VALVES FIRE SAFE STANDARDS
VALVES FIRE SAFE STANDARDS
(OP)
Hi;
I'm working on ball valves specifications and Our client spicify the following standards for fire tests ISO 10497 / API 607 and API 6FA.
I have just checked this standards and I found the qualifications of valves by nominal size aren't the same between ISO 10497 / API 607 and API 6FA;
- in ISO 10497 / API 607 all valves NPS>12" will be qualified by valve NPS 8,
- API 6FA valves the qualification is more détailed, for example valve NPS 42" will be qualified by valve NPS 16 (Table 2 API 6FA)while for the two first standards the same valve will be qualified by valve NPS 8.
It's obvious that the test cost isn't the same according to each standards. API 6FA seem to be more strenght.
My question is:
- Can we specify this standards as Identical or shall we specify one of them?
- And if tehre is what is a difference between them?
Thanks
I'm working on ball valves specifications and Our client spicify the following standards for fire tests ISO 10497 / API 607 and API 6FA.
I have just checked this standards and I found the qualifications of valves by nominal size aren't the same between ISO 10497 / API 607 and API 6FA;
- in ISO 10497 / API 607 all valves NPS>12" will be qualified by valve NPS 8,
- API 6FA valves the qualification is more détailed, for example valve NPS 42" will be qualified by valve NPS 16 (Table 2 API 6FA)while for the two first standards the same valve will be qualified by valve NPS 8.
It's obvious that the test cost isn't the same according to each standards. API 6FA seem to be more strenght.
My question is:
- Can we specify this standards as Identical or shall we specify one of them?
- And if tehre is what is a difference between them?
Thanks





RE: VALVES FIRE SAFE STANDARDS
In general, API 607 is normally assumed to be a more stringent fire test (although I have not reviewed the lastest edition in detail so perhaps this has changed) and most end users that I am familiar with would specify the API 607 test and would not accept an API 6FA test in place of the API 607 test.
However, most of these folks accept a API 607 test in place of the API 6FA test. Ultimately, you would have to consult with the end user and determine what their specifications say and what they will accept.
I don't remember the difference between the tests (I think it had to do with the fluid in the valve during test, how the valve is cooled after the test, and whether the valve is cycled after the test before being checked for leakage. It would be a simple matter to compare the two documents side by side.
RE: VALVES FIRE SAFE STANDARDS
RE: VALVES FIRE SAFE STANDARDS
The change in title suggests that it is no longer intended that this standard be restricted to soft seated valves and that it could more generally be used for any valve. Since there is nothing in the scope to restrict it in any way, I think this is an appropriate interpretation.
RE: VALVES FIRE SAFE STANDARDS
Also it is important to note that the API-600 series standards for gate, globe, check, ball and butterflys used in Refineries all require API-607. And since ISO adopted API-607 to create their version, they are the same for all intents and purposes. Minor differences, but the end results are the same.
API-6D, for upstream pipeline valve, not for refinery valves, allows several diffrent options for fire-testing. 6FA, 607, and ISO 10497. So your best bet to cover all options is to specify API-607 / ISO-10497 for all valves. It is accepted for any valve from the refinery back to the well head.