Typically a hydrostatic test is done at 1.

5 times the design pressure and it is really better

because it is done at a higher pressure that a pneumatic test. Also leaks tend to be easier to
see.

With a pneumatic test, because of the energy stored in the air or nitrogen, the test is only
done at 1.1 times the design pressure. Not as good a test in terms of stressing the system.
Also you need to use a leak detector like soapy water to find most small leaks. If you don't
soap the whole system and look very carefully, you can miss some leaks.

The various codes tell you what is the minimum to do but doesn't address the practical
questions of how you get a good test that assures that the equipment or system is really leak
tight and has no faulty material in it.

Air test uses compressed air to check for leaks, usually with some kind of fluid such as soapy water
on the joints (if it bubbles then there's a leak). Hydrostatic uses water pressurised in the system, if
there's a leak then water will pee out of the leak source. Hydrostatic is usually preferred as it's safer
(pressurised water is not explosive, unlike compressed air) and it's easier to see leaks.

Testing with air may prove more difficult since air is a smaller molecule
than water. 16 bar is not too high of a pressure to test with but will definitely have
more potential for damage if something ruptures (air is a lot more compressible than
water). Other than that, pressure is pressure.

If the duration of your hydro test isn't that long, say like 15 minutes or so, then the
water probably won't have time to freeze anyway. Of course that will depend on the
ambient temperature and wall thickness and material of the pipe. Just something to
consider.
ASME B31.3, Para. 345.1 states:
Prior to initial operation, and after completion of the applicable examinations required by
para. 341, each piping system shall be tested to ensure tightness. The test shall be a
hydrostatic leak test in accordance with para. 345.4 except as provided herein.
…
(b) Where the owner considers a hydrostatic leak test impractical, either a pneumatic
test in accordance with para. 345.5 or a combined hydrostatic-pneumatic test in
accordance with para. 345.6 may be substituted, recognizing the hazard of energy
stored in compressed gas.

So per the code, a leak test using air may be performed if the system owner
considers the hydrostatic test to be impractical.

It’s important to understand that the pressure at which the test is performed is a
function of the design pressure. Design pressure is a function of the allowable
stress limits on the piping which is also a function of operating temperature.
- For a hydrostatic test, para. 345.4.2 requires a pressure of not less than 1.5
times the design pressure.
- For a pneumatic test, para. 345.5.4 requires a pressure of not less than 110%
of design pressure.

Next step is for an engineer (preferably the piping system designer or stress
analyst) to create pressure test procedures. These pressure test procedures look
at the possibility of low temperature brittle failure, which may be a concern at
the temperatures you’re referring to. The pressure test procedures are actually a
set of procedures (typically) which include such things as method of pressurizing
system, valve positions, removal of relief devices, isolation of portions of the
piping system, etc…

Regarding the low temperature, para. 345.4.1 states: “The fluid shall be water
unless there is a possibility of damage due to freezing or to adverse effects of
water on the piping or the process (see para. F345.4.1). In that case, another
suitable non-toxic liquid may be used.” So glycol/water is allowed.

If the test is to be done pneumatically, test pressure should be raised to 25 psi

at which time a preliminary check shall be made, including examination of all
joints. The use of a low temperature bubble fluid is highly advisable.

So to conclude:
1. If the specification you’ve been given is to perform a hydro test at 16 bar,
then that should be 1.5 times the design pressure of 10.67 bar. Per B31.3, a
pneumatic test should therefore be performed not at 16 bar, but at 1.1 times the
design pressure or 11.7 bar. Run the pneumatic pressure only as high as 11.7
bar.
2. The possibility of brittle failure should be reviewed by the appropriate
engineer. In the case of temperature below 0 C, the material used should be
examined to verify it is not below the minimum useable temperature for that
steel.
3. A cognizant engineer needs to produce a set of pressure test procedures.
Those procedures need to indicate what sections of pipe are being tested, what
positions valves should be placed in, what relief devices need to be removed (or
installed), etc…
4. The pneumatic test needs to start at 25 psig and a preliminary examination
for leaks performed prior to increasing pressure.
5. Most important, the cognizant engineer must also examine the piping design
specification for all requirements pertaining to leak or pressure testing.

*Although B31.3 describes this as a “leak test”, when performed hydrostatically

at 1.5 times design, it is in affect, a structural test.

since the stored energy of compressed gas is so much higher.

If you do this via pneumatic test and you hear 'hissing', that tells you only that the system
as a whole has a leak somewhere. You must then go look for the leak.

If you do this via hydrotest, then your leak will be readily visible because it's got a wet spot.

If you want to see the consequences of pneumatic vs. hydrostatic related failures first hand, pop a
balloon with a pin and pop a water ballon with a pin. The difference will be readily apparent.

Hydrotests are safer than pneumatic tests because even the sudden generation of a crack in a vessel
or pipe will merely generate a leak or spillage rather than schrapnel and a devastating shock
wave. Even the small deformations necessary to develop the crack will reduce the pressure in the
vessel enormously if it is entirely filled with water.

binary mindset (i.e., "hydro good", "gas bad")

CWicker;
The initial or commissioning hydrotest at 1.5X MAWP is conducted below the yield strength of the
component material. I have seen a number of technical articles that indicate the benefit of an initial
1.5X MAWP hydrostatic test on components that contain inherent stress risers.

Apparently, the component material at areas of stress concentration could locally exceed the yield
strength resulting in a strengthening affect (locally) and crack blunting if minor fabrication flaws are
present. This of course provides some benefit for future service.

After the initial hydrotest, periodic hydrotesting at or below 1.5X MAWP, but above MAWP, serves no
real purpose other than to check for gross material defects. I for one, do not advocate pressure tests
above normal operating pressure on in-service components. This is especially true for boilers or high
temperature pressure vessels that could be adversely affected by introducing water on warm or hot
boiler components.

We have always tried limited the test pressure to a maximum of 1.1 x OP for hydrotesting
of inservice boilers.