Budget Shortfall Options
Ian Wyatt - Atkins
JIP on Bursting Disks for Shell & Tube Exchangers – 2nd Stakeholders Meeting
Heat Exchanger Design - Essential
•
HE 1. Establish design criteria and engineering analysis
requirements to assess if guillotine fracture is credible based on
the following:
•
•
•
•
•
•
The mechanical properties of the materials of construction used in heat
exchanger tubes, baffles, etc.
Degradation of the materials through corrosion or erosion.
Minimum tube thickness specification required to prevent guillotine
fracture.
Vibration analysis to ensure that the likelihood of guillotine fracture is
minimised.
Sensitivity analysis of process variations which should be carried out as
part of the engineering analysis to ensure that the design is robust, e.g.
flow, pressure, temperature etc.
Gathering industry heat exchanger data.
Heat Exchanger Design - Essential
•
HE 2. Establish design criteria that determine when transient
effects need to be considered for overpressure protection of
STHEs:
•
•
•
Determine if differential pressure limits can be established below which
transient effects from a tube rupture can be ignored.
Determine the maximum allowable transient overpressures (peak pressure
and duration) in the shell, under tube rupture conditions, below which fast
acting pressure relief is not required. Extend the University of Sheffield
work on heat exchanger stress distribution.
HE 3. Determine the impact of transient loads on the piping
systems if bursting disks are not applied for overpressure and
develop appropriate design guidelines to ensure that the piping
design is robust but not overly conservative.
Relief Device Selection - Essential
•
RD 1. Conduct shock tube tests at the same scale as typical relief
device sizes encountered in real applications to establish the
response times under a range of overpressures (150-400%).
•
RD 2. Establish mechanical integrity criteria for relief valves for
use in tube rupture service.
•
RD 3. Establish the range of process conditions for which
conventional relief valves could be utilised to protect against
tube rupture and those for which bursting disks are required.
This needs to consider aspects such as differential design
pressure between low and high pressure side of exchanger, relief
device speed of response etc. Alternate relief valve types and
manufacturers’ products will be taken into account.
Design Guidelines - Essential
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DG 1. A design decision flowchart that takes designers through
the engineering analysis required to develop the overpressure
protection design for a shell and tube heat exchanger.
DG 2. Relief device selection criteria for tube rupture.
DG 3. Relief device set-point selection criteria.
DG 4. Design criteria for overpressure protection of piping
connected to heat exchangers.
DG 5. Design criteria for the interface between the relief devices
and the relief disposal (flare) system.
DG 6. Lessons learned from operating experience of STHEs.
DG 7. Instrumentation requirements for detection of tube rupture
and bursting disk rupture.
Essential Tasks & Cost Estimates
Energy Institute:
Project Management:
£30,000
Main Task
RD1
RD2
RD3
HE1
HE2
HE3
DG1
DG2
DG3
DG4
DG5
DG6
DG7
Description
Conduct shock tube tests at the same scale as typical relief device sizes encountered in real applications to establishTotal
the response
times
Estimate:
under a range of overpressures (150-400%).
£330,000
Establish mechanical integrity criteria for relief valves for use in tube rupture service.
Researcher:
Establish the range of process conditions for which conventional
£120,000relief valves could be utilised to protect against tube rupture and those
for which bursting disks are required. This needs to consider aspects such as differential design pressure between low and high
pressure side of exchanger, relief device speed of response etc. Alternate relief valve types and manufacturers’ products will be taken
into account.
Establish design criteria and engineering analysis requirements to assess if guillotine fracture is credible
Establish design criteria that determine when transient effects need to be considered for overpressure protection of shell and tube
heat exchangers
Determine the impact of transient loads on the piping systems if bursting disks are not applied for overpressure and develop
appropriate design guidelines to ensure that the piping design is robust but not overly conservative.
a design decision flowchart that takes designers through the engineering analysis required to develop the overpressure protection
Engineering Study:
design for a shell and tube heat exchanger
£150,000
relief device selection criteria for tube rupture
relief device set-point selection criteria
design criteria for overpressure protection of piping connected to heat exchangers
design criteria for the interface between the relief devices and the relief disposal (flare) system
lessons learned from operating experience of shell and tube heat exchangers
Instrumentation requirements for detection of tube rupture and bursting disk rupture.
Contingency:
£30,000
Proposed Structure
•
The fee for operating companies or safety regulators sponsors is
£30,000
•
The fee for other participants (e.g. design houses) is £15,000
•
Relevant in-kind contributions may be accepted from other
participants, such as from relief valve manufacturers, heat
exchanger design software specialists, etc.
•
Target fee of £330,000 can be achieved with:
•
•
•
•
•
11 operators
Or 10 operators + 2 others
Or 9 operators + 4 others
Etc
Need 11 “operators”
Considerations
Main Task
RD1
RD2
RD3
HE1
HE2
HE3
DG1
DG2
DG3
DG4
DG5
DG6
DG7
Description
Conduct shock tube tests at the same scale as typical relief device sizes encountered in real applications
to establish the response times under a range of overpressures (150-400%).
Establish mechanical integrity criteria for relief valves for use in tubeKeep
ruptureResearcher
service.
Minimum 50%
Funding
Establish the range of process conditions for which conventional relief valves
be utilised to protect
fullycould
funded
against tube rupture and those for which bursting disks are required. This needs to consider aspects such
as differential design pressure between low and high pressure side of exchanger, relief device speed of
response etc. Alternate relief valve types and manufacturers’ products will be taken into account.
Establish design criteria and engineering analysis requirements to assess if guillotine fracture is credible
Establish design criteria that determine when transient effects need to be considered for overpressureSome guidelines
protection of shell and tube heat exchangers
require analysis
Determine the impact of transient loads on the piping systems if bursting disks are not applied for
overpressure and develop appropriate design guidelines to ensure that the piping design is robust but
not overly conservative.
a design decision flowchart that takes designers through the engineering analysis required to develop the
overpressure protection design for a shell and tube heat exchanger
relief device selection criteria for tube rupture
relief device set-point selection criteria
Need to provide
guidelines
design criteria for overpressure protection of piping connected to heat exchangers
design criteria for the interface between the relief devices and the relief disposal (flare) system
lessons learned from operating experience of shell and tube heat exchangers
Instrumentation requirements for detection of tube rupture and bursting disk rupture.
Management &
Contingency
proportional to
total funding
Cost Reductions
No of 'Operators'
11
9
7
5.5
Percent Funding
100%
82%
64%
50%
Funds Available
£330,000 £270,000 £210,000 £165,000
Full Time Researcher £120,000 £120,000 £120,000 £120,000
Project Management £30,000 £24,545 £19,091 £15,000
Contingency
£30,000 £24,545 £19,091 £15,000
Left for Analysis
£150,000 £100,909 £51,818 £15,000
Resulting Engineering Tasks
Main Task
RD1
RD2
RD3
HE1
HE2
HE3
DG1
DG2
DG3
DG4
DG5
DG6
DG7
Description
Conduct shock tube tests at the same scale as typical relief device sizes encountered in real applications
to establish the response times under a range of overpressures (150-400%).
Establish mechanical integrity criteria for relief valves for use in tube rupture service.
11
No. of 'Operators'
9
7
5.5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
relief device set-point selection criteria
1
1
1
1
design criteria for overpressure protection of piping connected to heat exchangers
1
0
0
0
design criteria for the interface between the relief devices and the relief disposal (flare) system
1
1
0
0
lessons learned from operating experience of shell and tube heat exchangers
1
1
1
0
Instrumentation requirements for detection of tube rupture and bursting disk rupture.
1
1
1
0
Establish the range of process conditions for which conventional relief valves could be utilised to protect
against tube rupture and those for which bursting disks are required. This needs to consider aspects such
as differential design pressure between low and high pressure side of exchanger, relief device speed of
response etc. Alternate relief valve types and manufacturers’ products will be taken into account.
Establish design criteria and engineering analysis requirements to assess if guillotine fracture is credible
Establish design criteria that determine when transient effects need to be considered for overpressure
protection of shell and tube heat exchangers
Determine the impact of transient loads on the piping systems if bursting disks are not applied for
overpressure and develop appropriate design guidelines to ensure that the piping design is robust but
not overly conservative.
a design decision flowchart that takes designers through the engineering analysis required to develop
the overpressure protection design for a shell and tube heat exchanger
relief device selection criteria for tube rupture