Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

Nitrogen Piping Material Requirement - ISO 8 Clean Room

Status
Not open for further replies.

H4nkj

Chemical
Jun 29, 2022
4
0
0
US
Hello all,

Long time lurker, first time poster.

I have been given a seemingly easy task but I'm hitting a wall. We have a nitrogen header piped through ISO 8 Clean Room laboratories. This is currently fed from a bulk LN2 tank and I need to disconnect that feed and supply the header from a MicroBulk LN2 tank. In the ceiling, this nitrogen header is all copper. At the point of uses in the labs, all the regulators and nozzles are stainless. I am concerned that the copper is not adequate enough for the application and it all needs to be replaced with stainless (which will be a much more difficult project).

A co-worker reached out to several old colleagues and they all asked if we reviewed ASME B31.3. I've since purchased and reviewed the standard but it wasn't much help. The standard is more revolved around the temperature and pressure ratings of different materials and little to do with how the material impacts gas quality. There is a paragraph in the "High Purity" section that states "Materials commonly used in high purity process piping systems include austenitic, ferritic, and duplex stainless steels, and nickel and nickel alloys," but this doesn't seem like enough to hang my hat on.

I also came across another post from this forum. Commenters were pretty unanimous that 316 SS is the 'industry standard' for that application but no one produced any specifications to back this up.

I reviewed the ISO 14644-1 (Classification of air cleanliness by particle concentration) and ISO 14644-4 (Design, construction and start-up). Everything revolves around air particulate count and the design and construction section only talks about materials used to construct the room (floors, walls, benchtops) and nothing about gas headers. In my application, the nitrogen will be used as an agitator under a fume hood and used to pressure transfer the product from a filter to collection vessel. In the pressure transfer step of the process, the N2 will be vented into the room. The nitrogen purity is 99.999% at delivery. If we can determine that 99.999% nitrogen in copper tubing will not have a negative quality impact on our product, I'm wondering if I can just install a particulate filter at every point of use to avoid raising the particulate count and effecting the ISO 8 clean room status.

Any comments or guidance would be appreciated. I would love to find a standard that I could use to defend my decision.
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

Heavy gage Cu tubing is common in pure gas applications. The joints are all brazed. You can buy this tube purged and capped. It isn't quite clean room quality as you get it but very close.
In clean room applications point of use filters are common. I see them in Pharma systems all of the time.
I believe that the Compressed Gas Inst. has a std/manual on high purity inert gasses.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
P.E. Metallurgy, consulting work welcomed
 
Hi Ed,

In my case, the builders used ProPress to couple the tube together. I am not sure if the tubing was originally purged and capped or not. I'm guessing it was not.

Are you referring to the CAGI or CGA for the high purity gas standard?
 
The problem with crimped connections is that any tiny leak is also letting oxygen and moisture in.
Get an analyzer and check gas purity at the source and the point of use.
I was thinking of CGA, but either might be helpful.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
P.E. Metallurgy, consulting work welcomed
 
I'm used to seeing 316 tubing for high purity gas work in clean rooms. But I will caveat that with this was for aerospace work where we just categorically always used 316 tubing with 37 degree flare connections. Wasn't ever really a consideration for other materials since our technicians were so good at working with it.

Vendors would sometimes want to substitute for Swagelok compression tubing connections but the Space Force regs at the time didnt allow for it.
 
EP, Yes, I have sold a lot of 316L tube for this service. They also weld a lot of it with automatic orbital welders.
This is what you would see in Pharma.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
P.E. Metallurgy, consulting work welcomed
 
Agree with IRstuff .... 316L SS should be the de facto go to for virtually everything !

I am doing a bit of guessing here, but wouldn't a copper piping system be of nearly the same cost as a thin-walled SS system ?

Additionally, the SS system has no risk of external corrosion, like the copper system would

MJCronin
Sr. Process Engineer
 
In manufacturing plants, we usually used K Cu pipe because cutting and brazing were so easy.
When I worked in a SS tube mill we used all 316.
When we re-ran supply lines we made single lengths for each run, they were each about 900' long.
Cu prices are way off of their highs, so I am not sure what the price balance is today between SS (0.065" wall tube or sch5 pipe) and K Cu pipe.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
P.E. Metallurgy, consulting work welcomed
 
What kind of cleaning does the lab undergo? Usually SS is used so that the cleaning chemicals will not cause any corrosion to the surface and possibly cause some particle shedding. Filtering the N2 gas at the point of use is typical, though you'd want to validate that the GN2 system as it stands doesn't pose a quality risk.
 
I appreciate the feedback from everyone. Sounds like there is not much literature to validate the decision, but we all unanimously believe 316L stainless would be best.

In my situation, stainless would be more expensive because I am modifying an existing copper header. The copper is already present so that is certainly the cheaper option. That doesn't make copper the proper solution, though!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top