×
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

Another Spin on Pneumatic Testing Energy

Another Spin on Pneumatic Testing Energy

Another Spin on Pneumatic Testing Energy

(OP)
After reviewing the great references in Thread794-26767 I still have a question about the total energy in a pneumatic test.

I'm testing 8 km of 20 cm (8-inch), schedule 40 pipe to 51 barg - when I do the math, I get a stored energy of over 500 kg of TNT.  The hoop stress during the test is 27% of SMYS, the line is WAY out in the boonies (closest house is 25 km), and it will be burried under 1.5 m of dirt so I'm not real concerned with injury to the public.

The question is: there is no way that the entire stored energy in a pipe-bomb this long will be spent in one catastrophic explosion (since the relative dP from any control volume to any other is very low only a few dozen meters from a rupture)so how do you approach "de-rating" the explosive force to an effective force?

David

RE: Another Spin on Pneumatic Testing Energy

1.  27% of SMYS
    
    1.1  Verify P/T class design & test pressure
    1.2  Base the SMYS on the weakest member
    1.3  Verify blind/spade pressure rating
         as bolted/welded flat heads.

2.  Consider,

    2.1  dT versus dP
    2.2  Consider why SV pop fully open Vs. PRV's
    
Granted the pipeline is under ground and its not clear how long the line is pnematic testing requires strict safety requirements.  

Cheers

RE: Another Spin on Pneumatic Testing Energy

(OP)
PVRV,
This line is adding some functionality to an existing system, the MAWP is set by the existing system and there is no benefit to having a small subset of the system with a MAWP higher than the rest of the system - the 27% of SMYS is the correct test pressure for this pipe.  

The line is 8 km long.

I've been considering that the worst-case scenario would be for one joint (about 9 m) to fail in the HAZ of the entire longitudinal weld (the pipe is ERW), so the length of one joint would be totally involved in the explosion.  Then I calculated a choked-flow velocity out the end of the two adjoining joints.  Finally I converted the velocity to a volume flow rate and used the AGA compressible flow equations to look the upstream and downstream pressures at each joint to find where you no longer have sonic flow in a joint - probably very conservative, but it looked like a good first cut.  I'm sure there is a more elegant approach, but this brute-force method looks like it has promise.

David

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