BenjyMac
Chemical
- May 1, 2002
- 13
I am currently designing a relief valve discharge pipework for a steam line. Please could someone tell me if the following is true:
The flowrate used for the discharge pipe sizing should be at least the Certified Discharge Capacity of the relief valve (I know some would use the un-derated figure).
I ask this question because the discharge pipework contains an expansion chamber to remove stresses from the pipework. When I carried out a blow-back check for the expansion chamber I realised that the vendor who had supplied the silencer had designed it based on a flow of 30,000 kg/hr which was a required relieving capacity giving a pressure drop of 0.4bar. The relief valve Certified Discharge was 47,755 kg/hr which meant a pressure drop 1 bar. The vendor argues that the discharge pipework would never see that flowrate because the required relieving rate (from a package boiler) would never exceed 30,000 kg/hr.
I think he is wrong and the pipework (and fittings) should be designed at 47,755 kg/hr. Am I right because at this flowrate we have a problem of blow-back. What are people's thoughts to replacing the expansion chamber for a bellows or flexi?
Many thanks in anticipation
Paul
The flowrate used for the discharge pipe sizing should be at least the Certified Discharge Capacity of the relief valve (I know some would use the un-derated figure).
I ask this question because the discharge pipework contains an expansion chamber to remove stresses from the pipework. When I carried out a blow-back check for the expansion chamber I realised that the vendor who had supplied the silencer had designed it based on a flow of 30,000 kg/hr which was a required relieving capacity giving a pressure drop of 0.4bar. The relief valve Certified Discharge was 47,755 kg/hr which meant a pressure drop 1 bar. The vendor argues that the discharge pipework would never see that flowrate because the required relieving rate (from a package boiler) would never exceed 30,000 kg/hr.
I think he is wrong and the pipework (and fittings) should be designed at 47,755 kg/hr. Am I right because at this flowrate we have a problem of blow-back. What are people's thoughts to replacing the expansion chamber for a bellows or flexi?
Many thanks in anticipation
Paul