END USER ARTICLE
triggers, ideally through a joint working group between API Subcommittee 6 and ISO / TC 153. A harmonised decision tree covering pressure class, size extrapolation, and what constitutes a“ significant” design change would remove a major source of interpretation risk for suppliers to both markets. Third, manufacturers with product ranges spanning both scopes( ball and butterfly valves) should consider the more rigorous protocol as their baseline, since qualification under ISO 23632’ s continuously monitored, all-gas regime is more likely to also satisfy the intent of API 6D Annex F than the reverse. Fourth, industry bodies and major operators should support a harmonised reporting template, extending ISO 23632’ s Annex A approach to the additional valve types within API 6D’ s scope, so qualification data becomes more directly comparable across projects and suppliers.
Conclusion
API 6D Annex F and ISO 23632:2021 were not designed to compete with one another; they were designed to serve overlapping but distinct segments of the valve industry. API 6D Annex F offers breadth— a validation framework usable across most valves— while ISO 23632 offers depth and formality for ball and butterfly valves specifically, with a more demanding test regime and a more rigorous documentation trail. For gate, plug, check, and axial valves, API 6D Annex F remains the relevant reference. For ball and butterfly valves, particularly where an operator requires cross-industry recognition, ISO 23632 is increasingly the
About the Author
Ir. TENGKU SYAHDILAN, S. T., Sr. Piping Valve Vessel( PVV) Engineer / Subject Matter Expert, PT Pertamina Hulu Mahakam Sr. Piping, Valve, & Vessel( PVV) Engineer / SME with over 25 years of experience in the Oil & Gas industry( Onshore, Offshore, FPSO), covering the full project lifecycle from conceptual study, FEED, detailed engineering, through construction and asset integrity management. Holds a key role as Referential Authority for Piping, Valve, & Pressure Vessel at Pertamina Hulu Mahakam, Member of
preferred choice, and its adoption in place of proprietary DVT specifications continues to grow among major operators. The two standards can, and arguably should, be read as complementary. What the industry still needs is closer alignment on scaling logic and re-qualification triggers, and clearer specification practice that states exactly which protocol, and which edition, a given procurement requirement is invoking.
the IOGP Piping & Valve Sub-Committee, and Member of the ASME B31.3 and ISO 13703 International Standard Committees. Possesses deep expertise in pipe stress analysis( static & dynamic), vibration assessment( AIV / FIV), fitness-for-service( FFS), material selection, and valve engineering and design. Experienced in leading 3D model reviews, managing vendor / contractor technical compliance, and providing advanced technical decisions and solutions for greenfield, brownfield, and operational activities.