ASME Standards for FRP Piping and Tanks - UTComp

FRP design standards keep getting better &#; what about predicting FRP reliability after it&#;s in service?

Fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) composites have come a long way since they were first used for vessels and piping in the chemical processing industry in the mid-20th century. 

For more information, please visit Yongchang.

Design approaches in the early days adapted &#; not always successfully &#; standards and methods used for metal equipment: they did not take into account the unique characteristics of FRP. 

This resulted in many early failures that tarnished the reputation of FRP as a reliable alternative to steels for corrosion-resistant service. 

Fortunately, the situation began to improve in the s as industry developed new design and construction methods that better suited the properties and behaviours of FRP.

Standards for new FRP equipment

Since that time, the ongoing efforts of groups like the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) have resolved the early design flaws and resulted in excellent design and construction standards for FRP equipment. 

Examples include the ASME RTP-1 standard for FRP pressure vessels and ASME NM.2 for FRP piping systems. 

ASME RTP-1 and ASME NM.2 prescribe requirements for the design, materials, manufacturing, installation, inspection and testing of new FRP vessels and piping. These are comprehensive, dynamic documents that undergo systematic review and updates. 

Design standards do not apply to in-service FRP

However, these standards do not apply to equipment after it goes into service.

If you want to learn more, please visit our website FRP Composite Sand Pipe.

In fact, while there are over 200 different consensus standards and codes related to design and construction of FRP equipment, ZERO offer any guidance on what&#;s required for inspection or Fitness For Service assessment of in-service FRP. 

Until recently, this left plant engineers and inspectors with nowhere to turn for help understanding the damage that can be expected once FRP equipment is in operational service. 

WRC Bulletin 601 a major step forward for FRP reliability

Last fall, the Welding Research Council (WRC) published the second edition of WRC Bulletin 601, &#;Assessment of Existing Fiber Reinforced Polymer Equipment for Structural Damage,&#; authored by UTComp founder and Chief Technical Officer Geoff Clarkson. 

WRC-601 provides technical guidance for including new FRP assessment methods, including attenuation-based ultrasound (UAX) techniques that form the basis of UTComp&#;s UltraAnalytix® NDT system, into the API and ASME consensus codes that are otherwise focused primarily on inspecting metal pressure vessels and piping.

It&#;s a major step forward in addressing the gap in inspection needs for in-service FRP assets. 

It also provides further validation for the UltraAnalytix methodology developed over 20 years of assessing FRP and other polymeric materials used in pressure vessels, piping and other assets in a wide range of industries.

It is not uncommon for us to get questions about FRP standards. One of the most common ones is, &#;What is the most appropriate Code or standard for our project. If you look at the choices for Codes and standards in most pipe stress analysis software, you would see that ISO is listed as an option for FRP piping.  ISO is a European standard for FRP/GRP/GRE piping. It is very detailed and offers a lot of good information. Also, it is very demanding on the FRP piping manufacturers for certified material data and physical properties for their specific piping product to be used on the project. For example, ISO requires long term hydrostatic design basis (HDB) testing in accordance with ASTM D to develop allowable stresses. This is a 10,000 hour or 10,000 cycle test that is material specific and takes about 15 months to complete. When I say material specific, that means the it is only valid for the specific resin, specific glass reinforcement and construction method of the tested pipe. It has been our experience that there are only a few piping manufacturers in the world that can truly meet all of the requirements of ISO for a specific FRP piping project. Without quantifiable certified data, the level of certainty in the analysis approach may be reduced and unpredictable. Unless the approved piping manufacturers have been pre-qualified to meet all of the requirements of ISO , including material specific HDB testing, I would not recommend applying ISO as the required project standard for FRP piping. Today as a more reliable path, I would recommend specifying ASME B31.1 or ASME B31.3 as the applicable piping Code for your custom FRP/GRP piping projects, particularly projects executed in the U.S. or by U.S. firms. Conversely, many GRE manufacturers have completed the necessary testing and are able to meet the qualifications for ISO . When specifying ASME B31 Piping Codes, a current and quality FRP piping specifications is imperative. Current, means they should have been updated in the last 5 years. A detailed specification help to supplementary and integrate the implementation of the Piping Codes. If your project or corporate specification have not been updated to a FRP experienced materials specialist in the last 5 years, I would recommend that you make that a priority, if you have FRP piping projects on the horizon. The value of an updated specification will be substantial for piping design and inspection compliance and the cost is relatively small.

I would be interested to hear about your challenges with piping standards for FRP/GRP.

Are you interested in learning more about GRP/FRP Flanges? Contact us today to secure an expert consultation!