Tarm Storage Tanks

This tank 400gallon.Cost 1000 USD here in Sweden.
I wonder how Tarm can take so much for they tanks in the US.Is the ASME standard expensive ?
http://www.rinkabyror.se/prodimg/small/2805_1.jpg
http://www.rinkabyror.se/showcat.aspx?catid=773

Thats crazy. just insane. anybody have any other options that might fit thru a 32" door?

Jim in CT said:

Thats crazy. just insane. anybody have any other options that might fit thru a 32" door?

Click to expand...

yes- the rectangular stainless bolt-together panel-ized modular tank like I'm doing,

see posts above; biggest single panel is 80 pounds, and any of the panels will fit through a door

contact Joe Brown who goes by "BrownianHeatingTech" around these parts, as I think he may be working on taking my "one-off" modular tank into something that'd be more in the nature of a "product" that you could just order

MrEd said:

That price must include the Tarm? or else perhaps those 220 gallon tanks are full of maple syrup?

Click to expand...

or crude oil

Hansson said:

I wonder how Tarm can take so much for they tanks in the US.Is the ASME standard expensive ?

Click to expand...

ASME listing is very expensive, however I don't believe that the tanks are ASME-listed.

However, listing with UL or WH are also very expensive, and I believe that the tanks will be listed that way.

The price also includes the trim (expansion tank, termovar, insulation, etc. etc.).

However, as Trevor noted, there are other options which will work better in certain situations. I wouldn't use the Tarm tanks above 660 gallons.

There are some benefits to the vertical pressurized tanks, in terms of footprint. Installed in the corner of a room, they will take up well less than half the floorspace that a round atmospheric tank consumes (in terms of actual footprint, and wasted "corner" space around the tank). Even compared to a rectangular tank like Trevor is using, they will take up less floorspace due to the more-efficient use of vertical space.

I do think that the rectangular stainless tanks which Trevor started the ball rolling on will end up being very useful for this industry. We'll likely see the pressurized tanks being used on systems of 220 to 660 gallons. The current design of the rectangular atmospheric tanks will be practical in sizes ranging from 500 to 2000 gallons (beyond that, I would recommend separating the tanks, as a single 2000+ gallon tank would be a major problem in case of a leak). I expect that the only real question will exist in the overlap area, and that will be determined on a case-by-case basis.

Joe

BrownianHeatingTech said:

There are some benefits to the vertical pressurized tanks, in terms of footprint. Installed in the corner of a room, they will take up well less than half the floorspace that a round atmospheric tank consumes (in terms of actual footprint, and wasted "corner" space around the tank). Even compared to a rectangular tank like Trevor is using, they will take up less floorspace due to the more-efficient use of vertical space.


Joe

Click to expand...

One other benefit is that you can get very god stratification in a vertical tank.
Stratification is very important if you want a good system!

Hansson said:

One other benefit is that you can get very god stratification in a vertical tank.
Stratification is very important if you want a good system!

Click to expand...

Indeed, particularly as the system volume goes down. A 1000-gallon tank doesn't need huge amounts of stratification to work well. A tank setup of 220, 440, or 660 gallons needs all the stratification it can get.

Joe

BrownianHeatingTech said:

Hansson said:

One other benefit is that you can get very god stratification in a vertical tank.
Stratification is very important if you want a good system!

Click to expand...

Indeed, particularly as the system volume goes down. A 1000-gallon tank doesn't need huge amounts of stratification to work well. A tank setup of 220, 440, or 660 gallons needs all the stratification it can get.

Joe

Click to expand...

So a vertical tank takes less footprint. It don't have to be so big witch mean that you can have a smaller "inexpensive" boiler.
The heat loses from a small tank should be smaller to.


Sounds excellent to me

This SS modular tank, would there be a liner? What are costs running, for just the tank (minus coils)? Dimensions?

Hansson said:

So a vertical tank takes less footprint. It don't have to be so big witch mean that you can have a smaller "inexpensive" boiler.

Click to expand...

The boiler size does not change. We're storing the roughly the same effective amount of energy (btu's or kW's) - we're just getting a higher temperature swing and on a smaller volume, to accomplish the same storage capacity.

Jim in CT said:

This SS modular tank, would there be a liner? What are costs running, for just the tank (minus coils)? Dimensions?

Click to expand...

No liner, which is how it can handle higher temperatures.

The tank is 62" tall, plus roughly 6" for the bulkhead in the center (roughly 18" square). The 1000-gallon tank should be 76" square. If you do the math, that's actually more than 1000 gallons, but I'm just labeling them in even numbers for convenience. Those numbers are for the tank itself, without insulation. Insulation will be 4" or more of polyisocyanurate. It's recommended to install a base of cinderblocks and plywood under the tank to keep it off the floor and improve insulation, but you could go with just the foam if headroom is an issue.

500-gallon would be the same height, but 76x40" footprint, and the 1500 gallon would be 76x114".

All these dimensions are rough, and subject to some change (the height is probably the closest to being "set").

Pricing is still in the works. This is very much in the "beta" stage, and until we work out the details with the fabricator, we won't know if it is an economically-feasible design or not. Obviously, if it cannot be competitive with the other technologies on the market, then there's no real point in making it into a commercial product. The number of options which will be available is also still in the works (eg, I'd like to have at least the three sizes, and the options of moving the tappings for the feed/return pipes, controls, and such to either the front or side, but we may have some other options).

Joe

BrownianHeatingTech said:

Hansson said:

One other benefit is that you can get very god stratification in a vertical tank.
Stratification is very important if you want a good system!

Click to expand...

Indeed, particularly as the system volume goes down. A 1000-gallon tank doesn't need huge amounts of stratification to work well. A tank setup of 220, 440, or 660 gallons needs all the stratification it can get.

Joe

Click to expand...

here's my take on the stratification question. I am not an engineer, but started reading used college physics textbooks for fun when I was in middle school, so that gives you a sense of the direction in which my mind tends to warp....

stratification is indeed important, and should be kept and preserved as much as reasonably possible, because in any situation in which you have less than an entire tank of max-temp water, you want to be able to segregate and use the hottest water first to meet you heat loads. this is one thing that steered me away from the "propane sausage tank" option (along with the fact that I could never shoehorn one down into my old farmhouse cellar hatch).

but to me, stratification is not about height, it's about velocity and direction of flow into and out of the tank

any mass of water taller than a puddle will stratify if there's nothing stirring it up

what stirs things up? velocity and direction of flow that makes the whole thing swirl around at random- like big single inlet pipes into or out of the tank sending concentrated flows of gallons-per-minute in a single direction. Or something introducing a temperature gradient where there's warm water down low that wants to rise because it's less dense, or introducing cold water up high that wants to sink because it is heavy

if you can create a situation inside the tank where you get a diffuse, multi-directional flow of hot water in and out near the top of the tank, and a similarly diffuse, multi-directional flow of cold water in and out of the bottom of the tank- then you can get and keep stratification in both charging and discharging the tank.

My hope is to do this by going from a small (1 to 1.5 inch) pipe from the hydronic system/ heat exchanger to a much larger (4-5 inch) vertical pipe (oriented vertically inside the big tank)with some baffles to slow and spread flow, and a lot of small diameter radial holes at the very top and very bottom, to allow a lot of little, low velocity currents at inlets and outlets at the top and bottom of the tank.

see the ramblings here:
https://www.hearth.com/econtent/index.php/forums/viewthread/20886/

it's sort of using the same ideas that make exhaust mufflers work- send a high pressure flow into a big chamber- but one that's enclosed from the outside world- and it'll emerge in a "smoothed" much more gradual flow (yes, I know that fluid dynamics and gas dynamics are hugely different, because you can compress gaseous matter a lot and basically can't compress fluids at all but the "muffler" analogy of using an intermediate, larger diameter chamber to smooth/ slow flow and velocity, is still the best "known" example I can point to).

I am just still noodling around about whether the vertical inside "decellerator pipe" needs to be stainless, or whether it could maybe be 4 inch diameter schedule 80 (thick wall) gray 4" PVC electrical conduit, which'll be cheaper to buy, and a lot easier to drill the large number of small holes in.... ideas welcome on that...

BrownianHeatingTech said:

Hansson said:

So a vertical tank takes less footprint. It don't have to be so big witch mean that you can have a smaller "inexpensive" boiler.

Click to expand...

The boiler size does not change. We're storing the roughly the same effective amount of energy (btu's or kW's) - we're just getting a higher temperature swing and on a smaller volume, to accomplish the same storage capacity.

Jim in CT said:

This SS modular tank, would there be a liner? What are costs running, for just the tank (minus coils)? Dimensions?

Click to expand...

No liner, which is how it can handle higher temperatures.

The tank is 62" tall, plus roughly 6" for the bulkhead in the center (roughly 18" square). The 1000-gallon tank should be 76" square. If you do the math, that's actually more than 1000 gallons, but I'm just labeling them in even numbers for convenience. Those numbers are for the tank itself, without insulation. Insulation will be 4" or more of polyisocyanurate. It's recommended to install a base of cinderblocks and plywood under the tank to keep it off the floor and improve insulation, but you could go with just the foam if headroom is an issue.

500-gallon would be the same height, but 76x40" footprint, and the 1500 gallon would be 76x114".

All these dimensions are rough, and subject to some change (the height is probably the closest to being "set").

Pricing is still in the works. This is very much in the "beta" stage, and until we work out the details with the fabricator, we won't know if it is an economically-feasible design or not. Obviously, if it cannot be competitive with the other technologies on the market, then there's no real point in making it into a commercial product. The number of options which will be available is also still in the works (eg, I'd like to have at least the three sizes, and the options of moving the tappings for the feed/return pipes, controls, and such to either the front or side, but we may have some other options).

Joe

Click to expand...

my "alpha" version of the "beta" tank that Joe describes is being fabricated as we speak; I'll document/ photograph/ post once it arrives and I start bolting it together.

when Joe speaks of sizes, which are big when you think of the overall assembled tank, everyone should remember that this thing is made out of modular panels, the largest single panel of which is approximately 60 inches by 36 inches, and weighs about 80 pounds. So although the assembled size will be big, the sub-parts that'll bolt together like "Legos" should all be very manageable, in terms of being able to pick them up and carry them into an existing structure.

Joints will be sealed with industrial buna gasket plus Sikkens industrial caulk rated for continuous 24/7/365 190 degree temps and intermittent temps up to 250 F-- so basically it should be possible to heat the thing to any sane temperature (unlike the EPDM liner based tanks) without any worries

I'm the guinea pig on this design that I am helping to create, but basically, given back trouble that rules out lugging concrete and blocks, and also a sense that I would not sleep soundly knowing that there's 1000+ gallons of near-boiling water in my cellar in a glorified pond liner (as with any of the EPDM tanks) (I've had a flooded basement before, and it was crummy enough with cold water...), I decided that this is worth a shot. Stay tuned

This system has been used for liquid feed mixing tanks around here. These are not exposed to heat but acids and mixing action. I was wondering what thickness you plan to use, I am putting some thoughts together with the manufacturer but the price looks to be steep. :roll:

Pybyr - In using my tank that attempts to diffuse the flow and minimize mixing, I have discovered an additional factor for good stratification. A high Delta T. For example, if I have a delta T of 20* and my tank bottom is 120*, then I will be sending 140* water to the top until the bottom of the tank rises above 120*. Devising a way to get a higher Delta T would result in higher levels of stratification. I have experimented with different pump speeds on the tank side of my plate hx etc. I am wondering if a larger flat plate would allow a higher Delta T in the upper temp range. I am happy with my tanks performance right now, but am always planning the next tweak that would make it better and help others with design.

hogstroker said:

This system has been used for liquid feed mixing tanks around here. These are not exposed to heat but acids and mixing action. I was wondering what thickness you plan to use, I am putting some thoughts together with the manufacturer but the price looks to be steep. :roll:

Click to expand...

I forget the gauge off the top of my head- and don't have the shop drawings nearby, but I think I recall it's 10 or 12. the co that is making it for me has a lot of experience with tanks, and assures me that with the extra rigidity added by the folded flanges, that thickness will be plenty.

WoodNotOil said:

Pybyr - In using my tank that attempts to diffuse the flow and minimize mixing, I have discovered an additional factor for good stratification. A high Delta T. For example, if I have a delta T of 20* and my tank bottom is 120*, then I will be sending 140* water to the top until the bottom of the tank rises above 120*. Devising a way to get a higher Delta T would result in higher levels of stratification. I have experimented with different pump speeds on the tank side of my plate hx etc. I am wondering if a larger flat plate would allow a higher Delta T in the upper temp range. I am happy with my tanks performance right now, but am always planning the next tweak that would make it better and help others with design.

Click to expand...

remind me of whether you ended up "doing" the horizontal pipes with lots of little holes for your inlet and outlet?

Or do you just have elbows, which is what I see in your photos?

I heated my tanks on Wednesday to 203F.
Right now the temp in the top is 176F and in the bottom 86F