGINAL WELD AT YPICAL
WELD IT IS ONLY INTENDED TO IU.U STRATE
DEFECTS IN WEIRS WHICH MUST BE CORRECTED PR TO
(`GATING AND LINING Further good welding practi and
welding codes suds as AWS AWWA ()-100. API 650 and 1104.
ASMF ANSi and MR take precedence over a written
description of the various degrees of surface preparation of
welds in this appendix the aeoanpamAna visual c omparator.
and the graphics.
The National Association of Corrosion Engtnem gay
ack the contributions of the following companies in the
preparation of the welding samples and the fabrication of the die
from which the plastic replicas have been molded:
Audmont. Morristown. NJ
Houston Lighting & Power. Houston. TX
S. G. Pinney & Associates Inc.. Port SL Lucie. FL
The Shetwin- Wiliiarns Company. Cleveland. OH
NACE also gratefully acknowledges tine assistance of KTA-
Tator Inc.. Pittsburgh. PA. in developing the weld pattern thatwas
used to mold the plastic replica of weld samples.
This standard represents a consensus of those individual members who have reviewed this document, its scope. and provisions.
Its acceptance does not in any respect preclude anyone. whether he has adopted the standard or not. from manufacturing,
marketing. purchasing. or using products, processes. or procedures not in oonformanoe with this standard. Nothing contained In
this NACE staff lard Is to be construed as granting airy right. by implication or otherwise. to manufacture. sell. or use in connection
with any method. apparatus. or product covered by Letters Patent. or as indemnifying or protecting anyone against liability for
irntringement of Letters Patent This standard represents minimum requirements and should M no way be interpreted as a restriction
on the use of better procedures or materials.
Section 1: General
1.1 Scope
This recommended practice provides requirements for the
design. fabrication, and surface finish of tanks necessary to achieve
the specified lining integrity required for the service to which the
fining will be subjected. whether it be for corrosion control or to
prevent contamination of the product being stored. Suggestions
are given in Appendix B for the responsibilities of the purchaser
(user). fabricator. and lining applicator regarding design
specifications and inspections.
MACE
I RP0178 -91
J
12 The recommended practices in this standard can also be used
in the design. fabrication. and surface finish of tanks or vessels for
services other than immersion. such as dry bulk storage of solid
materials.
1.3 Definitions
1.3.1 L)nT�n x Surface barriers. usually thin films less than 2D
rifts (0.5 mm) thick applied as either a lining or a coating. In
common usage, the term 'ooatkW and'Inings' are used
intercharigeably, but in this document, only the term "Image'
will be used. The requirements contained twfeln may or may not
apply to heavier. thick film coatings. sheet linings. trowel.
applied and gunite finishes, plasma. flame-sprayed coatings.
fiber - reinforced plastic finings. eta.
1.32 Surface Finish The degree of smoothness of a surface
produced by the removal of sharp edges and the appropriate
surface preparation of welds and other rough areas. The term
'surface frnW is also used to characterize the degree of
smoothness that is necessary to attain a surface to which the
lining can be applied satisfactorily per the lining spediirxt Ion.
' 21 Amity
i
Section 2: Design Requirements
21.1 AN surfaces of the tank interior shall be readily accessible
for surface preparation and lining application (Figures 1 through
10. Appendix A).
212 The n**m rn manway dt nWm for working entrance and
safety reasons during the Inkng application shall be as large as
V*Cdcai for the vessel being lined.
2121 ff possible. at least one manway shall be located
nest ground twork) level. except in tanks designed to be
buried below grade.
'212 Additional manways and openings) should be provided
as needed to tacillt ventilation and safety requirements.
22 Joints
2.2.1 Butt weld joints shall be used whenever possible
(Figure 5. Appendix A).
222 ftivets shall not be used.
22.3 Avoid the use of internal bolted connections.
224 Continuous lap welded Joints are permissible but not
preferred. For sheet lining material. this type of construction
may not be acceptable.
PARK 1 ..1 Ir. - A1
22.1 Ail connections to the tank shall be flanged.
2.3.2 Threaded connections shaft not be used in vessels
operating In corrosive environments (Figure 4. Appendix A).
However, if threaded connections cannot be avoided M corro.
sive environments. these parts shall be fabricated of corrosion -
resistant materials or constructed as shown In Figure 10.
(Cautionary note: See caption for Figure 8 of Appendix A for the
effect of exposed. uncoated dissimilar metal areas.)
23.3 Nozzle connections to be lined shall be as short as
possible and be a minimum of 2 in. (5 cm) diameter (Figure 4.
Appendix A). Connections less than 2 in. (5 cm) diameter shall
be suitably attached through a reducing flange (Figure 10.
Apps A)• Where thick film linings. trowel-applied. are
required. allow additional nozzie Inside diameter for lining
thickness.
2.4 Appurtenances Inside the Tank
2.4.1 The requirements of Sections 2 and 3 of this standard
chap apply to any item to be installed Inside a tank that Is to
be tined. Such appurtenances include agitator; arOmM
baffles, outlet connections, gauging devices. and internal
piping•
2.42 f< inside the tank. including nut and bolts„
cannot be lined. they shall be made of
materials. ( Cautionary' note: See caption for Figure 8 of Appen-
dix A for the effect of exposed. uncoated metal areas.)
2.4.3 If bolted connectors are necessary and cannon be made
of corrodorHasiftnt materials, the mating surfaces shall be
lined before assembly. Mating surfaoes and the sealing txx.
faces of nuts and bolts shall be gasketed to protect the lining.
2.4 .4 Dissimilar metals shall be electricelly Isolated from the
steel tank surface wherever possible. But where dissimilar
metals are used selection shall be such that the galvanic effect
Is minimized. Other corrosion mitigation methods may be
required (Figure S. Appendix A).
2.4.5 Heating elements shall be attached with a minimum
clearance of 6 In. (15 cm) from the tank surface.
2.5 Structural Reinforcement Members
22 Structural support members should be installed on the
exterior of the tank. However. If such members are installed
internally. they shall be fabricated of simple shapes such as
smooth round bars or pipe for ease of applying the lining
material.
2.52 The use of internal flanged connections. stiffening rings
reinforcement pads. angles, channels. 4beams. and other
complex shapes should be avoided. It they must be installed
internally. these members shall be fully welded and welds and
sharp edges ground and radiused a minimum of.1/8 M. (3
mm); 1/4 in. (6 mm) radius is preferred (Figures 1 and 6.
Appendix Act.
MACE
�
RP0178 -91
Section 3: Fabrication Requirements
3.1 M requirements given in Section 2 on Design Requirements
shell apply to afi fabrication procedures
32 Ail welding shall be of the continuous type. Intermittent or spot
welding shall not be allowed.
3.3 Fillets and comers must be accessible for grinding.
3.4 Field tanks fabricated for use with high heat cured linings (eg,
unmodified edified phenol formaldehyde thermosetting coatings) should
have bottom suitably insulated and installed on properly drained
foundations to facilitate proper cure of the fining on the floor of the
tank "Sine the sand-filled earthen foundation. concrete pad. or
other similar foundation is a poor insulator. some means must be
considered prior to the application of the Nning either to override the
heat sink or to distribute the heat uniformly. This can be
accomplished in several ways:
(a) with the use of property sized heaters;
(b) placing the tank on a concrete pad topped off with
a 44n.(10 -can) layer of vermiculite concrete.
(c) Insulating with a high compressive strength structural
grade insulation between the tank bottom and
foundation:
(d) Instal ft an internal temporary false bottom
approximately S ft (1.5 m) above the floor of the tank
prior to the final high temperature bake: or
(e) other suitable means that will practically and
effectively ensure a properly cured lining on the tank
floor.
Section 4: Surface Finish Requirements
4.1 Sharp edges and fillets shall be ground to a smooth radius of surface and surrounding metal surfaces in accordance with the
at Nast 1/8 ku. (3 mm): 114 in. (6 mm) is preferred. specification. Overgrinding, which would result in decreasing
the wall thlkness or the Integrity of the weld beyond the
42 Tank surfaces to be lined shall contain no wax or grease pencil limitations imposed by good welding prey. applicable
marls, gouges„ handling marks. deep scratches, metal ' stamp welding codes. pressure vessel ratings. eta., shall be avoided.
marks, slivered steel. or other surface flaws. The flaws shall be
repaired by solvent cleaning, welding or grinding. as appropriate. 4.4 Automatic machine welds may be acceptable as dictated by
the specifications for film continuity.
42 M rough welds shall be ground to remove sharp edges.
undercuts. pinholes. and other such irregularities (Figure 2,
Appendbc A). Chipping can be used to remove sharp edges it
followed by grinding. (See Appendix C for written and graphic
descriptions of five different degrees of surface finishing of welds
VW may be specified preparatory to the lining of tanks and
4.3.1 The amount of grinding performed shall be judicious and
performed only to the extent necessary to prepare the weld
MCE
45 M weld spatter must be removed. Chipping may be used If
followed by grinding or use of abrasive drsc.
4.6 The use of an an$epatter coating applied adjacent to the weld
area prior to wekHM is suggested. The use of siUcone. oil, or any
other anti - spatter materials that would not be readily removed by
abrasive blasting shag be avoided.
4.7 The fabricator shall avoid the use of oils or other foreign
material for checking weld continuity that would leave a
contaminating residue rot easily removed by abrasive blasting.
3
I APPENDIX A
Fabrication Details, Surface Finish Requirements, and Proper Design Considerations for Metal
Tanks and Vessels to be Lined for Immersion Service •
r�<
E%
c. '
�'\ C
wa seam weld
1
RadK1$ 11f11rt 1 013 Cm)
LB -
skip weld
FIGURE I - All construction involving pockets or crevices that will not drain or that cannot be properly
sandblasted and lined shall be avoided.
/ "::.:: icy;,'%'i'.... :lid, ?. %.ryiV�>:N$iTvyi �::;:�r•�:�;:9
k
DONT
FIGURE 2 - All joints shall be continuous full penetration weld. In tanks that require a 100% holiday4ree
lining, all welds must be smooth with no porosity, holes, high spots, lumps or pockets. Grinding is
' required to eliminate porosity, sharp edges, and high spots. The use of weld metal to fill in .undercuts,
etc., is required for severe service conditions and/or high bake linings. Compatible caulking materials
may be used for filling in mild service such as dry bulk storage-
.'
4 NACE
2 Channels Back4o -Bads
DONT
Krug ia d
' Inside of
Vessel
'1
�.
' 'fir ' ..:.:... }• .,.. .... •< . .... c:` :� ` ,•��•', ' w�:
DO ooNT
FIGURE 3 (above) - All weld spatter shall be removed.
Flanged OuM
Weld
f S tin. (5 cm) SfOn Flange
r . Weld Neck
sfwgbe was b r
Possible
Pound Comers . Inside or �
vessel
Sharp
comer;
0o
DONT
Pad Type Threads
pp_�.�.�ww/A M•
Round T
Comers Inside of:
Vess M�<
' ei •ni
\Sh p C x w
' DO CONT
FIGURE 4 - The outlets shall be flanged or pad type rather than threaded. Within pressure limitations,
slip-on flanges are preferred as the inside surface of the attaching weld is readily available for radiusing
and grinding. If operating pressure dictates the use of weld neck flanges, the inside surface of the
attaching weld is in the throat of the nozzle making repair of surface irregularities by grinding rather
' difficult.
NACE 5
nrV IV'J•
1
`�.J a•: � off;. ; ��`'
'' ♦ S Ca � wC.
_1c72i
00 DONT
FIGURE S - Butt welding should be utilized rather than lap welding or riveted construction.
DO DONT
FIGURE 6 - Stiffening members should be on the outside of the vessel or tank.
NACE
L�
MSI&Of
Vesw
DONT
FIGURE 7 - Roof to Shell Joint. Eliminate crevice and lap weld at roof to shell interface in a non - pressure vessel.
Emergency venting may be required in accordance with API 650 when the internal weld is added.
K.•1
FIGURE 8 - Dissimilar metal (galvanic) corrosion will occur where, for example, an alloy is used to
replace the steel bottom of a tank, or similar circumstances when alloy appurtenances must be a part of
the construction of the vessel. If a lining is then applied to the steel and several inches {usually 6 to 24
in. (15 to 61 cm)} onto the alloy, any discontinuity in the lining will expose a small anode surface. Once
corrosion starts, it progresses rapidly because of the large exposed alloy cathodic area to the much smaller
anodic area. Without the lining, galvanic corrosion will cause the steel to corrode at the weld area, but
at a much slower rate. The recommended practice is to line completely trie alloy as well as the steel,
thereby eliminating the possible occurrence of a large cathode to small anode surface.
Roof
Eliminate Crevice
ttruild -ul
or Prow Unrc+9 A Cation
pl API Standard 650 -88, - Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage' (Washington, D.C.: API, 1988).
7
NACF
,P01-78 -91
Tank Shell -►
Inside of
Vessel
This Area is Inaccessible for
Lining Application
SaewedN•ipple
.�,''.•'•,'.�.
v.
Internal Dished Head
for U se , DUAV
Fabrication and
Hot Ourinp of
Thxmoasttkq Lk*W
It Is Roe mmended
:N Y • s
That the Pkig Be
Left Out for
` '
of Curved (Preferred)
Vw6v and the
or Fig e. Fully seal welded
Flat Platt
Hole Pkpped with Crease
an t]iminat e In.
w d Ground. to
to Prewnt Atmospheric
Accessible Area for Proper
Corrosion of the Threads
'..
Surtaoe Preparation and
Lining in Muiti•Compartmerd
{
Tanks Constructed with Dished
Heads Between Compartments
S
_
FIGURE 9 - A technique (detail of fabrication) to allow for good continuity of lining application - for
inaccessible areas such as in multicompartment tanks.
,,,- t in. (2.5 cm) Thread Nipple
Sli On -.
Flange
Inside of
1
2 in. (5 cm)
�- Inside -►
If an alloy Mange is required.
the designer should consider the
use of Insulating sleeves and
washers as a protection against
galvanic corrosion
Overall Length
Shall be as Short
as PossiMe
Line Completely to Bolt Circle
Vessel Grind and Radius
FIGURE 10 - Minimum 2 in. (5 cm) diameter nozzle required for most thin film linings. Thicker film
linings may require a larger diameter nozzle. This diagram also illustrates suggested construction where.
a threaded connection is required in a tank that requires a holiday -free lining.
NACE
8
n
1
RP01T &91
APPENDIX B - Suggested Responsibifill"
This aectton recommends responsibirrties that should be assigned B.3 Responsibilities of the Designer
to the purchaser, designer. fabricator. lining applicator. and
kgnctor in orderto obtain a properly designed and fabricated tank B.3.1 The designer should be responsible for including the
for k*Klor li!Mg. required fabrication and surface details on all sketches and
drawings related to the tank.
6.1.iokk pesponsibpities
8.11.1 The purchaser. designer. fabricator. inspector(s). and
applicator should review and agree to the requirements involved
before contractual agreements are trade.
BA ResponsibifNes of the Fabricator
B.4.1 The fabricator should be responsible for adhering to the
fabrication and surface finish details shown on the woridng
drawings and desrribed in the tank specifications'
6.12 The purchaser. in agreement with the fabricator and lining
appilcator. should assign msponsibititY for Inspection of B.42 RespotuibilitY for additional welding. grinding. or surface
fabrication. surface finish% and lining applicatlon. and such finishing that may be revealed by the surtace preparation for
should be defined in all contracts. lining. plus any sabsequrent reblasting, must be defined in the
res lining Contract.
62 Rasponsibigdes of the Purchaser (owner or Used
621 The purchaser should be responsible for specifying and /or
appmft the deUkrequirements for design. fabrication. and
wrfwo finish to all parties concerned.
621.1 The detailed requirements should be fully described In
writing and include drawings of the tank to be fabricated and
tined and service requirements.
' 62,12 The purchaser should advise the fabricator.
lining applicator. and all inspectors of the detailed
requirements. including time schedules, inspection and
acceptable requirements in writing.
MCE
B.42 The fabricator. when ct*Mng the quality of the weld. shall
use only those materials that can be readily and thoroughly
removed by the fabricator after the completion of the inspection
procedure.
8.5 Responsibilities of the Uning Applicator
B.&, ResporWbil'dies foraddidonal welding. grinding. orsurface
finishing that may be revealed by the surface preparation for
lining. phis any subsequent reblasting. must be defined in the
lining contract.
B.6 Responsibilities of the inspectors)
BAI A qualified inspector should be responsible for the
verification of fulfillment of design. fabrication. and surface finish
requirements.
M M r M =� M M M M r M M MM ='
APPENDIX 0- Gonsda and Graphic Desatptlona of Various Degrees of Surface
Finishing of Welds That May be Spewed In Preparation for Uning of
Tanks and VesselsOl
NACE Weld
Preperetfon
Butt Weld
Fill Welded Tee Jotnt.
Lap Weld
G'�ing
Designation
*aid spatter removed and
Ground flush
all surface imperfections
A
and smooth;
repaired as necessary. The
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
free of an
weld is ground flush with the
defects m
plate surface.
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Minor Imperfections such as
S
around flush
porosity and undercutting
exist• The weld Is ground
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
flush with the
plate surface.
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
weld between the
Weld spatter removed.and
Weld spatter removed and-
two plat Weld spatter removed
two plat
Ground smooth;
ll surface Imperfections
a Pe
all surface imperfections
and an surface Imperfections
C
free of an
repaired as necessary. The
repaired as necessary.
repaired as necessary. The weld
defectsm
weld is ground smooth and
The weld to ground smooth and .
Is ground smooth and blended Into
blended Into the plate surfaces.
blended Into the plate surfaces•
the plate surfaces.
} i i+• ^
Inside of Vessel
}'.� >;k }`. }2? S$ y if % S
� � {'
. ry � vr. +. r. /.,. r..{} ?L . r
n, + :: ; ^ •` }S : •••.�<'' Yv;}..} + v ;v: };:r
e.+ t..: ..x.::. }r..J..r...: r � .<!. +� 3?+.2.....?.
- '
..}: • v •; + :y',`L,• T.4 r. L` • ..}... r. .4n4. �.. + ••y�. 5 •::::
: < }r�;.4 +. > + �^'r:: af. �+Y� r.,•,T' % !: • . •7.• �•.;
r r, .,v . , f L : + +,. +.r•+, +. r{!d) .
:.r;{$.•4 jy. !::;. �; } +i rn S
`:4 ���:v$,;� {:•4. ?� +.
� � x ' y .
:' �.+ Ln•: vY:,, �+•r{{::;::} `�::,;y;•�';�:{y'{"!�+��f,.�yy. ,,4 ti;S'y?,ri { / {,•.•,�. {. . � �y
}+: ?ry'': + S}.} • G.:rL:�y •{:$:•,:;;<
r• • } r •• ?. �i,:f, },., s:� .. } G,L{.,r <.
F$•C• {,Y•, ';:�:v +�.'':Y � +••YIr .�`'•Y• •:4:�:; {.y J:$$i
Vim
•
.
}rx• ::��• .+4';}�:f• } : •�.. , ?, ••J •tiy;��•. �}r:i
'.•� + rY . fG 'T• •. }�$.• �:v y}, .�{.,•'
:,1 SY,.,}},.•4Y•.V{v.•nx:•::? � -0i. .j >. •}
:., ?: ny?.:
�.'};••. �:• ti { r•:' � :{, ;��"?: {ji�� S•'�ii}'.•, }3Af:{ni:,:.
,4..xh.!'+•': },�:4`}r >�� •.S.} L :} rti • +• '{
rr +
S �.• !.• ' }' f' •. ;Y .!r,+ • }: • rJ�ti;: `:Si }., +�:>:�
fYil, ^ •,:;%Y•.iS:�..:'• + : #{ '• ?.i::.
•
•:+.,5,•.? r }>:. �. :r:. r.'{4?.•. >,: .,.•,.. • �yv.
n.:./ ., ^:.'::. y }. ?•+..
r'i PLE ASE NOTE The written descriotlon of the various decrees of surface preparation
of melds In the appendix of this standard takes precedence over the graphics which are
only of torlal representations of welds and arindina finishes and are In noway Intended
to be representative of the Integrity of the welds and over-lihe componlon visual
idalM IMV1' 1`llAIl►1`_!<�l►►Jav►wcr>•�nu,c — -- --
mAbrasive blasting In preparation for coating may reveal additional porosity and undercutting.
Some applicators request the fabricator to blast the welds to reveal these Imperfections prior
to requesting inspection of the grinding by the lining applicator. Responsibility for repair of
Imperfections so revealed should be resolved In the pro -job conference.
Please note: The visual comparator referenced In Appendix C Illustrates various degrees
of surface finishing for welds prior to coating or lining. Welds Included on the visual
comparator Include full seam welds, skip welds, butt welds, lap welds, etc. The visual
comparator is available from NACE Headquarters. For more Information, contact the
NACE CustomerService Department, P.O. Box 218340, Houston, Texas 77218.8340.
r� rr rr rr ri rr ri rr r r r r rr rr r rr rr rr rr
z
n APPENDIX C (Continued)(
M
Type of
Grinding
Butt Weld
Fillet Welded Tee Joint
Lap Weld
NACE Weld
Preparation
Designation
7
E
Weld Condition Prior to
Finishing
11I PLEASE
NOTE: The
: ":�: 4 �.�.
g. .k�fr$'' .l•' //� L
•s•.f•; •f'.•Y:S'
p,. { :r. :,r,.y.:::.r:$:•r� /� {•f:
{Y..:.::•:., ?fRi},r,•Rf(. }},.
.yfx {.4R;t•. ?
:}� {..:: <:f.+�'� •
YiiY�Yi
{y+l
11I PLEASE
NOTE: The
written description of the various degrees of surface
preparation
of welds
In the appendix
of this standard takes precedence over the graphics
whic are
only
pictorial representations
of welds and grinding finishes and are in no
way Intended
to be
representative
of the Intearity of the welds and over the ompanlon
visual
comparator.
NOR IS THE
"AS IS" ORIGINAL WELD A TYPICAL WELD.
RATHER iT is
ONLY
INTENDED TO ILLUSTRATE
DEFECTS IN WELDS WHICH M U ST
CORRECTED
PRIOR
TO COATING AND
- 8
LINING, Further, good weidina practice_ and •_._.e!.
ins codes
such
as AWS. AWWA
D -100 API 050 and 1104 ASME 'ANSI and AAR take
preced
over the
written description
of the various degrees of the surface preparatlon
of welds In
this appendix
the accomnanvina
visual comparator, and the graphics,
Minor Imperfections such as
Ground smooth porosity and undercutting exist.
and blended.(2) Weld spatter is removed, welds
are then ground smooth and blended
into the plate surfaces.
Minimal Sharp projections on the
weld bead, stage, and weld
spatter are removed.
Minor imperfections such as
porosity and undercutting exist.
Weld spatter is removed, welds
are then ground smooth and blended
Into the plate •surfaces.
Inside of Vessel
Sharp projections on the
weld bead, stage, and weld
spatter are removed.
Minor Imperfections such as
porosity and undercutting exist.
Weld spatter is removed, welds
are then ground smooth and blended
Into the plate surfaces.
Sharp projections on the
weld bead, stage, and weld
spatter are removed.
Inside of Vessel:y;:$;;
::$:�$••;:.�•• : >: :....:.::{ ,,
:Y�R�wR!!�wl��.�
,'•:n+y'C., 1. Y
qv�• .. , �:• �(•Y.
}{
. , ./'�••, •„
j} F .', + ' i .`F.'+' i bx, $}+'" Y'. r ff + •:+f''.r i"j;•;'+.�Y}
♦,{:..;f
S�i{'Ffr'. { � , : { } +l.•F.{'.4 �� ���.
{y ,F:l•,Tj.•:Y/,,F.; {.
,
\: :•.:. n < $ ' 4 ) .:\A 0.{:+.
,'may{ ,{ } .•'<
%/. F: W k ,{, F �i:;' iri` G : { >iR:{+ f . ' �f. 4 �.�i: • >'9�C•6�;M1 fi >.:
r R i }
Inside of Vessel
t blasting in preparation for coating may reveal additional porosity and undercut.
ting. Some applicators request the fabricator to .blast the welds to reveal these
imperfections prior to requesting Inspection-of the grinding by the lining applicator,
Responsibility for repair of imperfections so revealed should be resolved In the pre-job
conference.
Please note: The visual comparator referenced In Appendix C Illustrates various degrees
of surface flnishing .for welds prior to coating or lining. Welds Included on the visual
comparator include full seam welds, skip welds, butt welds, lap welds, etc. The visual
comparator Is available from NACE Headquarters. For more Information, contact the
NACE Customer Servlce Department, P.O. Box 2113340, Houston, Texas 77218.8340. .
.
0
4°
to