brainstorming:
This is a valid and important safety point that has been brought out and discussed. I’m adding this post because enough information can never be written or discussed when it comes to safety issues, and I feel there is an important result emanating from this thread.
You are not going to find as knowledgeable, hard-nosed, and experienced Chemical Engineer in safety issues and equipment as Guidoo that easily. I believe I perfectly understand his point and the logical basis he employs. I not only agree with him, but more importantly, I perceive just how he is trying to help you out of this dilemma. He is pointing out that no matter how great, thorough, or “safe” a code or standard may be considered, it is of little or no importance if it is not backed up by a system that enforces, polices, and ensures that it is applied. We still don’t know where you propose to install your HIPPS and much less what rules, laws, or codes apply there. Therefore, we can’t comment on that.
What I can comment on is the point being made: You, and any other engineer(s) involved in this application are the responsible persons for seeing to it that the relevant and locally prescribed safety procedures are installed and operated correctly. This is a minimal requirement. Additionally, from a professional and moral standpoint an engineer has a responsibility to analyze and critique local safety requirements as they pertain to his specific application. No amount of bureaucratic or political jurisdiction can substitute for sound engineering judgment. And it is this essential engineering judgment that Guidoo is stressing. We can all easily recline back and let the “codes” handle it; if something tragic happens, we can always turn away and state we did it according to the “code” and let it go at that. Most codes are very thorough and have been extremely well up-graded to reflect good sound engineering practice. However, there are still areas – especially in relatively new technology – which require careful and valued consideration before going forth. Substituting a PSV on a compressor discharge with a HIPPS application is certainly a case to consider carefully. We all know exactly what hardware, how it works, and the details of a PSV; we don’t know anything quantitative or qualitative about your HIPPS substitute except that it is considered as HIPPS. This, logically, cannot be a basis for a decision or a recommendation. Hence, Guidoo’s experienced comments.
A decision as important as the one that you present is one that should be decided logically based on experienced knowledge, careful scrutiny, legal and local codes, company policy, and sound engineering. You, and those close to the application, are the most qualified to undertake that decision. Certainly, detailed and candid discussion on this issue is a good start towards that decision and how it can be implemented safely.
Needless to say, I wish you luck and success in your decision.