View latest pressure equipment legislation and reports [November 2004] At the "Developments in PV Technology" conference (held at IMechE HQ, London on 23-24 November 2004), all of the speakers were asked to address the future - be it short-, medium- or long-term - for their particular topic.
The following in a summary of the key points:
1) Legislation and Standards The main emphasis was the review of the PED and SPVD with comments being invited now by the Commission. Interpretation is key - Q. When is a duck a fish? A. When it is in Bavaria! It is noteworthy that the Helpdesk has been successful and has addressed many issues but these seem to be tailing off. There will be a ‘Boilers Helpdesk’ following the same format established by the EN13445 helpdesk. There is much concern about identifying what will encourage purchasers and manufacturers to specify the European standard EN13445 as opposed to alternative documents such as PD5500, CODAP, ASME and AD-Merkblatter or DIN standards. This will be addressed by the Commission in the near future - even if a heavy approach is necessary.
2) Design and Materials A comprehensive review of the EU funded project on the comparison of EN13445 and ASME standards was presented outlining some ten examples which were undertaken in a round-robin format. Various components were issued to designers using various software tools and then designs were submitted to different manufacturers in different countries for costs including time and effort to satisfy the PED and EN13445. The main outcome was that in seven out of the ten cases, the EU standard proved cost effective, but some extra costs were introduced as a result of determining material properties and test plates. The brief overview of the work presented showed that there was much to be had from investing time in understanding the EU standard although for some simpler components, no extra cost benefit could be had.
In a specialist topic presentation on vessels for blast containments, the requirements for coping with unique items of pressure equipment which are well outside conventional standards was covered. But yet, there remains a need to comply with the PED for vessels with high pressure short duration pressure pulses.
3) Manufacture and Inspection The main outcomes of this session were such that manufacturing may be a global business and the issue of a need for guidance on complex combinations of clauses for two or more Directives was discussed (e.g. PED, Machinery, ATEX etc.) It was felt that while the PED had had a major and beneficial impact, there was a need for reviewing the PED guidelines and they would benefit from some consolidation or incorporation into a revised PED/SPVD.
4) Integrity and Life Assessment These sessions covered the salient points of the titles as presented. However there was an indication that industry specific guidelines are likely to be developed for fracture assessments. In addition, the use of probabilistic fracture assessments and their development could be used to identify higher risk area and more significant factors with the biggest effects. This may have an impact on defect assessment codes in the future.
5) Towards the Future Some overview of the position of pressure equipment for the hydrogen economy was presented. Some indication of hydrogen storage in tanks and piping was presented and some examples of use in specialist bespoke equipment were given; however much equipment will be built using conventional approaches and existing procedures. It was clear that managing risk at compressed hydrogen filling stations was important and that developing standards, safety training and consulting was essential to bring this industry forward to mainstream usage.
During discussion many points were made but some notable comments were that risk based design methods were being discussed in ASME for nuclear plants. It seems that many present believe there should be resurgence in nuclear power provision along with developments in hydrogen technology.
The concluding presentation on EPERC revisited the main thrust and drivers of EPERC and noted the move towards a Technology Platform. It was noted that fewer participants were willing to commit to EPETC even though the technical themes and associated funding priorities for the next EU framework is presently being formulated. Some comments were also made regarding the dwindling number of standards makers and participants. It is clear that the industry has contracted but works well in certain key specialist areas. There remains a need to encourage and develop links with major users of pressure equipment to show that there is benefit to be had by engaging in standard development and training of the next generation of engineers for the industry.
Conference Organising Committee
April 2005
Back to top
