Boiler Bare Inspection by Inspector of Boilers

Is the Boiler dept. enforcing government-mandated regulations or is the bare-inspection mandate an internal regulation? Sounds like quite an expensive undertaking.

Here's a link to the ASME's boiler code website -- perhaps you'll find a reference to bare inspection here, particularly if this is a recent addition. Good luck!

Thank you BestInShow, redfred and pwslack, for your reply.

I am from India, and the boilers are governed by IBR - Indian Boiler Regulations, enacted by the parliament during 1951/54 and amended during 1987. In India, any amendment in IBR has to be done only by the parliament and the matter will have to be routed through the boiler board to parliament. Perhaps a peculiar system for which I have no comment.

I have worked in all the states of India and only one particular state where presently working - the Boiler Inspectorate insists the bare inspection which is very expensive. The IBR does not have clause of bare inspection - as for as I know. Since the statutory authority is insisting - we have no choice.

Similarly for the Ehaust Steam bled from the Power Turbine fpr the process requirement at 1.0 bar to 1.5 bar, they insist statutory formalities, where as Ehaust Steam pressure from the Power Turbine is bled at more than 1.0 bar to 1.5 bar, then regulations apply. Then the question of regulations for 1.0 bar to 1.5 bar, does not apply, but we are forced to comply and considerable time is lost for material pre- inspection, stage inspection, and final inspection.

Now the matter reduces to "who will bell the cat" situation in this particular state where as the remaining states do not insist bare inspection. I think time alone can solve this since it is a prejudice in this particular state.

Thanks for sharing your experience and advice.

DHAYANANDHAN.S

It might be that that particular boiler design at another facility developed a failure over time. The inspectors intend to compare your facility with others to determine if this is the beginning of a trend or just a "one off" failure.

Remember the Authority Having Jurisdiction retains the right to inspect regardless of your safety record.

Thank you Mr.redfred for your views expressed. The boiler in question is of 45 Kg/cm^2 pressure and 485 Deg.C final steam temperature.

This particular boiler manufacturer, is a well established company and ISO, ASME ranked company more than 50 years in the Boiler Manufacture and supplied more than 1200 boilers of various capacity and temperatures, had collaboration with Foster Wheeler Boilers - a well recognized in Boiler Industry, in CANADA.

This company has supplied boilers throughout the country and no explosion of boiler has taken place and design wise this company does not compromise in quality.

But in this particular state authority irrespective of the boiler manufacturer bare inspection is forced on the industry - which is expensive.

As mentioned in the reply " who will bell the cat" is the situation.

Thanks,

DHAYANANDHAN.S

Hi

Are these are bagass boilers, that is they use the processed sugar cane as fuel? Could the requirement be there to ensure the fire side of the boiler is free of ash rather than just concerning itself with the integrity of the steam side?

Dear Mr. DavidH.

The bagasse - the residue of sugar cane after extracting the juice, with 50% moisture has only 1.0 to 1.3% of ash and relatively soft in nature and is burnt at the bottom of the furnace having a travelling grate. The furnace temp. is relatively low when compared to other fuel fired boilers.

DHAYANANDHAN.S

As far as your idea on "who will bell the cat" this is a universal concern in all democracies. It is also one of the root causes of democratic government inefficiency. I have no idea what if any recourse you have in India.

Here I would start by reviewing the relative codes and formally ask why I was being singled out for this inspection while complying with the inspection. I might discover a recall is being contemplated or just simply that the age of the boiler casting requires an inspection. This inquiry must be done with complete respect of the AHJ rights and responsibilities, otherwise nothing good will happen. I might discover that nobody is willing to answer my questions, regardless of how respectfully I inquire. Only in this last case might I then seek my retained corporate lawyer for any legal leverage. My lawyer might file under our freedom of information act for additional documents but this will certainly take additional time and expense.

As I alluded to earlier, democracies are notoriously inefficient for many reasons.

Well stated.

One might also consider, after the litigation card has been played, that the now belled cat might not enjoy his noisy necklace and an unjust persecution may begin.

Sounds to me a lot like Florida Building inspections. They get very involved and expensive when the inspector's cousin is the only contractor available to do the work.

Remember -

• it is only necessary to do what the Boiler Inspector requires if the facility requires continuing burst/collapse indemnity insurance cover on the equipment.
• If the Engineer is prepared to cover this indemnity in both civil and in criminal law personally, then inspection for insurance assessment is quite unnecessary - just light the burner and get on with it!

In my experience taking a well maintained system/machine/appliance to bits just to carry out a routine inspection causes more problems than it cures. We used to strip aircraft every 4 years in the navy, but this added strain on connectors, pipework, etc causing hours of rectification work and eventually the inspection was dropped. The same applies to your boilers - the Mean-Time-Before-Failure and general reliability will be reduced.

It sounds as if the state inspectorate is being over-cautious and I would suggest you request assistance from the Indian and Canadian designer/manufacturer of the boiler to put a case for exemption. After all, it is in their interest to show their design doesn't need this level of inspection - if they can prove their boilers require a much reduced lifetime maintenance cost they should increase local sales. As a compromise the boiler manufacturer might come up with a plan for a full 10 year inspection which doesn't need so much work and is acceptable to the inspector.

Tom

I'm assuming this is a commercial boiler, and that what is being asked is that the fire bricks are removed from the inside & the external insulation removed so the condition of the steel work can be inspected for degradation, this would be a ten yearly inspection.

Bazzer

...in pursuit of continuing burst/collapse indemnity insurance cover on the equipment.

Yes Mr. BazzerEnglander,

Thank you for your views.

It is a commercial boiler working in a sugar factory using Baggasse (with 50% moisture content) and this bagasse is the residue of sugar cane after extracting the juice.

The Baggasse analysis is C - 43%, O2 - 41%, H2 - 6.5%, Ash - 1.0 to 1.3% and contains brix free water which cannot be isolated. Works for 6 to 8 months during sugar cane crushing season only.

The bare inspection insisted is once in 10 years. A properly maintained boiler will serve fo minimum of 40 years, perhaps the efficiency may fall over years.

2 nos. of boilers by the same company erected in some other state in the same country by me 40 years back are still working, but not even once the bare inspection was demanded or imposed. The maintanace record shows, 3 times tube birst in one boiler and 2 times tube birst in the other boiler. From the beginning right from dry out exercise, and steam blow-out, the quality for boiler is strictly maintained. on 3 occasions, the Boiler-Drum water pH has fallen and boilers stopped, drained, and filled with treated water and started.

Once the sugar factory reaches full capacity, the surplus condensate is available during boiling of juice in multiple effect evaporator and it is polished and used.

Thanks,

DHAYANANDHAN.S

As I stated before this sounds like a commercial boiler ( only used in the cane cutting season ) for either hot water or steam so has to meet strict codes of practice, imagine if it exploded, the claims could wreck a company.

Bazzer

<...wreck a company...>

It would certainly <...wreck...> the career of the Engineer that sanctioned its going back into service, even if it didn't <...wreck...> the lives of the poor souls that were standing next to it at the time when it <...exploded...>.