Difference between bottom feeding and top feeding for the acid inlet of the hydrochloric acid storage tank
Thread Content
A fiberglass chloride storage tank with a diameter of 9,500 and a height of 11,000 suffered internal damage due to soluble impurities in the by-product hydrochloric acid; therefore, repairs to the tank’s lining are planned. The construction contractor’s work plan suggests that the acid inlet should be changed from the original location at the top (on the side at a height of about 400 mm from the bottom of the tank) to one where a vertical pipe is installed at the top of the tank for feeding. I don’t know what the reason for such a change is. If erosion is a factor to consider, then the material being pushed forward would fall freely from a height of 11 meters, so its erosive force must be considerable as well, right? What exactly is the difference?
The modification is correct; it involves feeding from the top, with the feed inlet installed at a vertical pipe channel located 200–400 mm below the bottom of the tank.
Yes, it is possible to do this, and there are guidelines indicating that such a high level of entry is acceptable. I just want to ask an expert to analyze them (whether it’s a qualitative analysis or not) – what are the differences between these two approaches, and what are their respective advantages and disadvantages: handshake
Bottom feeding is good; it provides anti-static and anti-erosion protection, but a anti-siphon hole is required.
It seems I didn’t explain clearly; it’s unclear whether it’s side feeding or top feeding after all.