September 2006

Engineering Case Histories

Case 34: Hydrotesting or pneumatic testing?

There is a big difference in safety between the two

Sofronas, A., Consulting Engineer

This question comes up often during vessel modifications. Usually the vessel foundation has not been designed for a water load or the process doesn't allow contamination with water. Project management's argument is that the vessel was designed for a gas pressure so a pneumatic test over pressurization, to verify the soundness of the modification, shouldn't be a concern. This analysis was done to help explain why vessels should be fully hydrotested, localized hydrotested with blinds, or other nondestructive inspection plans used, such as ultrasonic or X-ray instead of a pneumatic test, when possible. The discussion has to do with safety and the high energy involved when pneumatic pressure t

Log in to view this article.

Not Yet A Subscriber? Here are Your Options.

1) Start a FREE TRIAL SUBSCRIPTION and gain access to all articles in the current issue of Hydrocarbon Processing magazine.

2) SUBSCRIBE to Hydrocarbon Processing magazine in print or digital format and gain ACCESS to the current issue as well as to 3 articles from the HP archives per month. $399 for an annual subscription*.

3) Start a FULL ACCESS PLAN SUBSCRIPTION and regain ACCESS to this article, the current issue, all past issues in the HP Archive, the HP Process Handbooks, HP Market Data, and more. $1,995 for an annual subscription.  For information about group rates or multi-year terms, contact J'Nette Davis-Nichols at Jnette.Davis-Nichols@GulfEnergyInfo.com or +1 713.520.4426*.

*Access will be granted the next business day.

Related Articles

From the Archive

Comments

Comments

{{ error }}
{{ comment.comment.Name }} • {{ comment.timeAgo }}
{{ comment.comment.Text }}