With all sub-header and supply line valves closed, all drip leg drain valves closed and

all drip traps valved off,

As steam fills the piping system the initial volume of steam will condensate at a higher rate due to the relatively
cold pipe. However, as the supply of steam continues to move through the piping it will cause a large portion of
the forming condensate to flash back to steam. This will be apparent by, what should be, a small amount of
internal crackling and banging that takes place during this process.

With the system now flooded with steam and the main valve fully open the closed system contains partial
pressures of steam and air. The air that resided in the system before the introduction of steam is still contained in
the closed system under a partial pressure.

The theory of partial pressures is based on Dalton's Law of Partial Pressures. John Dalton observed that the
Total Pressure of a gas mixture was the sum of the Partial Pressure of each gas, or P total = P1 + P2 + P3
+ .......Pn. The Partial Pressure is further defined as the pressure of a single gas in the mixture as if that gas alone
occupied the container. It is therefore determined that, in our case, steam, as a partial pressure, will have the
same characteristics as its partial pressure.

Let us assume that the entrapped air, contained within the closed system, now makes up 10% of the volume
within that closed system and the newly introduced steam makes up the 90% balance of the volume. With an
absolute pressure of 300 PSIA, the pressure of the air would be 30 PSIA and the pressure of the steam would be
270 PSIA. With an absolute pressure of 270 PSIA the steam's characteristics would be a temperature of 407.8 ºF
with a latent heat content of 818.3 BTU's and a specific volume of 1.71 ft3/lb. Instead of the 417.4 ºF, 808.9
BTU's and 1.547 ft3/lb it would be at its original 300PSIA.

Not only does the air reduce the overall heat content of the steam by volume but once the air is in the system it
will have a tendency to plate out, or collect, on heat transfer surfaces further effecting the overall heating
efficiency of the steam. It is therefore essential that the air be removed from the closed system before the sub-
header valves are opened, compromising the efficiency of the entire system. Incidentally, this same process will
be repeated with each sub-header. The overall checkout and start-up procedure should be outlined and
accomplished in such a way that virtually all air is purged from the system before the final block valve, at each
user, is opened.

With the main system still closed off from the sub-headers, personnel, in a controlled procedure, will go to each
drip leg drain valve and slowly open it. It is recommended to use a multi-turn valve like a gate valve rather than
a quarter turn valve like a ball valve in steam service. The multi-turn valve provides much more control when
opening and closing, unlike a quarter turn valve.

The sequence of performing this blow-down should be in the direction of flow, starting with the furthest
upstream drip leg. And due to the inherent dangers of steam, much caution should be exercised while
performing this procedure.

Each drain valve only needs to remain open for a brief period. With the valve fully open for approximately one
minute this should be sufficient enough time to purge the steam containing air from each particular segment of
the piping system. Once the purge is completed for a specific segment close off the drain valve and open the
valves on both sides of the steam trap. Continue this process in the direction of flow.

That basically touched on the high points of starting up a steam system. There is much more to the process that
will be covered in a later section on check-outs and start-ups. These highlights were presented at this time to
show that, when considering start-up loads and conditions, there are no special needs. And please do not take
that as a general statement. There are certainly cases where a particular system may require that special
consideration be given to the start-up and shutdown process of a system.

Getting back to the placement of trap stations; In the process of locating the strategic positions of each trap the
designer has to determine what segment of pipe each trap will be assigned to. In the case of the trap located at
the base of the riser in Fig. 9, the designer should calculate the height of the riser plus the distance from the
upstream side of the expansion loop (at Trap Station #2). This will be the segment of pipe assigned to Trap
Station #3 at the base of the riser.

As in the previous calculation for radiant heat loss:

Let us assume that the riser has a length of 80'-0" and the lineal distance from the upstream side of the
expansion loop to the bottom of the riser is 160'-0". That gives us a total length of 240'-0" that trap station #3
has to be sized for. Based on 300 PSIA saturated steam running through a 10" header in an outside pipe rack
the calculation would be:

By using a 2:1 safety factor the condensate load would then be 677.94 or 678 lbs/hr. A practical trap for this
application would be a thermodynamic or thermostatic type.

One further note when designing trap stations for this application; address the issue of preventative trap
maintenance. If you're in plant maintenance or operations and you have the opportunity to provide input during
the design phase of a project, make this one of your discussion points. If you’re a designer, address this with the
owner's team.

There are two considerations we need to address with this particular application (actually it can be made to
apply to virtually any application): the first is the need to facilitate testing of the trap for preventative
maintenance, and the second is periodic strainer blow-down.

In the first consideration, when designing trap stations for steam distribution mains a typical trap station for a
drip leg would usually be installed in a pipe rack. This places the trap station in an elevated and very
inaccessible location.

When you consider the possibility of several hundred traps throughout a plant requiring lifts, ladders,
scaffolding and tie-offs, just to gain access to, it can be a costly and time consuming exercise. What ultimately
occurs is the trap stations are not maintained properly and in too many cases are even forgotten.

The second consideration is an all too frequent problem. Strainers, whether a separate item or an integral part of
the trap, are there to capture errant, entrained particles in the steam before they can reach and plug the trap
orifice. Just the nature of the intended purpose of the strainer indicates the fact that particles will be trapped and
will accumulate on the strainer mesh until they are removed. As they accumulate they progressively block off
flow through the mesh until, if not periodically cleaned, they completely block the flow of condensate to the
trap.

Inaccessible trap stations are frequently ignored or forgotten. Dropping a trap station to grade or access level is
one simple way to avoid this and should be a design consideration. In considering this option we need to
develop a cost profile for the intended alternate configuration. This will determine what the initial installed cost
for this alternative design might be and what the additional running or ongoing operating cost might be. This
will provide management with the necessary information to help determine whether or not to make the change.

This application we will use as an example will be an inside installation with a controlled environment. The
initial installation differential will include an additional length of pipe, insulation, added fittings and labor. For
this case we will assume the pipe support cost to be a trade off.

In order to locate the trap station at an accessible level it will have to drop 15'-0" requiring 30'-0" of additional
pipe, (2) 90B Elbows and 21'-0" of insulation. Using 3/4" , sch. 80 c.s. pipe with 3000 lb socketweld fittings
and 21'-0" of 1 1/2" thick fiberglass insulation. The condensate return leg from the trap station will only be
insulated up to 7'-0" above the access level for personnel protection. If this installation was to be outside, the
additional cost for heat tracing the condensate return riser along with insulating the balance of that return line
would have to be added into the initial cost.

Pipe, Fittings & Labor           $458.00

Additional cost consideration comes from any added operational costs due to relocating the trap station. In this
case it would consist only of the added radiant heat loss in the additional 15'-0" drop to the trap station. Because
the 15'-0" return section of piping is carrying condensate it is not a part of the heat loss calculation. The radiant
heat loss can be calculated using the preceding radiant heat loss calculation as follows:

If we base this on a system that operates 24 hrs/day, 7 days/week the total annual, additional steam loss in that
15'-0" drop would be: 8760 hrs. x 2.07 lbs/hr = 18133.2 lbs/yr. Assuming an approximate cost of $7.00/1000 lbs
to manufacture the steam, the total annual cost incurred by making the trap station more accessible would be:
18133.2 lbs/yr x $7.00/1000 lbs = $126.93. You can see by these figures that the ongoing operating cost
differential incurred in providing improved access amounts to less than $11.00/mo.

The advantage in doing this, however, will more than offset this added cost. By making these trap stations more
accessible, and again this does not only apply to steam main applications, it makes the preventative maintenance
effort much more efficient. Strainers can be blown down and traps can be tested in a much safer, less time
consuming and a more controlled manner. This is an issue that needs to be tabled and discussed early in the
design stages of a project. If agreement can be reached at an early stage it will save a great deal of time in trying
to redesign a system to accommodate such changes.

Very frequently there is a gap between an engineers perception of priorities and the priority perception of the
plant maintenance and operations personnel. In order to understand the importance of a well thought-out and
well designed steam tracing system from the plant personnel's viewpoint a design engineer needs to get a phone
call at 3:00 AM, with outside temperatures hovering around -20B F and winds gusting at 30 MPH. The
maintenance shift supervisor says a steam tracer in a pipe rack froze and ruptured, creating a potential freeze-up
of the pipeline it was protecting.

The next thing you know, you're not in your warm bed any longer but are instead at the plant. You're 30'-0" up
in a scissors lift in sub zero temperatures trying everything your experience allows to keep this line from
freezing. Which, if you don't succeed, could ultimately shut down a production facility.