Hydrostatic Test as per UG-99(b).

[ALA445]

Hi,
A vessel was hydrotested at our vendor's shop whose test pressure was 116 PSIG in accordance with UG-99(b) of ASME VIII DIV.1. but the vessel was given pressure of around 300 PSIG due to some miscommunication. Although vessel withstood the pressure but what is its effect on vessel and how to resolve this non-conformance in accordance with Code of Construction. Thanks in advance for any guidance.

 

[Jay_]

Was there no relieve valve on this vessel??

Detailing is a hobby,

 

[SnTMan]

ALA445, not much to go on here, but first, see UG-99(d). Assuming the AI does not reject the vessel outright, next step would be to, in consultation with the eventual owner, to determine which features of the vessel might have been adversely affected by the overpressure. Perhaps simple calculations may prove these features out or perhaps advanced analysis might be required. A common criteria is that stresses not exceed 90% yield.

Very much a matter for agreement among the parties, and maybe time to look for a new vendor

Regards,

Mike

The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand

 

[r6155]

The AI was not watching the test?

Regards

 

[Geoff13]

You should be contacting the designer of the vessel. With their knowledge of the design, including the MAWP and MAP, they should be able to provide ideas where the areas of greatest concern are. The designer can also assist you with all of SNTMan's good suggestions.

Since the vessel didn't explode I'm guessing MAP/MAWP is much higher than the design pressure.

 

[r6155]

If no deformations are seen, another hydraulic test could be done at 300 psig and controlling with acoustic emission test.

Regards

 

[r6155]

Geoff13
With the hydraulic test there is no explosion. There may be other breakage damage, but not explosion.

Regards

 

[Geoff13]

r6155
Yes, perhaps too strong a term.