Safety in the Plant
the specific composition of the sour gas in the specific service or installation. The results of this assessment will form the basis for determining the specific material requirements in accordance with MR0175/ISO 151546. These inputs from the user will be the basis for working with suppliers to select the appropriate materials of construction of the subject equipment. Based on the available input the most suitable corrosion-resistant material for constructing the equipment can be determined in close liaison with the equipment supplier. Offering in theory a good approach, this procedure becomes quite cumbersome when the relevant equipment involves castings - often produced in minimal quantities for economical reasons - or specially engineered machined-from-forging based designs. This is specifically valid for example for safety relief valves. Even when the user may be able to determine best suitable material grade for the specific application, the available executions of safety valves or pressure relief valves are limited. Special designs may be considered, taking into account the cost- related issues, type testing requirements and extended lead-times. A pragmatic approach, offering economical advantages of
Fig. 2. Protection of a safety relief valve against corrosion by use of upstream bursting disc device.
materials is often nor problem whereas the positive sealing provided by this device will avoid the contact of the safety valve critical components with the sour gas environment. Only in case where an unacceptable overpressure situation exists the bursting disc will relief the pressure into the safety valve inlet which will handle the pressure relief as planned. After completing the discharge situation, measures can be taken to safely close-down the process or divert to a parallel mounted system, allowing cleaning and repair of the initial pressure safety combination. In this way the use of standard execution equipment will offer an effective protection with important economical advantages, without discriminating the long-term safety aspect of the relevant installation. The consideration of
additional equipment (the bursting disc upstream of the safety valve) will often result in major savings in both the initial investment (use of standard material grade, shorter lead times of initial parts and spares) as well as in reducing the maintenance costs of the installation (lower need for cleaning, possibility for in-situ testing of safety valve setting, shorter downtime). n
considerable scale, is to combine the use of ‘standard’ NACE- compliant material safety or pressure relief valve with a bursting disc devices installed upstream. The availability of bursting or rupture discs and corresponding holder in suitable execution and
Enter 35 or ✔ at
www.engineerlive.com/epe
Roger Bours is Pressure Relief Manager, Fike Europe, Herentals, Belgium.
www.fike.com or
www.fike.be
Risk
management for the new Machinery Directive
A
new version of Laidler Associates’ Risk Management Software System is claimed
to help users to comply with the Machinery Directive 2006/42/EC and PUWER 98 Laidler Associates is launching a new version of its Risk Management Software System that gives up-to-the-minute guidance on risk assessments for the working environment, CE Marking to the Machinery Directive 2006/42/EC and PUWER 98.
Already widely used, the Risk Management Software System simplifies and speeds the process of assessment, as well as ensuring that no vital steps are missed.
The latest version has been updated to cover the requirements of the new Machinery Directive, 2006/42/EC, compliance with which became mandatory from 29th December 2009. Other enhancements include an option for users to decide whether they work to EN ISO 13849-1 or EN 954-1 for the safety of machinery, and there is also an on-disk copy of the Health and Safety Executive’s new PUWER Approved Code of Practice.
Its modular design means that the software can be enhanced to suit the needs of individual users by adding modules to deal with specific requirements beyond PUWER 98 and CE marking.
All modules guide the user through the steps
necessary for compliance by means of a simple question-and-answer approach that ensures that every step is completed.
The modules then generate detailed reports in a uniform format, thereby making it easy to fully document risk assessment processes and, in the case of CE marking, produce the essential technical files.
If non-compliances are found, a ‘to do’ list is created, listing items in order of risk. A further benefit of the system is the ability to store reports electronically.
The new version of the Risk Management Software System runs on Microsoft Windows XP, Windows Vista or Windows 7. A free demonstration version of the system is available for download from the company’s website. n
For more information, visit
www.laidler.co.uk www.engineerlive.com 35
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52