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 cowski on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Pressure Testing of Valves 2 1
- Thread starter Inchtain
- Start date
Doug Hunter
Automotive
Hello,
I would think that it would be stated within the "international applicable standards and codes" themselves. The requirements of the standards would be different depending on the application/industry and specifically the safety and cost risks involved. If you are a valve purchaser, I would think that the testing and conformance burden would be on the valve supplier. I'm afraid more details would be necessary to answer in any more detail.
Best regards,
Doug Hunter
Altarium Technical Consulting
I would think that it would be stated within the "international applicable standards and codes" themselves. The requirements of the standards would be different depending on the application/industry and specifically the safety and cost risks involved. If you are a valve purchaser, I would think that the testing and conformance burden would be on the valve supplier. I'm afraid more details would be necessary to answer in any more detail.
Best regards,
Doug Hunter
Altarium Technical Consulting
LittleInch
Petroleum
Far too vague "International standards and codes" are many and various.
Very few if any "REQUIRE" a 3rd party presence - that's up to the purchaser if they want to spend the money or not.
The cost to supply someone for e.g. a 1" class 150 valve test would be disproportionate, but where do you draw the line? Size, number, location of supplier?
That's YOUR call or your companys call, not the code or standard writers.
Not everything is codified this way.
Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.
Very few if any "REQUIRE" a 3rd party presence - that's up to the purchaser if they want to spend the money or not.
The cost to supply someone for e.g. a 1" class 150 valve test would be disproportionate, but where do you draw the line? Size, number, location of supplier?
That's YOUR call or your companys call, not the code or standard writers.
Not everything is codified this way.
Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.
Maybe more details/background over your inquiry.
Who are you? manufacturer, engineering company, end user or third party?
Which (geographical) region are you referring to?
Which type of valves?
Otherwise AI can answer your question, like below
Quote
The requirement for third-party presence, review, or approval during the pressure testing of valves (such as ball, gate, and globe valves) depends on the specific standards and codes being followed.
For instance, ISO 5208:2015 outlines the procedures for pressure testing of metallic valves but does not explicitly mandate third-party involvement12. However, certain industry practices or specific project requirements might necessitate third-party verification to ensure compliance and quality assurance.
It’s always a good idea to check the specific requirements of the project or contract, as well as any additional standards that might apply, such as those from the American Petroleum Institute (API) or the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME).
Unquote
My comments (I am not AI):
Third party = assuming this is Notified Body (NoBo) such as TUV, Bureaue Veritas, etc.
Object of testing: Prototype and/or Production valve
Then:
- Safety valves --> always to be witnessed by NoBo representative. Prototype of safety valve need to be send to ASME for its initial validation testing (usually this for VR ASME stamp qualification for fairly new workshop)
- Prototype valve (both control and manual valves)--> PED/CE marked to be witnessed by NoBo as well. Some end user also mandate such requirement for their representative to witness (and also audit) prototype valve.
- Production valves --> unless stated otherwise, then manufacturer self (assuming possess ISO 9001 qualification and purchase ASME standard? this I am not entirely sure) can perform the testing on their own and issue 3.1. certificate.
I might miss some details, but then the question is also general.
Regards,
Who are you? manufacturer, engineering company, end user or third party?
Which (geographical) region are you referring to?
Which type of valves?
Otherwise AI can answer your question, like below
Quote
The requirement for third-party presence, review, or approval during the pressure testing of valves (such as ball, gate, and globe valves) depends on the specific standards and codes being followed.
For instance, ISO 5208:2015 outlines the procedures for pressure testing of metallic valves but does not explicitly mandate third-party involvement12. However, certain industry practices or specific project requirements might necessitate third-party verification to ensure compliance and quality assurance.
It’s always a good idea to check the specific requirements of the project or contract, as well as any additional standards that might apply, such as those from the American Petroleum Institute (API) or the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME).
Unquote
My comments (I am not AI):
Third party = assuming this is Notified Body (NoBo) such as TUV, Bureaue Veritas, etc.
Object of testing: Prototype and/or Production valve
Then:
- Safety valves --> always to be witnessed by NoBo representative. Prototype of safety valve need to be send to ASME for its initial validation testing (usually this for VR ASME stamp qualification for fairly new workshop)
- Prototype valve (both control and manual valves)--> PED/CE marked to be witnessed by NoBo as well. Some end user also mandate such requirement for their representative to witness (and also audit) prototype valve.
- Production valves --> unless stated otherwise, then manufacturer self (assuming possess ISO 9001 qualification and purchase ASME standard? this I am not entirely sure) can perform the testing on their own and issue 3.1. certificate.
Otherwise means: 3.2. certificates required; certain local (country) regulation is applicable, specific requirement (very severe acute product) that end user imposed to be witness, etc.
I might miss some details, but then the question is also general.
Regards,
- Thread starter
- #5
Thanks for your feedback.
Actually, I am referring mostly for used/overhauled valves (ball, gate, globe, butterfly, wellhead equipment, safety valves) inside an onshore oil production field.
Regardless of Company Specifications, mostly followed standards are API 6A, API 6D, API 598, API 527, ISO 5208, ASME B16.
Is there a specific requirement in theses codes to call for a certifying body to attend and approve the pressure test?
Thanks
Actually, I am referring mostly for used/overhauled valves (ball, gate, globe, butterfly, wellhead equipment, safety valves) inside an onshore oil production field.
Regardless of Company Specifications, mostly followed standards are API 6A, API 6D, API 598, API 527, ISO 5208, ASME B16.
Is there a specific requirement in theses codes to call for a certifying body to attend and approve the pressure test?
Thanks
Doug Hunter
Automotive
I personally don't know those codes, but I would think that the codes themselves would give you your answer. Is the issue that you don't have the actual codes available to read, or that you don't have the time to read them?
Best regards,
Doug Hunter
Altarium Technical Consulting
Best regards,
Doug Hunter
Altarium Technical Consulting
- Thread starter
- #7
LittleInch
Petroleum
Then you need to buy them or get access via something like BSOL
Many professional organisations or universities have discounted links to get access.
Your employer needs to man up for this, even if its some sort of shared access or login.
Some are getting very smart now and any download only lasts 2 weeks or something like it.
My answer remains the same - I can't see any code or standard requiring this. Just depends on your spec or PO with the supplier.
Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.
Many professional organisations or universities have discounted links to get access.
Your employer needs to man up for this, even if its some sort of shared access or login.
Some are getting very smart now and any download only lasts 2 weeks or something like it.
My answer remains the same - I can't see any code or standard requiring this. Just depends on your spec or PO with the supplier.
Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.
Doug Hunter
Automotive
I agree with LittleInch (again). I'll add that if the code/standard doesn't specify it, then you can safely assume that it is not required.
Best regards,
Doug Hunter
Altarium Technical Consulting
Best regards,
Doug Hunter
Altarium Technical Consulting
Hi Inchtain,
To my experience requirement of having a third party involvement comes from government, insurance or user/owner and is not specified as such in referenced codes and design specifications. It normally used to have an independent party, not feeling the force to get it finished somehow, to review the situation.
The above mentioned NoBo's can be seen as such a third party on behalf of countries concerning e.g. pressure equipment. Company specifications often detail what that company wants to be reviewed by a third party not involved in the construction itself.
Looking at the by you mentioned equipment and specifications, it is very likely that the user/owner or country has set requirements concerning witnessing pressure tests. Just imagine a nice oil fountain or gas spout due to failing refurbished equipment, maybe even with casualties.
Good luck
To my experience requirement of having a third party involvement comes from government, insurance or user/owner and is not specified as such in referenced codes and design specifications. It normally used to have an independent party, not feeling the force to get it finished somehow, to review the situation.
The above mentioned NoBo's can be seen as such a third party on behalf of countries concerning e.g. pressure equipment. Company specifications often detail what that company wants to be reviewed by a third party not involved in the construction itself.
Looking at the by you mentioned equipment and specifications, it is very likely that the user/owner or country has set requirements concerning witnessing pressure tests. Just imagine a nice oil fountain or gas spout due to failing refurbished equipment, maybe even with casualties.
Good luck
The most important point to check is always what the enduser/customer actually expect,. This might be based on his experience, 'way of doing things', unwritten branch customs or earlier deliverance from your competitors.
This can differ from what current and validstandards actually says, and might not be described in the inquiry.
Conclusion: In my experience most conflicts regarding witnessed/not witnessed tests stem from misunderstanding of exact test specifications and certifications required. Advice: clarifications at order acceptance: specify what you have included in yor offer, and/or ask customer to specify exactly or confirm.
This can differ from what current and validstandards actually says, and might not be described in the inquiry.
Conclusion: In my experience most conflicts regarding witnessed/not witnessed tests stem from misunderstanding of exact test specifications and certifications required. Advice: clarifications at order acceptance: specify what you have included in yor offer, and/or ask customer to specify exactly or confirm.
-
1
- #12
Intriguing remarks from your comments:
- mostly for used/overhauled valves (ball, gate, globe, butterfly, wellhead equipment, safety valves)
- inside an onshore oil production field
- mostly followed standards are API 6A, API 6D, API 598, API 527, ISO 5208, ASME B16.The problem is that I have old versions of the codes
Which is open for various interpretation over your readiness and goals. And seems like you're aiming to be jack of all trades in the industry.
Some advise:
- Buy the newest standard whichever most applicable for you. Getting accredited by ASME or API is more advance level.
- Obtain ISO 9001. Most customer that I know of, would love to see your standard of quality
- Hire valve expert/consultant to generate ITP (Inspection Test Plan) and send that for customer approval over Review/Hold/Witness points. And follow that agreed ITP for your activities. Almost nothing can go wrong if stick to the plan.
Above at least my minimum (as end user) three checklist prior considering new valve repair companies.
PS: safety valve is a different kind. Original OEM parts and good network with Notified Body (you need them to seal the valve after testing) is paramount. If you're representing certain brand, for sure VR ASME certified is required.
API 6D, API 598, ISO 5208 are for industrial and pipeline valves
API 6A is for Wellhead
API 527 is for PSV
All of three requires different testing bench. There are only numbers of good (remaining) workshop that can do and certified (personnel included) for all three in one place. Otherwise each cases should be addressed to different companies.
Regards,
D
- mostly for used/overhauled valves (ball, gate, globe, butterfly, wellhead equipment, safety valves)
- inside an onshore oil production field
- mostly followed standards are API 6A, API 6D, API 598, API 527, ISO 5208, ASME B16.The problem is that I have old versions of the codes
Which is open for various interpretation over your readiness and goals. And seems like you're aiming to be jack of all trades in the industry.
Some advise:
- Buy the newest standard whichever most applicable for you. Getting accredited by ASME or API is more advance level.
- Obtain ISO 9001. Most customer that I know of, would love to see your standard of quality
- Hire valve expert/consultant to generate ITP (Inspection Test Plan) and send that for customer approval over Review/Hold/Witness points. And follow that agreed ITP for your activities. Almost nothing can go wrong if stick to the plan.
Above at least my minimum (as end user) three checklist prior considering new valve repair companies.
PS: safety valve is a different kind. Original OEM parts and good network with Notified Body (you need them to seal the valve after testing) is paramount. If you're representing certain brand, for sure VR ASME certified is required.
API 6D, API 598, ISO 5208 are for industrial and pipeline valves
API 6A is for Wellhead
API 527 is for PSV
All of three requires different testing bench. There are only numbers of good (remaining) workshop that can do and certified (personnel included) for all three in one place. Otherwise each cases should be addressed to different companies.
Regards,
D
I am very familiar with the codes you listed, plus some others for valve testing, including fire and fugitive emission testing.
They do not require 3rd party witness for the tests. The customer decides if they are willing to find and pay someone to witness the test, and the manufacturer usually charges an extra fee for this. Having the witness disrupts the production schedules, is a safety risk as the inspector may not know or properly follow the local rules, and someone from the manufacturing facility needs to stay with the inspector as a host.
Another consideration is that often, the 3rd party inspector does not have a lot of experience and knowledge. We had an inspector show up at our facility to witness a test. As soon as they walked in, the inspector asked for a copy of the standard since he was not familiar with the requirements. We ended up training the inspector on how the test is done while he watched the test. It cost the customer a lot of money for this independent inspector, and they did not get any significant benefit from it. I mention this case so you are aware that a 3rd party independent inspector does cost money but does not always bring a benefit.
They do not require 3rd party witness for the tests. The customer decides if they are willing to find and pay someone to witness the test, and the manufacturer usually charges an extra fee for this. Having the witness disrupts the production schedules, is a safety risk as the inspector may not know or properly follow the local rules, and someone from the manufacturing facility needs to stay with the inspector as a host.
Another consideration is that often, the 3rd party inspector does not have a lot of experience and knowledge. We had an inspector show up at our facility to witness a test. As soon as they walked in, the inspector asked for a copy of the standard since he was not familiar with the requirements. We ended up training the inspector on how the test is done while he watched the test. It cost the customer a lot of money for this independent inspector, and they did not get any significant benefit from it. I mention this case so you are aware that a 3rd party independent inspector does cost money but does not always bring a benefit.
LittleInch
Petroleum
All the 3rd party does for you is confirm that your particular valves have actually been tested.
They are not there to really monitor the tests or know how to do it.
Many though, especially if in remote locations are just "general" inspectors virtually picked off the street.
Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.
They are not there to really monitor the tests or know how to do it.
Many though, especially if in remote locations are just "general" inspectors virtually picked off the street.
Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.
Bonjour,
Ces codes n’exigent pas systématiquement l’approbation d’un tiers pour les vannes usagées/révisées, mais cela peut être exigé par certaines réglementations locales ou intégré dans les procédures de qualification de l’entreprise pour les équipements de production pétrolière.
- Status
Similar threads
- Question