Can YOU help? --> Unanswered questions <-- (Other than Marcelo's Informational posts)

API 6A Chokes - PR1 / PR2 Tests

DinuStan

Senior Design Engineer
#1
Hi all,
Greetings!!!

For API 6A Chokes, i have some below queries reg testing of validations.
Chokes as per API 6A 20th Edition clause 4 with fulfill the requirements of clause 10.9.

1.What is the difference between the Table 86(Performance Test Requirement) as per clause 10.9 in API Spec 6A and Annex F PR1/PR2 Requirements? since Table 86 doesn't have any detailed procedure clauses and Annex F is just an informative section (it shall be applied if purchaser or manufacturer need).

2. can Table 86 PR1/PR2 test procedure be written by manufacturer since it is only cyclic test for chokes?

Thanks
Dinu
 
#2
The difference between Table 86 and Annex F is exactly what you described: Annex F testing is only necessary if the manufacturer or purchaser specify it. A test procedure for validating that the product meets the Table 86 requirements can be written by the manufacturer.

Note: many purchasers of API 6A equipment misunderstand the meaning of PR2 and assume that requiring PR2 also requires Annex F PR2 testing. If you have a customer requiring PR2, I recommend clarifying with them if they want "normal" PR2 (ability to meet the cycle requirements from Table 86) or if they want Annex F PR2 testing.
 

DinuStan

Senior Design Engineer
#4
The difference between Table 86 and Annex F is exactly what you described: Annex F testing is only necessary if the manufacturer or purchaser specify it. A test procedure for validating that the product meets the Table 86 requirements can be written by the manufacturer.

Note: many purchasers of API 6A equipment misunderstand the meaning of PR2 and assume that requiring PR2 also requires Annex F PR2 testing. If you have a customer requiring PR2, I recommend clarifying with them if they want "normal" PR2 (ability to meet the cycle requirements from Table 86) or if they want Annex F PR2 testing.
Yes Jmech.. thanks for your reply..
the same interpretation is being with me also. but some of auditors from API asks during audit time, many things regardless of the subject about Table 86 and Annex F. Is there any reference documents from API Body about this queries or can we make a query regarding this to API Body?

thanks in advance...
 
#5
Please see attached API 6A interpretations summary. Number 6A-2012-30 (at the bottom of page 15) is relevant. It clarifies several items:
1. The cycle requirements in the table are design requirements, not validation requirements. However, you need to somehow validate that your finished design met the design requirements, which is difficult to do without validation testing. For cycle testing of a choke, you need to fully open and fully close the choke 3 times. The temperature and pressure at which you do this is not specified by API 6A, so it is up to you.
2. Annex F is not required if not specified.
If an auditor is insisting that Annex F is required even when not specified by the manufacturer or the customer, you need to remind the auditor about the meaning of "informative". If they simply need an answer for the product questions of an audit, the answer is "not applicable". If they still insist that it should be required, contact the audit manager. If they write a finding, appeal it, and you should win easily.
 

Attachments

#7
Please see attached API 6A interpretations summary. Number 6A-2012-30 (at the bottom of page 15) is relevant. It clarifies several items:
1. The cycle requirements in the table are design requirements, not validation requirements. However, you need to somehow validate that your finished design met the design requirements, which is difficult to do without validation testing. For cycle testing of a choke, you need to fully open and fully close the choke 3 times. The temperature and pressure at which you do this is not specified by API 6A, so it is up to you.
2. Annex F is not required if not specified.
If an auditor is insisting that Annex F is required even when not specified by the manufacturer or the customer, you need to remind the auditor about the meaning of "informative". If they simply need an answer for the product questions of an audit, the answer is "not applicable". If they still insist that it should be required, contact the audit manager. If they write a finding, appeal it, and you should win easily.

You don't happen to know of an API 6A 21st edition interpretations summary, do you?
 

DinuStan

Senior Design Engineer
#9
In Api 21st Edition is having very clear thoughts between PR1/PR2 table Requirement and Annex F requirement. In annex F there is no pr1 and annex f pr test is named as PR2F. So here after PR1/PR2 is only about table requirement. It will not meant about annex F requirement.
 

Top Bottom