Hazard levels for pressure vessels with internal bladders

Click For Summary
The discussion highlights the complexities of classifying pressure vessels in Australia and the United States, particularly regarding water buffer tanks and accumulators with internal bladders. In Australia, the classification system is based on a pressure-volume calculation multiplied by service factors to determine hazard levels, which dictate inspection and design requirements. In contrast, the U.S. lacks a unified standard, relying instead on various industry-specific codes, including the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, with inspections managed at the state level. The conversation emphasizes that risk assessment in the U.S. is often limited to prescriptive codes that categorize vessels rather than providing a comprehensive evaluation of risk. Overall, the need for clearer guidelines and standards for pressure vessel classification and risk assessment is evident.
LT Judd
Messages
25
Reaction score
8
TL;DR
What is the US system for classifying pressure vessels to determine hazard levels and required level of design and inspection oversight.
Hi , I am based in Australia and my question originates from some grey areas in the Australian system of classifying pressure vessels. I am guessing most users on this forum are US based . Does the US have a system for classifying pressure vessels such as air receivers , boilers, autoclaves, heat exchangers etc. to determine what level of inspection and design review is required?. If so could some one briefly describe it. From what I have seen on the web it looks like you don't have a general standard , but different standards depending on the industry and application. I am interested particularly in the case of water buffer tanks and accumulators that have a bladder inside them filled with nitrogen and how they are considered in terms of risk and hazard.
The Australian system is, I think, based on a German one in which you start with a pressure X volume figure ( MpA x Litres) and then mutiple by 3 different service factors to get a hazard number. The hazard numbers are then divided into five different bands (Logarithmically) which call out different requirements involving design, verification inspection and operation.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
We have ASME boiler and pressure vessel code, but inspections are a state (or insurance) thing. I live in Pennsylvania and we have our own PVC that sits over top of ASME for administration.

It seems to me that risk assessment is limited; the codes are prescriptive and you just find what category yours is in (unfired pressure vessel).

https://www.dli.pa.gov/Individuals/...ges/Boilers-and-Unfired-Pressure-Vessels.aspx
 

Thread 'A practical way to vaporize fuel for high MPG?'

Here's a video by “driving 4 answers” who seems to me to be well versed on the details of Internal Combustion engines. The video does cover something that's a bit shrouded in 'conspiracy theory', and he touches on that, but of course for phys.org, I'm only interested in the actual science involved. He analyzes the claim of achieving 100 mpg with a 427 cubic inch V8 1970 Ford Galaxy in 1977. Only the fuel supply system was modified. I was surprised that he feels the claim could have been...
View full post »

Similar threads

Force of pressurized water exiting a hose or pipe?
Replies
20
Views
10K
Misc. Hydrostatics problem in a water vessel
Replies
5
Views
2K
Pressure Vessel Design Question
Replies
3
Views
2K
Use internal pressure to compute work done by an expanding gas?
Replies
15
Views
3K
Calculate thickness of a pressurized vessel
Replies
5
Views
9K
What does it take to design a high pressure solar boiler
Replies
1
Views
5K
Water Pressure in a Sealed Vessel
Replies
5
Views
6K
I Irreversible adiabatic processes & entropy change (clarification needed)
Replies
22
Views
5K
Plumbing Compressed air powered water pressure
Replies
39
Views
14K
Measuring the internal pressure of a sealed container
Replies
10
Views
11K