Results 1 to 18 of 18
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Tampa Florida
    Posts
    1,076
    Rep Power
    25

    Painful safety lessons



    This just happened last week. It truly belongs in the Trail of Tears.

    A simple removal and replacement of a back room freezer case with a remote condensing unit. The freezer was in a commercial kitchen. The technician soldered up the liquid and suction piping and pressure tested the loop by putting liquid 404A into the liquid line. After a short time somebody ran out to him and said the freezer was on fire.

    The tech valved it all off and rushed to the kitchen. When he arrived at the kitchen, he couldn't see any fog or vapor, but there was a kitchen employee who was clearly distressed and coughing well after being evacuated from the kitchen.

    There was a bad solder joint in the liquid line. The tech repaired it, evacuated the system and put it back into service.

    The affected employee gasped to the technician "That was really bad." I have to think there was an open flame somewhere.... but I don't really know.

    It is an ugly situation. But other than using liquid to pressure test, I really cannot fault the technician. But we hurt somebody, and that is really bad.

    And I am in a quandary. How much safety can we afford to instill? This was a $300.00 job.

    Any advice, anyone?



  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    N.Ireland
    Age
    50
    Posts
    1,630
    Rep Power
    24
    Hi, Dan these things happen, but to minimise events like this and their harm to people and property we should employ a risk assesment and a method statement system to each and every job. This envolves considering the likley safety issues and writting out a preplaned way of dealing with these events or minimising their effects.
    One of the main things for a pressure test method statement is to restrict entry to the area being pressure tested to a safe distance, another is to provide adequate ventilation during the test.
    We have generic method statements which are wrote out for work such as this. The service guy is issued with these, he gives a copy to the customer and keeps a copy himself. This statement is signed by both parties, both parties should be then clear in their duties. In the case of the above incident if a risk assesment had have been undertaken and the method statement given the fault would have been on the customers side for not removing staff whilst the pressure test was undertaken.
    I know it's a pain, but so is a court appearance. A few copys printed off on the computer for standard proceedures is time saved in the end and it looks more professional when you hand one to a customer, it also puts a lot of the responsibility with the customer.
    Regards. Andy.
    If you can't fix it leave it that no one else will:rolleyes:

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Tampa Florida
    Posts
    1,076
    Rep Power
    25
    Thanks Andy. Would it be too much a bother for you to e-mail me what you have or direct me to a URL? I guess hindsight is better than no sight at all.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    716
    Rep Power
    23
    Andy... That is really great. I'm taking that under advisement, also.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Age
    63
    Posts
    258
    Rep Power
    23
    Why didn't the tech use R-22 & Dry Nitrogen as a leak test gas (I believe the EPA would be much happier with this method than the one the tech employed)?
    There is less danger with this method regarding phosgene gas, and he could have recycled the test gas and used it again on the next job.

    Zolar

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Doncaster, England
    Posts
    199
    Rep Power
    25
    In Uk you are not allowed to leak test with ANY refrigerant.

    All leak tests must be carried out using OFN. (Not even a trace of refrigerant is allowed.)
    Tony

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Age
    63
    Posts
    258
    Rep Power
    23
    If you're not allowed to leak test with any refrigerant, then why was the tech using R404a???

    In the US, we are allowed to use a mixture of 10% R22/90% dry nitrogen as a leak test gas. The test gas is required to be recovered when finished.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Posts
    19
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Painful safety lessons

    R 404 a for leak testing?!! Try nitrogen...As for the US being able to use 10% R22,I believe they signed on to the Montreal Protocol which forbids this.Then again U.S. seems to make their own rules with most things!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    southern england
    Age
    69
    Posts
    86
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: Painful safety lessons

    Pressure and strength test on new installations are conducted with OFN, Leak testing of systems with OFN with a trace of R22 is still allowed as leak detectors cannot detect OFN. Technically speaking R134a and R404a (Hfc's with an ODP of 0) are not included in the Montreal protocol but are in the Kyoto protocol (limits on GWP)(and F-gas) which the aussies and yanks wont sign up too.
    it's only a fridge, fix it. ;)

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Wirral UK
    Age
    58
    Posts
    68
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: Painful safety lessons

    I can honestly say I could not believe what I have just read. Leak testing with any refrigerant is dangerous particularly in a kitchen. I have only leak tested with nitrogen where the system is new or devoid of gas for the last 15 years and I can honestly say I don't know any one who would use a refrigerant in any mix or quantity.

    Good Brazing Good Practice and proper pressure testing with OFN is the only way it should be done unless the system is just short of gas and then a good leak test with an electronic locates the leak. If this doesn't work reclaim the gas and pressure testing using OFN. If that fails I have used florescent die, you do find the leaks although on open screw or recip compressors you can get a lot of mess around the shaft and the clean up can take forever.
    "It's better to remain silent and be thought a fool than open ones mouth and remove all doubt"

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Tampa Florida
    Posts
    1,076
    Rep Power
    25

    Re: Painful safety lessons

    My first post was a long time ago. The technician is no longer with us and upon further analysis and questioning, he was only saying he was leak testing. He was, in fact, charging the system after having failed to perform a leak test. Which also speaks poorly of any vacuum he claimed to pull.

    As far as the UK not allowing the use of a refrigerant for leak testing, that is a stringency that goes beyond the Montreal Protocol. Montreal protocol permits using trace amounts of a refrigerant combined with nitrogen in order to effectively use electronic leak detectors. Using a trace amount of refrigerant in the example I cited at the beginning of the discussion would not have caused any harm. The technician was not being truthful.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    East Anglia
    Posts
    1,160
    Rep Power
    25

    Re: Painful safety lessons

    Hi Guys,

    Surely its about time that someone (BOC,Rhone,Gasco ect) came up with some kind of gas that can be added to OFN when pressure testing so any leak can be picked up with an electronic detector and that doesn't contravine any legislation on emmisions

    Regards

    Raymond

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    ksa
    Age
    58
    Posts
    22
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Painful safety lessons

    Hi Guys,

    For me, I always prefer using N2 with trace refrigerants. As for safety and economic measures I do gradual increase of test pressures by using the regulator and perform leak test in between.

    Big leaks can be easily identified at low pressure test. Contamination of the surrounding can be minimized, saving of the pressure test gas can be considered depending on the equipment size and above all-surprises can be elliminated if ever there is a pressure break.

    The best formula for safety = observation+common sense+precautionary action/measures.

    But, sad to say, we sometimes forget.


  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Doncaster, England
    Posts
    199
    Rep Power
    25

    Re: Painful safety lessons

    With regard to producing a gas with a substance in it which can be picked up by electronic detectors, I believe that one of the manufacturers produce one with a trace of helium in it. (I would guess it is OFN with a trace of helium).

    So you can get electronic leak detectors which pick up helium, although they are quite expensive.
    Tony

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    england
    Age
    61
    Posts
    17
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Painful safety lessons

    does anyone remember the pipework guys who leak tested a multisplit system in the north east of uk with water?

    seemed like a good idea at the time----LOL
    :eek:Why on earth would somebody do that?:(

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Age
    59
    Posts
    145
    Rep Power
    19

    Re: Painful safety lessons

    Using refrigerant to do a pressure test actally cost higher than using dry nitrogen gas, especially 404a. But to carry the bottle of dry nitrogen cylinder around makes the job tougher.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Nottingham UK
    Posts
    5,668
    Rep Power
    51

    Re: Painful safety lessons

    I'm quite amused when I see people saying that watching a vacuum gauge rise will indicate whether or not a system is leak tight.

    Bear in mind that a system under absolute vacuum will only be subjected to 1 bar atmospheric pressure (14.9psi) and is mainly used to indicate the presence of water vapour.

    If you apply nitrogen (OFN) at multiples of atmospheric pressure then you stand a much greater chance of seeing if your system is leak tight and capable of withstanding working pressures.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,302
    Rep Power
    25

    Re: Painful safety lessons

    Quote Originally Posted by fridge51
    does anyone remember the pipework guys who leak tested a multisplit system in the north east of uk with water?
    This is not too surprising. I heard of a large centrifugal chiller that was hydrotested. Not the water piping mind you, the chiller package...

    The compressor and refrigerant piping were completely filled with water and then pressurized to find the leaks.

    Someone always has to get creative and have a "better" way of doing things. Similar to the crimped tubing used as an expansion device in another post for the propane refrigerator.

    Who knew refrigeration could be so difficult?

Similar Threads

  1. Health and Safety Guidance
    By Abe in forum Legal-Business-Marketing
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-07-2009, 05:59 AM
  2. Health and safety installation
    By klimek in forum Chit Chat & Service Stories
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 16-10-2006, 06:29 PM
  3. safety valves
    By gspatch in forum Technical Discussions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-11-2003, 12:36 AM
  4. Oil Pressure safety scenario
    By herefishy in forum Trouble Shooting
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 17-05-2003, 12:42 AM
  5. lessons learned
    By aaron crimmins in forum Chit Chat & Service Stories
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-12-2001, 07:02 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •