scholarly journals Pump and Valve Inservice Testing: How Pump and Valve Testing Evolved

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Ruggiero
Keyword(s):  
Centrifugal Pump ◽  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
Power Test ◽  
Service Testing ◽  
The Future ◽  
Pump Testing ◽  
Instrument Accuracy

The O&M Code was developed when it was decided to move Pump and Valve In-Service Testing Requirements from ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section XI to a standalone Code. IST for Pumps was originally is ASME Section XI IWP and for Valves IWV. Safety and Relief Valves were a Power Test Code and not in the scope of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. IWP and IWV were developed after plants had been designed and built. The desire was that no back-fits were to be required to comply with IST requirements. After the 1986 Edition, IWP and IWV requirements were moved into O&M. Appendix 1 of OM was what used to be the Power Test Code. While this was going on, the NRC issued what has been called “the Richardson Letter”. Among other things, that letter required that IST for pumps better asses the condition of the pumps by putting higher accuracy instrumentation on the test pipe. For many plants, this was the minimum recirculation pipe. Over the course of time, the committee was able to get agreement that if a centrifugal pump were tested “back on its curve” increased instrument accuracy would be meaningless. This was the genesis of what we now call comprehensive Pump testing. Additionally, there were several alternative methods for valve testing that had been developed. It became clear, that simple periodic stroke timing of a power operated valve was simply not adequate for detecting degrading performance. This presentation will discuss how Pump and Valve In Service Testing evolved to what it is today and discuss what might be alternatives in the future. I want to thank Robert Parry, who provided some insights into this presentation specifically where my memory needed a bit of jogging. Paper published with permission.

Hydrotesting and In-Line Inspection: Now and in the Future

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerry Rau ◽  
Mike Kirkwood
Keyword(s):  
New Technologies ◽  
Inert Gases ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
Operating Pressure ◽  
Inherent Safety ◽  
Safety Issues ◽  
The Future ◽  
Integrity Assurance ◽  
High Level

Pressure testing of pipelines has been around in some form or another since the 1950s1–14. In its earliest form, operators used inert gases such as Nitrogen or even air to test for pipeline integrity. However, with the significant increases in pipeline pressures and inherent safety issues with a pressurized gas, the switch to using water happened in the late 1960’s15–17. Hydrostatic tests (referred to as hydrotests) have been used since then to set and reset the Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP) for pipelines but as other technologies develop and gain acceptance will hydrotesting still play a key role in pipeline integrity in the years ahead? Currently, hydrotesting is a topic for the impending US Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration’s (PHMSA) Proposed New Rule Making (PNRM)18. Under the NPRM, hydrotesting is required to verify MAOP on pre-1970s US “grandfathered” pipelines, as well as on pipelines of any age with incomplete or missing testing record and include a high level test with a “spike” in pressure. But hydrotesting may not be the only method. Alternative methods and new technologies — used alone or used in combination with hydrotesting — may help provide a more comprehensive way for operators to identify and address potential problems before they become a significant threat. This paper explores both sides of the argument. Before In-Line Inspection (ILI) technology was even available, hydrotesting was the absolute means of the proof of integrity. However, hydrotesting is under scrutiny for many reasons that this paper explores. ILI was introduced in the 1960’s with the first commercially available Magnetic Flux Leakage (MFL) tools that presented the industry with an alternative. Currently there are a huge array of available technologies on an ILI tool and so is the role of the hydrotest over? The paper looks at the benefits of the hydrotest and these are presented and balanced against available ILI technology. Furthermore, as pipelines are being developed in even more harsh environments such as deepwater developments, the actual logistics of performing a hydrotest become more challenging. The paper will also look at both applications onshore and offshore where regulators have accepted waivers to a hydrotest using alternative methods of proving integrity. The paper concludes with the current use and needs for hydrotesting, the regulatory viewpoint, the alternatives and also what the future developments need to focus on and how technology may be improved to provide at least a supplement if not a replacement to this means of integrity assurance.

scholarly journals Extradition Between the UK and Ireland After Brexit—Understanding the Past and Present to Prepare for the Future

2020 ◽  
pp. 002201832097753
Author(s):  
Gemma Davies ◽  
Paul Arnell
Keyword(s):  
Transition Period ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
Good Friday ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Good Friday Agreement ◽  
The Future ◽  
Close Relationship ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

The Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom have a long, close and difficult history. The most recent phase of which dates from 1998 and the conclusion of the Good Friday Agreement. Since 1921, however, there has been unique practice between Ireland and the UK as regards the transfer of accused and convicted persons from one to the other. Indeed, there has been a special and close relationship between the two in that regard; albeit one not without difficulties. In recent times EU Justice and Home Affairs measures and the Good Friday Agreement have supplemented and strengthened the relationship. These include, since January 2004, the European Arrest Warrant (EAW). The EAW has been particularly important in streamlining the extradition process between the Ireland and the UK. This phase of history and co-operation is coming to an end. The UK’s membership of the EU has now ceased, and a transition period during which the UK remains part of the EAW will end on 31st December 2020. The extradition relationship between the two is therefore facing a considerable challenge. There are several options open to Ireland, the UK and the EU as a replacement. Time, political will and the interests of third states, however, may well stand in the way of the conclusion of an agreement that optimally serves the interests of all parties and criminal justice. This paper considers the origins of extradition between the UK and Ireland and the alternative methods of extradition open to the UK and Ireland after Brexit. Consideration is given to the likely operation of a Norway-Iceland style agreement and whether such an agreement will be in place by the end of the transition and, if it was, whether its terms are likely to be sufficient for the needs of Ireland and the UK. The possibility of a bilateral arrangement on extradition between Ireland and the UK is also explored. Underlying the discussion is the critical point that the future extradition relationship must retain its ‘special’ characteristics, and therefore maintain the trust and good will that has developed over the years and given rise to an effective extradition relationship between the two countries. In other words, the lessons of history must be remembered.

What’s New in Section I [2001 Through 2003]

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
John R. MacKay
Keyword(s):  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Heat Recovery ◽  
Steam Generators ◽  
Si Units ◽  
The Future

It has been a three years since I last prepared a summary of significant revisions to the Section I of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. In addition to the routine maintenance and upgrade revisions that occur in each annual addenda to the Code, there are several major activities under way that will have a significant impact on Section I in the future. One of these is a contemplated new Part covering Heat Recovery Steam Generators. The second is the publication of the 2004 Edition of the Boiler Pressure Vessel (B&PV) Code in SI units.

Pneumatic Test of Pressurised Equipment: Its Hazards and Alternatives

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kaveh Ebrahimi ◽  
Saeid Rahimi Mofrad
Keyword(s):  
Shock Waves ◽  
Liquid Medium ◽  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
Design Codes ◽  
Pressure Testing ◽  
Cylindrical Pressure Vessel ◽  
Pressure Test ◽  
Extreme Hazards ◽  
Methodological Assessment

Pressure testing of pressurised equipment is crucial in establishing confidence that it is capable of performing the duty for which it has been designed and fabricated. A pressure test is usually mandated by pressurised equipment design codes for newly fabricated equipment. Also many regulations or industry codes for the design and fabrication of pressurised equipment require that a pressure test is performed on any modified in-service pressurized equipment to verify that the integrity of the equipment has not been compromised after such modifications. Although the usual and normally the preferred method of pressure testing is conducting a full hydrostatic test on the entire equipment (i.e. using a liquid medium, typically water), there may be occasions that a hydrostatic test is simply not practical. As an alternative to a full hydrostatic test, the designer may consider performing a localized pressure test or sometimes a full pneumatic test on modified equipment. It must be emphasized that a full pneumatic test can create extreme hazards to a facility and nearby personnel and therefore needs a careful and methodological assessment prior to being attempted on any equipment. This article is structured primarily as an attempt to assist the organizations in charge of design and inspection of newly fabricated or in-service equipment to identify general hazards associated with pneumatic test of pressurised equipment in a structured manner. An analysis of a simple cylindrical pressure vessel is presented to provide a better understanding of hazards associated with pneumatic test. Two tables in the paper provide the recommended exclusion zones from the equipment being pneumatically tested in order to reduce hazards associated with shock waves and/or projectile fragments. The paper also briefly explains alternative methods of testing in lieu of a full hydrostatic or pneumatic test. [1, 2]

scholarly journals Pengujian Kinerja Pompa Sentrifugal Multistage Berkapasitas 118,5 KW pada PLTP Berdasarakan Standar ISO 9906

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-113
Author(s):  
Wahyu Hidayat ◽  
Damawidjaya Biksono ◽  
Dadan Zulpian
Keyword(s):  
Centrifugal Pump ◽  
Field Test ◽  
Performance Test ◽  
Standard Procedure ◽  
Test Method ◽  
Pump Performance ◽  
Multistage Centrifugal Pump ◽  
Total Head ◽  
Pump Testing ◽  
Test Result

AbstrakPengujian unjuk kerja pompa sentrifugal multistage berkapasitas 118,5 kW di kawasan Pembangkit Listrik Tenaga Panas Bumi (PLTP) daerah Jawa Barat saat ini akan menyesuaikan prosedur standar. Standar pengujian pompa diterapkan pada proses pengujian pompa dengan tujuan nilai hasil pengujian valid. Nilai head dan debit yang didapat dari pengujian dibandingkan dengan hasil pengujian sebelum penerapan standar. Pengujian pompa sentrifugal menerapkan metode pengujian lapangan dengan menerapkan standar ISO 9906-2012. Standar ISO 9906-2012 adalah panduan baku pengujian pompa rotodinamik. Dari hasil pengujian, didapatkan kurva pompa sentrifugal multistage debit maksimal 116,64 m3/h pada head 275,13 m. Pada data spesifikasi kapasitas pompa sebesar 108 m3/jam dan head total sebesar 300 m. Hal ini berarti prosedur pengujian pompa ISO 9906-2012 dapat memungkinkan kita untuk melihat kinerja pompa aktual.Kata kunci: pompa sentrifugal, pengujian lapangan, uji kinerja pompa, ISO 9906  AbstractPerformance test of multistage centrifugal pump at geothermal power plant area around west java is about to adapt standard procedure. Pump testing standards are applied during pump performance test in order to valid test result values. Head and flowrate value from current test compared with previous test result before standard are applied. Pump performance test use field test method by applying ISO 9906-2012 standard. ISO 9906-2012 standard is a normative guidance for rotodynamic pump testing. The test result shows multistage centrifugal pump curve maximum flowrate is 116,64 m3/h at total head 275,13 m. Pump specification sheet shows that maximum capacity is 108 m3/h and total head 300 m. It indicates that ISO 9906-2012 standard pump testing procedure allow us to determine actual pump performance.Kata kunci: Centrifugal pump, field test, performance test, ISO 9906

The Future of ECVAM: A Personal Perspective

2002 ◽  
Vol 30 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 239-241
Author(s):  
Michael Balls
Keyword(s):  
Alternative Methods ◽  
Personal Perspective ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
Validation Process ◽  
The Future ◽  
Chemicals Policy ◽  
The Three Rs ◽  
Made In

Progress made in the practical application of the validation process is summarised, and some of the remaining problems are considered. Highlights of the first ten years of ECVAM are reviewed, and ECVAM's activities as a route of communication on the Three Rs are discussed. Finally, some suggestions are made for maintaining ECVAM's momentum in the future, especially in relation to the challenge and opportunity for alternative methods afforded by the new EU Chemicals Policy.

What’s New in Section VIII [2002 Through 2003]

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas P. Pastor
Keyword(s):  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Si Units ◽  
The Future ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Division 2

It has been a three years since I last prepared a summary of significant revisions to the Section VIII Pressure Vessel Code. In addition to the routine maintenance and upgrade revisions that occur in each annual addenda to the Code, there are several major activities under way that will have a significant impact on Section VIII in the future. One of these is the rewrite of Section VIII, Division 2. The second is the publication of the 2004 Edition of the Boiler Pressure Vessel (B&PV) Code in SI units.

Investigation of Fluid Transients in Centrifugal Pump Integrated System With MultiChannel Pressure Vessel

2013 ◽  
Vol 135 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Wuyi Wan ◽  
Wenrui Huang
Keyword(s):  
Centrifugal Pump ◽  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Design Method ◽  
Oscillation Amplitude ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Integrated System ◽  
Centrifugal Pumps ◽  
Transient Pressure ◽  
Improve Design ◽  
Fluid Transients

A pressure vessel is installed to prevent transient vacuum and overpressure in centrifugal pump integrated system. In order to study the transient response of the pressure vessel with multichannels and improve design approach, an integrated system with two centrifugal pumps and a pressure vessel is presented. Based on the water hammer method of characteristics (MOC), the integrated numerical model and program are established by combining pumps, valves and pressure vessels in the integrated systems. Transient pressure process and gas volume variation are simulated for the pressure vessel. The Oscillation amplitude and frequency are obtained, and then the extreme hydraulic transient pressures are analyzed and compared. An optimal design method is provided to determine the safe and economic mass (SEM) of gas (nitrogen) and corresponding optimal safe and economic volume (SEV) of pressure vessel.

Design Criteria for Boilers and Pressure Vessels in the U.S.A.

1988 ◽  
Vol 110 (4) ◽  
pp. 430-443 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin D. Bernstein
Keyword(s):  
Elevated Temperature ◽  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Failure Modes ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Design Criteria ◽  
The Future ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Design Loads ◽  
Elevated Temperature Design

Preface. Code criteria defined. Evolution of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. How the Code operates today. Design by rule. Evolution of design by analysis. Types of stress and their significance. Failure modes. Strength theories. Design loads. New or unusual designs. Code Cases. Interpretations. Stress limits for design by rule and design by analysis. Elevated temperature design. Recent developments. A glimpse at the future. References.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document