Michael Huebner is a Staff Engineer at

Flowserve Corporation, Flow Solutions

Division, in Deer Park, Texas. He has more
than 20 years experience in the design of
mechanical seals, centrifugal and positive
displacement pumps, and fluid conditioning
equipment. For Flowserve, he has served in
design, testing, and application functions in
both the U.S. and Europe.
Mr. Huebner is a member of the
International Pump Users Symposium
Advisory Committee and the API 682 Task Force. He received his
B.S. degree (Engineering Technology) from Texas A&M University.
ABSTRACT
APIs recent release of Standard 682, Second Edition, represents
a major revision to this standard. The latest revision has greatly
expanded the scope of the standard by including applications to
more pumps, adding new seal types, and creating seal categories.
While the standard has changed significantly, the original focus of
the standard has remained the sameto guide the user into
selecting proven seal technology to successfully seal a variety of
applications. This tutorial introduces some of the more significant
changes to the Second Edition.
INTRODUCTION
API Standard 682 (1994) was originally published in 1994. This
standard was the result of the efforts of a number of key rotating
equipment engineers in the refinery industry. The purpose of the
standard was to capture proven solutions to the most common
sealing applications seen in refineries. There was no attempt to
cover every type of rotating equipment or mechanical seal. There
was also no attempt to cover every application. Rather the standard
was to serve as a guide to selecting seals based on what was
working in actual services. In the process, the Task Force had to
define a number of key concepts.
The sealing industry had developed with very little effort on
standardization between various pump and seal original equipment
manufacturers (OEMs). This resulted in a continuous spectrum of
seal sizes and designs. There were no standard seal models, design
features, materials, or operating windows. Even the nomenclature
between seal components was different between different OEMs.
Before the 682 Task Force could create a standard, it had to define
a great number of concepts related to seals. This included nomen-
clature, seal types, and seal arrangements. It also created a
methodology for seal selections based on process fluids and
operating conditions.
This standard has been used around the world on new projects,
expansions, and seal upgrades. Its acceptance has been truly inter-
national. Since the introduction of the First Edition in 1994,
though, there have been many changes in the sealing industry that
made a revision to the standard beneficial. First, new seal models
(such as dry gas seals and containment seals) have been widely
used in industry. Users had also shown interest in expanding the
scope of the standard to include pumps commonly used in
chemical industries. The application of the First Edition created
international challenges since it was written primarily defaulting to
other American standards such as ANSI and ASME. The API Task
Force was given the assignment of taking a very successful First
Edition and creating an updated and expanded Second Edition that
would address these issues.
GENERAL
At first glance, there is very little in common between the First
Edition and Second Edition other than the size of the document. This
is because the standard has been completely reorganized in
preparation for its publication as an ISO standard (ISO 21049). This
has resulted in a completely different arrangement and numbering of
the document. Any references to specific clauses or appendixes from
the First Edition will not be correct in the Second Edition. Upon
closer examination, the reader will find most of the information
from the First Edition is still there although there have been
significant additions in many areas. Although this tutorial covers
many of these additions, the reader should review the standard for a
thorough understanding of the requirements of the Second Edition.
DIMENSIONS
Since the Second Edition has been written as an ISO standard,
all dimensional data have been presented in SI units. US customary
units are also given in parentheses as a secondary reference. The
user will specify whether data, drawings, hardware (including
fasteners), and equipment supplied to this standard will use SI units
or US customary units.
SEAL CATEGORIES
Seal categories are subspecifications within the Second
Edition. Before defining a category, it would be helpful to
understand why they were created. The First Edition specified a
seal designed for demanding services. This included features such
as a distributed flush arrangement and floating throttle bushing on
all single seals. These features made these seals larger and more
costly than required for many general duty applications. For these
applications, some users have specified seals that had only some of
the features required on a standard seal. Customers referred to
these seals as being designed in the spirit of 682 or with the
intent of 682. It was clear that all the features required by the
First Edition were not required for every application. As the
standard was expanding the scope to include more chemical
pumps, it was seen as inevitable that this practice would continue.
It was also critical to recognize that chemical duty pumps and
their seals were intended to be applied in a smaller operating
window than the traditional First Edition seals. Most chemical duty
pumps are designed to operate at lower pressures and temperatures
than the API 610 pumps so it was consistent to create a seal
category that reflected the pumps capabilities.
A seal category is a subspecification that defines the intended
pump, operating window, materials, design features, and docu-
mentation requirements for the seal. There are three categories
117
OVERVIEW OF API 682 SECOND EDITION
by
Michael B. Huebner
Staff Engineer
Flowserve Corporation
Deer Park, Texas
defined as Category 1, 2, and 3. A Category 1 seal is a seal intended
for chemical duty pumps. A Category 2 seal is intended for API
610 (ISO 13709) pumps in refinery services requiring fewer
features than a 682 First Edition seal. The Category 3 seal is
intended for API 610 pumps and is basically the same seal defined
in the First Edition. Table 1 outlines some of the features and
requirements for each category.
Table 1. Comparison of Features of Categories.
SEAL TYPES
The seal type defines the basic design of a seal as well as the
materials of construction. These are largely unchanged from the
First Edition. Seal types are defined as Type A, B, or C. A Type A
seal is a pusher seal with a rotating flexible element, silicon carbide
versus carbon faces, alloy C-276 springs, fluoroelastomer O-rings,
and 316SS metal components (Figure 1). A Type B seal is a
bellows seal with a rotating flexible element, silicon carbide versus
carbon faces, alloy C-276 diaphragms, fluoroelastomer O-rings,
and 316SS metal components (Figure 2). A Type C seal is a
bellows seal with a stationary flexible element, silicon carbide
versus carbon faces, alloy 718 diaphragms, flexible graphite
secondary seals, and 316SS metal components (Figure 3).
Figure 1. Standard and Alternative Type A Seal.
In the First Edition, all seals were assumed to be contacting wet
seals. Although there have been many lively discussions about
whether standard liquid mechanical seals are contacting or not, for
the purpose of this standard they are designated as contacting wet
(or CW) seals. The Second Edition introduces two other seal
designs: the containment seal and the noncontacting seal.
Figure 2. Standard and Alternative Type B Seal.
Figure 3. Standard and Alternative Type C Seal.
A containment seal is a backup seal in a dual unpressurized seal
arrangement. It is designed to operate at less than 10 psi for the life
of the inner seal. When the inner seal fails, the containment seal is
designed to run under full seal chamber conditions for a minimum
of eight hours and prevent or minimize process fluid leakage to
atmosphere. The containment seal is designated as CS.
A noncontacting seal is a seal that is designed to intentionally
create a hydrodynamic lift and operate with a specific face
separation. This design is used primarily on dual pressurized gas
seals. It may also be used on liquid or mixed phase applications.
This seal design is designated as NC.
SEAL ARRANGEMENTS AND CONFIGURATIONS
A seal arrangement defines the number of seals in the cartridge
and the pressure in the cavity between dual seals. In the First
Edition, seal arrangements were relatively straightforward. An
Arrangement 1 seal was a single seal. An Arrangement 2 seal was
a dual seal in a series (face-to-back) orientation. The buffer fluid
cavity between the two seals was maintained at a pressure lower
than seal chamber pressure. An Arrangement 3 seal was a dual seal
in a series (face-to-back) orientation with a barrier fluid pressure
greater than the seal chamber pressure.
In the Second Edition, the same definitions of arrangement
apply although there are more options available due to the
inclusion of containment seals and noncontacting seals. This made
it necessary to introduce the concept of the seal configuration. The
PROCEEDINGS OF THE TWENTIETH INTERNATIONAL PUMP USERS SYMPOSIUM 2003 118
configuration is a subset of the arrangement and it defines the
function of the seal (contacting wet, noncontacting, or containment
seal). It may also define the type of bushing (on a single seal) or
the orientation on Arrangement 3 seals. An example of a configu-
ration is 1CW-FL. This would be interpreted as an Arrangement 1
seal where the inner seal is a contacting wet (or CW) seal with a
floating (FL) bushing. A 2CW-CW seal is interpreted as an
Arrangement 2 seal where the inner and outer seals are both
contacting wet (CW) seals.
Arrangement 3 seals have the most options. These seals can be
provided as dual pressurized liquid seals in a variety of orienta-
tions. These are contacting wet seals (CW) in a face-to-back (FB),
back-to-back (BB), or face-to-face (FF) orientation. A 3CW-FB is
an Arrangement 3 contacting wet seal in a face-to-back orientation.
Arrangement 3 seals can also be provided as dual noncontacting
gas seals (gas barrier fluid) in a variety of orientations. A 3NC-BB
is an Arrangement 3 noncontacting seal in a back-to-back
orientation. The relationship between seal arrangements and
configurations is shown in Figure 4.
Figure 4. Seal Configurations.
On Arrangement 3 seals, the order of the configurations shown
in Figure 4 designates the order of preference as defined by the
standard. The default configuration for a dual pressurized,
contacting wet seal is in a face-to-back orientation (3CW-FB). This
was the default Arrangement 3 from the First Edition. For a dual
pressurized, noncontacting seal, the default configuration is a
back-to-back orientation (3NC-BB).
DESIGN REQUIREMENTSGENERAL
The Second Edition states that the standard does not cover the
design of the component parts of mechanical seals This refers
to the requirements that are typically covered in standards such as
allowable stress levels and deformations. The standard does
however contain a great number of requirements covering
everything from O-ring sealing surfaces to drive collars. The
majority of the design requirements are unchanged from the First
Edition. Some of the changes are noted below.
One of the significant changes is the separation of pump and seal
standards. Both the API 610 and API 682 Task Forces made efforts
to remove redundancies between the two standards. In API 610
(1995), most seal requirements, the seal code, and seal piping plans
have been eliminated with a reference made to API 682. In API 682,
Second Edition (2002), all shaft and seal chamber tabulations have
been eliminated. All references to seal chambers and pump require-
ments are made back to the original pump specification. This is also
consistent with the inclusion of ASME B73 and ISO 3069 Frame C
seal chambers. The only pump requirements remaining in the
standard pertain to the interface between the pump and the seal.
In the First Edition, process connection sizes, orientations, and
markings were specified for the three arrangements. In the Second
Edition, the greater number of configurations along with the
different seal categories has resulted in an extensive chart detailing
the required connections. One of the key objectives is to eliminate
the potential for connecting process piping to atmospheric
connections. In the First Edition, this was accomplished by
making all process connections
3
/4 NPT and all atmospheric
connections
3
/8 NPT. In the Second Edition, most process
connections are
1
/2 NPT, atmospheric connections are
3
/8 NPT, and
liquid barrier/buffer fluid connections are
1
/2 or
3
/4 NPT (depending
upon the shaft diameter).
There are also a greater number of possible connections in the
Second Edition. This has resulted in different connection symbols.
Table 2 shows these differences. All other connections such as
flush (F), cooling (C), drain (D), and quench (Q) remain the same.
Table 2. New Connection Symbols.
In addition to the sizes and symbols for connection, the Second
Edition also specifies the angular orientation of the connections
when viewed from the end view of the seal. All connections that
are self-venting (such as the flush, buffer/buffer fluid outlets, and
flush outlets) are located at the top of the seal (or zero degrees).
All connections that function as a drain (such as the drain and
containment seal drain) are located at the bottom of the cavity (or
180 degrees). These locations are defined as the location where
the connection intersects the cavity. This does not require the
actual connection port to be at this location on the outside
diameter (OD) of the seal gland. This is especially true for
tangential ports where the piping will connect to the gland at
some angle off vertical.
The First Edition specified clearances between the inside
diameter (ID) of the seal sleeve and the OD of the shaft to be
between 0.001 and 0.003 inch including tolerances on both parts.
This was independent of the shaft diameter. Depending upon the
tolerances of both parts, this could lead to clearances under 0.001
inch. On larger diameter seals, this created installation and removal
problems in the field. In the Second Edition, the allowable
clearance (along with the tolerances on the sleeve and shaft) are
defined as F7/h6 according to ISO 286-2. This has resulted in
clearances up to 0.0037 inch on the larger seal sizes.
The First Edition specified that the default material for all seal
faces was premium grade, blister-resistant carbon versus reaction
bonded silicon carbide. For seals requiring two hard faces, the
default face materials were reaction bonded silicon carbide versus
nickel bound tungsten carbide. In the Second Edition, there is a
difference between materials for different seal categories. Since a
Category 1 seal will typically be used in a chemical pump, the
default face materials are premium grade, blister-resistant carbon
versus self-sintered silicon carbide. Categories 2 and 3 are the
same as the First Edition (premium grade, blister-resistant carbon
versus reaction bonded silicon carbide). For seals requiring two
hard faces, the default material for both faces is silicon carbide.
OVERVIEW OF API 682 SECOND EDITION 119
Arrangement 1
One seal per cartridge
assembly
Arrangement 2
Two seals per cartridge assembly with a
containment seal chamber which is at a
pressure less than the seal chamber pressure
Arrangement 3
Two seals per cartridge assembly
that utilize an externally supplied
barrier fluid
Liquid buffer fluid Gas buffer fluid or
no buffer fluid
Liquid barrier fluid Gas barrier fluid
Dual contacting
wet seals
2CW-CW
Contacting wet
inner seal with a
containment
seal
2CW-CS
Non-contacting
inner seal with a
containment
seal
2NC-CS
Contacting wet
seals in a
face-to-back
configuration
3CW-FB
Contacting wet
seals in a
face-to-face
configuration
3CW-FF
Configuration
Contacting wet
seals in a
back-to-back
configuration
3CW-BB
Configuration
Non-contacting
seals in a
face-to-face
configuration
3NC-FF
Configuration
Non-contacting
seals in a
back-to-back
configuration
3NC-BB
Configuration
Non-contacting
seals in a
face-to-back
configuration
3NC-FB
Contacting
single wet seal
with a fixed
throttle bushing
1CW-FX
Contacting
single wet seal
with a floating
throttle bushing
1CW-FL
Configuration
Configuration
Configuration Configuration
Configuration
Configuration
Configuration
ACCESSORIES
Seal Coolers
A seal cooler is used to reduce the temperature of the fluid in the
seal chamber. This is often done to increase vapor pressure or
improve fluid properties for the seal. The First Edition outlined
some of the construction details for seal coolers. In general, all seal
coolers had to be designed with process fluid on the tube side and
cooling water on the shell side. Both the tube and shell sides had
to be completely drainable. Piping for the tube was required to be
3
/4 inch tube with a minimum 0.095 inch wall thickness.
The Second Edition maintains these requirements but adds an
additional smaller size cooler for smaller shafts. For shaft sizes of
2.500 inches or less, a cooler with
1
/2 inch tubing and a minimum
wall thickness of 0.065 inch should be used. For shafts larger than
2.500 inches, a seal cooler with
3
/4 inch tubing and a minimum
0.095 inch wall thickness should be used. Of course, the primary
consideration in selecting a seal cooler must be adequate heat
removal. This may result in a larger seal cooler being applied to
seal with a shaft diameter under 2.500 inches.
Barrier/Buffer Fluid Reservoirs
Reservoirs are used on Plan 52 and Plan 53A piping plans to
provide buffer and barrier fluids to the seals. The First Edition had
detailed requirements for the dimensions, materials, and instru-
mentation for these reservoirs. One of these requirements was that
the volume of the barrier fluid in the system at the normal liquid
level was five gallons. The Second Edition maintains most of the
same requirements for reservoirs but has added a smaller size
reservoir for smaller shaft sizes. For shafts with a diameter of 2.500
inches and smaller, the standard reservoir shall have a capacity of
three gallons at normal liquid levels. For shafts larger than 2.500
inches, the capacity should be a minimum of five gallons as
detailed in the First Edition.
Condensate Collection Reservoir
The condensate collection reservoir is a vessel used to collect
leakage from a Plan 75 system. This reservoir not only collects the
leakage, it provides a place for liquid and gas phase leakage to
separate and be piped to the appropriate recovery system. The
reservoir will also be instrumented to monitor inner seal leakage
through both the liquid level and pressure in the reservoir. The
standard provides details of the construction for this vessel.
Barrier/Buffer Gas Supply Panels
Gas supply panels are used on Plan 72 and Plan 74 systems to
provide a filtered regulated inert gas to the mechanical seals. The
supply panels must have, at a minimum, a pressure regulator,
coalescing filter, flow meter, low pressure switch, pressure gauge,
check valve, and isolation valve. A typical arrangement for these
components is shown in Figure 5. The purchaser and seal OEM
shall mutually agree on the instrumentation and general arrange-
ments for the panel.
SEAL QUALIFICATION TESTS
The First Edition introduced the concept of the standardized seal
qualification test. Since one of the goals of the standard was to
provide seals with high probability of achieving three years of
uninterrupted service, it was natural to try to obtain some objective
evidence that this could be accomplished. Seal testing was done on
a number of representative fluids under common operating
conditions. In addition to steady-state operation, there were a
number of starts and stops along with pressure and temperature
variations to evaluate the seals on real world conditions.
The Second Edition has continued with this philosophy and
introduced qualification testing for containment seals and dual gas
seals. Containment seals are designed for long runs under
relatively low duty conditions. Their function during this stage of
Figure 5. Typical Barrier/Buffer Gas Supply Panel.
operation is to isolate the containment seal cavity from
atmosphere. Per the standard, the pressure in the seal cavity should
be less than 10 psi. The containment seals real work begins when
the primary seal fails. In this condition, the containment seal may
be operating on high pressure vapors or process fluids. The quali-
fication testing is designed to simulate normal operation as well as
failure of the inner seal. Leakages and pressure drops are
monitored and recorded at key points during the testing. The
containment seal test sequence is shown in Figure 6.
Figure 6. Containment Seal Test Sequence.
Dual gas seals are designed to run with barrier gas maintained at
a pressure higher than the seal chamber pressure. In actual service,
there may be interruptions in the gas supply that could affect seal
performance. Qualification testing for these seals includes steady-
state testing under the same conditions outlined for liquid seals.
This includes starts and stops along with variations in the pressure
and temperature of the process fluid. After completing this testing,
the seal is exposed to upsets in the barrier gas supply. The first
phase simulates a complete loss of barrier gas pressure under static
conditions for one hour. The seal is then repressurized and tested at
3600 rpm. During testing, the barrier pressure is isolated from the
supply pressure and allowed to decay while the seal continues
operation. The pressure is reestablished and allowed to reach
equilibrium. The tester is then stopped, the seal isolated, and
pressure decay measured for 10 minutes. Leakages and pressure
drops are also monitored and recorded at key points during
operations. The dual gas seal test sequence is shown in Figure 7.
All testing of liquid seals performed under the First Edition is
valid for the Second Edition with one caveat. The First Edition did
not define an acceptance criterion for the seals during testing.
Basically, it was up to the seal OEM to determine if the seal was
suitable for the service. While it is still the seal OEMs responsi-
bility to ensure an acceptable seal, there is now an acceptance
criterion. During testing, the seals must maintain a leakage rate of
less than 1000 ppm (as measured by EPA Method 21) or 5.6 gr/hr.
This leakage criterion does not apply to testing of dual gas seals or
PROCEEDINGS OF THE TWENTIETH INTERNATIONAL PUMP USERS SYMPOSIUM 2003 120
PI PSL FSH CV
FIL PR FI FO V
To seal
From gas supply
If specified
3600
0
S
p
e
e
d
(
R
P
M
)
Dynamic test
phase
Static test
phase
Dynamic test
phase
Static test
phase
Minimum
100 hours
Minimum
100 hours 4 Hours 5 Minutes
10 PSI Propane
25 PSI
Nitrogen
40 PSI Diesel
250 PSI
Diesel
Figure 7. Dual Gas Seal Test Sequence.
containment seals under failure conditions. In addition, the
measured wear on the seal faces must be less than 1 percent of the
available wear.
HYDROSTATIC TEST
Hydrostatic testing is required for all the pressure boundary of
the seal and support system. This includes the seal gland, all
piping, reservoirs, and other auxiliary equipment exposed to
process fluids. In the Second Edition, there is an exemption for seal
glands machined from a single piece of wrought material or bar
stock. Cast seal glands still require testing.
ANNEX ARECOMMENDED
SEAL SELECTION PROCEDURE
The seal selection procedure was introduced in the First Edition
to give guidance to the user in selecting a seal for a specific
application. These applications, as well as the procedures, are
broken down into three process fluids: nonhydrocarbon,
nonflashing hydrocarbon, and flashing hydrocarbon. The
procedure goes through a number of steps including selection of
the seal type, arrangement, and piping plan. The selection
procedure has been revised for the Second Edition to include the
new seal designs and categories. It also has a greater focus on the
selection of the seal arrangement.
ANNEX DSTANDARD FLUSH
PLANS AND AUXILIARY HARDWARE
Annex D contains all the standard piping plans for mechanical
seals. While most of these piping plans were also in the First
Edition, there have been several changes to reflect different tech-
nologies and address the requirements of the new seal designs.
PLAN 14
Plan 14 is a combination of a Plan 11 and a Plan 13 (Figure 8).
This is most commonly used on vertical pumps where there is a need
to provide a flush to the seal chamber while continually venting back
to suction. This plan was included in API 610, Eighth Edition (1995),
and has now been moved in API 682, Second Edition (2002).
PLAN 53
A Plan 53 is a dual pressurized liquid seal support system. In the
First Edition, this was defined as a reservoir that is pressurized by
an inert gas. While this is the most common method of providing a
Plan 53, other options also exist. It was difficult to specify these
options, though, since there were no recognized designations for
them nor any standardized details on piping and instrumentation.
The Second Edition has addressed this by defining three variations
of the Plan 53: Plan 53A, 53B, and 53C. These variations are
considered as technically equivalent. If the user specifies a Plan 53,
any of these variations may be provided.
Plan 53A
This is the Plan 53 as defined in the First Edition. Barrier fluid
is maintained in a reservoir and circulated by the mechanical seal
Figure 8. Standard Seal Flush Plan 14.
(Figure 9). The barrier fluid is pressurized by an external source
such as a regulated supply of nitrogen. The reservoir serves to
remove heat from the barrier fluid as well as provide makeup fluid
for normal seal losses. Excessive seal leakage is detected by a
change in fluid level in the reservoir. The primary disadvantage of
this plan is that there is an interface between the pressurization gas
and the barrier fluid. At higher pressures, this can lead to
significant gas absorption into the barrier fluid resulting in poor
seal performance.
Figure 9. Standard Seal Flush Plan 53A.
Plan 53B
This plan replaces the reservoir with a bladder accumulator
(Figure 10). The accumulator provides both pressurization of the
barrier fluid and makeup fluid to compensate for normal seal
OVERVIEW OF API 682 SECOND EDITION 121
3600
0
S
p
e
e
d
(
R
P
M
)
Dynamic test
phase
10 Minutes 1 Minute 1 Hour Equilibrium Equilibrium
Static test
phase
Barrier at 0 PSI
Barrier at
0 PSI
Barrier at
test
pressure
Barrier at
test
pressure
Barrier
blocked in
Static test
phase
FO FI Q/D
V
To pump suction
From pump discharge
LBO
LBI
PI PSL
LSH
LSL
LI
If specified
R
e
s
e
r
v
o
i
r Make up barrier fluid
By purchaser
By vendor
From external pressure source
Normally open
V
LBO F LBI
R
e
s
e
r
v
o
i
r
From external pressure source
losses. The bladder separates the pressurization gas from the
barrier fluid preventing absorption of the gas at high pressures.
Since the bladder is precharged with the pressurization gas, the
plan can be operated without a permanent connection to an
external gas supply. The barrier fluid is circulated by the seal
through a loop that includes a seal cooler and other instrumenta-
tion. Excessive leakage is detected by a drop in the pressure in the
seal loop. This plan is normally more expensive than a Plan 53A.
Figure 10. Standard Seal Flush Plan 53B.
Plan 53C
Another variation of this plan uses a piston accumulator (Figure
11). Pressure from a reference source (normally the seal chamber)
is piped to the bottom of the piston accumulator. Due to the
differences in the areas on the piston, a higher pressure is generated
at the top of the accumulator. This is piped into a seal loop. Like
the Plan 53B, the barrier fluid is circulated by the mechanical seal
through a seal cooler. With no pressurization gas, there is no
chance of gas absorption into the barrier fluid. Since the piston
accumulator pressurizes the barrier fluid based on the reference
pressure, the barrier pressure automatically tracks actual operating
conditions including system upsets. One of the disadvantages of
this system is that the accumulator is exposed to process fluid. This
is a concern in corrosive or abrasive applications. In addition, this
plan is generally more expensive than either the Plan 53A or 53B.
PLAN 71
The 70 series of piping plans addresses piping requirements of
dual gas seals and containment seals. Plan 71 is designated for
seals where the containment seal cavity is run dead-ended (Figure
12). It will also be used when no other containment seal piping has
been specified and the connections are plugged for purchasers use.
Figure 11. Standard Seal Flush Plan 53C.
Figure 12. Standard Seal Flush Plan 71.
PLAN 72
Plan 72 is an external buffer gas supplied to the containment seal
cavity through a control panel (Figure 13). This plan is provided
when it is beneficial to sweep the containment seal cavity with an
inert gas. Buffer gas is maintained at a pressure lower than seal
chamber pressure and less than 10 psi. This plan is almost always
used in conjunction with a Plan 75 or 76 to sweep the buffer gas
and seal leakage into a closed collection system. Requirements for
the control panel are detailed in the standard.
PLAN 74
Plan 74 is an external barrier gas supplied to a dual pressurized
gas seal (Figure 14). Barrier gas is provided at a pressure higher
than seal chamber pressure to positively prevent process fluids
from leaking to atmosphere. Normally an inert gas such as plant
PROCEEDINGS OF THE TWENTIETH INTERNATIONAL PUMP USERS SYMPOSIUM 2003 122
LBO
LBI
PI PSL
TI
Make up barrier fluid
Bladder accumulator
If specified
Bladder charge connection
V
LBO
F
LBI
Bladder charge connection
Bladder accumulator
LBO
LBI
PI PSL
LI
LSL
TI
Make up barrier fluid
If specified
Piston accumulator
V
LBO F LBI
Piston accumulator
GBI
CSV
CSD
V
GBI F CSV CSD
Figure 13. Standard Seal Flush Plan 72.
nitrogen is used as the barrier gas. Requirements for the control
panel are detailed in the standard.
Figure 14. Standard Seal Flush Plan 74.
PLAN 75
A Plan 75 is used to collect leakage into the containment seal
cavity when the process fluid does not completely vaporize (Figure
15). This leakage may be liquid phase or a mixture of liquid and
vapor phases. The accumulation of liquid leakage in a containment
seal cavity may adversely affect seal performance so all leakage
should be drained from the low point drain at the bottom of the
containment seal cavity. The leakage is piped to a collection
reservoir that is connected to liquid and vapor recovery systems.
Inner seal performance is monitored by pressurization of the
reservoir and by monitoring the liquid level in the collection
reservoir. The inner seal can also be tested by blocking in the
reservoir and noting the time/pressure buildup relationship in the
reservoir. Requirements for the reservoir are detailed in the standard.
This plan may be used by itself or in conjunction with a Plan 72.
PLAN 76
A Plan 76 is used to collect leakage into the containment seal
cavity when the process fluid completely vaporizes (Figure 16). Since
containment seals are normally used to prevent or minimize process
Figure 15. Standard Seal Flush Plan 75.
leakage to atmosphere, the containment seal cavity is piped into a
vapor recovery or flare system. High leakage rates past the inner seal
will result in a pressure increase between the seal and the orifice in
the piping. This will be detected by the pressure indicator and high
pressure switch indicating failure of the inner seal. Specification for
the piping and instrumentation are detailed in the standard. This plan
may be used by itself or in conjunction with a Plan 72.
Figure 16. Standard Seal Flush Plan 76.
OVERVIEW OF API 682 SECOND EDITION 123
FI
F
I
L
CSD
GBI
PSL
CSV
PCV
Buffer gas panel
By vendor By purchaser
If specified
PI
FSH
From external source
V GBI F CSV CSD
From external
source
GBI
GBO
FI
F
I
L
PSL
FSH
PI
If specified
Gas barrier panel
By vendor By purchaser
From external source
V
GBI GBO
From external
source
GBI
CSD
To vapor
collection system
To liquid
collection system
PI
PSH
LSH
Test connection
If specified
By purchaser
By vendor
LG
V
GBI F CSV CSD
From external
source
GBI
CSD
PI PSH
Tube
Pipe
To collection system
150 (6") min
By purchaser
By vendor
CSV
V
GBI F CSV CSD
From external
source
ANNEX FMECHANICAL SEAL DATASHEETS
The First Edition introduced a very comprehensive set of seal
data sheets. This consisted of five pages of seal data plus two
additional pages of pump data. While they were thorough, users
seldom, if ever, completely filled these out. The Second Edition
revised these data sheets so that all the necessary information is
contained on two pages. Since the data requirements and design
options are different for different seal categories, there are two sets
of data sheets. One set of data sheets covers Category 1 and 2 seals
and one set covers Category 3 seals. These data sheets are provided
in both SI and US customary units.
ANNEX JMECHANICAL SEAL CODE
Historically, many seal users have relied on the old API 610
(1995) coding for general designations of mechanical seals. The
code BSTFN (and its many variations) can still be seen on seal and
pump data sheets today. While this code was useful, it does not
convey information that is required on seal selections in API 682.
Before developing the new code, the Task Force investigated who
was using seal codes. It was determined that the primary users
were engineering contractors working on projects. During the
project stage, operating conditions for the pump are defined, but
very little is known about the equipment that will be used for the
application.
At the project stage, the Task Force identified four key pieces of
information that will be required for the seal OEM to select a seal:
the seal category, the arrangement, the seal type, and the piping
plan. The first position of the code defines the category and is
designated as C1, C2, or C3. The second position defines the
arrangement and is designated as A1, A2, or A3. The third position
defines the seal type and is designated as A, B, or C. The last
position defines the piping plan(s) and is designated by the two
digit piping plan number. If more than one plan is required (such
as on dual seals), the additional plans are added to the end of the
code.
An example of a new seal code is C1A1A11. This is interpreted
as Category 1 (C1), Arrangement 1 (A1), Type A (A) seal with a
Plan 11. An example of a dual seal with multiple piping plans is
C3A2A1176. This is interpreted as a Category 3, Arrangement 2,
Type A seal with a Plan 11 on the inner seal and a Plan 76 on the
outer seal.
One of the comments made about the new code is that it does not
include information about seal face and gasket materials. The Task
Force considered this and concluded that all seal types have a
default set of materials defined in the standard. If the user desires
to specify alternative materials, these will need to be defined
outside the seal code.
CONCLUSIONS
This tutorial provides a quick glimpse of the many changes in
API 682, Second Edition (2002). The user is encouraged to review
a copy of the revised standard to determine the extent of the
changes and its effect on their organization. Overall, the Second
Edition will allow the benefits of API 682 to be applied to a greater
number of applications and be used more easily in a global market.
REFERENCES
API Standard 610, 1995, Centrifugal Pumps for Petroleum,
Heavy Duty Chemical and Gas Industry Services, Eighth
Edition, American Petroleum Institute, Washington, D.C.
API Standard 682, 1994, Shaft Sealing Systems for Centrifugal
and Rotary Pumps, First Edition, American Petroleum
Institute, Washington, D.C.
API Standard 682, 2002, PumpsShaft Sealing Systems for
Centrifugal and Rotary Pumps, Second Edition, American
Petroleum Institute, Washington, D.C.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Huebner, M. B., Thorp, J. M., Buck, G. S., and Fernandez, C. L.,
2002, Advances in Mechanical SealingAn Introduction to
API 682 Second Edition, Proceedings of the Nineteenth
International Pump Users Symposium, Turbomachinery
Laboratory, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas,
pp. 59-65.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author would like to thank the American Petroleum
Institute for its cooperation and permission to reproduce figures
for this tutorial. Special thanks go to Andrea Johnson for her
behind the scenes work at API during the creation of this
standard.
PROCEEDINGS OF THE TWENTIETH INTERNATIONAL PUMP USERS SYMPOSIUM 2003 124