Equation 6.3.1.1 in CGA S1.3 is based on modeling to API methods described in: Heitner, T. Trautmauis, and M. Morrissey, “Relieving Requirements for Gas Filled Vessels Exposed to Fire,” 1983 Proceedings-Refining Department, Volume 62, American Petroleum Institute, Washington, D.C., pp. 112-122.

This method considers the transient nature of the vessel warming in combination with the…

API 520, Sizing, Selection, and Installation of Pressure-relieving Devices Part I - Sizing and Selection, was written for use in the process industries in gas and liquid service.

CGA S1.3, Pressure Relief Device Standards-Part 3-Stationary Storage Containers for Compressed Gases was written for fixed equipment in gas service.

Which standard to use depends on the choice by the owner…

Pressure relief systems may use reclosing devices like relief valves, non-reclosing devices like rupture discs, or a combination of both in parallel. Some systems may also be equipped with emergency blowdown systems that are operated by control systems. Selection of the proper devices is dependent on the system design and relative hazards. Variables that affect the selection include the type…

The answer could be no devices at all, just a TPRD, just a PRD, or both. It depends on the potential overpressure scenarios identified during a hazard assessment. TPRDs typically are not used on ASME pressure vessels since they are not ASME compliant devices and since  system siting provides protection from engulfing fires. However, TPRDs are frequently used in portable applications for…

It depends on the service. Variables include disk design, corrosion resistance, number of cycles, and how to close the operating pressure is to the rupture disc set pressure. One approach is to ask the manufacturer for their recommendation. Typical practice for U.S. Department of Transportation vessels and discs is to replace them at the tube requalification (i.e., every 5 to 10 years in the U…

Based on the question, it’s not clear if the reference to stress corrosion cracking (SCC) has been proven or is only suspected. It can be difficult to identify the nature of the cracks (SCC vs H2 embrittlement without analysis and microscopy). In addition, the question does not mention that the cylinders contain hydrogen gas, but it’s assumed since it was submitted to the Panel. 

…

An annual inspection of safety devices is recommended. Testing requirements will be based on the type of device and a quantified risk analysis. Typical replacement or function testing of relief valves is between 5 and 10 years depending on the application within the industrial gas industry. Rupture discs are not tested but are frequently replaced on an interval based on manufacturer…

Several programs can predict this such as HyRAM or PHAST. The inputs are critical to a safe
answer.

This is not a simple answer due to the many types of flame lengths and flame orientations due to pressure and direction. NFPA 2 recommends that vent systems should be designed so that if the safety relief valve is relieving at capacity the radiative heat felt by an individual at grade…

Water icing at the exit of a stack is certainly an issue in cold climates. Significant effort has been put into vent stack outlet design to minimize the probability. Documents such as CGA G5.5 have topworks that are recommended. Stacks that face upward have a higher probability of having water, ice, or snow enter the stack and freeze. 

Relief device sizing for liquid hydrogen tanks follow recognized standards such as CGA S1.3. The sizing criteria include a worst-case scenario of an engulfing fire with loss of vacuum integrity.

LH2 tanks are unlikely to BLEVE due to the vacuum insulation outer jacket (usually carbon or stainless steel) preventing direct impingement of fire onto the main pressure vessel, as well as the…