×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

(OP)
I'm having trouble with coming up with the right groove design.  Briefly, I do hydrostatic testing on valves from 2" to 36".  For 2" - 12" I need to test them for leakage up to 5000 psi water pressure.

I have a 200 ton hydraulic clamping system with 200 mm cylindrical rod in the middle, sandwiching the valve are two plates (36" wide) top and bottom (see pic attached).   

Success so far:

* Last year, I cut groove to 7.0 mm wide, 5.0 mm deep (Using NBR 70D, 7.0 mm wide O Rings).   The grooves are cut "round" as opposed to "retangular U shape" , giving it even less volume.  

I was able to test to 3000 psi water pressure for 12" valves using about 90-100 ton clamping force.  


* This year, I cut another plate with 6.5 mm wide groove and 6.0 mm deep (Using NBR 70D, 7.0 mm wide Orings).  The grooves are cut "rectangular" giving it more volume than 'round' cut.  I was able to test up to 4000 psi water pressure for 4" valves using about 50 ton clamping force.  

But with the 6.5mm, 6.0mm cut, anything above 6" fails miserably at 1800 psi and below.  Sometimes it pops out, most of the times it just leaks.  


So I need to re-cut my grooves.  

Some have suggested that I go with a groove that is 8.0 mm width and 5.0mm deep (7.0 mm Oring) - enough volume in the groove to swallow all of the Oring.  

The problem I may encounter is that my clamping force is not uniform & exacting like a bolting series.  I'm relying on a 200 mm wide cylindrical rod in the middle to 'clamp' it together.  Therefore, any gap inside the groove may cause all sorts of unplanned leakage, especially at higher pressure (2000-4000 psi).  I'm sort of relying on the extruding O ring for 'tolerance' adjustment, sort to speak.    

On the other hand, I know that elastomer are incompressible.    And that I may have different problems such as extrusion, swelling, etc, etc, if I don't give it enough volume for it to do its work (I've read that Oring should only be 80-90% maximum volume of Groove Volume).  

That said, I do have empirical data that putting the Oring inside groove it will not fit and under 100 ton of compressive force DOES NOT destroy it.  Nor does it make the seal fail.  In fact, it was sealing 12" valves pretty nicely up to 3000 psi (I'v never tested beyond0.  Again, in that set up, I cut the Oring groove 'round', 7 mm wide, 5 mm deep using 7 mm NBR 70D Orings.  

So, I know I need to re-cut my plates.  The question is, how?

I'm thinking either:

7.0 mm wide, 5.0 mm deep, rectangular U shaped.  Using 7.0 mm NBR 70D Orings.  

or

8.4 mm wide, 6.0 mm deep, rectangular U shaped.  Using 8.4 mm NBR 70D Orings.  


Any help, suggestions is appreciated.  


Yes, I should use my old plates, but they are too small, I designed the new bigger plates according to a 'suggestion' for better seal by a specialist... well..







   

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

To my opinion the plates are too flexible. An FEA analysis of the plates clamped by he bolts under pressure will reveal how much the plates deflect thereby allows extrusion of the O-ring or the leak. The plate/clamping should be rigid enough to prevent deflection of the plates between the bolts.

Why not connect the valve to the a short piece of a standard compatible pipe with a welded standard flange and close the other end of th pipe? If the combination of valve and flange doesn't hold the 5000psi then the system is self protected against a pressure eise of 5000 psi. The o'ring/packing then will be the fuse.

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

(OP)
Yes, perhaps plates are the problem.  The plates are about 60 mm thickness.  960 mm in diameter.   The older plates are only 450 mm in diameter but 65 mm in thickness.  

We do use blind flanges for emergencies but when you are testing hundred of valves, it becomes impractical to bolt them, especially 2500# Class valves - pus the gaskets are expensive, single use.  

I've these seen these plates at work with similar set-up, they  even used 50 mm plates.  I don't expect the plates to hold much pressure past 12" - but at least they should suffice for 100 psi air pressure tests.  

  

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

the deepth of the groove should be a given for the cross section of the O-ring, to give % compression.  then the width to allow for the o-ring deforming when compressed. I'm not accustome to dealing with metric desiginations so forgive if the values you state are per design. another importaint consideration is the durometer of the o ring material.  for applications where the joint gaps and durometer of the o-ring are liable to extrude, a backing ring is needed.  I would suggest consulting an o-ring design catologe like Parker's
http://www.parker.com/literature/ORD%205700%20Parker_O-Ring_Handbook.pdf  

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

Agree with byrdj, read the book. Your grooves are too tight.

Cheers

Greg Locock

SIG:Please see FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

I'll have to agree  that your end plates are way too thin for the larger valves. The plates on our valve tester capable of 2400 psig for valves up to 24" were around 4" thick and were supported on a frame using 4" guide rods. The machine was horizontal built like a filter press frame.  
As stated above use the catalogue dimensions for a particular O-ring. Most O-ring manufacturers have excellent technical service departments that will give you assistance in selection of material and design of the seating groove.

Take a look at some of the flanges on the Barbee Testers.

http://www.barbeetesters.com/s5.htm

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

The "new" flange grooves (7mm ring dia., in 6mm groove depth) were too deep, you only had about 15% compression, which is marginal for a static seal.  The o-ring should be compressed to a nominal 25% for high pressure static seals, at least that is the value we design to, so a 5mm groove depth is probably going to work a bit better.  As others noted, use the groove dimensions and details in the mfgr. handbooks.  If the rings are extruding, consider using a backing ring, or contouring the o.d. side of the groove, or increasing the seal durometer, to help the ring hold its shape better.

We've used thinner flanges than what you've described, but not above about 900-1000 psi.  We also don't rely on a single element to provide clamping for hydro tests, but then we tend to be a bit cautious about human lives.

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

25% isn't too much either, you might go further, up to 30-35% imo. Also, have you used a harder ring (higher shore hardness)? you need high hardness for high pressure. The mentioned Parker site is a very good one.

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

(OP)
So for 7.0 mm Oring, should I cut it 7.0 mm wide and 4.5 mm (or 5.0 mm deep)?  

I would like to cut it 8.0 mm wide, 4.5 mm deep (Similar to what Parker suggest I tihnk) but then all the O ring will stay inside the ring.  There is also the Dovetail design, but again, this design will swallow all the O Ring when compressed.  I think this will work great for bolted clamping system.  But for hydraulic clamping, I don't know if this will work.  

I want some extra rubber outside the groove to help the seal.  If some parts of O Ring are ouside, there's no popping out because it will have free space to expand laterally instead of being confined.  Well, up until internal pressure overcome the hydraulic pressure.  Then it is just matter of increasing the hydraulic pressure.  

I had success with this set-up up until 12" valves and 3000 psi water pressure.  But then I had to use about 90-100 ton of clamping pressure.  Groove: Round cut - 7.0 mm wide, 5.0mm deep.  Oring 7.0 mm NBR 70.  

  

    

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

I read that you are using the oring like a gasket, and your claming device results in unequal clamping force to compress gasket around its perimeter

if you cut the groove as per the dimensions for a "Normal" oring groove so that when the oring is compressed, the flanges go metal to metal.  then the internal working pressure that makes it past the inside metal to metal will press the oring against the OD of the groove to flange and seal.

If your clamping device doesnot result in the flange going metal to metal on the full perimeter, you can adjusts its orientation so that equal loading around the perimeter is achieved

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

NBR90 'So for 7.0 mm Oring, should I cut it 7.0 mm wide and 4.5 mm (or 5.0 mm deep)? '

Design it like the manual says. High static pressure O ring design is  trivially easy- do it like the book.

Cheers

Greg Locock

SIG:Please see FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

page 98/292 of the parker design handbook previously posted gives the following recomendation for a static gland

a 7mm cross section oring would be -400 series oring (0.275")
the gland depth L would be 0.201 to 0.211" (5,2mm)75%
the gland with W would be 0.342 to 0.362' (8,9mm)128%
the gland OD would be the O-ring OD +0/-0.060"  

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

(OP)
Thanks all for your kind help.  I will eventually follow Parker's guide :) - but then we have to do a Dovetail groove because else the Oring will just fall out from the top plate.  Our machinist is not so fond of doing Dovetail, says it is very difficult.  Waiting on the bit....

Right now, I'm going to do a little experiment and just shave 1 mm off the plates to 7.0 mm wide, 5.0 mm deep and let the O ring be a 'gasket' as byrdj noted.    

Yes, I will stand far away while testing.  Although, all the times that it went 'pop', only splashes of water came out.  But I understand high pressure is nothing to be messed with.  Air - anything above 100 psi - is what I'm afraid of, not water (under 5000 psi).  

     

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

Agree.  But it's sometimes hard to get all of the air out.

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

Using an O-ring as a "gasket" at high pressure is not a a good idea. I'm not clear on your geometry but the gap that the ring is to seal should be as close to zero as possible. And that gap should not be changing with pressure.

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

Your pic is not visible, so I'll do some more assuming.

you say the
the inservice gasket is a one time use
so I'll assume the valve flange are flat and use a steel ring backed flexatalic type gasket.

you also say the oring goes in an upside down flange.

why not make a backing ring plate, that is 5mm thick.  then the manifold and valve flanges can be flat.  if OD backed flexatilics are what they use, you could afford to destroy one to get the ring, clean the ID and use an oring that gives about 25% compression.

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

I think byrdj has a very good idea.

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

The Parker dimensions usually work well. Sometimes a quad ring or square ring will work better than an o-ring in face sealing.

You may find Inch size seals a better choice as many more sizes, materials and configuration may be available. You should also measure the metric o-ring to make sure of its dimension are correct for the groove.

I don't think NBR is the best material for sealing water.

Ed Danzer
www.danzcoinc.com
www.dehyds.com

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

(OP)
Ed,

What would be the best material for sealing water?  Viton?  

Thanks.

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

Look in the Parker book. Neproene may be a good lower cost choice than Viton.

Ed Danzer
www.danzcoinc.com
www.dehyds.com

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

while the original question was o-ring groove design, and the replies have been mainly make the groove as per recomendations so it will act as an o-ring and not a gasket, your clamping force my be inadaquate.  a correct oring will seal IF the clamping force is greater than the seperating force.

ie 12" diameter at 3000psi gives 170 tons.
  

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

At room temperature, NBR is as good as any other common rubber materials for water sealing, though it may swell a little over long-duration soaks, and that swelling can cause issues for sealing.  EPDM is a better choice if that is happening.  

But, NBR (or even SBR) have better resilience (won't take a set as easily), and wear resistance, and so may be better choices for tooling applications.

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

Hi

I have not read all the converation but I`m quite sure that my tip is not discussed.

I`m working as an engineer at a valve making company, we stays at maximum Ansi Class 300 pressure class, pressure test is then 78bar, 1130 psi.

When I design any special pressure test equipment, I always seal it on the inside diameter of the valves endings.

We have plates like you but they don`t have any o-ring grooves, instead they have four threaded holes, we bolt a thin round plate onto the big plate, the thin round plate has the same outer diameter as the valve size and has an o-ring on the outside. With this design the plates can deflect much without any leakages and don`t demand any pre compression from the clamping equipment.



 

  

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

(OP)
Sweguy,

Thanks for your input; your ideas sound great.  I have a few questions:

How thick are your thin round plates?  What is your maximum valve size you can test to?

I suppose you need to drill two holes in each side of the thin plates for air/water passage?  

How did you cut your O-Ring groove (width, height and O ring width)?  

How would you design it for higher pressures (ANSI Class 600 and Above)?

 

RE: O-RING Groove design for hydrostatic testing

Hi NBR90

Actually we us similar method as you for our standard valves but when we are making big valves that are very rare for us we don`t have any pressure machine that can take the force, so then we have blind flanges with the design as I have described. Thickness are as a standard blind flange for the biggest size that the are plate will be used for.  

One blind flange can be drilled for a couple of sizes and pressure classes.

The thin round plates that we are using are roughly 20-25 mm thick. and have a groove on the outside for a 6mm o-ring, compression roughly 5-10 % in this design the o-ring will be seal better with high pressure, when the pressure rises the o-ring will be forced against the outer and inner diameter, so the compression rate is not so important.

We only test with water and has a single hole in the middle of the plates, a small distance out from the middle we have four bolts that holding the small plate against the big plate, note that the threaded holes in the big flange shall not be drilled to deep, there is still pressure working in this area. Outside those holes there is a o-ring groove with an o-ring that seals between the big and small plate. Note that the diameter where this groove is must be smaller than the valve size, this lets the pressure compress the o-ring instead of what happens in your design where the pressure is forcing the plate away from the flange.

If I should design it for higher pressure classes, I should make sure that the gap between valve bore and the small plate outer diameter to be at a minimum, I should probably design it with  a gap of 0,5mm on the diameter.

If you are worried over the compression rate for the o-ring, I have an example of minimum compression but tight anyway. On a diameter of 800mm I installed a o-ring that was 9mm thick, it was compressed 0,2mm. 2-3 % compression and I tested it up to 28 bar without problem.

  

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources