×
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

COOLING WATER-SEA WATER (UNDERGROUND)

COOLING WATER-SEA WATER (UNDERGROUND)

COOLING WATER-SEA WATER (UNDERGROUND)

(OP)
Hi everyone,
In one of our projects, the FEED documents contain PMS of entire plant, so we shall follow it. In definition of "COOLING WATER-SEA WATER (UNDERGROUND)" service, the pipe material is Copper-Nickel, for small sizes(say 3/4 to 4) , GRE for 6" to 24" and API5L-B (flake-lnd at field) for 66" to 96".
The question is: In your opinion why the designer of PMS decided to change from GRE to CS (glass flake lined) for large sizes?

RE: COOLING WATER-SEA WATER (UNDERGROUND)

Either there were too many small lines and they forgot to change them, or a higher yield strength is required for the same pressures when using those larger diameters.  

**********************
"The problem isn't working out the equation,
its finding the answer to the real question." BigInch
http://virtualpipeline.spaces.live.com/

RE: COOLING WATER-SEA WATER (UNDERGROUND)

(OP)
Thanks BigInch for your reply,
Questions:
"Either there were too many small lines and they forgot to change them..."
What does that mean? the subject is larger size. Are you in favour of CS?
"...or a higher yield strength is required for the same pressures when using those larger diameters."
Why are you seeing in this way? the thickness can be more for GRE, but the price is much lower (half of CS, adding 20% field work for glass-flake lining.

RE: COOLING WATER-SEA WATER (UNDERGROUND)

Just saying that, if the required GRE thickness is not practical, or cost effective for the larger diameters, a higher yield material will allow the wall thickness to be reduced.  

**********************
"The problem isn't working out the equation,
its finding the answer to the real question." BigInch
http://virtualpipeline.spaces.live.com/

RE: COOLING WATER-SEA WATER (UNDERGROUND)

(OP)
Isn't it related to erection problem of big GRE pipes, something like leakage?

RE: COOLING WATER-SEA WATER (UNDERGROUND)

Is it possible the specifier trusted steel more for the very large lines (that I assume are quite important to the facility operation)?

RE: COOLING WATER-SEA WATER (UNDERGROUND)

Mr...

"GRE for 6" to 24" and API5L-B (flake-lnd at field) for 66" to 96"."

What is used from 24" to 66" ??

GRE stands for what...???  

The most typical reason for selecting a lined carbon steel pipe  (a fundamentally undesirable construction) is that you need the strength of steel to resist the membrane stresses developed by pressure.

-My opinion only

-MJC
 

   

RE: COOLING WATER-SEA WATER (UNDERGROUND)

(OP)
To rconner:
That's what i want to know, why designer is trusted to steel for larger sizes.

To MJC:
GRE stands fot Glass Reinforced Epoxy. The jump from 24" to 66" is from FEED P&ID, which doesn't include any size between.

Does anybody out there have experience with U/G erection of GRE or GRP for high flow of seawater?

RE: COOLING WATER-SEA WATER (UNDERGROUND)

You may find some of your answer by reading part of the history at e.g. http://www.steeltank.com/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=NndJFN%2BbSyE%3D&tabid=94&mid=452.  Basically, while I don't know much about the flake lining system talked about here (and more often see cementlinings) I believe steel has a record in even the very largest sizes you talk about here going back at least a hundred years or more.  While many steel lines, and particularly in the days before modern linings and coatings, have eventually devloped some corrosion issues, I guess that record in general is still one of reasonable dependability and cost-effectiveness in carrying water and other fluids.  
The other materials you talk about are much newer developments, and while they are perhaps perceived to have good corrosion resistance (and some folks like to try new things) and it won't take much web searching for you to find that they have a much more checkered/chequered performance history in even their much younger lives, and some experiences in literal infancy have exhibited problems.  
Maybe the designer figures, "Better the devil you know."       

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