vessel without proper construction tag
vessel without proper construction tag
(OP)
Hi folks:
I've seen this before but hadn't thought much about it because nobody seems to care.
Having said that, on several occasions I've seen in use a compressed air manifold with a receiver, with 8 outlets on it or so.
Upon further investigation, noticed no construction tag on it and nothing pertaining to material(thickness) used ,mawp,mawt, not even a pressure guage or safety valve.
I have seen this practice done on other jobs.Is this legal and if not should I contact our regional boiler inspector? Thanks
Dave
I've seen this before but hadn't thought much about it because nobody seems to care.
Having said that, on several occasions I've seen in use a compressed air manifold with a receiver, with 8 outlets on it or so.
Upon further investigation, noticed no construction tag on it and nothing pertaining to material(thickness) used ,mawp,mawt, not even a pressure guage or safety valve.
I have seen this practice done on other jobs.Is this legal and if not should I contact our regional boiler inspector? Thanks
Dave





RE: vessel without proper construction tag
Not all jurisdictions regular pressure vessels, as far as that goes.
RE: vessel without proper construction tag
that is if the pressure exceeds 15 psig.
RE: vessel without proper construction tag
RE: vessel without proper construction tag
RE: vessel without proper construction tag
I see this all the time in many industrial settings and just shake my head.
RE: vessel without proper construction tag
All this assumes no internal corrosion, but it would take a lot of rust to bring Tmin down below 200 psig. P*D / 2SE gives a Min Thickness of .039" for a 6" A53ERW pipe at 200 psig. Pipe is VERY strong. If it is well supported, if all the fittings are welded, if there are no valves, etc.
RE: vessel without proper construction tag
RE: vessel without proper construction tag
RE: vessel without proper construction tag
I find it interesting that you started the thread with a question. Now you are arguing a position. It would appear that you are trying to gain support from this site to settle an issue which you have started at work. As the responses were not to your liking, you became argumentative.
It seems that nobody would argue that this air pig is distributing flow. So the only remaining issue is to determine whether it is generally recognized as a piping component or accessory. Given that everybody else recognizes this as a piping accessory, I think the case is closed.
But by all means... Go blow the whistle to the regulators. Let us know the results of the investigation.
jt
RE: vessel without proper construction tag
Star for you for expressing my thoughts as well. If sftyvlv believes there is an issue, then he shouldn't argue it here, he should report it.
Patricia Lougheed
******
Please see FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on how to make the best use of the Eng-Tips Forums.
RE: vessel without proper construction tag
I'm very sorry, I did not intend to argue this question, your expertise is highly valued and I do not mean to upset anyone.
I have seen "air pig" style manifolds from a manufacturer with a "U" stamp and tag verifying the specifications I first listed. I assumed a "backyard" manifold would not be allowed where employees or the general public are exposed to it.
RE: vessel without proper construction tag
jt
RE: vessel without proper construction tag
RE: vessel without proper construction tag
It is a function of function. Regardless of size or pressure, is the 30" pig still serving in one of the functions in the quote in my post of 10 Nov 13:23?
Unless you no longer use the equipment for distributing, then it would still likely fall under one of the B31 or other national piping codes. Not a vessel.
jt
RE: vessel without proper construction tag
RE: vessel without proper construction tag
Thanks