Self-Bunded vs Traditional Fuel Tanks
Structural Design Comparison
Traditional Tanks
- Single-walled or basic double-walled design
- Higher leak vulnerability with single walls
- Requires separate containment systems
- More susceptible to environmental damage
Self-Bunded Tanks
- Integrated double-walled construction
- Interstitial space holds 110% of capacity
- Built-in spill containment
- Superior environmental protection
Key Advantage: Automatic leak containment without external systems
Installation Requirements
Traditional Tanks
- Often requires concrete foundation
- Needs separate external bund wall
- Higher installation costs
- Less flexible for relocation
Self-Bunded Tanks
- No need for external bund construction
- More space-efficient installation
- Easier to relocate when needed
- Lower overall installation costs
Key Advantage: Ideal for temporary sites like construction projects
Maintenance Considerations
Traditional Tanks
- Frequent leak monitoring required
- Containment pans need regular checks
- Higher corrosion risk
- More intensive cleaning needs
Self-Bunded Tanks
- Built-in containment reduces spill monitoring
- Still requires integrity checks
- Less external maintenance needed
- More durable construction
Summary of Key Differences
- Safety: Self-Bunded tanks offer superior leak protection
- Environmental Protection: Integrated containment meets strict regulations
- Installation: Self-Bunded tanks require less infrastructure
- Mobility: Easier to relocate without rebuilding containment
- Maintenance: Reduced monitoring needs for spills
Industry Applications
- Construction: Temporary fuel storage with easy relocation
- Agriculture: Safe fuel handling in sensitive environments
- Industrial: Compliance with strict environmental regulations
- Remote Sites: Self-contained solutions without infrastructure
Preferred Choice: Where safety, compliance, and flexibility are priorities