×
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

Using Rupture Disc Instead of Safety Relief Valve

Using Rupture Disc Instead of Safety Relief Valve

Using Rupture Disc Instead of Safety Relief Valve

(OP)
The project I'm working on involves designing the piping system for a reciprocating compressor test rig - only clean air will be used as the medium. For the compressor packages safety relief valves are used, however I am trying to see if there is any reason why a rupture disk cannot be used instead as a cheaper alternative. We will have alarms and trips in place as standard and so we don't expect the pressure relieving device to ever be in use all going well. In the unlikely event of a high enough pressure to activate the device, we would not incur any financial penalties from the downtime required to replace the rupture disc for subsequent testing.

Also worth noting,
  • the valve/disc discharge would be re-routed within the system - no exposure to the atmosphere.
  • some level of air pulsation will be present from the compressor discharge - fatigue risk?
Could you please share your wisdom and tell me why using a rupture disc vs. a safety relief valve would not be a good idea?

RE: Using Rupture Disc Instead of Safety Relief Valve

Have a hunt around on the safety relief valve forum and you'll find more answers there.

In general you want to use a bursting disc for
  • non pulsating service
  • Where you never really expect the pressure to climb
  • where the bits of the disc can't cause a problem to anything downstream
  • Where sudden reduction in pressure is not an issue
  • Where not using a relief valve makes good sense
  • Where you need almost instantaneous operation faster than a valve can provide
I don't think you have any of those and this is a wholly bad idea IMHO
It might initially be cheaper than a relief valve, but not once you factor in the time and effort you will need to replace the wretched thing on a regular basis with downtime, risk of damage to the compressor, replacement time, cost of the bursting disc etc.

Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

RE: Using Rupture Disc Instead of Safety Relief Valve

In addition to LittleInch's excellent list above, or perhaps clarifying his 2nd last bullet point:

- where leakage is not tolerated, but re-closure after a relief event isn't essential either

If reclosure after a relief event is required, you need a nonfragmenting rupture disk, a disk leakage detection means, and a relief valve AFTER the disk.

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


Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close