Storage tank design with special focus on Cryogenic fluids

A: A: Surface area ~15,000 m² times 8 W/m² is ~120 kW. Divide by LNG latent heat and inventory, you land near 0.1%/day. That's the sanity check you do at 2 a.m. B: Vapor density doesn't rescue the energy balance; heat leak still rules. C: Roof losses matter, but not enough to double the rate at this scale. D: CFD refines it later; this call is about order-of-magnitude risk triage.

A: A: Full containment means exactly that — credible inner tank rupture with liquid retained. That's the safety logic. B: NFPA 59A distances don't replace containment philosophy. C: Structural-only thinking ignores why prestressing and crack control exist. D: Procedural overfill controls aren't accepted as a primary barrier in hazard analysis.

A: A: At cryogenic service, cold spring and vapor density matter; 0.15 barg vs 0.2 barg leaves no operating margin. B: Parallel PSVs are common when sized correctly and manifolded. C: Nozzle size depends on relieving case, not tank volume alone. D: MAWP vs design pressure mismatch often hides a real assumption gap.

A: A: This is the industry workhorse for large LNG tanks and behaves predictably at −162 °C. B: Carbon steel hits brittle transition well above LNG temperature. C: Duplex loses toughness and isn't qualified for this service. D: Aluminum works cryogenically, but dismissing it purely on seismic grounds mixes material and structural issues.