NOTICE REGARDING CASES OF THE ASME

PRESSURE TECHNOLOGY POST CONSTRUCTION (PCC) STANDARDS

All PCC Cases in effect as of October 1, 2017 will remain available for use until
annulled by the PCC Standards Committee.
 INDEX

Case Approval Date Book Annulled Date .

100 October 3, 2017 PCC-2 …

 PCC CASE

100

Approval Date: October 3, 2017

Cases will remain available for use until annulled by the PCC Standards Committee.

PCC CASE 100

Test Devices for Localized Pressure or Tightness Testing of Welded R epairs
PCC-2

Inquiry: What requirements and recommendations should be added to or used in lieu of PCC-2 2015 Edition
Article 5.1 section 3.4.3 for methods of isolating a weld to conduct a pressure test?

Reply: It is the opinion of the Committee that the following requirements and recommendations should be used
in lieu of the methods for isolation and pressure testing of welds as described in PCC-2, Article 5.1, section 3.4.3.

1.0 DESCRIPTION

1.1 Scope

1.1.1 Scope. This Case provides guidance for the use of mechanical devices used to isolate sections of piping
systems and conduct a hydrostatic pressure or tightness test. Typical applications are
(a) testing the circumferential welds for the installation of a flange pair in a piping system
(b) testing after the replacement or addition of new branches in piping systems
(c) isolating and testing piping assemblies that are pre-fabricated for field installation, for example, in
modular fabrication.

1.1.2 Types of Mechanical Devices. This Case describes the methods for use of four types of mechanical
devices for isolation of piping systems in preparation for testing as follows:

(a) TYPE I – Internal Plug with Unconnected External Blind Flange

Fig. 1 – Type I Hydrotest Device

1
 PCC CASE

100
(b) TYPE II – Internal Double Ended Plug with External Means of Applying Bolt Load to the
Flange

Fig. 2 – Type II Hydrotest Device

(c) TYPE III – Internal Plug Connected to an External Blind Flange

Fig. 3 – Type III Hydrotest Device

(d) TYPE IV – Internal Double Ended Plug with No Assembly Load on Flange

Fig. 4 – Type IV Hydrotest Device

Figures 1, 2, 3 and 4 used by permission of the Integrity Engineering Solutions, Dunsborough, Western Australia

1.2 Definitions

(a) Code Hydrostatic Leak Test – A hydrostatic pressure test that meets the
requirements of the applicable code, for example, ASME B31 Piping Codes.

(b) Full System Hydrostatic Pressure Test – A pressure test that consists of the entire
piping system being tested by the application of pressure to the test value. This test

2
 PCC CASE

100
generates stresses due to pressure, flange assembly, weight of piping system and test
fluid, and initial flange misalignment.

(c) Local Hydrostatic Pressure Test – A pressure test that consists of the application of
pressure to the same or higher value as a Full System Hydrostatic Pressure Test at local
regions around a weld in a piping system.

(d) Weld Leak Test - The application of a hydrostatic test pressure to the weld location
that will allow the identification of any existing through-wall leak paths in the weld.

2.1 LIMITATIONS

2.2 Part 1 of this Standard

Section I of this Standard, “Scope, Organization and Intent”, contains additional requirements
and limitations. This Case shall be used in conjunction with Section I.

2.3 Additional Considerations and Limitations

When using a weld test isolation device, the following limitations should be considered:

(a) The user is cautioned to ensure that use of any device is done in accordance with
the requirements of its manufacturer, and the isolation of any system for pressure
or tightness testing is verified.
(b) There may be limitations by device manufacturers regarding pressure, size and
configuration.
(c) Some devices may leave visible internal markings or other damage (scoring,
grooves, etc.) which may not be acceptable for certain services. For example,
localized marking may result in regions of high hardness which may not be
acceptable in stress corrosion cracking services.
(d) Structural integrity of the piping system is not being tested by this method as
may be accomplished by the application of a Full System Hydrostatic Pressure
Test.
(e) All devices will test the leak tightness of welds; however, not all devices will test
the integrity of the weld by applying hoop and/or axial stresses that are normally
produced by Full System Hydrostatic Pressure Tests.

3
 PCC CASE

100
3.0 DESIGN

3.1 General

(a) Table 1 should be considered for selection of the device type.

Table 1 – Device Type Selection Guidance

Type I Type II Type III Type IV

Code Hydrostatic Leak Test; All Equivalent Equivalent Equivalent Equivalent
stress components < 53 MPa
(7.75ksi)
Code Hydrostatic Leak Test; Equivalent Equivalent Equivalent Equivalent
1
Circumferential stress > 53 MPa
(7.75ksi),
Longitudinal stress < 53 MPa
(7.75ksi)
Code Hydrostatic Leak Test; Equivalent Equivalent Equivalent Not
2
Circumferential stress > 53 MPa Equivalent
(7.75ksi),
Longitudinal stress > 53 MPa
(7.75ksi)
Full System Hydrostatic Pressure Equivalent Equivalent Not Not
3 4
Test Equivalent Equivalent
Notes: 1) Type IV hydrostatic pressure may need to be increased to compensate for lack of
flange assembly circumferential stresses
2) Type III may be considered equivalent if the longitudinal pressure stresses are small
relative to the flange assembly stresses (< 30%)
3) Type I may be considered equivalent if the stresses due to weight and misalignment
are not considered significant
4) Type II may be adjusted to achieve a longitudinal stress in excess of nominal flange
assembly and pressure stress, in order to compensate for the lack of stresses due to weight and
misalignment

3.2 TYPE I – Internal Plug with Unconnected External Blind Flange

(a) Type I devices should be selected when there is a need to conduct a pressure test that
provides similar loadings as developed by a full system hydrostatic pressure test.

3.3 TYPE II – Internal Double Ended Plug with External Means of Applying Bolt
Load to the Flange

(a) Type II devices should be selected when there is a need to conduct a pressure test that
provides similar loadings as developed by a full system hydrostatic pressure test.

(b) Type II devices are the only devices within the scope of this Case that are capable of
developing a stress field at the weld that can be equal to or more severe than the full
system hydrotest (including self-weight generated external loads).

(c) A calculation to determine the appropriate bolt load to be applied by the external loading
mechanism shall be developed. This calculation should determine whether the developed
longitudinal stresses at the weld meet or exceed the full system hydrotest stress field.

(d) When using this method, the flange strength shall be considered to ensure permanent
deformation of the flange does not occur. See WRC 538 for further information.
4
 PCC CASE

100
(e) Application of the external loads should be accurately measured so as to not be greater
than the yield stress of the piping material.

3.4 TYPE III – Internal Plug Connected to an External Blind Flange

(a) Type III devices should be selected when there is a need to conduct a pressure test
that provides similar loadings due only to pressure as developed by a full system
hydrostatic pressure test.

(b) Stresses applied by a Type III device include hoop and axial due to assembly of
the device and pressure.

(c) No external loadings are applied by this device.

3.5 TYPE IV – Internal Double Ended Plug with No Assembly Load on Flange

(a) Type IV devices should be selected when there is a need to conduct a leak test that
does not apply any additional loadings.

(b) Tests using a Type IV device may be considered equivalent to full system hydrostatic
pressure test when the test pressure applied is defined as follows:

PHe = min[0.95 * 2Sy t/D; PH + CAPC] (1)

Where:
PHe = Hydrotest pressure to create an equivalent stress field
Sy = the lowest specified minimum yield stress of the pipe system’s components
t = pipe wall thickness
D = pipe outside diameter PH
= Hydrotest pressure
CA = 3.0 for class 150 systems and 2.25 for class 300 systems
PC = flange class ceiling pressure according to ASME B16.5 Table A-1

Consultation with the device manufacturer should be considered for using Type IV
devices in services above Class 300 systems.

(c) Type IV devices should not apply any axial stress

4.0 FABRICATION

In the context of this Case, Section 4.0 addresses requirements of device installation.

a) The minimum distance between the centerline of the weld to be tested and the seal
location for any of the methods described in this Case shall be greater than
0.5
1.5(dt) (2)

Where:
d = inner diameter of the pipe
t = nominal pipe wall thickness

5
 PCC CASE

100
Fig. 5 –Hydrotest Device Seal Location

Used by permission of EST Group, Hatfield, PA, USA

A distance less than that required by equation 1 may be used with appropriate
engineering analysis provided and acceptance of the owner.

b) Ensure the interior of the piping system is clean and free of any debris that can hinder the
sealing and/or clamping action of the device.

c) Additional pipe length may be required for installation of the device to account for
potential damages caused by the device due to scoring, grooves, etc., as well as to allow
all welds to be tested. In most cases, an additional 220 mm (9 in.) will suffice to allow
for any potential damage to be removed and for all permanent piping to be tested. After
testing, remove the additional length of pipe.

4.1 TYPE I – Internal Plug with Unconnected External Blind Flange

a) TYPE I may be installed with or without a lanyard to prohibit movement downstream

into the pipeline.

6
 PCC CASE

100
Fig. 6A – TYPE I Hydrotest Device with Lanyard

Used by permission of EST Group, Hatfield, PA, USA

Fig. 6B – TYPE I Hydrotest Device without Lanyard

Used by permission of EST Group, Hatfield, PA, USA

b) For cases where a lanyard is used, a special blind flange from the device manufacturer
may be required.

c) The blind flange shall contain openings such as threaded ports for the filling and venting
and for release of pressure. A valve should be used for pressure release.

7
 PCC CASE

100
d) Operation

1) Install the device within the pipe containing the weld to be tested. Ensure the
proper spacing of equation 1 is maintained. For smaller size pipe, a tool from the
device manufacturer may be required.

2) Tighten the device in accordance with the manufacturer’s

recommendations.

3) Install a lanyard if desired.

4) Install the blind flange with fill and vent ports.

5) Fill with pressure test medium and complete the test.

Fig 7 – Type I Typical Installations

8
 PCC CASE

100

Used by permission of EST Group, Hatfield, PA, USA

4.2 TYPE II – Internal Double Ended Plug with External Means of Applying Bolt
Load to the Flange

a) A Type II device is a combination of a Type IV device with the means to apply a bolt
load to the weld. This may be accomplished with a split ring flange that is capable of
eliminating any linear movement along the OD of the pipe.

b) Insert the Type IV device and secure to the ID of the piping.

0.5
c) Install the split ring flange not less than 1.5(dt) from the upstream end of the hydrotest
device.

Fig. 8 – Location of Split Ring Flange

1.5(dt)0.5

Used by permission of Integrity Engineering Solutions, Dunsborough,Western Australia

d) Fill with pressure test medium and complete the test.

e) Install a minimum of four (4) bolts with nuts on the inside of each flange to apply a force
to the weld to be tested. Apply torque to the bolt such that the resulting stress is equal to
or greater than what would be applied by a Full System Hydrostatic Pressure Test.
9
 PCC CASE

100
1) Determination of stress applied during test should be in accordance with the code
of construction.

2) Applied bolt stress should not exceed 380 MPa (55 ksi), unless a higher stress
is justified and calculation in accordance with ASME PCC-1, Appendix O.

3) Bolt torque to achieve the target bolt stress should be calculated in accordance
with ASME PCC-1.

4.3 Type III – Internal Plug Connected to an External Blind Flange

a) Install the device and assemble the flange joint. Apply torque such that the desired
bolt stress is achieved; see PCC-1.

b) Fill with pressure test medium and complete the test.

4.4 Type IV – Internal Double Ended Plug with No Assembly Load on Flange

Fig. 9 – Type IV Device

Test medium fill port

Upstream monitor port

Used by permission of EST Group, Hatfield, PA, USA

a) Engage the seals in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions.

b) Fill with pressure test medium and complete the test.

5.0 EXAMINATION

5.1 Examination Prior to Initiation of the Hydrotest

a) Any required volumetric examination should be completed prior to

installation of the hydrotest device.
10
 PCC CASE

100
b) The weld to be tested should be examined by PT or MT method.

5.2 Examination During the Hydrotest

a) The minimum pressure of the hydrotest shall be monitored and shown to be

stable for a minimum of 5 minutes or that as required by the code of
construction, whichever is greater, indicating there are no leaks from the weld
being tested.

b) After the test pressure has been maintained for the required duration, VT shall be
performed on all welds during the test. The test pressure may be reduced to not less than
the design pressure of the system being tested while performing this examination.
Acceptance criteria shall be in accordance with the code of construction.

5.3 Examination Following Completion of the Hydrotest

a) The interior of the pipe should be examined for surface damage where the device clamps
engaged with the interior wall.

b) Any damage found may be analyzed for acceptance using engineering methods.

6.0 TESTING

In the context of this Case, this section is not applicable.

7.0 REFERENCES

ASME B16.5, Pipe Flanges and Flanged Fittings, latest edition

ASME B31.3, Process Piping, latest edition

Publisher: The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME). Two Park Avenue, New
York, NY 10016-5990; Order Department: 22 Law Drive, P.O. Box 2900, Fairfield, NJ 07007-
2900 (www.asme.org)

Brown, Warren, “Comparison between hydrotest and local hydrotest methods for pipe welds,”
Proceedings of ASME PVP2013, 2013 ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Division Conference,
July 2013.

Welding Research Bulletin 538, Determination of Pressure Boundary Joint Assembly Bolt
Loads, W. Brown; February 2014

Publisher: Welding Research Council (WRC), PO Box 201547, Shaker Heights, OH 44122
(www.forengineers.org/welding-research-council)

11