1 / 11

API 6AV1 and API 6A Comparison

API 6AV1 and API 6A Comparison. Task Group Report Austin Freeman – Halliburton, Chair David Comeaux – GE, Roy Benefield – FMC, & John Yonker – CEC, members February 9, 2010 API SC6 Winter Meeting Houston, TX. Background. Reference Documents:

Olivia
Download Presentation

API 6AV1 and API 6A Comparison

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. API 6AV1 and API 6A Comparison Task Group Report Austin Freeman – Halliburton, Chair David Comeaux – GE, Roy Benefield – FMC, & John Yonker – CEC, members February 9, 2010API SC6 Winter Meeting Houston, TX

  2. Background • Reference Documents: • API 6AV1 – Specification for Verification Test of Wellhead Surface Safety Valves and Underwater Safety Valves for Offshore Service (1st edition, Feb. 1996) • API 6A - Specification for Wellhead and Christmas Tree Equipment (19th edition, July 2004) • ISO 10423 - Specification for Wellhead and Christmas Tree Equipment (4th edition, December 2009)

  3. Background • API Spec 6A (19th edition) included Annex I giving Performance Verification Procedures for SSV and USVs; 6AV1 is a normative reference in 6A • During adopt-back, Regional Annex O added definition of test agency and requirements to test a valve at a test agency (10.20.4.3 c)) • ISO 10423 (4th edition) issued Dec. 2009 has both of the above two requirements and 6AV1 is a normative reference in it. • API Specs 6A and 6AV1 are both in 30CFR250.806. “All SSVs and USVs must meet the technical specifications of API Spec 6A and 6AV1” • API 6AV1 is currently in the monogram program and has 1 licensee

  4. Taskgroup Charge • Investigate if all the requirements of 6AV1 have been faithfully incorporated into ISO 10423 and what should be done with 6AV1 (withdraw, amend, leave alone)

  5. Major Findings • Annex I is normatively referenced in clauses 4.1, 10.20.1, and 10.20.4.3 of the current (19th) edition and ISO 10423 (4th edition). • "Valves operating as safety valves shall be of the PR2 performance level and meet the requirements of Annex I." • "Safety valves shall meet the performance requirements specified in Annex I and those shown in Table 82." • "To verify a specific PR2 standard service valve for a SSV/USV design, the manufacturer shall satisfy the class I or class II test in accordance with Annex I."

  6. Major Findings • The language in Annex I appears to point to the eventual withdrawal of 6AV1. • "The verification testing requirements in this annex are not represented as duplicating actual well conditions. Verification tests that have been completed in accordance with verification testing requirements of API Spec 14D or API Spec 6AV1, during their validity, will satisfy the requirements of this annex.“ • The monogram Annex N in 6A refers one to 6AV1 for the requirements for the test agency. The definition of "test agency" in Annex O (and in 10423) is stated as: • "independent third party that provides a test facility and administers a testing programme that meets the class II SSV/USV valve-validation testing requirements of Annex I of this International Standard and API Spec 6AV1" • NOTE: The requirements of this definition (independent, and third party) both violate CEN guidelines on standards content.

  7. Differences between 6A and 6AV1 • 6AV1 uses PR1 and PR2 to refer to the two classes of service. API 6A and ISO 10423 use Class I and Class II. • 6AV1 describes the class 1 or PR1 test only in once place (clause 4.2) where it says the PR1 test can be run with water or similar fluids. Annex I describes the Class I test in detail in clause I.3. • The requirement to do a test per Annex I is stated in 10.20.4.3 c) where it says to submit a valve to a test agency but in Annex I.4.1 it says the manufacturer shall test the valve. • The test agency requirements in Clause 4.4 of 6AV1 are not present in Annex I. However, in the definition of "test agency" in 3.119, compliance to 6AV1 is required which puts them back in. Therefore, if we want ISO 10423 or 6A to stand alone and contain all the requirements for 6AV1 testing, we would have to put these in Annex I or some other annex.

  8. Differences between 6A and 6AV1 • ISO 10423 Clause I.1.4 on scaling of one valve test results to other sizes and pressure ratings only applies to Class I tests. The similar clause in 6AV1 (4.5.1) allows scaling for PR2 (Class II) test results. (see next slide) • The use of the application forms and documentation of the test differs from 6AV1 to 10423. • The flow diagram in 6AV1 Figure 1 is missing from Annex I. • The minimum tank size of 5 bbl (0.8 m3) was changed to 1 m3 (6.25 bbl). • The measurements of viscosity and sand content were changed from API standards to ISO standards (ISO 10414-1). • API 6AV1 includes licensing criteria and requirements for the test agency. There is nothing in ISO 10423 about this.

  9. Path Forward Assuming we want to remove 6AV1 from publication: • Include all 6AV1 content in ISO 10423 by amendment. We need to do an amendment anyway to fix the Class II scaling issue. We would also fix the definition of test agency and remove 6AV1 from the normative specification list. • Reword the requirements for test agency to remove "independent third party" to fix the CEN issue. • Notify SWRI that 6AV1 is to be withdrawn. • Notify MMS that 6AV1 is to be withdrawn. • Withdraw document.

  10. Questions?

More Related