×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Contact US

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!

*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

Mitigation Options for Existing Oversized Relief Valve Installation

Mitigation Options for Existing Oversized Relief Valve Installation

Mitigation Options for Existing Oversized Relief Valve Installation

(OP)
Adequacy check of existing relief devices (2No. 8T10s set @17.7 barg; conventional)for LPG storage spheres confirms they are grossly oversized in the event of governing external fire scenario.

Using API model I calculated relief load of 79,833 kg/hr. Relief fluid z factor is around 0.6691 indicating non-ideal behaviour. However, I used API 521 sizing equations for ideal gas and selected a 1No 4P6 as adequate for overpressure protection.Certified rated capacity is 26.90%. Aspen Flare System confirms back-pressure is over 30% so a balanced type valve was selected. I reckon a dynamic simulation may even result in lower relief load. I am guided by the general acceptable overcapacity is between 25-30%.

I passed my results to a Contractor/Consultant for validation/verification.
Using the superior HEM Method, they calculated relief load is ~89,087.3 kg/hr. Now they proposed 2 options:


1. 1No. 6Q8 with valve lift restriction to about ~44.2% overcapacity.[restrict orifice area up to ~52 cm2 from full lift orifice area of Q (71.29 cm2)].

2. Insulate Spheres
Provide 1” thick foam glass (thermal conductivity is very less ~0.055 W/m∙K) conservatively as a fire proof insulation on listed sphere with environmental factor of 0.3 per Table 5 API 521 to mitigate oversize concern.

o Required Orifice area: (~26,730 kg/hr; 11.96 cm2)

o Selected Orifice area: (~ 41,160 kg/hr ; 18.406 cm2 considering full lift of 4L6 orifice; API area)

o Relief valve is ~54% oversized

In this case also, restricted lift will be required for lower 4L6 size.

Given this, which option should be considered considering a whole bevy of technical safety factors and cost.

Thanks.

RE: Mitigation Options for Existing Oversized Relief Valve Installation

Will the insulation reduce product loses, such that you get an economic payback? If so, that needs to be considered too.

Good Luck,
Latexman

RE: Mitigation Options for Existing Oversized Relief Valve Installation

This is a firecase relief only RV - just leave things the way they are. What if the pool fire were to be only a fraction of the API heat rate?
How do your calcs differ from the original firecase load calcs? Is it to do with drainage around the spheres?
If you use the firecase RV sizing routine in Pro/ II - Simsci, the firecase RV load may be even smaller.

RE: Mitigation Options for Existing Oversized Relief Valve Installation

Quote (Sirius P.Eng.)

I am guided by the general acceptable overcapacity is between 25-30%.
Can you share proofs/links?

Quote (Sirius P.Eng.)

Given this, which option should be considered considering a whole bevy of technical safety factors and cost.
It is not a common practice to avoid an oversized relief device. What is a problem you are trying to avoid? Chattering? Cycling? Backpressure? Relief load to vent/flare?
Many of relief devices are sized for multiple case. Most of those cases have low relief load and therefore are oversized. As per my experience most of RD handling multiple relief cases are oversized as those was sized for one biggest case and was not multiplied&staggered.
Why oversizing of most RD is not a problem but this particular RD is a problem to be avoided by so expensive means?

For info:
1/ Note that para. 7.1.1 API 521 has no instruction for avoiding cycling. The same is valid for para. 2.4.2.2.4 CCPS "Guidelines for Pressure Relief and Effluent Handling Systems". Only a few companies I have met prohibited oversizing (ExxonMobil and BP) but threshold was 75% not 30% (see para. 7.5.1 DP XV-C or 10.1.a.1 GP 44-70 respectively).
2/ In your case additional small staggered RD may be an option.
3/ In your case stem lift stopper may become the cheapest option. Contact a manufacturer for plot "capacity vs lift". It looks like the same as transport pin on top of bonnet. Sorry I do not remember the correct name of this device.

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! Already a Member? Login


Resources

Low-Volume Rapid Injection Molding With 3D Printed Molds
Learn methods and guidelines for using stereolithography (SLA) 3D printed molds in the injection molding process to lower costs and lead time. Discover how this hybrid manufacturing process enables on-demand mold fabrication to quickly produce small batches of thermoplastic parts. Download Now
Design for Additive Manufacturing (DfAM)
Examine how the principles of DfAM upend many of the long-standing rules around manufacturability - allowing engineers and designers to place a part’s function at the center of their design considerations. Download Now
Taking Control of Engineering Documents
This ebook covers tips for creating and managing workflows, security best practices and protection of intellectual property, Cloud vs. on-premise software solutions, CAD file management, compliance, and more. Download Now

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close