Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations JAE on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Converting API 650 to API 620 tank
- Thread starter drials2
- Start date
That's really just not something addressed by the standards.
The problem is that API-620 has requirements about how a tank is built- not just the completed geometry, but the inspections that are to be done in the construction process, etc. If that isn't done, there's no way to do it after the fact.
It's a similar issue, to if a tank is not built to any standard, can you go back after the fact and make it meet API-650 or ASME or whatever? You can correct obvious deficiencies, you can evaluate the design, but can't go back and change the past and cause it to have been made a particular way.
The problem is that API-620 has requirements about how a tank is built- not just the completed geometry, but the inspections that are to be done in the construction process, etc. If that isn't done, there's no way to do it after the fact.
It's a similar issue, to if a tank is not built to any standard, can you go back after the fact and make it meet API-650 or ASME or whatever? You can correct obvious deficiencies, you can evaluate the design, but can't go back and change the past and cause it to have been made a particular way.
I agree with JStephen. It is not address how to achieve the additional inspection requirements of API 620. Notably, the combination hydrostatic and pneumatic tests and the radiography are difficult to achieve in the same quality of new construction.
What is the intended outcome? Is the owner looking for additional working pressure?
What is the intended outcome? Is the owner looking for additional working pressure?
- Thread starter
- #4
One thing you might look at is the pressure rating for the roof based on top angle area in Appendix F versus API-620. I suspect your design pressure will go down, not up, when you start looking at that change. API-650 App. F allows higher compressive stress in the compression ring area.
The radiography is an issue, and the more and better records you have of how that was done, the better. The general issue is you have requirements for "one shot in the first 10' welded" and have no idea what sequence it was all welded in, or who welded what, etc. Any requirements for inspection of the root pass, gauging material, etc., become a problem after it's all finished.
The allowable stresses and the impact testing exemptions are considerably different between the two codes, with API-620 being more conservative in both cases.
The radiography is an issue, and the more and better records you have of how that was done, the better. The general issue is you have requirements for "one shot in the first 10' welded" and have no idea what sequence it was all welded in, or who welded what, etc. Any requirements for inspection of the root pass, gauging material, etc., become a problem after it's all finished.
The allowable stresses and the impact testing exemptions are considerably different between the two codes, with API-620 being more conservative in both cases.
LittleInch
Petroleum
Normally the stress levels in a 650 tank are just about maximum for the steel if it's been designed right. I've never heard of anyone doing this, but that's not to say it can't. Have you asked a tank supplier to look into it yet??
Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.
Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.
- Status
