old ring gasket utilization or re-use 1

[Rasheed Khan]

I have one very simple query relating to the Ring gasket, during T&I of Refinery , operation need to utilize the old ring gasket as there is no physical deformation and damage evidences, but inspection they need to replace it with new one as well as to find the hardness value . Can it utilize the old gasket if there is no physical damage and it is necessary to find the hardness at site ?

 

[racookpe1978]

Not recommended. Why do you think re-using a gasket is cheaper than shutting down and fixing the leak?

 

[LittleInch]

See

http://www.flexsealindustrial.com/Flexitallic_RTJ_Product_Data.pdf

As it says the ring deforms locally. You will not be able to see this visually.

Operations don't "need to" reuse it, they are just unaware of the reasons why and its inbuilt into them not to throw something away when it appears to be re-usable.

At best this is poor practice and any minor cost saved is more than increased by time taken to fix leaks when returned to service or tested.

Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

 

[BigInch]

Reuse of gaskets has got to be the #1 False Economy PracticeOf the piping world.
Reuse gaskets only in emergency situations.

Technology is stealing American jobs. Stop H1-Bs for robots.

 

[mk3223]

It sounds that no gasket was ordered before starting the piping work.
The RTJ gaskets of the different material are made with different maximum hardness values. Also, the material ID is stamped on the gasket.

 

[pennpiper]

mk3223,
It sounds like you are guessing! Such wild speculations lead to wrong conclusions and wrong solutions.

Ask the OP for more information, find the correct problem and then recommend the proper solution.

Sometimes its possible to do all the right things and still get bad results

 

[BigInch]

I think... a pretty good guess.

Technology is stealing American jobs. Stop H1-Bs for robots.

 

[mk3223]

It's my bad.
Just reminded to an old mistake before...