<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<record
    xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
    xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim http://www.loc.gov/standards/marcxml/schema/MARC21slim.xsd"
    xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">

  <leader>01306nab a2200181   4500</leader>
  <controlfield tag="005">20260520003916.0</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="008">260224s2009    xxu                      </controlfield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1="0" ind2="0">
    <subfield code="a">Analysis of pressure relief valve proof test data</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="260" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a"></subfield>
    <subfield code="b"></subfield>
    <subfield code="c">mar. 2009</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="270" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">2009-03-31 ; 2009-03-31</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">6 p. ; 24-29</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">This article reports on our statistical analysis of pressure relief valve (PRV) proof test data for the failure mode, fail-to-open, i.e., the PRV remains closed when actual pressure reaches or exceeds 150% of set pressure. Three data sets, from two Fortune 500 operating companies, which met the intent of the quality assurance of proof test data as documented by the Center for Chemical Process Safety Process Equipment Reliability Database (CCPS PERD)[Note 1] initiative, were analyzed. Although the original intent of our analysis focused solely on estimating the failure rate during the useful life[Note 2] of the equipment, it became apparent that the probability of failure on initial installation or reinstallation after proof test, and the need to address what constituted end of useful life were very significant.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="581" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">1</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="t">Process safety progress</subfield>
    <subfield code="g">28</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="942" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="c">ARTICULO</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Bukowski, Julia V.</subfield>
    <subfield code="9">40682</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="c">169392</subfield>
    <subfield code="d">169392</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="0">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="1">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="4">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="7">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="9">237211</subfield>
    <subfield code="a">BAAB</subfield>
    <subfield code="b">BAAB</subfield>
    <subfield code="d">2026-03-05</subfield>
    <subfield code="j">200044193</subfield>
    <subfield code="l">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="p">200044193</subfield>
    <subfield code="r">2026-03-05 15:11:35</subfield>
    <subfield code="w">2026-03-05</subfield>
    <subfield code="y">ARTICULO</subfield>
  </datafield>
</record>
