JoeWong88,
I think you are missing the intent of my posts. I'm basically coming to the resolution that:
1. Firstly, hot oil coolers should not use water if the tube rupture relief scenario cannot be adequately handled.
2. A rupture disc makes a worse condition (less safe) for this particular...
The more I think about this issue, the more questions I generate. The way I see it, there's no possible way to prevent a pressure surge caused by the direct contact of hot oil (650F+) with the water. If you put a rupture disk on the low pressure side (in this case the water side) once it...
I understand the need for relief, I'm just concerned about the reaction time of the relief device when water is mixed directly with the hot oil? Is a rupture disk better for this application?
Does anyone out there use water for hot oil cooling? If so, how do you reconcile tube rupture relief case? (Note: client intends to used double tubesheet to prevent issue at tube-tubesheet joint, but this doesn't address a tube failure).
Does API 521 indirectly require one to include inlet/outlet piping when sizing for fire relief of a code vessel in it's guidelines for assumed fire coverage of 2500ft2? I'm sizing a valve for a small piece of equipment where the inlet/outlet piping has a relatively significant surface area.
I have always heard (and may have at one time read), that field instrumentation cannot be employed to reduce or eliminate relief liability. I am currently looking at a system that has a low flow switch on the shellside of the exchanger with hot oil on the tubeside. The flow switch activates a...
