Choosing a pressure transmitter is not just about matching the normal operating pressure; if you overlook short spikes, proof limits or burst ratings, you can damage the sensor, compromise safety and delay your project. We use pressure range, overpressure and burst pressure as separate checks because each one answers a different question about how a device will behave under real process conditions.
In this guide, we explain how these ratings relate without treating datasheet figures as interchangeable. You will see why a transmitter may measure accurately within its range, survive a defined overpressure event, yet still have an absolute failure limit that must never be approached in service. Our aim at Diversified Technologies is to help you read specifications with confidence, compare sensor technologies sensibly and choose protection methods that suit your process before an overpressure event becomes a repair, recalibration or replacement issue.
- Pressure range is the calibrated measuring span, while proof and burst ratings are separate survival and containment limits.
- Normal operation should stay within safe working pressure, and expected spikes must be compared with the manufacturer’s proof rating.
- Burst pressure is a destructive failure boundary where containment may fail, not spare operating capacity or acceptable headroom.
- After any excursion beyond the rated span, calibration should be reviewed before the transmitter is trusted again.
What is pressure range on a transmitter and how is it specified?
The pressure range on a transmitter is the calibrated interval it converts into an electrical signal, such as 0 to 10 bar gauge. The specification normally gives lower and upper values, reference type, units, output scaling and accuracy. Normal operation should stay within the safe working pressure, not the proof or burst limits.
Start by separating the measuring span from the survival ratings. A transmitter may read accurately across its stated span, tolerate a short overload above it, and still have a higher mechanical failure threshold. Those three numbers belong in different parts of a specification because they answer different engineering questions: what can it measure, what can it survive, and where does containment cease to be credible?
IEC 60770-1 evaluates industrial-process transmitter performance against defined input and output values, so the calibrated endpoints need to be stated precisely. Beyond this, at Diversified Technologies, we treat the selected range as a scaling decision first and a safety decision second: the safety check comes from comparing the process load, expected spikes and the manufacturer’s stated overload limit.
| Specification field | What you should state | Example wording |
|---|---|---|
| The calibrated endpoints define the usable measuring interval. | State the lower and upper values in the same engineering unit. | A datasheet may say “0 to 10 bar gauge equals 4 to 20 mA”. |
| The reference type explains what the reading is compared against. | Specify whether the device is gauge, absolute, sealed gauge or differential. | A vacuum service may require “0 to 1 bar absolute”, not “0 to 1 bar gauge”. |
| The output scaling tells the control system how to interpret the signal. | Match the analogue or digital output to the engineering span. | A common analogue format is “4 mA at zero and 20 mA at full scale”. |
| The accuracy basis affects the real error at different points. | Check whether accuracy is quoted as percentage of full scale or percentage of reading. | An accuracy of ±0.5% FS on a 10 bar unit permits ±0.05 bar error. |
| The survival limits sit outside the calibrated measuring interval. | Record proof, overload and burst values separately from the working span. | A sheet may list 10 bar nominal, 20 bar proof and 40 bar burst as separate ratings. |
The examples use round numbers on purpose, because manufacturers vary by sensor design, diaphragm material and wetted construction. A 0–10 bar gauge unit might be offered with a proof pressure of 2× full scale and a burst pressure of 4× full scale, giving 20 bar and 40 bar respectively. A 0–6,000 psi hydraulic transmitter might instead use 1.5× proof and 3× burst, giving 9,000 psi and 18,000 psi. Manufacturer documents, including BD Sensors datasheets, commonly list these as separate columns; never infer them from the measuring span alone.
One common follow-up is whether a wider span is always safer. It’s not. Choosing a 0–25 bar unit for a process that normally runs at 3 bar may improve headroom, but it can reduce resolution and make a ±0.5% FS error equal to ±0.125 bar. Another common issue is turndown: a smart device may be electronically scaled to a narrower interval than its sensing element, yet proof and burst still follow the physical sensor body, not the software scaling.
So start selection with the normal operating value, the maximum credible transient, and the consequence of failure. For a pump discharge line with water hammer risk, pressure spike protection may matter more than nominal accuracy. For a piezoresistive sensor or strain gauge transmitter on corrosive media, diaphragm material and ultimate tensile strength influence the true mechanical margin. The best specification names the calibrated span, reference type and survival limits explicitly, so procurement, installation and safety review are all working from the same facts.
Overpressure (proof pressure): what it means and typical test methods
An overload rating is the short-term pressure a transmitter can take without a permanent calibration shift; it isn’t the normal operating range. In selection work, we treat proof pressure as a survival-and-recovery value: a 0–10 bar unit may be rated to 20 bar proof, while a high-range 0–6,000 psi sensor may show 1.5× proof depending on diaphragm material, sealing method and construction.
Bottom line: proof testing is intended to verify that the sensing element remains leak-tight and returns within stated accuracy after a controlled overload, whereas burst testing is destructive and establishes the failure boundary. According to IEC 60770-1 performance-evaluation methods, overload and recovery should be checked against declared datasheet limits; ASME B40.100 makes a similar distinction between safe working pressure, proof and burst concepts for gauges. In practice, the question is simple: will the device survive a process spike without drift? If it won’t, add snubbing or upstream spike protection.
Send us your normal operating pressure, the worst credible transient and the media, and our engineers will check the span, proof and burst ratings against the duty before you order.
Burst pressure explained: failure limits and safety implications
Safe specification starts by separating a survivable overload from a destructive limit. A burst rating marks the point where a sensor or wetted component may rupture, leak or permanently lose containment.
- Identify the maximum working value from real operating data, not the catalogue span alone. A line that normally runs within range but can spike above it needs a different assessment from a stable pneumatic loop. Record media, temperature, pulsation frequency and isolation valve positions, since these details can change the way a failure develops.
- Separate proof from burst before comparing models. Proof pressure describes a non-destructive overload rating; the burst limit is a containment-failure threshold and must never be treated as spare operating capacity. According to IEC 61298-2, process measurement devices should be tested under stated reference and influence conditions, so instrumentation accuracy should be checked after abnormal loading.
- Use ratio examples cautiously, then confirm the exact part number. A common 0-10 bar industrial sensor may list proof at 2× full scale and burst at 4× full scale, giving 20 bar and 40 bar respectively; a 0-6,000 psi unit may instead list 1.5× proof and 3× burst, giving 9,000 psi and 18,000 psi. Use these only as selection illustrations, not replacements for current manufacturer data sheets such as those from BD Sensors.
- Check the system code boundary as well as the instrument limit. ASME B31.3 and B31.1 apply to piping design and test requirements, while ISO 19879 covers test methods for metallic tube connections used in fluid power systems, including proof and burst testing. If the transmitter is mounted into a manifold or adaptor, the weakest rated component sets the practical ceiling.
- Allow for transient overpressure, not just steady operating load. Water hammer in a fast-closing valve train can exceed the measured span for milliseconds, which is long enough to deform a diaphragm even when the recorder misses the peak. Reduce the event at source with slower valve actuation, or add protection such as snubbers, accumulators or isolation hardware where the process allows.
- Decide the replacement rule before an incident occurs. A sensor can return neatly to zero after overpressure and still have span shift, seal fatigue or reduced insulation resistance. Calibration after overpressure should include as-found readings at 0%, 50% and 100% of span, and any leakage, cracked threads or permanent offset beyond tolerance should trigger removal from service.
- Document the safety margin in the specification file. A pressure rating chart should show the working value, proof allowance, destructive limit and chosen margin; for example, a process with a 10 bar maximum and a credible 15 bar surge should not use a device whose proof rating is only 12 bar. At Diversified Technologies, we favour this written comparison because it keeps procurement, maintenance and safety review aligned around the same limit.
The step most often misread is treating burst as a reserve capacity. It isn’t a usable margin; it’s the point where containment may fail and personnel, plant and environmental safeguards become the primary concern.
Quick comparison: pressure range vs overpressure vs burst pressure
Most applications need three separate limits, not one headline rating. Use the rated span for accuracy, the proof limit for survivable excursions, and the rupture limit for personnel and plant safety. Worth noting: for specification review, our best choice is usually the smallest span that covers normal operation with adequate proof margin.
| Factor | Rated span | Proof limit | Rupture limit |
|---|---|---|---|
| The value tells you how to use the transmitter. | It defines the calibrated measuring interval, such as 0–10 bar or 0–6,000 psi. | It defines the non-destructive ceiling, often called overpressure or proof rating. | It defines the failure boundary assessed through a burst pressure test. |
| The example shows how ratings compare. | A 0–10 bar unit may suit a process that normally stays below 8 bar. | A 2× proof rating would tolerate a 20 bar transient without guaranteeing accuracy during that event. | A 4× rupture rating would place mechanical failure around 40 bar, subject to the datasheet. |
| The decision affects system design. | It protects instrumentation accuracy and resolution. | It covers water hammer, transient spikes and ISO-style proof testing. | It feeds into relief valve sizing, ASME design review and safety cases. |
The factor that most often decides the specification is the proof margin. Just as important, IEC 61298-2 ties stated performance to defined test conditions; after any excursion beyond the rated span, calibration should be reviewed before the instrument is trusted again.
How are working, proof, overpressure, and burst related?
From lowest to highest risk, working pressure, proof pressure, overpressure, and burst pressure line up as: working pressure/pressure range < proof pressure/overpressure < burst pressure. In practical terms, the working rating is for normal measurement and continuous operation. The proof or overload limit is short-term survivability. The burst rating is the point where containment can fail.
On a datasheet, read the normal measuring span first, the short-duration proof or over-range capacity second, and the structural rupture limit last. Proof is also described as over-range capacity, meaning the maximum applied load that doesn’t alter the device’s stated performance. Some datasheets add a caveat: after a severe event, minor recalibration may be allowed before the instrument is judged compliant again.
Take a water-treatment skid designer reviewing a pump discharge transmitter. In that case, the normal control band is 6–8 bar, so the span is suitable for measurement. The datasheet then lists 15 bar proof and 30 bar burst. With those ratings, a brief 12 bar pump start-up surge sits below the overload limit, so the instrument should survive and continue within specification. A credible water-hammer event of 18 bar changes the decision: it exceeds proof, even though it’s far below burst, so we’d treat that as a selection or protection problem rather than acceptable headroom.
The working span describes the normal measuring window: we compare it with the continuous process condition and the required accuracy band. A 6–8 bar operating band fits comfortably inside the selected transmitter span. The proof or over-range value describes short-term survivability: we compare it with start-up, shut-down, dead-heading and valve-change events. A 12 bar transient remains acceptable against a 15 bar proof value if the datasheet conditions are met. The burst value describes the structural failure boundary: we treat it as a safety limit, not as a usable operating margin. A 30 bar burst figure does not make an 18 bar transient acceptable for a 15 bar proof-rated device.
A digital log that averages at 8 bar can hide millisecond hammer pulses that stress the diaphragm material, seals and welded joints. In a piezoresistive sensor, the silicon sensing element may be protected by an isolation diaphragm, but that assembly still has mechanical limits governed by geometry, fill fluid, media compatibility and, ultimately, material strength. Put differently, standards such as IEC 60770 for transmitter performance testing and ASME B31.3 for process piping design reinforce the same engineering discipline: compare the worst credible condition with the correct rated limit.
Best practice is to size the instrument for the measuring task, then separately review overload protection. If the expected transient is above proof, choose a higher-rated model, add a snubber, fit a relief path, reduce valve slam, or redesign the impulse line. Don’t treat burst as a comfort factor. Burst is where failure begins, so the safest instrument is the one whose everyday readings, abnormal excursions and fast spikes all stay inside the right boundary.
How to choose the correct overpressure margin for your process (step-by-step)
Start with the real process duty, not the catalogue range, when you pick the margin. Our rule is simple: the selected transmitter must measure normally at the top of its span, recover after credible upset events, and fail safely before the system creates a personnel or containment hazard.
First, define the operating envelope. Record the normal range, the maximum working pressure (MWP), vacuum conditions, temperature, media compatibility, and cycle rate. A 0–10 bar water line that runs at 7 bar but surges to 14 bar needs a different device from one that never exceeds 8 bar. Next, identify the credible upset. Include pump start-up, valve slam, blocked outlets, thermal expansion and cleaning cycles. ASME B31.3 expects design conditions to reflect the most severe coincident conditions likely in service, so short spikes belong in the selection, not in the footnotes.
Then, choose a proof limit above the upset. Think of proof pressure as the highest short-duration load a transmitter can take and still return to its measuring span within specification. For a 0–10 bar sensor, a common datasheet pattern is 2× proof and 3× burst, giving 20 bar proof and 30 bar burst, although the manufacturer’s sheet always wins. After that, check the burst limit against system safety. Burst is a failure boundary, not a usable allowance. If an ISO pressure test or customer specification requires evidence, check whether the device has been verified by hydraulic, pneumatic or destructive burst testing and whether the method suits the stored energy in your medium.
After that, allow extra margin for dynamics. Fast hydraulics, water hammer and gas service often justify moving from 1.5× to 2× or more above the credible peak. If a 0–6,000 psi unit sees repeated 7,500 psi transients, sensor overpressure recovery and long-term drift matter as much as survival. Finally, document the decision. Put the chosen span, proof limit, burst value, media, temperature and protection method into one pressure rating chart. That stops a future replacement from being chosen just by thread size and electrical output.
The step most often missed is separating a safe working limit from burst. Worth noting: if the process can regularly reach the proof value, the transmitter is underspecified; the normal span or the protection design must change.
We can help you match recorded surge peaks to the right proof rating and specify snubbers, pulsation dampers or diaphragm seals where the tapping point makes spikes unavoidable.
How do pressure spikes and water hammer affect ratings?
Pressure spikes, surge pressure, and water hammer can briefly exceed a device’s normal measuring span even when steady readings look safe. A quick transient can push past the proof limit, damage the sensing element, or approach the rupture limit before an operator sees it on a slow gauge or control screen.
These events are usually created by sudden changes in flow: pump starts and stops, rapid valve closure, solenoid valves snapping shut, or a moving liquid column being forced to decelerate inside pipework. So the selection point is straightforward: use peak-pressure data, not only average operating pressure, when choosing the sensor range and its overpressure allowance.
- A pump start or stop can accelerate or halt flow faster than the instrument can display it: The spike may exceed the proof pressure even when the normal reading stays inside the calibrated span. Review logged peaks and choose a device with enough temporary overload capacity for the worst credible start-up case.
- A fast-closing manual valve or solenoid valve can create a sharp hydraulic shock: The transient may occur in milliseconds, so a slow display can hide the highest load. Use slower valve actuation, restrictors, or surge suppressors where the process allows them.
- A long liquid column in pipework can store momentum and release it as water hammer: The resulting load may challenge the seal, diaphragm, thread, or wetted body before the control system reacts. Specify the measuring span from measured peaks and verify the proof and burst limits in the datasheet.
In practice, there’s no universal water-hammer value worth designing around. According to the Joukowsky relation, a 1 m/s velocity change in water with a wave speed near 1,400 m/s can create roughly 14 bar of additional load, before pipe elasticity, valve timing, branch geometry, trapped gas and damping are considered. That’s a calculation example, not a substitute for application-specific surge measurement. For a real chemical, oil and gas, or water-treatment line, we’d base the selection on recorded peaks, dynamic modelling, or documented commissioning data rather than a generic spike allowance.
Standards reinforce that distinction. IEC 60770 and IEC 61298 describe performance testing for industrial transmitters; ISO pressure test practice and ASME pressure piping codes treat proof, leak and design conditions differently from destructive limits. A burst pressure test is therefore not a recovery check. After a severe transient, the unit may need recalibration even if it has not leaked, because sensor overpressure recovery can include zero shift, span change or hysteresis.
First, identify the highest credible steady operating value and the fastest flow-change events. Next, measure or calculate surge peaks at the instrument tapping, not only at the pump or valve. Then, compare those peaks with the datasheet’s proof limit and rupture limit, using the manufacturer’s pressure rating chart where supplied. Finally, add mitigation such as snubbers, restrictors, pulsation dampeners, surge suppressors, slower valve actuation, and adequate overpressure margin.
The safest specification is the one that treats the displayed value as only part of the loading picture.
Sensor technologies and how they behave under overpressure (strain gauge, piezoresistive, capacitive)
Sensor choice changes what happens after an over-range event: a bonded strain gauge transmitter may shift zero, a piezoresistive sensor can suffer diaphragm or bridge damage, and a capacitive design often tolerates small deflections well but can be vulnerable if its sensing gap collapses. Put simply, proof rating is a survival test, not a promise that instrumentation accuracy stays unchanged.
For context, a 0–10 bar unit may carry a proof rating around 2× span, while high-range 0–6,000 psi models may have a lower multiplier because stored energy rises sharply with volume and diaphragm area. Under IEC 60770-1 performance-test principles, transmitters are evaluated against stated operating and limiting conditions, so it’s worth looking beyond span and comparing diaphragm material, oil fill, mechanical stops and expected surge profile. But if your process has water hammer or fast valve closure, protection such as a snubber or correctly sized relief valve usually matters more than choosing one sensing technology in isolation.
Installation and protection methods to prevent overpressure damage
A sound installation protects the measuring element before it reaches its proof limit. Treat the rated span, proof value and burst value as separate design boundaries, then add mechanical safeguards so a fault doesn’t become a failed instrument.
- Fix the normal operating window first. Start with the maximum continuous load, not the average reading. Use the calibrated span as the measuring boundary, the proof value as a short survival limit, and the burst value as a hazardous failure boundary.
- Add margin for foreseeable excursions. Compare start-up, shut-down, pump dead-head and blocked-valve conditions against the device limits, then document the result in a one-page limits checklist or line rating chart. A common rule of thumb is to keep the highest expected working value below about two-thirds of the proof value, but the final margin should follow the process risk and the manufacturer’s datasheet.
- Size the relief path before choosing the instrument. Where stored energy is significant, sort out relief valve sizing, rupture disc capacity and bypass route capacity before selecting the sensor. According to ASME BPVC Section VIII, relief devices are selected to prevent equipment from exceeding allowable limits; ISO 4126 gives equivalent principles for safety devices protecting against excessive load.
- Place the transmitter where hydraulic shock is lowest. Avoid mounting directly beside fast-closing valves, reciprocating pumps or elbows where water hammer can concentrate energy. If the only available tapping is exposed to transient overpressure, fit a snubber, pulsation damper or capillary seal and accept that response time may slow from milliseconds to seconds.
- Protect the sensing face from heat, blockage and chemical attack. Use siphons on steam, diaphragm seals on viscous or corrosive media, and isolation valves that cannot trap liquid between two closed points. In chemical dosing, water treatment and oil and gas skids, trapped incompressible fluid can expand with temperature and impose loads far above the live process value.
- Verify the installation with a controlled proof test. Raise the load gradually, hold only for the period stated in the procedure, and never use the burst figure as a test target. IEC 60770-1 is often used to evaluate transmitter performance, while ISO-style proof testing should confirm integrity without permanently shifting zero or span.
- Inspect and recalibrate after any confirmed excursion. If the device has seen a surge above its proof value, remove it from service until the diaphragm, threads, electrical output and seal system have been checked. After overpressure, don’t skip calibration when instrumentation accuracy affects batching, custody transfer, safety shutdowns or environmental reporting.
The step most often missed is the second one: teams compare the instrument with steady operating conditions and forget the short events. Burst resistance is a last line of containment, not a design allowance.
Reading datasheets: where to find pressure range, overpressure and burst information
Start with the operating span, then read outward to the limits. For a water-treatment skid using a 0–10 bar transmitter, we’d mark the measurement span, the proof pressure and the burst limit before checking process spikes against them. In simple terms, proof pressure is the non-destructive limit; burst pressure is the failure boundary where containment can be lost.
- The measuring span states 0–10 bar gauge: The instrument is meant to measure accurately only across that stated span.
- The overpressure rating states 20 bar: The sensor should survive a short excursion to twice full scale, but calibration may need review afterwards.
- The burst value states 40 bar: Don’t choose the device for service anywhere near this safety boundary.
According to IEC 61298-2, pressure transmitters are tested for performance under defined reference conditions. If the datasheet cites ISO pressure test or ASME pressure terminology, treat those notes as test-context clues, not permission to exceed the stated rating chart.
What to do after an overpressure event: inspection, recalibration and replacement guidance
A practical recovery plan starts with one question: did the event stay below the proof limit, or did it enter the unknown zone between proof and burst? In this worked example, a water-treatment dosing skid normally runs at 7 bar. A fast valve closure produces an 18 bar surge, while the datasheet states a 20 bar proof rating and a 50 bar burst limit.
After a pressure overload, don’t put the transmitter back into duty until its zero, span and mechanical barrier have been checked against the datasheet limits.
Start by making the installation safe, rather than trying to judge the instrument straight away. The maintenance engineer should isolate the skid, vent trapped media, lock out the source of energy and record the highest indicated value, even if it came from a separate logger. If the only evidence is an alarm record, we’d treat that as provisional because fast transients can be missed by slow sampling. ASME B31.3 separates normal operating limits from test and design conditions for process pipework, which is the same discipline needed here: don’t confuse a survivable event with a verified measuring device.
- The first inspection is a close look at the process connection, housing, cable entry and any snubber or chemical seal: The engineer looks for leakage, bent fittings, damaged threads, distorted diaphragm material or signs of fluid ingress. If there is leakage, deformation or electrical damage, replacement is the safest route rather than recalibration.
- The datasheet review compares the 18 bar incident with the stated working span, proof rating and burst limit: The 18 bar surge is below the 20 bar proof figure but above the 10 bar calibrated span, so metrology still has to be verified. If the event exceeded the proof rating, the unit should be removed from service even when it still outputs a signal.
- The calibration check tests zero, span and linearity across the stated range: IEC 60770-1 assesses transmitter performance against defined reference conditions; ISO/IEC 17025 adds traceability and uncertainty where accredited calibration is required. If zero shift, span error or hysteresis sits outside the acceptable tolerance, replacement is usually more defensible than adjustment alone.
In this example, the instrument has survived mechanically because the 18 bar peak did not reach the 20 bar proof value. That doesn’t prove it’s accurate. Strain gauge, piezoresistive and capacitive designs can all show hidden zero shift after a sharp overload, especially where the diaphragm has been stressed close to its elastic limit. Burst is a different matter: it’s a failure boundary linked to containment and ultimate tensile strength, not a working allowance. A 50 bar burst figure must never be used as a process design target.
Two follow-up checks prevent the same fault returning. First, review whether the maximum working pressure and safe working pressure used in the specification allowed enough margin for valve closure, pump start-up or water hammer. The key distinction: a common engineering starting point is to consider at least 1.5× the normal maximum, then verify the requirement against the actual transient profile rather than a rule of thumb. Second, confirm whether spike protection is fitted in the right place; a snubber installed too far from the impulse point may protect less than expected.
The practical conclusion is simple: keep the transmitter only when the event stayed below proof, the body is undamaged and recalibration confirms stable output. If any one of those conditions fails, replace it and correct the surge source before restarting the loop.
Contact Diversified Technologies for pressure sensor selection and integration
Correct selection starts with the worst credible event, not the neat operating range. At Diversified Technologies, we help you separate maximum working rating, proof pressure and burst limit before integration, because those limits answer different questions: measure accurately, survive overload, and avoid rupture. In practice, the rule is straightforward: the proof test is a survivability check, while the burst figure marks the stated failure boundary, not a usable margin.
For process pipework, that same thinking has to follow the mechanical code path; according to ASME B31.3, design conditions are based on the most severe coincident temperature and load expected in service. If you’re comparing a 0–6,000 psi hydraulic device with a water-treatment transmitter, ask two questions first: what’s the highest short-duration spike, and will the instrument recover within calibration after it?
Speak with a Diversified Technologies engineer on 585-461-2110 for help with transmitter selection, overpressure margin, protection hardware and post-event calibration.
Frequently Asked Questions
Gauge, absolute, and differential transmitters can share the same numeric span while having different reference points, port stress conditions, and allowable line-pressure limits that must be checked separately. For example, a differential transmitter may measure a small pressure difference while both ports sit at a much higher static pressure. Match the reference type and any common-mode or static line-pressure rating to the actual piping conditions before comparing spans.
Repeated excursions near proof pressure degrade long-term stability even when each individual event remains below the stated survivable overload limit for the device in service. Proof tests often verify no permanent shift after a defined event, not unlimited cycling at that level. If the process has frequent surges, specify a wider span, add mechanical protection, or choose a design rated for pulsation and fatigue.
Vacuum service must be specified as part of the pressure reference and span because some positive-pressure transmitters cannot tolerate full vacuum on the process connection. A range such as 0 to 1 bar gauge does not automatically mean the sensor survives negative gauge pressure. For pump suction, sealed tanks, altitude chambers, or evacuation steps, check both the calibrated vacuum span and the absolute pressure limit.
Temperature and process media affect safe pressure measurement because seals, diaphragms, fill fluids, electronics, and wetted materials each have limits outside the pressure rating itself. High temperature can weaken seals or shift electronics, while corrosive or viscous media may require isolation, compatible alloys, or remote diaphragms. Confirm pressure ratings at the actual process temperature, not only at room-temperature datasheet conditions.
Control alarms and relief devices should be set from the protected system’s safe operating limits, not from the transmitter’s maximum survivable proof or burst rating. The transmitter is an instrument, not the primary pressure-protection device for a vessel, pipe, or machine. Use applicable design codes and a competent engineering review to coordinate relief valves, shutdown logic, and transmitter survival margins.