Fuel Tank Materials Comparison
1. Ordinary Carbon Steel
This is a common material used in traditional tanks. It is low-cost and easy to process, suitable for transporting less corrosive fuels such as diesel and kerosene.
- Cost: Low
- Corrosion Resistance: Poor, prone to rusting
- Maintenance: Requires regular anti-corrosion coating
- Best for: Diesel, kerosene
- Not suitable for: High-sulfur fuels, humid environments
2. Stainless Steel
Using 304 stainless steel as the mainstream material, it contains chromium-nickel alloys and offers excellent corrosion resistance. Suitable for volatile or corrosive fuels.
- Cost: 30%-50% higher than carbon steel
- Corrosion Resistance: Excellent
- Maintenance: Easy to clean, resists scaling
- Best for: Gasoline, ethanol
- Considerations: Stringent welding requirements
3. Aluminum Alloy
A representative lightweight material, weighing approximately 40% less than carbon steel. Superior corrosion resistance, especially against seawater erosion.
- Weight: 40% lighter than carbon steel
- Corrosion Resistance: Superior to carbon steel
- Strength: Low, not impact-resistant
- Best for: Coastal areas, long-distance transport
- Considerations: Specialized welding equipment needed
4. Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic (FRP)
Made from a composite of glass fiber and resin, offering exceptional chemical resistance. The tank body is seamlessly molded, minimizing leak risks.
- Chemical Resistance: Exceptional
- Heat Resistance: Poor (degrades above 60°C)
- Weight: Less than carbon steel
- Best for: Methanol, biodiesel
- Construction: Seamlessly molded
5. Steel-Plastic Lined
Combines steel strength with plastic corrosion resistance. Features a polyethylene (PE) or polypropylene (PP) plastic layer inside the carbon steel tank body.
- Cost: Between carbon steel and stainless steel
- Corrosion Resistance: Excellent (from plastic lining)
- Heat Resistance: Poor (max 60°C)
- Best for: Fuels with acids/alkalis
- Main Issue: Damaged lining difficult to repair