Table of Contents:
List of Appendices
Two consequences result from a complete rupture:
For a leakage failure, the hazard consequences can range from no effect to very serious effects:
The types and applications of pressure vessels included and excluded in this chapter are summarized inTable IV:3-1. An illustration of a schematic pressure vessel is presented inFigure IV:3-1.
NOTE: Though this review of pressure vessels excludes inspection or evaluation of safety release valves, the compliance officer should be aware thatNO valves or T-fittings should be present between the vessel and the safety relief valve.
Most of the pressure or storage vessels in service in the United States will have been designed and constructed in accordance with one of the following two pressure vessel design codes:
Vessels certification can only be performed by trained inspectors qualified for each code. Written tests and practical experience are required for certification. Usually, the compliance office is not equipped for this task, but is able to obtain the necessary contract services.
TABLE IV:3-1. Vessel Types
Vessels included: | Vessel types specifically excluded: |
---|---|
Stationary and unfired | Vessels used as fired boilers |
Used for pressure containment of gases and liquids | Vessels used in high-temperature processes (above 315° C, 600° F) or at very low and cryogenic temperatures |
Constructed of carbon steel or low alloy steel | Vessels and containers used in transportable systems |
Operated at temperatures between -75° and 315° C (-100° and 600° F) | Storage tanks that operate at nominally atmospheric pressure |
Piping and pipelines | |
Safety and pressure-relief valves | |
Special-purpose vessels, such as those for human occupancy |
Figure IV:3-1. Some Major Parts of a Pressure Vessel
Deaerator Service
Analysis of incident survey data and other investigations has determined the following features about the deaerator vessel cracking.
The failures and the survey results have prompted TAPPI (Technical Association of Pulp and Paper Industry), the National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors, and NACE (National Association of Corrosion Engineers) to prepare inspection, operation and repair recommendations. For inspection, all recommendations suggest:
The TAPPI and the NACE recommendations also contain additional items, such as:
Amine Service
Although the possibility of cracking of carbon steels in an amine environment has been known for some years, real concern about safety implications was highlighted by a 1984 failure of the amine process pressure vessel. Overall, the survey found about 40% cracking incidence in a total of 294 plants. Cracking had occurred in the absorber/contactor, the regenerator and the heat exchanger vessels, and in the piping and other auxiliary equipment. Several of the significant findings of the survey were:
Wet Hydrogen Sulfide
The harmful effects of hydrogen generating environments on steel have been known and recognized for a long time in the petroleum and petrochemical industries. In particular, sensitivity to damage by hydrogen increases with the hardness and strength of the steel; and damage and cracking are more apt to occur in high strength steels, as follows:
Ammonia Service
Pulp Digester Service
These vessels had a very good service record with only isolated reports of cracking problems until the occurrence of a sudden rupture failure in 1980. The inspection survey has revealed that about 65% of the properly inspected vessels had some cracking. Some of the cracks were fabrication flaws revealed by the use of more sensitive inspection techniques but most of the cracking was service-induced. The inspection survey and analysis indicates the following features about the cracking.
Summary of Service Cracking Experience
For vessels and tanks within the scope of this document, the service experience indicates that the emphasis of the inspection and safety assessment should be on:
Of the various conventional and advanced nondestructive examination (NDE) methods, five are widely used for the examination of pressure vessels and tanks by certified pressure vessel inspectors. The names and acronyms of these common five methods are:
VT, PT, and MT can detect only those discontinuities and defects that are open to the surface or are very near the surface. In contrast, RT and UT can detect conditions that are located within the part. For these reasons, the first three are often referred to as "surface" examination methods and the last two as "volumetric" methods. Table II of PUB 8-1.5 summarizes the main features of these five methods.
Liquid Penetrant Test (PT) depends on allowing a specially formulated liquid (penetrant) to seep into an open discontinuity and then detecting the entrapped liquid by a developing agent. When the penetrant is removed from the surface, some of it remains entrapped in the discontinuities. Application of a developer draws out the entrapped penetrant and magnifies the discontinuity. Chemicals which fluoresce under black (ultraviolet) light can be added to the penetrant to aid the detectability and visibility of the developed indications. The essential feature of PT is that the discontinuity must be "open," which means a clean, undisturbed surface.
The PT method is independent of the type and composition of the metal alloy so it can be used for the examination of austenitic stainless steels and nonferrous alloys where the magnetic particle test is not applicable.
Magnetic Practice Test (MT)
Radiography (RT)
Ultrasonic Testing (UT)
The fundamental principles of ultrasonic testing of metallic materials are similar to radar and related methods of using electromagnetic and acoustic waves for detection of foreign objects. The distinctive aspect of UT for the inspection of metallic parts is that the waves are mechanical, so the test equipment requires three basic components:
Very short signal pulses are induced into the material and waves reflected back from discontinuities are detected during the "receive" mode. The transmitting and detection can be done with one transducer or with two separate transducers (the tandem technique).
Detection Probabilities and Flaw Sizing
The implementation of NDE (nondestructive examination) results for structural integrity and safety assessment involves a detailed consideration of two separate but interrelated factors.
The overall reliability of NDE is obviously an important factor in a safety and hazard assessment. Failing to detect or undersizing existing discontinuities reduces the safety margin while oversizing errors can result in unnecessary and expensive outages. High reliability is achieved through a combination of factors, as follows:
This chapter and PUB 8-1.5 has a large amount of information on the design rules, inspection requirements, and service experience, relevant to pressure vessels and low pressure storage tanks used in general industrial applications. Though the compliance officer is not usually qualified as a pressure vessel inspector, as a summary and a reminder,Appendix IV:3-1 outlines the information, data, and recordkeeping that are necessary, useful, or indicative of safe management of operating vessels and tanks.
These records, in addition to the construction and maintenance logs, usually are kept by the plant engineer, maintenance supervisor, or facility manager, and will be indicative of the surveillance activities around safe operation of pressure vessels.
Chuse, R. 1984. Pressure Vessels: The ASME Code Simplified. 6th ed. McGraw-Hill: New York.
Forman, B. Fred. 1981. Local Stresses in Pressure Vessels. Pressure Vessel Handbook Publishing, Inc.: Tulsa.
Hammer, W. 1981. Pressure Hazards in Occupational Safety Management and Engineering. 2nd ed. Prentice-Hall: New York.
McMaster, R.C. and McIntire, P. (eds.) 1982-1987. Nondestructive Testing Handbook. 2nd ed., Vols. 1-3. American Society for Metals/American Society of Nondestructive Testing: Columbus.
Megyesy, E.F. 1986. Pressure Vessel Handbook. 7th ed. Pressure Vessel Handbook Publishing Inc.: Tulsa.
OSHA Instruction Pub 8-1.5. 1989. Guidelines for Pressure Vessel Safety Assessment. Occupational Safety and Health Administration: Washington, D.C.
Thielsch, H. 1975. Defects and Failures in Pressure Vessels and Piping. 2nd ed., Chaps. 16 and 17. Reinhold: New York.
Yokell, S. 1986. Understanding the Pressure Vessel Code. Chemical Engineering 93(9):75-85.
Introduction and Scope. This outline summarizes information and data that will be helpful in assessing the safety of steel pressure vessels and low pressure storage tanks that operate at temperatures between -75° and 315 °C (-100° and 600° F).
Vessel Identification and Documentation. Information that identifies the specific vessel being assessed and provides general information about it include the following items:
Vessel location
- Original location and current location if it has been moved
Vessel identification
- Manufacturer's serial number
- National Board number if registered with NB
Manufacturer identification
- Name and address of manufacturer
- Authorization or identification number of the manufacturer
Data report for the vessel
- ASME U-1 or U-2, API 620 form or other applicable report
Design and Construction Information
Information that will identify the code or standard used for the design and construction of the vessel or tank and the specific design values, materials, fabrication methods, and inspection methods used include the following items:
Design code
- ASME Code Section and Division, API Standard or other design code used
Type of construction
- Shop or field fabricated or other fabrication method
VIII, division 1 or 2 vessels
- Maximum allowable pressure and temperature
- Minimum design temperature
API 620 vessels
- Design pressure at top and maximum fill
Additional requirements included, such as
- Appendix Q (Low-Pressure Storage Tanks For Liquefied Hydrocarbon Gases) and
- Appendix R (Low-Pressure Storage Tanks for Refrigerated Products)
Other design code vessels
- Maximum design and allowable pressures
- Maximum and minimum operating temperatures
Vessel materials
- ASME, ASTM, or other specification names and numbers for the major parts
Thermal stress relief (PWHT, postweld heat treatment)
- Design code requirements
- Type, extent, and conditions of PWHT performed
Nondestructive examination (NDE) of welds
- Type and extent of examination performed
- Time when NDE was performed (before or after PWHT or hydrotest)
Service History
Information on the conditions of operating history of the vessel or tank that will be helpful in safety assessment include the following items:
Fluids handled
- Type and composition, temperature and pressures
Type of service
- Continuous, intermittent or irregular
Significant changes in service conditions
- Changes in pressures, temperatures, and fluid compositions and the dates of the changes
Vessel history
- Alterations, reratings, and repairs performed
- Date(s) of changes or repairs
In-Service Inspection
Information about inspections performed on the vessel or tank and the results obtained that will assist in the safety assessment include the following items:
Inspection(s) performed
- Type, extent, and dates
Examination methods
- Preparation of surfaces and welds
- Techniques used (visual, magnetic particle, penetrant test, radiography, ultrasonic)
Qualifications of personnel
- ASNT (American Society for Nondestructive Testing) levels or equivalent of examining and supervisory personnel
Inspection results and report
- Report form used (NBIC NB-7, API 510 or other)
- Summary of type and extent of damage or cracking
- Disposition (no action, delayed action or repaired)
Specific Applications
Survey results indicate that a relatively high proportion of vessels in operations in several specific applications have experienced in service-related damage and cracking. Information on the following items can assist in assessing the safety of vessels in these applications:
Service application
- Deaerator, amine, wet hydrogen sulfide, ammonia, or pulp digesting
Industry bulletins and guidelines for this application
- Owner/operator awareness of information
Type, extent, and results of examinations
- Procedures, guidelines and recommendations used
- Amount of damage and cracking
- Next examination schedule
Problem mitigation
- Written plans and actions
Evaluation of Information
The information acquired for the above items is not adaptable to any kind of numerical ranking for quantitative safety assessment purposes. However, the information can reveal the owner or user's apparent attention to good practice, careful operation, regular maintenance, and adherence to the recommendations and guidelines developed for susceptible applications. If the assessment indicated cracking and other serious damage problems, it is important that the inspector obtain qualified technical advice and opinion.
Back to TopOccupational Safety and Health Administration
200 Constitution Ave NW
Washington, DC 20210
800-321-6742 (OSHA)
TTY
www.OSHA.gov
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
200 Constitution Ave NW
Washington, DC 20210
800-321-6742 (OSHA)
TTY
www.OSHA.gov
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH
The Department of Labor does not endorse, takes no responsibility for, and exercises no control over the linked organization or its views, or contents, nor does it vouch for the accuracy or accessibility of the information contained on the destination server. The Department of Labor also cannot authorize the use of copyrighted materials contained in linked Web sites. Users must request such authorization from the sponsor of the linked Web site. Thank you for visiting our site. Please click the button below to continue.
Close