HomeMy WebLinkAboutWTR2702210(1) W-2210 Highlands 565 Tank Interior Painting-reports
6
BEGINNING
OF FILE
FILE TITLE *2
• 5 C
Dw
1
r � . F
.`s 5
�J
r
I
x .
r -
}t
e .
�si . ��t��MM�rrdnPrns...l.s.:r+�n+.Ta.+.....�„ .,. . ...-..._._ .--.."•'� :.
XIle. �' •'
i
P P
Y�
ry
CITY OF RENTON '
HIGHLANDS REPAINTING PROJECT
PREDESIGN ACTIVITIES
Prepared by
CH?M HILL
August 1995 s-
I
l
L
�C
CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION I
BACKGROUND
SUMMARY OF FIELD TESTING 3
RELATED EXPERIENCE-MT. OLIVET REPAINTING PROJECT 7
COST OPINIONS 5
CONCLUSIONS 10
RECOMMENDATIONS II
`t.. Appendix A. PHOTOGRAPHS
L�
l�
INTRODUCTION
This report documents the results of Task 1, Predesign Activities, for the Highlands water
storage reservoir recoating project. The work in this task was performed to observe
structural and existing coating conditions and to estimate costs for the recoating project. It
was completed in accordance with City of Renton contract No. CAG-95-039,dated April 26,
1995,
The work performed in this task included field observations and preparation of cost opinions.
I
� 1
I
I
I
1
BACKGROUND
1 The Highlands water storage reservoir is a 0.75-million-gallon(MG),elevated steel
structure. It was constructed in 1959 in accordance with American Water Works Association
(AW WA)standard D-100-52. According to the record drawings, the steel plate material was
Jspecified to be ASTM A 283-GR-C; the tank structural steel was specified to be ASTM A-7.
Access to the tank is available through two manholes. One 24-inch diameter manhole is
located on the top of the tank. A second 12-inch by 18-inch access manhole is located in the
center standpipe at ground level.
A review of the original tank construction documents(specifications)indicates that protective
coatings were specified for the interior and exterior of the tank to provide corrosion
' protection. The original specifications indicated that the internal coating was to be a three-
coat inorganic zinc coating. A vinyl coating system consisting of a primer and subsequent
coats to achieve a 5 mil thickness was specified as an alternative to the inorganic zinc coating
for the tank interior.
A con%o ot;evaluation in 1970/1971 indicated that the internal coating was beginning to
1 deteriorate. Rust and corrosion pits were forming at isolated locations on the tank walls
I where the coating had failed. In 1971,an impressed current cathodic protection system was
installed to provide supplemental corrosion protection to submerged surfaces in the tank.
In 1978, the tank exterior was recosted. This work consisted of sandblasting and application
of an epoxy primer and polyurethane topcoat.
The existing protective coating system inside the Highlands tank is at the end of its service
life. This study was made to determine the remedial actions required to provide continued
corrosion protection for the interior of the tank.
In addition to the tank interior painting, safety modifications to the tank ladder and hatch
' (platforms and railings)were incorporated into this project.
2
t�
t
}� SUMMARY OF FIELD OBSERVATIONS
Field observations were made to verify the condition of the existing coating inside the tank,
and to observe structural items to allow design of new safety platforms and railings.
fPreliminary structural observations were made during the week of June 2, 1995. Obser-
vations of the ceiling plates and roof supporting structure were made during the weeks of
June 19 and July 24. 1995. These observations were made from a raft when the tank was i
full. The results of these field observations are summarized in the following sections.
Photographs were made to document the condition of the protective coating and structural
steel in each of the areas described below. These photographs are included in Appendix A.
I Interior Protective Coating System
Exposed steel surfaces were observed by raft around and above the area of typical water level \
fluctuation(approximately 12 feet below the access manhole). These observations indicate
Oat the coating on the exposed surfaces of the ceiling has a gray color typical of inorganic
zinc coatings. The coating on the submerged portion of the tank surfaces,where observed,
had a tannish -vhite appearance. The tannish white coating could be an inorganic zinc
coating in which the zinc has dissolved due to water immersion,or it could be a vinyl
coating.
1 The protective coating system on the submerged metals that could be observed exhibited
extensive blisters. Tice coating blisters are relatively small, but are medium dense to very
dense depending on where they were observed on the ladder and the tank walls. The degree
of blistering is best described as Blister Size No.4, Medium Dense(ASTM, D714—
Evaluating the Degree of Blistering of Paints). Where the coating was intact on the ceiling,
I wall,and ladder, it had relatively good adhesion.
Where the coating has failed at the blisters,corrosion products(rust)have framed. Most of
the rust nodules were hard and tightly adhering to the steel. Some metal loss had occurred
under the tightly adhering rust,but active corrosion appeared to be minimal due to the
Operation of the cathodic protection system.
The coating system on the access ladder,although blistered, was providing acceptable
corrosion protection where it was observed. Some light rust was observed on the top 3 to 4
1 feet of the ladder and at the ladder connenion point at the roof; little corrosion was observed
on the submerged portion of the ladder. Where the coating had failed on the ladder, white
calcareous deposits had formed from operation of the cathodic protection system. No
significant pitting of the ladder was observed in the area exposed.
2
_ t
t?
t.
_ -
U r
k W5.
q
The coating on the ceiling plates was in fair condition(approximately 10 percent of the
surface had surface rust beginning to show). Rust deposits were present around the edges of
lapped ceiling plates,painters rail•angles,and other areas that are typically difficult to coat.
The paint thickness was measured at a limited number of locations with a magnetic thickness
gauge. The paint thickness ranged from 3 to 6 mils.
Two samples of the existing protective coating were collected from inside the tank. One
sample was obtained from the ceiling and one from the wall. Both samples were laboratory_
analyzed for metals that could affect removal by sandblasting and debris disposal. The _
results of these tests are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1
Concentration of Metals in Paint Samples 'zt
t
Metal Concentration of Metals in Concentration of Metals in
Paint Sample from Overhead Paint Sample from
I Steel(ppm) Wall Plate(ppm)
Arsenic <3 <2.9
Barium l3 11
Cadmium 250 50
Chromium 4.6 19
Lead 1600 1300
Mercury <0.99 <0.98
Pit depth measurements were made at evaluate amount of localized reduction in wall
thickness that had occu-red because of corrosion under the rust deposits. The maximum pit
depth measured was between 40 to 50 mils, located on the wall plates at an elevation
approximately 12 feet below the hatch level. Generally, the pits were relatively shallow(less
than 0.020 inch).
Structural Observations
I
Structural observations were made to evaluate safety improvements to the tank access system.
The results of these observations are summarized below:
• The ladder from the ground to the catwalk is equipped with a safety cage and
safety climb device. There are no intermediate rest platforms in the 100-foot
ladder between the ground and catwalk; two intermediate rest platforms would
greatly reduce fatigue and improve safety aspects of the climb to the catwalk.
4
Flit
• The ladder terminates at an awkward and unsafe manner at the catwalk level.
Photographs of the ladder termination were made,and existing ladders,
railings,and catwalk dimensions were measured. Discussions with structural
Personnel. and subsequent discussions with the City maintenance staff, }
` indicated that a ladder landing with grating and handrails placed over the
existing catwalk railing would be the most effective method to improve access NNN;
` and safety at this location.
• The ladder from the catwalk to the top of the tank is curved and follows the rr '
rr� geometry of the tank shell. A safety climb device will need to be i H
this ladder. installed on
. r • There were some signs of localized corrosion on the interior ladder where it is
i - terminated to the underside of the tank roof,but the ladder appeared to be in
sound structural condition.
• No safety railing or othrr platform is present on the tank roof around the
access manhole, vent,and aircraft warning lights. Exposed cathodic
Protection conduit is also present at the tank roof,terminating at a junction
box between the access manhole and the tank vent. Observations and
discussions with structural personnel and City maintenance staff indicatrt that
handrailing alone would be sufficient improvement at this location. Since
maintenance activity is minimal on the tank roof, it was determined that a
r
grating-type platform would not be required.
Cathodic Protection
The cathodic protection anodes were observed inside the tank from the raft. The anodes
appear to be in good condition and should provide several more years of service. When the -reference electrode is removed as par of the interior repainting project, it should be observed
to determine if it steeds to be replaced.
Exterior Protective Coating
The exterior protective coating was observed during this task. The exterior protective
coating is presently providing effective corrosion protection for the exterior surface of the
tank. Active corrosion was observed at only one location--an area of approximately two
square feet on the overflow pipe at the catwalk level.
However, it was noted that the there are many areas, particularly on the tank bowl above the
catwalk,where the topcoat is distwnding from the primer. This effect was observed with the
manufacturer's representative of the existing protective coating tTnemec). Paint samples '
were removed and i
laboratory analyzed by the manufacturer. We have not yet received a � -
formal report from the protective coating manufacturer; it will be forwarded to the City when
it is received.
S
L� �
Yn� Bil
F
h
It was also noted that mildew is row
the vertical surfaces)over a large g on much of the tank exterior surfaerinces(primarily on
mildew will eventually begin to degrade the protective surface.
tThe Presence of Ux
E
Pressure washed to remove the mildew. tank should be
I' The primer on the exterior surfaces of the Highlands tank appears t"be in good condition
and appears to have good adhesion to the tank steel.
applied in 1978. The existing protective coating was
I
j The City should consider applying a new finish coat to this tank for the following reasons:
The existing coating is 17 years old
' The amount of work required to touch-up damaged areas
• The repair to damaged areas will result in adverse aesthetic conditions(spots)
' The tank needs to be Pressure washed.an item that would also be requircd as
a surface Preparation for a new finish coat
The City should plan to apply a new finish coat to the tank exterior within the next two
Years. The protective coating(primer)will deteriorate without this work and result in the
reed to re-sandblast the tank sooner than would normally be required.
v
e -
4�
e y
t
hP
t:--
6
i
Mr
lr�
tirE�':F,L`n:
I
RELATED EXPERIENCE -MT. OLIVET TANK REPAINTING
PROJECT
The interior surfaces of the 3-MG Mt.Olivet ground level tank was recoated in 1991. Although
this tank is a ground level tank and had a different coating than Highlands,both tanks were
constructed within five years of one another and have been exposed to similar water conditions.
Both tanks were provided with cathodic protection at the same time.
The experiences during the Mt.Olivet tank repainting project that may affect the Highlands
tank painting project are discussed below.
• Fitting. Although pit depth measurements were obtained during the 1„design,it
was not practical to fully evaluate pitting until the tank was sandblasted and the
i primer was applied. An extra coat of paint,epoxy filler,and pit welding were
considered for repairs at Mt.Olivet. An ex1ia coat of paint was considered the most
cost effective method for extending the service life of the protective coating at pits
in the Mi.Olivet tank. The additional coat of paint was approved at a cost of
$14,375.
a Weld Protrusions. Rough weld protrusions were present throughout the tank where
erection equipment was attached to the tank during construction. These protrusions
were too large and rough to be effectively prepared or removed by sandblasting.
Therefore.an additional item of work was approved to remove the weld protrusions
by grinding. The additional cost for this work was$6,500,
Both pitting and weld protrusions were observed in the Highlands tank. The pining is relatively
shallow in the areas observed:however,it will not be practical to fully evaluate the pitting until
the tank has been ciewatered,sandblasted and primed. Trowel-grade,potable water epoxy pit
fillers are available for repairing pitted steel water tanks. One of these products was evaluated
for the Mt.Olivet tank,but was rejected since the contractor's proposal was considered too
expensive. Cormideration should be given to including the epoxy pit filler in the conaw
documents for this project to be bid on a square foot basis This will allow the City to select the
filler option if it is deemed necessary w ithout a signi licant change order.
i
Weld protrusions wcrc also observed inside the Highlands tank However,they did not appear
to be as rough or as large as those observed in the Mt.Olivet tank. Hooch er,it may K.
necessary to grind these areas. This work would best be accomplished on a negotiated force f
aarnunt with the 00110Wor once the extent of the work is determined.
Improvement projects on older water storage tanks may in\ol%c extra work that cannot be
easily anticipated. Therefore,the City should maintain a suitable contingency for this proicct to
allow timely completion within the set budget. For example,timcbmW order cos"for Mt.
Olivet were approximately 20 percent of the bid price.
7
COST OPINIONS
Cost opinions were developed for the proposed interior coating and structural modifications
to the Highlands water storage tank. The cost opinions developed for this work are discussed >,�
j in the following sections.
Protective Coatings
The presence of lead in the existing paint inside the Highlands tank can affect the cost of this
project in two ways.
IFirst,sandblasting operations inside the tank,which is a confirKd space,can result in dust N
the air that contains lead. If the lead content in the air inside the tank exceeds the action
limit,the contractor must provide for worker safety in accordance with OSHA rule 1926.62.
This would include,among other items,appropriate respiratory protection,personal
protective clothing,on-site changing areas, hand-washing facilities,biological monitoring,
iand personnel training. Our fee=project experience indicates thu removal of protective
Coatings with approximately IM'ppm lead in a confined space can result in exoeeding the
lead action level.
The second factor that can impact the cost of the project is disposal of sandblast residue
contaminated with lead. If the lead content of the sandblast residue exceeds the action level
according to WAC 173.303-070,the residue must be treated and disposed of as a hazardous
waste. Disposal of the waste as a hazardous waste will significantly increase the cost of the
project.
Since the existing paint contains lead, it is difficult to establish a single cost for this work.
Therefore,cost opinions were developed for three alternatives and are summarized in Table
2.
Table 2
Cost Estimates for Interior Tank Repainting(Excluding Structural)
Alt. _ Description Cost Opinion
1 Repainting with no lead in air and no[mad in sandblast residue El t8,000
i 2 Repainting with lead in air, no lead in sandblast residue $135.000
3 Repainting with lead in air, lead in sandblast residue E181,000
The bid prices for this work may vary significantly due to the contractor's approach to
sandblasting and their estimates for handling and disposing of spent sandblast material which
contains lead. The disposal costs will vary based on the amount and type of material to be
disposed and'or the disposer's perception of risk.
8
i
1 �
j
I
IOne local painting contractor(Dunkin and Bush,Redmond,WA)experienced with lead paint
removal projects was contacted for estimated costs to recital the interior of the tank. The
contractor was asked to estimate the costs of sandblasting all interior surfaces to bare metal,
recoating the interior with a three coat polyamide epoxy paint system,and disposing of the
sandblast residue. The contractor's estimated the cost for this work was 5160,000 to
I $180,000.
I
The estimate provided by the contractor included medical tests to ensure that workers are not
Ioverexposed to lead.
If the project is completed during the winter months(December,January.February),It is
estimated that an additional 515,000 to 525,000 will be required to pay for
heating/dehumidifying equipment within the tank.
The City should in Uude a contingency to the badget to provide for grindine,pit repairs or
oth-r uun,-structural repairs if they are requred. 'Lhe pits we observed were n• ;deep
I enwylh to warrant repairs,but others m y become apparent as the surface is sandblasted and
closer observations are made. We suggest that the contract documents include provisions for
pit repairs by force-account.
IStructural Additions =T
IThe cost rstimate for the structural additions to the Highlands water tank are estimated to be
$25.000.
I .All cost estimates prepared in this report are in 1995 dollars and ircpdet 25 ppcepl
contingency. Sates ax is not included. They have been prepared for guidance in project
evaluation and implementation from the information available at the time of the estimate.
The final costs of the project will depend on actual labor and material costs,worker safety
requirements,costs for disposal of hazardous waste(lead contaminated abrasive aggregate),
I productivity,competitive market conditions,final project scope and schedule,and other
variable factors. The final project costs will vary from these estimates. Because of dMe
Ilium .*w&%d rcab anise be carefully reviewed prior to making specific fioarcwd
i
9
awpaieywsyjq�ar '
i
CONCLUSIONS
Based on our observations and tests of the Highlands elevated water storage tank,we have ,f
concluded that:
i 1. The protective coating inside the tank has reachcd the end of its service life.
The coating on the roof structure and ceiling plates is in fair condition.
2. The existing coating contains lead. When this coating material is removed by
sandblasting,the operations may result in requirements for worker safety.
The resulting sandblast residue may contain enough lead to require special
handling and disposal.
' 3. The ladder inside the tank is in good condition.
4. The pining of the tank walls may require some isolated repair by welding,to
replace lost metal. This can be handled contractually by force account since
the extent of welding repair will not Sc known until the tank is sandblasted
5. The existing cathodic proteuion system is in good condition and should
provide several mur:years of service.
t
1
10
I
RECOMMENDATIONS
The existing coating inside the tank should be removed and replaced. The new coating -
system should consist of the following:
• Surface Preparation: White-metal sandblast(SSPC SP-5).
• Coating Type: Potable water approved polyamide epoxy. � `..-tweaJ� tin Z
i �r:Ms
• Number of Coats.Thickness: three coats, twelve mils dry film thickness
(plus one stripe coat of all welds and edges of structural steel).
Since pitting of the steel was observed inside the tank, an epoxy filler is recommended. j
After the tank has been sandblasted and primed,observations can be made to determine if
and where the fil:cr is required. The epoxv filler will be used where pits are found that have
sharp edges. Pits with rounded edges,depending on pit depth,should be adequately
protected by the specified coating at 12 mils.
t°
Yroviatorts should be iachdW in the contract documents to encore that :re N
comr&cmr
ttwrtiturs arid provides for worker safety in accordance with OSHA Rule 29 CFR 1926
WAC-296-155-176. If lead in the air exceeds action levels,the contractor must provide for a•�.ro
wWker safety as teWimd by the regulations.
Waste generated by paint removal olkrations, including paint chips from sandblasting, must �l
be characterized for hazardous and dangerous waste constituents in accordance with
applicable federal,state,and local regulations including 40 CFR 261 and 262 and WAC 173-
303-070. If it is determined that the waste is hazardous or dangerous waste,the Contractor
must store,transport,and dispose of the waste in a manner that is in compliance with
applicable federal,state,and local regulations. The Contractor must provide a copy of the
waste determination analytical results and the final disposition of the waste shall be certified
by the Contractor with a certificate of acceptance and hazardous or dangerous waste ^f
manifest,if applicable,from the disposal site. The City will have the right to approve or ( '"
disapprove of the transportation and disposal methods and the disposal site selected by the I
Contractor.
Structural modifications are recommended to improve access and worker safety on the
elevated sections of the water storage tank. These modifications include installation of a
platform at the catwalk,handrailtng around the hatch at the top of the tank,and a safety
climb device on the ladder between the catwalk and the tank roof hatch.
r
The exterior of the tank should be recoated within the next two years. We anticipate that this
work would consist of a pressure wash, spot repairs, and application of one or two finish
coats. A nonskid surface should be provided under the roof access ladder and within the roof
handrail area as part of this project.
LI
' ,P
li
a..
..x
1
The cathodic protection anodes and reference electrode should be reinstalled after the tank
recoating is complete. However,the cathodic protection system should be turneG off for at 'n
least one year(the paint warranty period). The system can re re-energized in the future when
visual observations indicate it is needed.
i`
i
i
I
I
i
i
12
q .
K
� YI
F.. - � , � � air°rei'1 a+n.•r�
NO
u y
H I�4
I�
Chicago Bridge&Iron
Technical Services Company
601 W.Lffid St,.t
Plmn9eld.llM1nuas Wsat 8929 'r
November 8. 19% Mailing Add...:
P 0 Boa 9
Plan6eld.IlLnas 605u 0009
815 439 31 W
The City of Renton FM 915 439 3130
i
Dept.of Planning/Building/Public Works
i Fourth Floor
200 Mill Avenue South
i
.. Arm.:Mr.Tom Malphms IF
'I
Re: Elevated Water Tank Inspection
CBI Contract%1623
750,000Gallon Spheroidal Elevated Water Storage Tank
s Original CBI Contract 8-0381
if
Attached please find t, copy of the inspection report prepared by Mr.Terry S.Grill of our
Plainfield,Illinois office.
1 In general,the report indicates that the tank is in good condition.However,the inspector found
general corrosion in the form of pitting through iut the interior wetted surfaces and moderate
corrosion was found in the hip course(#4 Plates)where the water line appears to fluctuate.We
feel that this corrosion is not detrimental to the tank,but actions must be taken to arrest any
further corrosion.Activating a Cathodic Protection System.and close monitoring of the paint
system by a professional service are recommended means to keep the corrosion in check. -
"' However the paint system cannot replace the original metal as part of the structural membrane.
Therefore if the monitoring reports that corrosion is progressing,the structural integrity of the
tank could be in jeopardy and be detrimental to the life of the structure.Hence it is important that
the new paint system be maintained and not be allowed to remain in service beyond its
recommended life span.
Below is a summary of the report and recommendations:
Foundation
i The surface of the foundation piers were found to be in good condition.However material should
be applied to prevent further cracking of the grout and corrosion to the metal.Also keep the top
of the piers clear of debris,grass and weed overgrowth,and built-up of dirt.The top of piers
should be a minimum of V above grade as recommended by A W WA.
J
1�
1
i
• N
F
ry
Chicago Bridge& Iron
,ink Exlerin Technical Services Company
The paint system on the exterior is in good condition on the riser and tank bottom.However
isolated spots on the shell have cracking and peeling and the roof also shows signs of weathering.
Some minor r r was seen on the tower rods anti balcony,and the anchor bolts at the base plate
intersection are rusting.
"Touch-up"painting should be applied to areas like the anchor bolts and balcony soon.Since the
exterior system as a whole is starting to break down,a full repainting should be scheduled for the
near future.
Tank InIgrior Wet
The paint on the roof is in good condition.Only small amounts of rust was seen on the painters
angles and lapped seams.The hip course(84 plates)and equator course(413 plates)have general
corrosion all over and moderate corrosion in localized pitted areas.The moderate corrosion is
familiar on elevated tanks and was found locally in elongated vertical strips up to 3/4', wide x 6'
long.(See the attached drawing that maps the corrosion on the N4 plates.)The pitting appeared
more concentrated in the center of the plates.Vertical weld seams appeared full and without
pitting.The pitting was generally located about 6'above the equator which is at the low point of
where the water line appeared to fluctuate.(See the attached Plate Stress Check.)Painters rails
and stiffener angles had rusting,but it was more oxidation build-up than heavy pitting and the
angles were in good shape.
Our inspector noticed that the corrosion was mostly on the south side of the tank as the attached
drawing reflects.One reasonable theory for this phenomena is that rectifiers on the anodes of the
cathodic protection system may have failed in this quadrant.However this is hypothetical.Since
the paint system is over 35 years old,there are too many variables that would contribute to the �[
localized pitting and the general corrosion.
The bottom bowl and head plates also have moderate corrosion with general pittng of about
0.02".The riser column has been sandblasted but N e have presumed that it also had moderate
corrosion.
The attached plate stress check has one sample of calculated requirements for a point on the N4
plate.Overall,we feel that the corrosion is not detrimental to the structural integrity of the tank and no operating restrictions to the specified capacity or head range is needed.
We do recommend that the tank interior be repainted to prevent additional oxidation and metal
I loss.The locally pitted areas should be covered with Tnemic 63-I500"Filler and Surfacer'or
equal after application of the prime coat.We also recommend cathodic protection for the lank and
the riser column.After the tank is placed back in service,the a4 plates must be visually examined s
r'
at 24 month intervals to insure that the paint system and repairs arc in good condition to keep
additional corrosion in check.
IlLnk!C2mDOnent
The tank accessories appear in good condition and undamaged.Two tower rods have been hit by
equipment but are only slightly bent.
i
o-
r n qqr
Chicago Bridge&Iron
Technical Services Company
The attached report sets forth the visual observation of CBI's inspectors during the inspection of
the tank performed on September 16, 1996;however,it is expected that you will satisfy yourself
as to the adequacy or accuracy of any information provided by CBI and take full responsibility to
any decision you make as to the use of any of the information provided by CBI.CBI is not able to
guarantee or represent that the tank and paint may not be subject to a condition or conditions _ ,t
which may not have been discovered by CBI's inspector but which may become evident during -°
repairing,repainting and/or further use of the tank.CBI makes no wanranty of any kind,expressed
or implied,with respect to these services.
If you have any questions concerning this report please contact the writer,John Julian or Terry
Grill of our Plainfield office.
Regards,
Andrew K.Edenbum Tart'S.Grill
II Engineering Coordinator It111110 or
Mir
i
r F.3
rt
§h
p
3
4' 4.
f
,` a
ct.
lift TANK INSPECTION REPORT
r
Inspection Contract No. 961623 _ Original Contract No. 6-MI
' Year Built 1960 Inspected By Tom Grill Dale of ltgpsotiort 10249681M25096
Location: Street 1e Strew NE 'lore 5g5
City Renton __ Su wprovkm weMinoton
Present Owner City of Renton {
Original Owner City of Renton ., ,
DESCRIPTION OF TANK
Type of tank m 750MG Spheroidal Cplumn Supported Tank
Capacity _ 7r+n nm ralkm
Type Construction(RNeted,Welded) _ WELDED Number of Columns 8
i
Height 1 W-O SCL Type of Columns(Laced or Tubular) Tubular
i
Type of Bottom Taus ___ Riser(Wet or Dry) Wet
Type of Roof Spheroidal Shell Ladder(Revolving or Fixed) Fue
I Number of Tower Panels 3 Root Ladder (Revolving a Fixed) Fixed
FOUNDATION CONDITIONS i
I
1. Are there any indications of foundation sedle,nont? No If yes'describe —
2. Is concrete or grout Chipped or cracked?V@{ It yes describe _ Misr wdace necks in tm of twy
Grout loose under 5ev rQ;f col,{m base late put only about W deep(local in nature o ly -T lona)
Y
3. Is soil around base of tank saturated with water or are there any indications of underground pipe leaks? No If yes describe
Standing water was noticed around center nser but this n n was from rand no
A. Is soil eroded so that any pan of the foundation is undermined or a large pen left bare? _ Ng If y,s'describe
S. How far does the foundation extend out of the ground? (Column Rem) Sityttral are flush with roil up to 12'prombon on _
others flay of la dl
(Riser Pier a to 5 itches ) (Ring Wall NA _
d) Put WA by pans of this report that do not apply to type of tank being inspected.
PRINTED IN USA GO IM(Page 1 of 9)REV APR 79
r
I
I
I 1 .
6. Does the tank have a valve Of? No __ Is the valve pit dry? NIA
Are there any indications that the valve pit or floor slab have settled? N/A
Is the concrete of either cracked or chipped? WA DescvOe H equked
i
7. Are foot elbows,etc,anchored to valve Pit floor or Hoot stab with Ihrlrq blocks Dr eIenp,bole? DnhmrraM
Are there any indications any of the pipes Have moved? NO Describe H induced I
f I
PAINT(HISTORY)
r
General information about previous paintings(If avapeble)
1. Dates of last painting: Inside 196D(AI E c1lan)
Outside 1978
2. Surface preparations used: Inside Picka a PrjM2,n Shop Spot Blellf Itl
Outside 1971 Sandblast `
3. Paint system or type paint used:Insideoust-Z nc o itle 21.ra pg 1
Outside 197H Tnemac Sens 70 Dolvu tha f
4. General comments concemirlg last or Prior planting(Dates,type Paints,etc.for previous syatams) _ The ezterim syftm,s in
Mgd condition,but therea everel soot the t vst
Interior has been santlbl stetl I a j
" a_ 5 Pf fie total I Will to EN92rate corrosion was found throunh W thet
manor v Med surfaces
TO
1. Are tower posts in tine? Vas
2. Is riser or cyan0er straight? Yes _
3. Are tower rods and cylinder rods in good adjustment and well tuned? Ves
a. Are rods in good condition? Yes-
(it<." � (It rods are reduced in size,measure pan and give dimensions
..Two rods have been hit by-MUIPMitnt rl( o rid the b
9f the lank fonmim si,ahtbends but smooth deformation
5. Are tower rod pins,stM Pins and cylinder rod pins or bolts in good condition? _ Yes
IMPORTANT: II pins with coffers,are all coffer I-place and well spread; If pins with nuts,are all nuts in place with Mreads
burred or welded?
N/A
PRINTED IN USA
GD ION(Papa 209)REV APR I9
}
I
I
6. Are struts in good condition? Yes
7. Are columns in good condition? _Yes
6. Are column connections in good condition? Yes
9. Is balcony floor in good condYlcn? Yes (Rain t s oondoa'in seve9l are.sl to no damaae noticed
10. Is balcony toe plate in good condition? Yes
11. Is balcony hand rail in good condition? Yes
12. Are balcony spaces,supports and connections to tank in good condition? Yes !
Secborls 1 to 12,if answer is To'describe.
Rust-tip;-i2Cce.7 a ouM the d a' hole VIe rWe of Lkwp -Y-did not a t be ae b s int surface 1
Not City intends to reptiml the eylenor of the lank Within two veers ate this corrosion will ba arrested al that bme.
However d the clly has any affet vN-to work ightIguled for Via exter of teas area should be attended to.
I
i
I
i
13. Has dirt accumulated on balcony floor? No V yes',to what depth _ Vent small amount at ffa ae to web I!
f
14 Are there any missing bolts or rivets n the lower or in the balcony handfail7 No If yes describe
General condition of protective coating an tower and balcony (Specify by column,rods,etc.)
Good coVeregB Tan areas of mildew on all IQ",comaaa9nta too coat beginnimit to brook downI
SQMQ mi rust on lgwgr Mds Whom struck by ea gMa t
y t'.
r
Estimated percentage of coats in good condition. top coats 75%-85% primer 90%
PRINTED IN USA W 1036(Page 3 of 9)REV APR 79
{ ANCHORAGE
1. Are base plates in good mnddion? Yes
2. Are anchor bolls tight? I"
1 Are anchor bolls and nuts in good condition? Yes (some rust was notroedl
(8 anchor bolts are reduced in size measure and report dimensions) Eig"ti are st no at Da•e plate interswron.not
eons lti Serious at time of insggcgo.bps must be cleaned and led soon
e. Are anchor bolls connections Pr chair in good condition? Yes
Sections 1 to A,8 arewer're',describe
CONDITION OF STRUCTURE
Describe pans of structure that contains paling on outside surface. None❑Oeceoi Lust minor rust found
Gore size of pits,number of pits Per square foot,depth of pits,is pitting localized or
general?
CONDITION OF METAL AND PROTECTIVE COATING OUTSIDE
Large riser cylinder Good appearance.but pa t betainnind to break domn
I Estimated percentage in good condition: top coats 85-90% primer 90%
Shalt N/A
Estimated percentage in good condition: lop coats WA primer -
Bell WA
Estimated percentage in good condition: lop mats N/A primer
1 Bottom Good metal is covered arM orotecled
i EslknaNd percentage in good condition: lop mats 90.95% primer 95%
1 Shell Fair.-Rl1MLj-qrj9tLrWr;f_pael'ra' isolated t 'wll need attention
Estimated percentage in good condition: top coats 75 -85% primer __85-90%
Root Fair,Paint beginning to show 0f Ihenno-will need atterim ygon _
Estimated percentage in good condition: top coats _80% _ primer 85%
CONDITION OF THE PROTECTIVE COATING AND METAL INSIDE
Large Riser Cylinder Interror has been sandblasted to bare metal
Is the cylinder pined? Yes If yes•describe _ No access' can only esim ill,
No.of pits per sq.it _ Est.up to 50 _Sae of pas Up to W 8%•De
Depth of pits Oo to 1P+2•Isolated up to 1/16'(Estimated) Is pining localized or General? Qimeral coup
only vig_w from tao Imk'na down wim hate light lit sc ad coed t n ah ullant that had amessetl the areal 'r
PRINTED IN USA GO 10d6(Pa
ge 4 of 9)REV APR 79
I
t
Condition of protective coating None fined Dean sandblasted) —
Estimated percentage in good condition'. top goats 0°re printer 0% i
Slash
Is the shaft pitted? WA It yes'describe IN
No.of pits per sq.t, WA Size of pits ._ WA
Depth of pits WA Is pining localaed or General? WA
Condition of protective coating WA
Estimated percentage in good condition top coats WA primer N/A
Bad
Is the Doll pored? N'A If yes'describe
No.of pits per sg,D. Size of pits _
Depth of pits Is pining localized or General?
Condition of protective coating —
Estimated percentage in good condition: tap mats DrNrnar
Bottom
A Are the bowl plates pined? yes d yeti'deunbe
No.of pits per sg It 50 Size of pit _--A'1QS}' _
Depth of pits 02''n wrieral.OS'isoated Is pitting localized or General? General
Conddion of protective mating None:has¢gytn san��yg{$q(g,¢arQmetal
Estimated percentage In good condition: top coals 0% primer 0%
S Is the head plate pitted? --Y0s_____If yes'deudbs Same as bowl pates
No.of pits per sg.If Sae of pits
Depth of pits _ Is pining localized or General?
PRINTED IN USA GO 1006(Pap 6 W s)REV APR 79
I
J
Hsu
Condition of protKI"mating Nsly.^x}Qean sanQDWstetl to ba a tel
^r
Estimated percentage in good condition top coats D%
primer _ D%
SMII I
Is the shell p41ed7 Ya If ya'tlawylpp Mil
li aM Y4 pis awa
Ring No. .
(From Bottom) No.Pits Srze of Sq.Ft. Pits Depth
opth
its
Y3 DleteS fEqWI;Ir p151 SD Dar So fl
bK R D
W ft bolifen CMOs&B-CIE d A S Mk at w 1 ha
ads
Y4 Wate<1MJg��1—.— - Ianoatad mrros' n t 41' itle k Ina vertically Win Damml
The_coi�"to 'dtl t h d 12.pg_Ipcaled ry Me 14 1ha Y4' era welde0 n r 14Q§y e.Dut seemed to De rt�ie_
conwntrated In tM tamer an pf the n nlGolace
fo
YRftal LQid I_ h _d
1 rr , n
trDffi3e9 lull Ths b ally(grtl ebo ?Te �u-IC D i •F{5n above to trend cove ee a rea o _the
ipl�i(e6 app t sn Qgy.�n(awragglmm�P N plates a Dead I
6 ' bo Due to the l a d access f tleoM of Croft a.•a•.,.do"". . in roes wM sarlmlas cNa 'no hatl be rrlaetI WQA ch k was taken at
?S.1sG9lis�ingt w@,uwt ckanad.rree;yrg�d n r-flPLS�'+A�45' g••_�„a,� in gig at in•s I -bon.
i
Is pitting localized or general? Arva..a b pa IM tetl — p
Cthe water. kmi nyw -1 s
CINldshon of comer weld outside N]A
insak I
Condit on of pmw-tw mating &tot BA%of 1
,Rfle tank— -z-_S2eert3$RQClastee ro Da a Ia1
Esbmated percentage in good Condition: top croak A
--L.__ primer
4
t
PRINTED IN USA
DO IOCa(POP 601 p)Pf/APR 79
1
I w.
C'
}
i
j
. .
Y
love,,,
Root/structural u
A Rool(Below H.W.L.) a.
Is the roof pitted? _ No it yes'describe smell amount of st at o jitters andle
_ Pits per sq.It WA See of pits
i _Depth of pits _. Is DMirg localized Or general?
Conrglion of protective coating __ None Isandb aslodl
Estimated percentage in good condition: top cpefs _ pnmpr
B roof (Above H.W.L.)
Is the root pined? Nona ftgWI It yes'descnbe smell Amount OI MI at plate Inns
Pits per sq.If Size of pits
Depth of pits Is Dieing localized or general?
Condition of protective coating —_@8�41asted to bar,mMt
Estimated Percentage in eood condition: topcoats primer _.
MISCELLANEOUS
Is the tank equipped with a cathodic protection system? Yes If yes-describe _Installed,_ 1971
Manufacturer _CA21EEg Is the system operating properly? Assume
Cenibr se does not ha nodes t M' a d{cusse0 this with customer and was told this will be gomicted
Was the tank emptied for the inspection? YES I not completely emptied,state how tar down -
Is any portion Of the vessel exterior covered by troat casing _ No _ It yes-state which pan
Description of frost casng(a) Type(wood,aluminum,etc.) N/A
lb) Date installed (c) Is It properly supported?
0) Condition
Y
i
I
PRINTED IN USA 00 toots(Peps 7.19)REV APR 79
1... ..rw:w.wwsrtrr+.rr�faw.+��•+-,.�—+�MJ
f
I
Are there any indications of leaks in Me tank or nser? No -
If yes'describe _ --
Are there any indications of leaks in the piping,expansion pint,etc. — N
Is the bonom covered with mud or scale? —Ygs _ If'yes'to what depth? 2"to 3ft deep i 11enAe1•'El
Is there any indication that mud or scale from the tank has anlered the outlet? NOIt the tank is riveted,state the condition of laps and rivets on ouis,&0 cylinder,bosom,shell and root N/A
Have rivet heads been seal welded? WA Describe any previous repairs to inside areas.
it
State condition of various components in terms such as good.fah or poor conclition,or state it accessory rat applicable.
ACCESSORIe^ _NOT APPLv'ARLE
Tenk or Rrser M nh
Column Ladder ood
a r
Roof Lad er
R I Man le
R I Venl r Fin I
IMigif Tank Soldier —
Rod
P m�Ancle Good
Overflow Good
e 5!4gLLadder WA _
Heater Pipe WA
Expansion Joint A
Other Accessor N/A
PRINTED IN USA W idse IPege 9 of 9)REV APR 79 - -
J
•II Door or lkll MM fA
11 adder -- MIA
A
Pb lip Insyebron A
Condensate Pladorm A _
if Oder if WA
Acce T be Man NM
Access Tube LadgEr
Describe fully any of the above aocassodes which am not in good Condition. 11 repair or replacement of any pad is recommended,
grim complete descril lbn inlluding bcation and extend of repair reconarorbed. —_—
I
Repairs mad,by Inspector
.I None
I — -
Reccrremanded Repairs
�I ],�_I t 'or must be�Q@i�ted to teal prevent atld t oral p.^'^^^"I bss
p T11e too v�t�gd plate¢1e0 pl -hip o real m st be suall e a 'lied at 94 mo Ih Ttervals to Ins,di,the cant aystem rc
1 _jq peed croMilion end reoa'red a§ led-n ortler to prevent dd'tb el corrosion to 1�igprg'
3. The customs ho M have the Camodb P giffaion supol'er d9�I MI^ st'ra o1 a ode•'n the 5'-0 diarreter
I
center column
_ 4. Colurrm aligner boas M V1 be kept in uood condition the maosgn rbliced at the 1i of the i lspeclb IS not a
` problem.bllt remedial action must betaken soon to new the p tell' pant oat n0 A y ea bea It1e boa halt and
— nob in base plate shoultl 6e cl�a ed of debt s end sggled 'm a good p jL c Ik le help preven is r retention whyh i
can exclgr$Io gorrosbn to thearea, I
Note Add,jonal pages to be usud a necessary
I
Date 1WOM __ Signature of lnspegler T^'^ ^ II — i
l
PRINTED IN USA G91nue(Page 9 ei 91 REV APR 79
w
a a
„v Lt
rEt
� � x
F'?
NORTH " ---CCw M EAStwo .1625' IN Cr
(I MEASURED A"—-'
i
1 2B • 2i 26 s 2A 23 21 21 1 IB 16 J 12 II 70
j frj ftj ftj f�j ftl ft�
, I , 1 � i11 III J1 i1 111
I I I I I I
-3PL( I I
COL h COL -6 COL •r COL % :OL 05 COL y
COL .1
UDDER Ca I COL +B UPPER BALL STRETMT
PLATFORM
1 J6' BIDE BALCONY
I I
1
i
I
I
COL. @ COL Al
(0'FLOV COL!
•3P (.625) B PLS
1
I
O 13 l.5) 16 PLS
G4 PLATES (1/4)
20 ARM
I
1
I �
COL •3 j COL Mi
I
1 '
I
1
I
PLAN OF ROOF
rum ora nsi a�aa ea[
J+ i
MC �
is
MEASURED .e625' IN GENERAL -
(1)MEASURED .ee'— •A (.25) (2e PIS ARORD)
I 11 le I IA I 12 a 10 e 7 6 B 2 I
ftj ftj ftj ft'1 r&1"lTR'S ANGLE Mom
IOIAL CIRCIMFERENCE
i I .
AOI CUTOUT C ,J EWATOR J
T T AND REYELDED I t
I I I (APPEARS FROM ERECTION)
•3 P PL •7 PL •3 PI +1 PL
I I
ea -6 A -5 CO, •A COL 9 p COL -2COL COL •I
'6 UPPER BALL STRETCHOUT OF INSIDE o LADDER
IAW LARD?
r
I
' 76' WIDE BALCONY
COL +7
1 TO'FLOW COL)
•dP (.625) B PLS
•J (.5) 16 PLS
V PLATES (1/4)
2e ARM
i
COT. %
MAP OF CORROSION
75M X In, B0.
SPIEROIDAL
COL •5 RENTON.WA
MIM•1N f%423
w yew nn ll-ice% tA13
ROOF 0.1NSLLU/.i A )i55�_ •� '•+
�E+fYO ••fx. 1
36' dt i
1
BASIS IN OHECKING
04 PL CL AWWA D100-84
TCl 1/4 A 30 SNOW LOAD=25 PSF
e cana•kn � I pEFINRIONS
TI=Latitudinal Stress (psi)
D R2=19.5' T2=Mendianal Stress (psi)
HR-Horizontal Radius (ft)
L X=13_75' R1 =Normal Radius (ft)
EO ash 1` -1 R2=Radius of Curvature(ft)
2.645' HR.32
1344 e3 PL . 58' _. _ . — P =Water Pressure
1P50 .
J �,—
Seam 1/2 Mtl=Metal Load (kips)
WT=Water Load(kips)
Area&Volume Calculation S =Snow Load(kips)
AAGc = 111.71 SO FT x„r,D 27.68 FT
ABGD = 4.71 SO FT X,, = 32.60 FT
ABGG, = 53.77 SO FT x,,o = 27.98 FT
AAD, - 53.23 SO FT x. = 26.93 FT VA = 9007 CU FT
VA L = 18M Cu FT
Total Volume of Water above B . 27293 CU FT
Surface Aree = 2-pi�2-19.5'Nn�,�]�a p2)+13.751 19.5.0.7109 : 2478 SO FT
#4 PL to B 1 I 2 / J
0.7f088
Water Load
WT= 27293 x 62.4/1000 IM3 kips P .1o275'82A 841 pat
Wal Load
Roof Load = 19 kips
Paint Rail = 1 kips
r Stiffeners = 2 kips
s4 PL above B = 25 kips
MI = 47 kips
Snow Load
S = 43.4 kips
T2 = IHL)'1P-tMB+WT+. 11 1= 1517 LBS/FT
2 pi'HR^2
T1 = R1'(P.(T2M(R2))= 19192 LBS/FT (GOVERNS)
tnEM = 19192 = 0.107 in < (0.25-0.08=0.17 in) (OKAY)
12.15000
SUEIECf
OFFICE REFERENCE NO.
Plata Stress Check ® PCB REVISION 961623
MADEBY CHi MADEBY CHKD BY
750MG x 100'6CL Spheroidal TSG AIGi SN7'1 OF
Renton.WA DATE DATE DATE DATE
I I/IN6 1 I/I196
_. -- Gn 64A REV AUG%
7
�an