Flow Solutions Division

BW Seals
Durametallic Seals
Pacific Wietz Seals
Pac-Seal

VOL. 14, NO. 1

OVERVIEW OF SECOND EDITION 2

SEAL CATEGORIES 4

QUALIFICATION TESTS 5

PIPING PLANS 6

CONFIGURATIONS 7
 overview
An overview of changes
W
hen API-682, First Edition,
debuted in October, 1994, it
represented the most complete
centrifugal pump seal standard
ever published. It was born out of the experi-
ence of rotating equipment and maintenance
engineers in the refinery industry. Their goal
was to capture their collective knowledge
about what really worked.
Instead, what they accomplished went
beyond that modest goal. The standard
became a systematic approach to seal design
and selection. It also was a textbook on seals,
applications and piping systems.
In the years since its release, the seal industry
continued to evolve. Different seal types have
demonstrated successful field performance. New
piping plans and support systems have been
developed to support these seals. In addition,
end users requested the standard be expanded
to include seals for ANSI/ASME pumps and
other pumps used in the chemical industry. API-
682 also gained international acceptance as the
standard for seals in refinery services, although
the extensive references to U.S. standards (such
as ASME and ANSI) have made implementation
difficult in some countries.
Progress continues
When the API-682 Second Edition Task Force
was formed in 1998, it sought to address these
challenges. The Task Force consisted of mem-
bers from the refinery industry, the chemical
industry and manufacturers of seals and pumps.
During its development, the Second Edition
evolved into a true international standard
2 www.flowserve.com
addressing sealing challenges in the petroleum,
natural gas and chemical industries. While
there have been numerous changes, the stan-
dard’s overarching goal remains constant: it
seeks to provide the user with a means of select-
ing and specifying a mechanical seal with a high
probability of achieving 25,000 hours of contin-
uous service, while complying with emissions
regulations.
API-682, Second Edition, was released as an
API document in July, 2002. To prepare for its
release as ISO 21049 at the end of 2003, the
standard has been completely reformatted as
an ISO standard. The layout and numbering
of clauses, tables and figures has changed. The
First Edition attempted to use SI units, where
possible. The Second Edition has expanded
this concept and uses SI units as the primary
units with U.S. customary units as secondary
units. Where applicable, ISO standards are the
primary references with U.S. standards (such
as ASME, ANSI, etc.) as secondary references.
There are a number of other significant
changes in the Second Edition. These include
a change in the pump references, an expan-
sion of the standard’s scope and the introduc-
tion of seal categories. New seal types also have
been added, along with new piping plans and
testing requirements to support them.
The First Edition defaulted to the use of API-
610 pumps. Both API-682 and API-610 defined
standard seal chambers and shaft diameters.
The Second Edition includes additional pump
types and seal chambers (specifically ASME
B73 and ISO 3069 Frame C). To avoid unnec-
essary duplication, most references pertaining
Face to Face

to pump construction details have been
eliminated. The only remaining pump
specifications pertain to inter faces
between the seal and the seal chamber.
The First Edition recognized that no
standard could cover every possible appli-
cation, equipment type and operating
condition. It sought to provide coverage
for the most common services, sizes and
conditions. The Second Edition
expanded the scope to apply to a greater
number of applications. Figure 1 shows a
summary of the changes in scope.
Categories
Seal categories have been introduced to
address the need for different seal
applications. Seal categories are sub-
specifications within the standard that
specify the pump type, operating win-
dow, design features, seal face materials,
documentation and testing require-
ments. This allows the user to select a
category addressing the requirements
for an application without incurring
unnecessary complexity or cost.
The most common type of mechani-
cal seal is a liquid contacting seal. In
recent years, two additional types have
become popular. The containment seal
is a back-up seal designed to run under
First Edition
Size Seal sizes from 1.50” to 4.50”
(30 mm to 120 mm)
Temperature -40˚ F to 500˚ F (-40˚ C to 280˚ C)
Pressure (absolute) 0 to 515 PSIA (0 to 34.5 bar)
Fluids Water, sour water, caustic,
amines, some acids, most HCs
Pumps API-610, ISO 13709
Figure 1. Comparison of scope of first and second edition
low-duty conditions and isolate primary
seal leakage to keep it from escaping to
the atmosphere. It also captures leak-
age if the primary seal fails. Another
popular design is the dual gas seal that
uses a barrier gas to prevent positively
any process fluid leakage to the atmos-
phere. The Second Edition includes
both designs.
Testing requirements also have been
introduced to document the perform-
ance of containment seals and dual gas
Face to Face www.flowserve.com
overview
seals. Containment seals are subjected
to steady-state operation and simulated
failure of the primary seal. Dual gas
seals are subjected to steady-state opera-
tion and a simulated failure of the bar-
rier gas supply. Liquid seals still will be
tested as outlined in the First Edition.
The Second Edition lists acceptance cri-
teria for every test based on leakage and
seal wear.
Support systems
Piping plans are intended to improve the
seal’s performance and reliability and the
Second Edition introduced several new
piping plans. The plan for dual pressur-
ized liquid seals now includes options for
bladder accumulators and piston trans-
mitters. The piping plans for dual gas
seals and containment seals include the
collection of leakage from seal cavities.
The addition of new seal types and an
expanded operating window necessi-
tated developing new seal selection pro-
cedures that account for seal type,
piping plan and seal category. The stan-
dard’s annexes also include expanded
tutorials on the selection procedure,
piping plans and seal materials.
The Second Edition of API-682 repre-
sents a major revision to the most popu-
Second Edition
Shaft diameters from 0.75” to 4.30”
(20 mm to 110 mm)
-40˚F to 750˚F (-40˚ C to 400˚ C)
0 to 615 PSIA (0 to 42 bar)
Water, sour water, caustic,
amines, some acids, most HCs
ANSI/ASME B73.1 and B73.2,
ISO 3069 Frame C, API-610, ISO 13709
lar standard for mechanical seals. These
revisions update the standard with the
latest advancements in seal technology.
It also positions the standard for use in
new industries and applications. To
understand the scope of these revisions
fully, users are urged to review the entire
document and take advantage of its
many tutorials and guides. With the new
features, the Second Edition promises to
continue its place as THE mechanical
seal standard. ●
3
 categories

Providing the right seal for the service

A
PI-682, First Edition, defined seal features only three: Categories 1, 2 and 3. There is a ten-
that could meet the most demanding dency to equate the category number with the
services. This included distributed flush severity or criticality of the service, but the Task
arrangements and floating bushings. While these Force made a conscious effort to avoid implying
features are required for many applications, many this connection. Rather, seal categories define
more don’t require anything that sophisticated. common sets of seal requirements.
To avoid additional costs and work within space Category 1 seals, for example, apply to chemi-
limitations, many First Edition users would specify cal duty pumps, such as ASME B73 and ISO 3069
seals that were, in effect, pseudo-682 seals with Frame C, pumps that are generally smaller and
only some of the design features. With the Second operate at lower pressures and temperatures
Edition’s inclusion of chemical pumps, this situa- than refinery pumps. They also are exposed to
tion would certainly continue and grow. more aggressive chemicals than many refinery
The First Edition also had significant docu- pumps. Single seals of Category 1 default to a sin-
mentation and testing requirements for every gle-point seal flush and a fixed carbon bushing.
purchase order. That represented an additional A distributed seal flush and floating bushing are
options. The default seal faces are
Feature Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 self-sintered silicon carbide
against carbon. The documenta-
Seal chamber size Iso 3069 Type C. ISO 13709/API 610 ISO 13709/API 610 tion and qualification require-
Temperature range -40˚ C to 260˚ C -40˚ C to 400˚ C -40˚ C to 400˚ C ments are less stringent than
-40˚ F to 500˚ F -40˚ F to 750˚ F -40˚ F to 750˚ F those shown in the First Edition.
Category 2 seals are intended
Pressure range 22 bar 42 bar 42 bar for use in API-610 pumps in refin-
absolute 315 PSIA 615 PSIA 615 PSIA er y ser vice. By default, a single
Face materials Carbon vs self- Carbon vs reaction Carbon vs reaction Category 2 seal features a single-
sintered SiC bonded SiC bonded SiC point seal flush and a fixed, non-
sparking metallic bushing. A
Distributed flush When required When required Required distributed seal flush and floating
requirements or specified or specified
bushing are options. The default
Grand plate metal Required Required inside Required Inside seal faces are reaction-bonded sili-
to metal contact and outside bolt and outside bolt con carbide against carbon. Like
circle diameter circle diameter the Category 1 seal, the documen-
Throttle bushing Fixed carbon, Fixed non-sparking Floating carbon
tation and qualification require-
requirements floating carbon metal, floating ments are less stringent than in the
optional carbon optional First Edition.
A Categor y 3 seal represents
Documentation Minimal Minimal Rigorous the most demanding require-
requirements ments in this standard. These
seals are designed for API-610
Table 1. Comparison of seal categories
pumps in refiner y ser vice. A
burden to seal manufacturers, a burden that ulti- Category 3 seal requires a distributed seal flush
mately found its way to the seal’s market price. In and a floating carbon throttle bushing. The
addition, the 682 Task Force wanted to distin- default seal faces are reaction-bonded silicon car-
guish clearly between seals intended for chemi- bide against carbon.
cal pumps and those used for the heavier duty The documentation requirements are the
refiner y pumps. The new concept of Seal standard’s most stringent. During qualification
Categories addresses these concerns. testing, Category 3 seals must have been tested
A seal category is a sub-specification within as an assembly in the configuration the seal
API-682, Second Edition that defines the seal’s manufacturer is offering for sale. This category
operating window, design features, materials of most closely represents the requirements of API-
construction, documentation and testing 682, First Edition. Table 1 summarizes the major
requirements. In general, the standard identifies differences among the three categories. ●

4 www.flowserve.com Face to Face


Performance proves the design
A
challenge facing the API-682 First
Edition Task Force was producing a
standard that specifies a seal that
will per for m reliably for a minimum of
three years. While it is easy to produce a doc-
ument that specifies this level of reliability,
it’s far more difficult to prove objectively
that a piece of equipment satisfies the
requirement. Qualification testing helps
provide assurance that seals will meet these
objectives.
Qualification tests
For liquid seals, the First Edition intro-
duced a series of tests designed to repro-
duce common refiner y operating
conditions. Fluids (such as water, caustic,
propane, and oils) and test conditions were
selected to simulate common refinery serv-
ices. In addition to steady-state testing, a
number of starts and stops as well as pres-
sure and temperature cycles were included.
These help mimic upsets and variations
common in normal applications. At critical
points during the testing, performance cri-
teria, such as temperatures and leakage
rates, were recorded on an API-682
datasheet. These are available to customers
upon request.
Qualification testing is designed to evalu-
ate a specific seal design. Each design and
face material offered for a service must be
evaluated in the appropriate test fluid.
Because the standard covers a range of seal
sizes, both small and large seals must be
tested. Once the test regimen qualifies a seal
model, it can be offered without additional
performance testing.
The API-682 Second Edition continues in
this tradition and includes testing require-
ments for containment seals and dual gas
seals. Like the First Edition, these tests
include both steady-state testing as well as
simulating operating condition upsets. The
standard also has a new datasheet to record
seal performance.
Containment seals
A containment seal runs under low-duty
conditions for the majority of its life. In
many cases, the containment seal cavity is
piped to a flare or vapor recover y system
Face to Face www.flowserve.com
testing
operating at less than 10 psi. In this mode,
the seal’s primary purpose is to prevent the
low-pressure vapor in the containment seal
cavity from escaping to the atmosphere. In
the event of a primary seal failure, the con-
tainment seal may be exposed to process
conditions and is expected to operate and
allow for orderly equipment shutdown with-
out a major release of process fluids to the
atmosphere.
Containment seal testing requirements
include operation on 10-psi propane vapors
for a minimum of 100 hours. The seal is
then stopped, pressurized to 25 psi and
blocked in. The pressure decay is recorded
over five minutes. The containment seal cav-
ity is then filled with diesel at 40 psi for an
additional 100 hours to simulate failure of
the primary seal. After 100 hours, the seal is
stopped and exposed to 250 psi diesel for an
additional four hours. Leakage, pressures
and other operational data are collected at
key times during testing.
Dual gas seals
These seals operate on a pressurized barrier
gas to prevent positively any process fluid
leakage to the atmosphere. The barrier is
normally a filtered, regulated inert gas
(most commonly nitrogen) monitored by a
barrier gas control panel.
Dual gas seals are tested for a minimum
of 100 hours under steady-state conditions.
The seal is then stopped and the barrier
gas pressure is reduced to zero. This simu-
lation of barrier gas pressure loss continues
for a minimum of one hour. The barrier
gas pressure is then restored and the seal
restarted. Under dynamic conditions, the
bar rier gas supply is shut of f for one
minute to simulate a disruption in the gas
supply. The seal is repressurized and
allowed to reach equilibrium. The seal is
stopped, blocked in and monitored for an
additional 10 minutes.
Qualification tests have proven to be an
effective way to demonstrate the ability of a
mechanical seal to perform in real world
conditions. With the addition of these new
tests, end users can be assured that seals con-
forming to API-682 have a high probability
of meeting their reliability objectives. ●
5
 Plans
New versions support expanded seal offerings
A
piping plan describes a system that
improves mechanical seal reliability
and per formance by modifying the
seal’s environment. Over the years, a number
of standard plans have been developed which
are used throughout the seal industr y. API
682, First Edition described many of them and
the Second Edition expands on this to include
plans for containment seals and dual gas seals.
Popular variations of dual pressurized liquid
seal plans also have been added.
Plan 14
This is a combination of Plan 11 and Plan 13.
It has been used most commonly on vertical
pumps. Previously, Plan 14 was included in
API-610, but has been moved to API-682.
Plan 53
This describes the system required to operate a
dual pressurized (Arrangement 3) liquid seal.
In the First Edition, Plan 53 was defined as a
reservoir pressurized by a blanket of inert gas.
While this is a popular design interpretation,
other variations exist, especially in Europe.
The Second Edition defines two popular varia-
tions to allow users to specify these directly. If
the user specifies only a Plan 53, the variations
are considered technically equivalent.
Plan 53A
Plan 53 from the First Edition is now called
Plan 53A. Barrier fluid circulating through a
reservoir provides cooling and make-up fluid
to the seal. A blanket of inert gas pressurizes
the system. While this plan is easy to set up
and operate, the exposure of pressurization
gas to the barrier fluid can cause operational
problems in high pressure systems.
Plan 53B
Plan 53B provides for barrier fluid pressuriza-
tion by means of a bladder accumulator. This
approach eliminates direct contact between
the pressurization gas and barrier fluid, which
eliminates gas absorption. During a loss of bar-
rier fluid, the accumulator provides make-up
fluid with a resulting decrease in system pres-
sure. An external cooler in the circulation
loop removes heat.
6 www.flowserve.com
Plan 53C
Plan 53 uses a piston accumulator (also called a
piston pot or piston transmitter) to provide
pressurization and makeup fluid to a barrier
fluid circulation loop. It takes a reference pres-
sure from the pump and produces a higher
pressure in the barrier fluid. Barrier fluid tem-
perature is controlled with an internal or exter-
nal seal cooler. Plan 53C provides pressurization
without an outside pressure source and allows
barrier fluid to track seal chamber pressures. A
disadvantage is that it exposes the accumulator
to process conditions.
Plan 71
This plan features plugged containment seal
cavity connection ports. It may be used when
the containment seal cavity is intended to be
dead-ended or if the user wants to upgrade to
a different plan in the future.
Plan 72
Plan 72 defines the supply of low-pressure
buffer gas to an Arrangement 2 containment
seal cavity. The buffer gas dilutes any leakage
escaping the primary seal and sweeps it away to
a flare or process recovery system. This plan is
used in conjunction with Plan 75 or Plan 76.
Plan 74
Plan 74 defines the system for supplying high-
pressure barrier gas to an Arrangement 3 dual
gas seal. The barrier gas provides the operat-
ing environment for the seal and prevents
process fluid from reaching the atmosphere.
Plan 75
Plan 75 defines a system for handling liquid
or mixed phase leakage from an
Arrangement 2 containment seal cavity. Any
leakage that doesn’t vaporize completely is
piped to a collection reservoir below the seal.
Plan 76
Plan 76 is for handling vapor phase leakage from
an Arrangement 2 containment seal cavity.
Process fluids that completely vaporize in the con-
tainment seal cavity are piped directly to a flare or
vapor recovery system. Failure of the primary seal
can be detected by an increase in pressure. ●
Face to Face
 configurations

More selections for more applications

T
he First Edition covered only the most For example, Arran-
common mechanical seal: the con- gement 1 defines a sin- Arrangement 2
tacting liquid seal. The term “CW” gle seal. The Second Two seals per cartridge assembly with a
designates this seal in the Second Edition. Edition allows options containment seal chamber maintained at a
During the last 10 years, industr y has for fixed (1CW-FX) pressure less than the seal chamber pressure
embraced other seal types, including contain- and floating (1CW-FL)
ment seals, non-contacting primary seals and bushings for this Liquid buffer fluid Gas buffer fluid
dual gas seals. Because these now have arrangement.
proven performance records, they’ve been Arrangement 2 de- Dual contacting Contacting wet
wet seals inner seal with a
included in the Second Edition. fines dual seals in a containment seal
Containment seals are defined as the outer face-to-back orienta- Configuration
Configuration
seal in an Arrangement 2 configuration run- tion with the buffer 2CW-CW
ning on buffer gas or vaporized process flu- fluid maintained at a 2CW-CS
ids. These seals r un under low-pressure pressure less than seal chamber pressure
conditions (less than 10 psi) for a minimum (see Figure 1). This arrangement can Non-contacting
inner seal with a
of 25,000 hrs. If the inner seal fails, the con- include a liquid buffer fluid (2CW-CW) as containment seal
tainment seal must operate under full seal defined in the First Edition. In addition,
Configuration
chamber conditions for a minimum of eight the dual seal now may have a containment
hours. Containment seals can have either seal for the outer seal with the contain- 2NC-CS
contacting or non-contacting seal faces. In ment seal cavity filled with vaporized
Figure 1.
the Second Edition, the term “CS” designates process fluid or from an external buffer Configurations for
a containment seal. gas supply. The containment seal may be Arrangement 2
Non-contacting seals produce an inten- used with a conventional liquid inner seal mechanical seals.
tional hydrodynamic lift that separates the (2CW-CS) or with a
seal faces. The non-contacting approach is non-contacting inner
used primarily in dual gas seals and operates seal (2NC-CS). Arrangement 3
on a barrier gas. It also can be used as a pri- Arrangement 3 seals Two seals per cartridge assembly that
utilize an externally supplied barrier fluid
mary seal operating on process fluids. In the are dual seals with the
Second Edition, the term “NC” designates a barrier fluid maintained
non-contacting seal. at a pressure greater Liquid barrier fluid Gas barrier fluid
The First Edition defined seal arrangements than the seal chamber
on the basis of the number and orientation of pressure (see Figure 2). Contacting wet Non-contacting
seals, face-to-back seals, back-to-back
the seals in the assembly as well as the pressure The First Edition off- configuration configuration
in the buffer/barrier fluid. This scheme ered only one option: a
Configuration Configuration
offered only a limited number of options. dual seal running on a
Arrangement 1 meant a single seal. liquid barrier fluid in a 3CW-FB 3NC-BB
Arrangement 2 meant dual seal with a non- face-to-back configura-
pressurized buffer fluid. Arrangement 3 tion (3CW-FB). The Contacting wet Non-contacting
seals, back-to-back seals, face-to-face
meant a dual seal with a pressurized barrier Second Edition includes configuration configuration
fluid. Arrangements 2 and 3 oriented the seals back-to-back (3CW-BB)
Configuration Configuration
in a series (or face-to-back) configuration. and face-to-face (3CW-
To accommodate new seal and pump FF) configurations. 3CW-BB 3NC-FF
types, the Second Edition allows a greater In addition, there are
variety of options. While there are still three options for non-contact- Contacting wet Non-contacting
seals, face-to-face seals, face-to-back
arrangements, options allow for different ing seals operating on a configuration configuration
operating modes and orientations of dual barrier gas in a back-to-
Configuration Configuration
seals. Each option is assigned a configuration back (3NC-BB), face-to-
code that defines the arrangement, seal face (3NC-FF), and 3CW-FF 3NC-FB
function and options for secondary seals or face-to-back (3NC-FB) Figure 2. Configurations for Arrange-
seal orientations. configuration. ● ment 3 mechanical seals.
Copies of API 682 may be ordered from API at www.api.org
Face to Face www.flowserve.com 7
 Embrace proactive maintenance,
utilize manpower more effectively,
reduce maintenance costs,
and improve equipment
reliability and predictability.

Condition Data
Point Monitoring Vibration Collection
and Analysis

TM

The CDPM Program

uses proactive and predictive Lube Oil Sampling
maintenance techniques to and Analysis

detect the most common

rotating equipment and
mechanical seal problems.

Critical Temperature
All data collected can be analyzed Trending and Analysis
and trended using the best technology
available. Changes in the trends indicate
possible failure or a situation that, if not
corrected, could lead to failure. Trigger Point
Monitoring

For more information on CDPMTM

contact your Flowserve representative
Technology
www.flowserve.com/seals/cdpm
TM

Phone 269 281 2650

© Flowserve Corporation