Pressure vessel with pneumatic vibrator 3

[ed72073]

Hi everyone,

I have been following this site for a while but never really post questions. There is more knowledge on here than I can ever interrupt, but I have some questions.

First I work where there are many pressure vessels that are used for gear process blasting or peening. These are double chamber vessels that allow contentious operation during exchange cycles of the media. The pressure vessels range from 250-450 gallons and were made to proper code requirements. Then a non code shop attached steel pads to mount a pneumatic vibrator. I don't think this is allowed, or is it? The vibrator acts like a hammer to help the media flow on humid days, but these thing hammer hundreds of time each minute. The pads are located where both tanks are welded together, so about mid point on the whole tank.

My understanding is you should not hammer onto a pressure vessel, or is that wrong?

So is having the blocks welded onto the pressure vessel after a certification, does that rendering the certification void?
Is having anything altered on the pressure vessel after the certification void if done by a non code shop?
Having any alteration been done requires a "R" stamp along with documentation required?

These are Division 1 pressure vessels, and I have been bring these concern to the company with resistance to have them repaired or replaced properly.

 

[TGS4]

Where in the world are you located and does the ASME Code have the force of law there? How about the API post-construction standards? The answer will make a difference to the response.

 

[ed72073]

I am located in Illinois, but these pressure vessels are all over the Midwest and outside of the USA. The pressure vessels are used in companies such as Ford, Chrysler, Borg Warner, American Axle, Dana, ALD, Caterpillar, Pratt Whitney, and others. Not all of the pressure vessels have pneumatic vibrators attached, but all of them do contain a ring that was welded on after certification and the tank manufacturer is not aware of this alteration. The modification was done by a machine manufacturer company I did work for from 1991-2011, and I would guess 200 pressure vessels. Another thing that was done on some of the pressure vessels was to remove the ASME tag before the equipment was shipped to the end user, only for the reason that the customer would contact the machine manufacturer for parts and not the tank manufacturer.

I have know this to be wrong for years and myself and other employees have brought this to the attention to the owner of that company, but his feeling was it is no big deal. That company does not have the proper training or qualifications to perform the alteration, and once the alteration were made there was no documentation provide to anyone.

I know that people lives are on the line and they are not aware of the dangers. I have contacted the media about this, but it is just my allegations and it seems that until something happens they don't want to be bothered. I have also contacted the National Board of Pressure Vessels Inspectors and made them aware of the altercations, which they do know how serious this to be, and will be doing inspections. I also think that none of these pressure vessels are registered in the states that they are located in, or if they need to be. As far as construction standards, there were none in place for the alteration, anyone that worked for that company would weld on the pressure vessels that was required.

 

[marty007]

As someone working at an ASME 'U' and 'R' stamp shop, I am cringing reading your post.

Any work done on an ASME VIII pressure vessel should only be completed by an 'R' stamp certified shop (with all of the bells/whistles). The repair/alteration work would need to be overseen by an AI and the work documented with an AI signed R-1 form.

If the owner of the company doesn't appear to care, he might change his tune if the state board knocks on his door. In Illinois, pressure equipment appears to fall under the jurisdiction of the: Office of the Illinois State Fire Marshal. They should be able to answer or respond to any concerns that you have.

 

[TGS4]

Egads, Ed72073. Definitely going to the National Board is a good start. The State Boiler and Pressure Vessel jurisdictions are also the next places to go.

 

[ed72073]

I have contacted several members of The National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors in the states that I know these do exist in, and I am finding that some have less requirements than others. The local inspector here in Illinois I have had great communication with and he is taken this very serious. He does plan on doing an inspection at the location that I know the tanks are in. The question I had asked is what keeps the company from just continue operating the machine if a violation is found? The answer was, Nothing, but that company would be opening themselves to unlimited liability if there was to be an accident.

The local Fire department does do yearly inspections, but I don't think they ever asked about the pressure vessels. OSHA was also notified this and they did recommend that the vessels be repaired or replaced, but nothing was ever done.

Every pressure vessel that had an alteration or modification was never marked with a "R" stamp, and this was always done by a non code shop. Myself as well as many others performed the alteration from instruction of the owner, when any questioned this they would be threaten with their jobs, so after awhile no one would raise the issue anymore. There is one pressure vessel that does have a "R" stamp and was done by a certified shop, but they only welded the blocks for the vibrators and not the ring, they never knew about the ring alteration.

Some of the people that I have been trying to make aware of these issues, look at it as I am just trying to make problems for the company and I should have let people know about this years ago. I have let people know about this years ago, but no one ever followed through. I was just a small voice (and not the only voice) in a larger company. Anyone that can offer help I appreciate anything, and Please continue to add comments about these issues.

 

[marty007]

Your other post about manifolds brought be back here. Do you have any updates on these pressure vessels?

 

[ed72073]

There are some updates, but things are moving very slow. I have been in contact with several state inspectors and some persons at where the pressure vessels are located, but I have old or few contacts there. The state inspectors have been great to work with, and some I get no responds back, also waiting to hear from local Fire Departments.

In some of the states it is required to be registered and inspected, others no inspection is required. Those inspectors that know where the pressure vessels are located will be looking into the issue and inspections. I have provided the most information to them and will answer any question they do have, but as I said it has been moving slow. The people at the plants that I have been in contact with are either eager to the issue or the complete opposite, meaning no further responds back or seem to just drop the ball. This is been somewhat typical from the way others in the past have left the issue up in the air.

If anyone can offer any support or guidance to me that would be great. I am just a small shop that know the dangers with pressure vessels, but am not an ASME code shop. I am thinking that the company that wants me to produce the manifolds have had an issue or problem that they are not telling me. If they made the manifolds in the past, then why are they not currently build those? The manifolds is something I, myself will stay away from, but if I can have a code shop build them, that would be something I feel comfortable with.

My claims to the pressure vessels is something that is easily to verify in a couple of minutes, and those that do have the ASME tag attached, they can use that information to request the approved prints used to produce and test the tanks, and this can be used to again verify my claims.

One thing that I have been asked, and I don't know the answer is, what is the life expectancy of the pressure vessels? Being that they use an abrasive media and I have seen and repaired one that wore out.

Sorry for the long post.

 

[marty007]

Thank you for the update.

I'm sure some of the owners of the equipment are not too happy to hear about this, but this is a major safety issue that deserved a thorough follow-through. It's not always easy to be the bearer of bad news, so I have to commend you for following through on this.

Cheers,

 

[ed72073]

That is my exact point, there are lives at great risk, and the companies need to take corrective action to insure no one is injured or killed. The difficulty that I have run into is I am just a little voice to all the huge companies that don't want to be bothered. I hope soon those I have contacted do find there to be the issue I have stated and correct them ASAP, then maybe others will follow if I can provide someone following through.

Believe me I know it is bad news and how companies look at me for telling them about the issue. The company that did the alteration is not a small fly by night company at all, but knew this to be wrong and ignored the fact. That company feels it to not be a big deal and I know of at least one pressure vessel that was documented incorrect after it was repaired, part way.

 

[ed72073]

Well I have an update to one of the pressure vessels that was inspected. The ASME tag was removed and the inspector would not allow the pressure vessel to be used or operated without have the tag. The customer contacted me for an answer as if I knew what happen to the tag or if I could provide any documents. After a few calls and email exchanges he now was in a bind as he has five other tanks with the same alterations that did pass inspection prior, but they used the prints provided from the machine builder, who is a non code shop and doesn't hold any certifications to alter the pressure vessel. I would think on the print it should have some type of stamp or certification number that the inspector would look for.

They were able to obtain the original ASME tag from the machine builder, and the inspector allowed it to pass. When he had told this to me I couldn't believe it, how could this pass, and the inspector could have no way requested the original documents of the tank from the National Board to prove it to be compliant. The inspector only used the prints provided from the machine builder, and never questioned why the ASME tag was removed.

There was also another tank inspected, but it was the wrong tank the inspector looked at (different inspector), and when I told him that, he seemed to become upset with me saying I should have reported this way earlier with more details. How much more details could I have provided, I gave him the name of the machine company, The manufacturer of the pressure vessel, the location in the plant along with the address, and a person to contact at the plant. I don't think he will be going back to look again or look at the others I told him about. So how should I proceed now? It almost seems that there is a lack of effort or safety from some people, which is what I have found when I did work for the company.