Can be that the water is expensive, but it would be more expensive, when the plant burns down, because the system is never properly tested, maintained, abused or other. How do you calculate the the value of somebodies live? Compare it with the cost water? If this is the mindset of your management, I am glad not working over there.

The fire water pumps on piper alpa were tested on paper. The system failed when needed, resulting in one on the worst disasters in the history of the Oil Industry.

Hang on, where did I say we don't test the fire pumps? In fact I have said we do do it.

P/s Mr Steven, it appears to me you have been very quick in making assumptions from what other people say on several occasions eg when I said I saw mechanical people use their hand palms to detect steam leaks, straight away you suggest safety audits and when I said "A job is not worth doing if it can't be done safely comes from BP, straight away you mentioned about Texas explosion.

On the HVAC motor maintenance, you assume we "outsourced HVAC to a contractor and the inhouse crew starts doing monthly PM, there is something awfully wrong. That means the quality of work delivered is not up to standards, we outsource because we don't want the headache, don't have the experience, or the (human) resources."

And you said every refinery has NFPA25, including yours, did you assume this? Have you read it, at least for safety audit purposes as you suggested? I guess NFPA don't write a standard to be good on paper and for safety audit purposes. Which standard was used to design your fire pumps for your refinery? To me a standard represents a body of knowledge and consensus, which is worth learning at least as a start.

Btw, Mr. Vee, I appreciate your answers to my questions and I thank you for those. In this case you said to run the fire water pumps for 4 to 6 hours whereas the NFPA25 suggests minimum 40 mins for weekly test run and annual capacity test may be will take 4 to 6 hours to complete. And if I remember correctly even the OEM Caterpillar manual did not specify up to 4 to 6 hours run to prevent carbon deposits. Can we resolve this? P/s NFPA25 can be previewed online in internet.

Another problem if I remember correctly was that the (Timoshenko) diesel engine piston head got cracked due to this frequent test run. Any explanation?

Josh, I give my opinion based on the sometimes "limited" information supplied. Remember I don't see what you see , so I have to use my imagination (digging back in history and compare with things/events/stories/facts).
Sometimes I get carried away too much, I confess, but If a step accidentally on some sore toes, that does not mean that I am an evil person, looking to prejudicate others.

About the NFPA code, and all other codes I will be short.
In your country are there legal sanctions if you do not follow the code? I assume not, in your branch it is advisable to follow it, but a small hand-made fireworks factory owner, probably would not know about NFPA
I have seen/heard people using the NFPA code, as standard, but when you go in the field to do an inspection:

The code is a very good and comprehensive Data Collection, but in some cases the guys who will be in trouble, don't know about the existance of this document, else they would give management a hard time putting things in place.

About safety, I am rude, as you know a drilling rig is one of the most dangerous places to be. It is very easy to loose a finger/hand in one moment of unattention. I still have all ten, but I once felt the pain, when using a chain hoist without working gloves. The chain hit one of my fingers.

By the way Josh, your questions always are interesting, they chalenge me to dig futher.

Josh,
In your posts, you had given the impression that you do not run the fire pumps on full load during test runs, except once a year. If that has been understood by me and others correctly, please reconsider your note to Steven, based on the following points.
1. It is many years since I read the NFPA std., but as far as I recall, it is a std. for the pumps, not their drivers. What we were discussing earlier relates to how we treat the Cat engine. If the engine has to work properly every time, it needs to run on full load, not on no load. Secondly, any std. is a minimum requirement. You can always do more, if that is justified.
2. If you have to run the engine on load, it is not enough to run the water back to the tank, unless you dissipate the energy through some means like a throttle valve or multiple orifice. A relief valve offers little or no resistance. If the engine has e.g. an auxiliary shaft, you could hook up an alternator and load that alternator electrically. I suggested opening a valve at the far end of the main as a simple way, as this would flush the line. You could also test the deluge system in some part; that is another test that needs to be done anyway, to confirm that the deluge works in each area. Whatever you decide to do, the bottom line is that the Cat engine must not run cold, else we will have the blowbys and autorunning that Nguyen Ba Triet started this thread about. Cat engines are the issue, not fire pumps.
3. There are ways to reduce the 4-6 hours, but these need careful control, so I am not planning to dicuss them on the forum. If Cat will accept a shorter run, by all means follow what they say. But if they say, run on full load, please do so.
4. Which Timoshenko piston are you talking about? I cant recall any discussion on this subject, I must have missed that thread.

Vee, yes, we are talking about the Cat engine first and how to run it, right?

By full load, do you mean to run the pump against the entire length of the firefighting line and to discharge the end of the line every time we run the fire pump? Yes or No?

The NFPA25 suggests:
1) weekly test run which may be dicharged via a relief valve whose outlet is connected to an overboard line and start the engine using automatic timer if any. I think this test run is a failure finding task, am I right? Is this not sufficient?
2) annual capacity test at flow condition including to function test fire & gas system, the deluge valve and pump performance test. I think you & Steven refers to this annual test scenario to be run 4 to 6 hours and more frequently, possibly in conjunction with fire drills. Do I understand you two correctly?

The Timoshenko piston head is a new subject introduced and a problem we faced with our diesel engines driving the fire pumps.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Josh,

quote:

the OEM Caterpillar manual did not specify up to 4 to 6 hours

Josh, the OEM will not put this information in a manual, because:
1) They don't know your operation
2) They want to sell parts/service, by the way I have heard rumors that the British Leyland automobile industry got into problems, because their equipment rarely was giving problems. And when problems arose, the OEM did not exist anymore. (Landrover, bedford etc..)
3) Somebody can sue them if they write too much, a serious problem in the USA Somebody will try to sue them anyway.
4) Their technicians know this, and use it in their internal reports
5) If you give the prospective client too much info, he could do the calculations and discover that it is too costly

Josh, we live in the information era, a lot of this info can be seen on-line, but who has access to it?

By the way I also do not believe everything because it is on the Internet. Any lunatic could put some rubbish there and claim it is the thruth.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: svanels,

Can read NFPA25 here:

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Josh,

Thanks Josh, I will pass the link to the "floor", hopefully the "Information Higway" is not to crowded.

Wait a second Josh, the link brings me to some JAVA thing, and it aint Indonesia

Josh,
I will embed my answers in italics in your text

quote:

By full load, do you mean to run the pump against the entire length of the firefighting line and to discharge the end of the line every time we run the fire pump? Yes or No?
Full load means any way by which the engine runs at rated horse power

The NFPA25 suggests:
1) weekly test run which may be dicharged via a relief valve whose outlet is connected to an overboard line and start the engine using automatic timer if any. I think this test run is a failure finding task, am I right? Is this not sufficient?
For the pumps it is sufficient in so far as to prove it starts and pumps; but not that it can deliver full flow at rated pressure. For that the annual test is OK; its also shows the driver operates at light or no load. It says nothing about possible damage to the driver during these runs
2) annual capacity test at flow condition including to function test fire & gas system, the deluge valve and pump performance test. I think you & Steven refers to this annual test scenario to be run 4 to 6 hours and more frequently, possibly in conjunction with fire drills. Do I understand you two correctly?

Yes, the annual test proves that the entire system, including people, works

Follow this link if your RealRead Java is set up, Click I agree & Open NFPA25 etc. See Chapter 8.
http://www.nfpa.org/freecodes/free_access_document.asp?id=2502

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Josh,

Nguyen, I read the engine manual which does say for a standby unit, the test run won't last more than 5 mins. However, I also refer to NFPA110 for emergency and standby power supply system which again confirms the engine must be run at least for 30 mins. A bit conflicting but the practical experiences said above seem to support running it longer than 5 mins. Have you solved the problem?

The only thing catterpilar will put in their manuals is that you must not run the engine for more than 5 minutes at maximum capacity.

When they refer to standby units, they are talking about Generator Sets. This confussion comes when the term "continuous" pops-up. Because the generator has its rating, but the engine has its rating also. If you have a 1200 HP motor, that does not mean you can take out the equivalent in electricity at the other end.

Ok I will double-read the manual.

I bet there is no such manual as:
Caterpillar firewater pump, written by Cat

I have seen the 3208 in trucks, on rigs, on pontoons, on boats, coupled to a lot of other divices, like gearboxes, generators, hydraulic pumps, plunger pumps, backhoe loaders etc...

Hi everybody, Today I find the cause of much oil and smoke jet out seriously through oil stick and air filter continuously of fire water caterpillar diesel engine.

Because the check valve 6 inch of discharge line of water pump was stuck so that high pressure water in discharge piping go back through suction piping and so drive the pump's impeller and start the engine with reverse revolution. Therefore, engine was overheat due to oil pump not operate(In fire water engine do not let engine shutdown when having parameter troubleshutting such as low oil pressure). That time piston rings were stuck and intake piping became eshaust piping.

Thank everybody very much and will to see again!

Nguyen Ba Triet,
Thank you for your updating us on the 'real' reason for the failure. Some people post a query and get some pretty detailed advice which we never know whether they use or dont use. Further if they do find out thye 'real' answer, they dont bother to tell the people who tried to help.
You are an exception, and a good customer. I hope others follow your fine example.