Reciprocating Compressor Dampener Bottles 1

[Jedediah]

Are Reciprocating Compressor Dampener Bottles exempt from ASME and API 510 requirements? Or are they considered pressure vessels and required Code stamping?

 

[FacEngrPE]

The legal answer depends on the AHJ, as there is often an exemption for vessels internal to equipment in the regulations. This exemption is not in the ASME code however so a prudent engineer can always use the code.

Not having a vessel code stamped is false economy. If in doubt as your company's underwriter of pressure vessels.

 

[SnTMan]

How big a ol' bottles are they?

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

 

[saplanti]

Of course they are pressure vessels which subject to suction at inlet, high pressure at discharge with pulsation and mechanical vibrations. If I was a clients I would ask all design documents (mechanical and acoustics) in addition to code stamping.

 

[LittleInch]

Well they are usually a supplied item so ask the vendors.

Most seem to at least be PED and many ASME VIII

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

 

[CuMo]

If this is what I'm thinking of, you might also need to consider fatigue due to pulsations in pressure.

 

[weldstan]

I've seen them stamped and not stamped. When I was with an EPC company, we always specified them to be U-Stamped when the project was in the USA and designed to ASME VIII but not stamped (for the most part) when the project was not.

 

[g2ktcf]

I have always required them to be stamped (previous compressor packager). They are subject to numerous sources of vibration including acoustical. Do not take a chance.

 

[Jedediah]

Thank you all for the technical input on this subject. Reasoning for my question is because ASME Section VIII has Code expemptions for PV's that are an integral part of a pump or recip compr.

 

[g2ktcf]

Integral to me is NOT a flanged and bolted on pulsation dampener.