Alteration or Major Repair ???
Alteration or Major Repair ???
(OP)
Dear mates,
Are adding new nozzles 24" and 12" to existing PV, it is not affecting the pressure-containing capability informed in the original data report.
Is it Alteration or Major Repair.
Any input will be highly appreciated.
Are adding new nozzles 24" and 12" to existing PV, it is not affecting the pressure-containing capability informed in the original data report.
Is it Alteration or Major Repair.
Any input will be highly appreciated.





RE: Alteration or Major Repair ???
In my opinion, it is a major repair and qualifies to be given R stamp.
RE: Alteration or Major Repair ???
Find here below definitions on API 510 (2014):
3.1.1
alteration
A physical change in any component that has design implications that affect the pressure-containing capability of a
pressure vessel beyond the scope described in existing data reports. The following should not be considered
alterations: any comparable or duplicate replacement, the addition of any reinforced nozzle less than or equal to the
size of existing reinforced nozzles, and the addition of nozzles not requiring reinforcement.
3.1.41
major repair
Any work not considered an alteration that removes and replaces a major part of the pressure boundary other than a
nozzle (e.g. replacing part of the shell or replacing a vessel head). If any of the restorative work results in a change to
the design temperature, minimum allowable temperature (MAT), or maximum allowable working pressure (MAWP),
the work shall be considered an alteration and the requirements for rerating shall be satisfied.
RE: Alteration or Major Repair ???
RE: Alteration or Major Repair ???
As metenger point out above, if you are adding a 24" nozzle which has identical or reduced loads as an existing one (e.g. the new nozzle has less liquid head at its elevation and is in the same thickness of shell), then you can simply copy the design of the existing one. I would run calc's anyway just to verify the design, but technically I do not have to. This would push you towards "Repair."
If, on the other hand, no previous 24" nozzles exist, or you are adding one to a shell section which has a different loading or thickness, then you must run calculations to verify the design. This would push you towards "Alteration".
RE: Alteration or Major Repair ???
Just to summarize.
New 24" nozzle, has simmilar loading and thickness as the PV has, also more bigger nozzles are already installed onto the PV from the original design, but is increasing 10% production of the PV, this production increment is a "design implication" but not affecting any pressure-containing capability.
Then, this new one as per the definition in API 510 (2014) is to be considered as an alteration??
RE: Alteration or Major Repair ???
RE: Alteration or Major Repair ???
3.3.3 (j) - "The addition of a nozzle where reinforcement is a consideration may be considered to be a repair, provided the nozzle is identical to one in the original design, located in a similar part of the vessel, and not closer than three times its diameter from another nozzle."
RE: Alteration or Major Repair ???