Effective Emergency Relief System (ERS) design helps companies meet risk-management goals, compliance requirements, and sound business practices. ioMosaic provides a total ERS solution with our comprehensive ERS design services, from reactivity testing for design basis determination to calculations for Z-axis deflection from dynamic loads.
Our team has decades of experience performing PRFS analysis and design.
Our risk-based approach helps mitigate near-unventable scenarios to a tolerable level of risk.
Better evaluate hazards in your facility with an accurate process simulation.
Delivering properly designed pressure relief systems that save both money and time.
Reasonable estimates of the expected time to failure (ettf) or expected time to yield (etty) are required and necessary for effective risk management as well as effective emergency and fire protection and response. Read this paper for a demonstration of calculating ettf or etty in fire exposure scenarios with Process Safety Office® SuperChems™.
The API and ASME guidelines and standards for emergency relief systems both state that total nonrecoverable inlet pressure losses between protected equipment and a spring-loaded relief valve should be limited to 3% of the relief valve set pressure. Inlet pressure losses above this limit may experience ‘chatter,’ which can lead to damage of equipment, valves, and piping. The API standards allow for inlet pressure loss beyond 3%, with a proper engineering analysis. Consistent with the performance-based nature of these guidelines, operating companies can define what a proper engineering analysis is and often such an analysis can be experience based. The requirement for inlet pressure loss, be it 3% or higher, is not sufficient to guarantee pressure relief valve (PRV) stability. This issue is a hot topic which is currently being debated within industry and regulators. Regulatory authorities in the United States have recently imposed fines on companies which had relief valves which did not comply with these criteria. The outcome of these discussions will have widespread implications affecting most petrochemical companies. This paper presents a summary of the history and application of the 3% rule, and presents practical mitigation options for companies trying to follow this rule. It will benefit anyone involved in safety and pressure relief systems.
This PSE module performs efficient tracking of process safety related data and analysis. A customized workflow allows for a specific operating unit or the entire facility to be studied and evaluated for compliance.
A large U.S. company in the oil and gas industry needed to evaluate their protective relief systems in a unit of abnormal operation in which a reactor in a two-stage reactor system was to be bypassed. The client wanted to have the capabilities to safely bypass either of the reactors while not having to shut down the entire unit. Read this case study to find out how we delivered solutions that empowered the client to confidently bypass either reactor without unit shutdown, safeguarding continuous operations.
Apr 1, 2025
Dec 1, 2024
Aug 19, 2024