Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!

Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!

  • Congratulations TugboatEng on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

ASME B16.34 vs API 598

Status
Not open for further replies.

megero

Mechanical
Joined
May 21, 2007
Messages
6
Location
GR
Hello!

I am a little confused with ASME B16.34 vs API 598 test procedures. So far I had the idea that the tests specified in ASME B16.34 were OK for 150# lug type butterfly valves. Can anyone tell me what makes a 150# lug type butterfly valve inappropriate for ASME B16.34 procedures (shell test etc) and only suitable for API 598 tests (similar with ASME but longer duration in different sizes)? Is it a metal-to-metal feature or something like that?

Thanks!
 
Hello Megero,

Not completely my field of knowledge, but if I understood correct: ASME B16.34 has no different leakage classes for soft sealed valves and metal-to-metal sealed valves. This often makes it difficult to buy metal-to-metal sealed valves according to ASME B16.34, because they must comply with the more strict rules of soft seal valve leakage. API 598 on the other hand makes a difference and allows more leakage in metal-to-metal sealed valves.

In the end it normally does not make a difference because the metal-to-metal sealed valves will leak anyway.

Additionally it might also be a design issue. ASME B16.34 prescribes minimum wallthicknesses. When selecting a strong material and a thin wallthickness the valve might comply with the API specifications and not with ASME B16.34.

I hope this helps.

M.v.h.
Terje
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor

Back
Top