Codes and Standards in support of an International ......Dec 06, 2016 · EN 13445 and EN 13480...

Codes and Standards in support of an

International Partnership - Update

Chris Mossey

LBNF Project Director

December 6, 2016

Fermilab – Motivation and Context

• Motivation:

– Fermilab is the only U.S. laboratory solely focused on high

energy physics and desires to increase international

collaboration and participation in world leading experiments

– Fermilab always desires to obtain superior technology

regardless of where sourced in the world

• Context;

– Fermilab is a “Management & Operations” contractor operated

by the Fermi Research Alliance LLC under contract to the U.S.

Department of Energy

– Governed by contract No. DE-AC02-07CH11359, and

incorporated DOE orders, notices, and

– Subject to high level statutes and regulations from

Congressional and Executive direction (e.g., 10CFR851)

2016.12.06Mossey | Codes and Standards Update2

Fermilab – Issue and Solution

• The issue is not that European or other international standards are not as safe as U.S. standards… it is that (not surprisingly) they may not be exactly the same as the standards Fermilab is specifically required to follow per DOE.

• Solution:

– Fermilab has developed a process that describes how we will assess international standards and document that they provide an equivalent level of safety.

DOE office that manages Fermilab has approved this approach in FESHM 2110.

– Approach: Fermilab established four separate committees to review standards identified by CERN EDMS ID 1582304:

• Process/cryogenic standards

• Mechanical standards

• Structural standards

• Electrical standards


Process described on next three slides -->

Step 1: Establish Process for Ensuring Equivalent Safety

• FESHM Chapter 2110: Ensuring Equivalent Safety

Performance when Using International Codes and Standards

– New chapter co-authored by FNAL Chief Safety Officer, and

Cryogenic, Electrical, and Mechanical Safety Subcommittees.

– U.S. Federal Regulations mandate that U.S. national

laboratories mush follow “national consensus” codes that are

typically published by American engineering societies

• For example, 10CFR851 specifies that pressure vessels and

piping must conform to ASME standards

• If the “national consensus” codes are not applicable, then an

equivalent level of protection and safety must be provided.

• Equivalencies have to be established on a code-by-code

basis. Blanket approval of a code system is not practical due

to sheer quantity of codes and their revision cycles.


Step 2: Preparation of White Paper

• White Paper Topics

– Introduction section with overview of applicable international code

– Examination of service history of equipment conforming to applicable international code

– Comparison of the “American” and “International” codes across major subject areas

• Design

• Materials

• Fabrication

• Examination and Inspection

• Testing

– Supporting Documents

• Consultant Reports

• Conference and Journal Papers

• Book References

– Sub-committee of FESM committee reviews and asserts that code provides “equivalent safety”; FNAL accepts code; DOE monitors compliance with process


Step 3: Preparation of FESHM Update

• Each safety committee is responsible for a number of safety

manual (FESHM) chapters that get updated when the

equivalency is documented

– The appropriate FESHM chapter is updated and any limitations

on this equivalency are included in the FESHM chapter.

– In cases where a FESHM chapter requires documentation that

an assembled system adheres to a code, the documentation is

still required even with the equivalency

• For example: an engineering note is prepared by a qualified

person and peer reviewed by another qualified person

Qualified Person: A qualified person is a person who, by possession

of a recognized degree or certificate of professional standing, or who,

by extensive knowledge, training and experience, has successfully

demonstrated the ability to solve or resolve problems relating to the

subject matter and work.


Equivalency Assessment Status

1. Process / cryogenic

2. Mechanical

3. Structural

4. Electrical


8

Equipment built per International Standards – 1. Process / Cryo

Cryogenic panel has already determined many codes that provide equivalent safety levels:

2016.12.06Mossey | Codes and Standards Update

Specifically, a previous study (2007) examined the equivalency between PED EN 13445 and AD 2000 and ASME BPVC Section VIII for the pressure vessels, and PED EN 13480 and ASME B31 for the pressure piping. The study resulted in recommending the following:• “Pressure equipment that is designed in accordance with harmonized

standards EN 13445 and EN13480, as well as AD 2000, and stamped with either the CE (PED) or U (ASME) stamps should be treated equally”.

• “Pressure equipment provided with CE stamp based on the standards other than EN13445, EN 13480 and AD 2000 requires an extended engineering note as defined by appropriate chapter of the Fermilab ES&H Manual”.

After 2007 study, Fermilab proposed and received approval from the DOE Chicago office to reference PED 97/23/EC in the FESHM 1070: Fermilab Work Smart Set and to modify FESHM 5131: Pressure Vessels to allow acceptance of CE-marked pressure vessels for installation at Fermilab without an extended Engineering Note. Such practice has been in place since 2009 and has saved substantial efforts without compromising safety.

http://esh-docdb.fnal.gov/cgi-bin/ShowDocument?docid=346

http://esh-docdb.fnal.gov/cgi-bin/ShowDocument?docid=346

http://esh-docdb.fnal.gov/cgi-bin/RetrieveFile?docid=456&filename=FESHM 5031 Pressure Vessels.pdf&version=10

9


Cryogenic panel has already determined many codes that provide equivalent safety levels:


Then in 2015-2016, a study was conducted by the Fermilab Cryogenic Safety Subcommittee (CSSC) to examine equivalency of the process piping per PED standard EN 13480 versus ANSI/ASME B31. The study concluded that the level of safety associated with ASME B31 series versus EN 13480 should all be considered equal and resulted in recommending the following:• “Allow accepting CE-marked piping per PED 97/23 EN 13480 for installation at

Fermilab”.• “Update Fermilab ESH Manual Chapter 5031.1 to reference PED 97/23 EN 13480

as one of the applicable standards”.• “Allow expedited review and acceptance of the CE-marked piping based on the

manufacture’s documentation package per EN13480-5 Table 9.4-1 (including all required items marked “x” or “xa”). Also, instruct reviewers that for the CE-marked piping of categories 0 and I, for which CE-mark does not bear identification mark by the appropriate EU/PED notified body, the reviewer shall apply additional scrutiny as typically applied for the B31 series piping”. Documentation is of paramount importance!

10


Cryogenic panel has determined via communications with CERN that since EN 13445 and EN 13480 will be exclusively used for vessels and piping, onlythree standards need to be investigated:

The panel has already done exhaustive work of reading through the standards (only ISO 4126 is a 11-part standard) and verifying that EU standards in principal have similar approaches and equations to calculate minimum required flow capacities and orifices.


11

Equipment built per International Standards – 1 .Process / Cryo

Cryogenic panel has also engaged in conversations with largest EU manufacturers, such as Herose and Leser, and US manufacturers, such as Pentair.

We learned that practically all safety accessories, such as pressure reliefs and rupture disks, are classified in PED Category IV thus requiring certification by EU notified body for pretty much every step of the process, from design to production and testing. This is good news.

We also learned that almost all EU manufacturers have a capability of dual marking for the pressure reliefs and carry ASME certification. The cost for dual marking is relatively small of ~ 200 EU (Leser Co. quoted only $100 USD) or may be negligible in some instances. This is also good news.

As Fermilab requires ASME coded reliefs only for the pressure vessels, not for piping, the cost for SBNFD could be less than 40 x 200 EU.


12


Cryogenic panel considering to defend the following statement to MSS:

For the overpressure protection of the pressure vessels and process piping installed at Fermilab where FESHM rules require use of ASME-stamped relieving device, a CE-marked pressure relieving device, which carries a mark per appropriate part of EN ISO 4126 and either ASME stamp or a certification mark by an authorized notified body per PED 2014/68/EU, Article 24 to indicate certified compliance with EN ISO 4126, is accepted for use at Fermilab at its marked pressure and flow capacity within its valid certification period.

The sizing, use, installation and application of this relieving device shall be verified by Fermilab users per appropriate Fermilab ESH chapter.

We expect that we will be able to defend this statement for reclosing pressure reliefs, but expect some difficulties for non-reclosing burst disks. We would like CERN to consider limiting use to pressure reliefs only for protecting cryogenic vessels designed for 1 barg or higher.


13

Equipment built per International Standards – 2. Mechanical

Mechanical panel is preparing to investigate the standards to the right:

The panel will be investigating equivalency between the EU standards and requirements per AWS, similar to the effort done at CERN for CRAB Cavities design for LHC upgrade.


14

Equipment built per International Standards – 3. Structural

Structural panel is developing processes and procedures for structural design review and acceptance of structures designed and constructed outside of US DOE jurisdiction.

Determine if the following Euro codes provide designs with a level of safety comparable with applicable United States Codes:

• EN 1990 - Basis of structural design

• EN 1991 - Actions on structures

• EN 1993 - Design of steel structures

• EN 1999 - Design of aluminum structures

• EN 14620 - Design and manufacture of site built, vertical, cylindrical, flat-bottomed steel tanks for the storage of refrigerated, liquefied gases with operating temperatures between 0 and -165C


15

Equipment built per International Standards – 3. Structural

Structural panel is considering to establish acceptance criteria for structural designs under the listed structural Euro codes, including but not limited to:

• Design calculations/electronic models

• Drawings

• Technical specifications:

Products/materials

Fabrication

Quality Assurance/Control

Installation

Testing


16

Equipment built per International Standards – 4. Electrical


• CERN’s MOU (EDMS ID 1582304) identified two EN electrical

standards:

– 61010: Standard for Safety: Electrical Equipment for Measurement, Control,

and Laboratory Use

– 61326: Electrical equipment for measurement, control and laboratory use –

EMC requirements

17



• Review results for IEC 61010: Standard for Safety: Electrical Equipment

for Measurement, Control, and Laboratory Use

– UL 61010 is the U.S. equivalent code. UL 61010 retains the text of

the IEC document and adds “National Differences” that add to,

modify, or delete portions of the IEC code.

– An ad hoc committee of the ESS analyzed the National Differences

and identified 28 substantive* differences. Of the 28 substantive

differences, the IEC provided an equivalent level of safety in all but

6.

– One critical similarity is that UL 61010 allows the use of IEC-recognized

internal components! This is very good news and eliminates any need to

compare hundreds of IEC and UL component standards.

* Substantive: Affects circuit design or component selection. Does not include informational notes or formatting changes.

• Summary: Good progress

on electrical front; white

paper completed (Step 2)

and forwarded to full ESS

(electrical safety sub-

committee) for review

• Once reviewed and

approved by ESS, can

incorporate “equivalent

safety” into FESHM (Step

3).



19



• Review results IEC 61326: Electrical equipment for measurement,

control and laboratory use – EMC requirements

– Equivalent U. S. standards are found in Title 47 of the Code of Federal

Regulations, Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Part 15, Class A,

for intentional transmitters and unintentional radiators.

– Measurement and control equipment designed to detect the faint signals

typical of neutrino research experiments must both reject electromagnetic

interference (EMI) and avoid generating EMI that would interfere with other

equipment to a degree far beyond those codified in standards for this type of

equipment.

– Any equipment that would not conform to either electromagnetic

compatibility (EMC) standard would be useless in neutrino physics research

environments.

– Detailed investigation of EMC standards equivalency would not be a wise

investment of laboratory resources.

* Substantive: Affects circuit design or component selection. Does not include informational notes or formatting changes.

20



• Future electrical and electronic equipment equivalencies - The value of future code equivalency analyses will depend heavily on the type of equipment covered by the standard:

– Power distribution equipment. Includes switchgear, panelboards, disconnect (safety) switches, and receptacles. Differences in voltage, frequency and units of measurement (FPS vs. MKS) make success unlikely.

– Energy conversion equipment. Includes utilization equipment which convert electrical energy into another form of energy, such as heaters, pumps, chillers, and light fixtures. The special accommodations for differences in voltage and frequency of electric power systems will make it unlikely that any efforts to demonstrate equivalencies will produce significant cost or time savings.

– Instrumentation and computing equipment. This equipment immediately converts the incoming AC power into low voltage DC to power semiconductor-based components. A concerted effort has been supported by manufacturers of this type of equipment to foster the adoption of harmonized international standards to allow them to sell identical equipment into many markets, save for different power cords. This is where Fermilab efforts to establish equivalency with international standards is likely to be most beneficial.

Final note

• Design standards vs. Operational Readiness Clearance

process – two things!


Two phases of approval: Equipment and Experiment

• The regulations by which Fermilab must operate make it

necessary for us to approve equipment for use.

As a simple example, a hair dryer could be approved equipment

for use at Fermilab.

• However, that is only the first of two steps. The second step is

experiment approval, which is done through our Operational

Readiness Clearance (ORC) process.

Again with the simple example, an experiment in which a

person standing in a water-filled bathtub would use the

approved hair dryer would be unlikely get an ORC.

• Both steps must be successful for an experiment to operate.

• NRTL-listed equipment and equipment approved by other

methods are treated the same during an ORC.


• Backup and additional information


24

Equipment built per International Standards – General

In essence, by the end of 2016, DOE already enabled Fermilab to accept for use any CE-marked pressure vessel per EN 13445 and any CE-marked piping system per EN 13480 provided that they bear identification mark by the appropriate EU/PED notified body. Both, FESHM 5031 and FESHM 5031.1 have been modified appropriately to incorporate language allowing such acceptance.

That was significant, but narrow scope of the equipment that DOE allowed to except for installation and use at Fermilab without extensive re-verification.


http://esh-docdb.fnal.gov/cgi-bin/RetrieveFile?docid=456&filename=FESHM 5031 Pressure Vessels.pdf&version=10

http://esh-docdb.fnal.gov/cgi-bin/RetrieveFile?docid=362&filename=5031 1 Sept 2016.pdf&version=14

25

Equipment built per International Standards – General

The process per FESHM 2110 is designed to determine whether the alternative standards provide equivalent levels of safety as the otherwise appropriate U.S. codes or standards. The panels are asked to develop white paper analyses, which will be provided to the Heads of the respective laboratory safety subcommittees for review. Upon completion of review, the sub-committee heads will forward their safety equivalency assessments to the Chief Safety Officer for review and forwarding of appropriate documentation to the Fermi Site Office.

This process has worked in the past for allowing acceptance of CE-marked pressure vessels built per EN 13445 and CE-marked process piping built per EN 13480. The process is relatively easy is equipment is marked by an appropriate EU notified bodies (NB), for example TUV, but require additional engineering scrutiny in absence of NB mark.

Therefore, Fermilab has already a mechanism in place to allow acceptance of equipment per EN13445 and EN13480.


UL 61010 National Differences

• IEC 61010: Standard for Safety: Electrical Equipment for Measurement,

Control, and Laboratory Use

– In an experiment with the infrastructure requirements of ICARUS,

power distribution must be carefully planned, so these differences

have to be identified and resolved prior to installation:

• Requirements for direct wiring of equipment to mains supply

• Cord & plug connections must use U. S. plug types

• Direct plug-in “wall-wart” transformer have to comply with UL 1310 or UL 60950

– These differences can be identified and any required modifications

determined by a review of electrical schematics and material lists:

• Internal switches and overcurrent devices must open ungrounded lines.

• Verify any conductive coatings that might be present will not flake off and fall where

faults could be created.

– This difference will be addressed during the ORC process:

• Equipment with hazardous lasers or ionizing radiation are referred to appropriate

Fermilab SME reviewers.


Date post:	15-Mar-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	3 times
Download:	0 times