Thursday, January 3, 2008
There was a interesting question raised elsewhere and i find it interesting to share with my lovely reader...
Maximum recommended wall temperature (Tw) for carbon steel vessel would be about 593 C or 1100 F as quoted in API Std 521. This value is material dependent.My opinion would be :
Would it be accurate to say that the high "Design Temperature" could/should be used for Tw ?
There are many factors affecting fire type, heat flux, etc and wall temperature would be varies.
Heat Flux Varies
Pressure containing equipment exposing to fire, the wall temperature is very much subject to type of fire, relative distance, momentum of fire, how a fire flame impinging equipment, what type of material on fire, etc and the results is heat flux would be localized.
Low Heat Transfer
Low heat transfer between wall and vapor would leads to wall temperature far higher than the gas temperature.
Environment
Environment factor such as humidity, wind condition, etc affect the heat transmission.
As above factors are difficult to quantify, thus wall temperature of equipment would be difficult to be estimated. Personally i would always recommend to put extra efforts in fire detection, prevention and evacuation of risk instead concentrating in heat flux, wall temperature for gas expansion case. Read more HERE
However, for Pressure relief device load, i would consider to reduce the set pressure as low as reasonable possible and use the conservative approach such as taking the gas temperature at relieving condition even though it is higher than the nominated design temperature, worst F factor, etc.
It is not cost effective to consider maximum recommended wall temperature (Tw) as design temperature of the system. Otherwise 90% (if not 100%) of plant design temperature would be maximum recommended wall temperature (Tw).
Heat Flux Varies
Pressure containing equipment exposing to fire, the wall temperature is very much subject to type of fire, relative distance, momentum of fire, how a fire flame impinging equipment, what type of material on fire, etc and the results is heat flux would be localized.
Low Heat Transfer
Low heat transfer between wall and vapor would leads to wall temperature far higher than the gas temperature.
Environment
Environment factor such as humidity, wind condition, etc affect the heat transmission.
As above factors are difficult to quantify, thus wall temperature of equipment would be difficult to be estimated. Personally i would always recommend to put extra efforts in fire detection, prevention and evacuation of risk instead concentrating in heat flux, wall temperature for gas expansion case. Read more HERE
However, for Pressure relief device load, i would consider to reduce the set pressure as low as reasonable possible and use the conservative approach such as taking the gas temperature at relieving condition even though it is higher than the nominated design temperature, worst F factor, etc.
It is not cost effective to consider maximum recommended wall temperature (Tw) as design temperature of the system. Otherwise 90% (if not 100%) of plant design temperature would be maximum recommended wall temperature (Tw).
Related Post
- Should we consider JET FIRE for Pressure Relief Valve (PSV) load determination ?
- Should we install Butterfly valve for Pressure Relief Valve (PSV) isolation ?
- Another descrepancy found in API Std 521Jan 2007
- ERRATA - API Std 521, Pressure Relieving and Depressuring Systems
- Requirement of overpressure protection devices on system design to PIPING code
- Discussion on ISENTROPIC and ISENTHALPIC process via Relief Valve
- Use of conventional type PSV with back pressure exceeded 10% set pressure
Labels: Design, Fire, Pressure Relief Device
posted by Webworm, 10:46 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Let us know your opinion !!! You can use some HTML tags, such as <b>, <i>, <a>
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
Home:
<< Home