Phast 8.0 Release Notes

RELEASE NOTES
PHAST TM
Taking hazard and risk analysis one step further
Version: 8.0
Date: November 2017
Reference to part of this report which may lead to misinterpretation is not permissible.
Date: November 2017
Prepared by: DNV GL - Software
© DNV GL AS. All rights reserved
This publication or parts thereof may not be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,
including copying or recording, without the prior written consent of DNV GL AS
Table of contents
1 NEW FEATURES APPLICABLE TO ALL PHAST USERS ............................................................ 2
1.1 Improved dispersion calculations for short-duration releases .......................................................... 2
1.2 Modelling of crater formation for breaches in long pipelines ........................................................... 7
1.3 Improvements in modelling and results for time-varying discharge calculations ............................. 8
1.4 Time-varying modelling of fireball size and intensity ........................................................................ 9
1.5 Improved options for modelling expansion at the beginning of the release ................................... 10
1.6 Parallel processing available for dispersion and toxic calculations .................................................. 10
2 NEW FEATURES APPLICABLE TO USERS OF THE FULL PHAST PROGRAM .............................. 11

2.1 Warehouse Model for modelling toxic plumes from a warehouse fire ........................................... 11
2.2 Run in Parallel option for running consequence calculations for multiple Scenarios at the same
time 13
3 OTHER DIFFERENCES AND BUG FIXES ............................................................................ 15

3.1 More options for specifying process flow conditions for Short pipe Scenarios ............................... 15
3.2 New option for modelling of a Standalone BLEVE Blast explosion .................................................. 16
3.3 New option for modelling jet flames that impinge on the ground .................................................. 16
3.4 New options for modelling a bund .................................................................................................. 16
3.5 Materials can be exported and imported between workspaces ..................................................... 17
3.6 Calculations for dispersion, flammable and toxic effects now all use the same height of interest . 17
3.7 Building wake modelling now selected by default........................................................................... 18
3.8 Baker-Strehlow-Tang explosions now involve entire cloud volume ................................................ 18
3.9 Simplification of options for initial view time for Dispersion Graphs .............................................. 18
3.10 Simplification of consequence reporting for explosion ................................................................... 18
3.11 Simplification of some options for explosions ................................................................................. 19
3.12 Some Long pipeline inputs simplified and clarified ......................................................................... 19
3.13 Bug fixes .......................................................................................................................................... 21
4 ALERTS AND WORKAROUNDS ........................................................................................ 23
| RELEASE NOTE | Phast version 8.0 Page i

1 NEW FEATURES APPLICABLE TO ALL PHAST USERS
The following features are applicable to users of Phast and Phast Lite, and to users with and without the
extensions for multi-component modelling and 3D explosion modelling.
1.1 Improved dispersion calculations for short-duration releases

Releases with short durations pose a particular challenge for modelling, because the modelling of
continuous releases performed in the core dispersion calculations assumes that the duration is sufficient
for the release to reach a steady state in which air is entrained only through the sides of the cloud, and
in which entrainment in front of and behind the cloud can be neglected. For short releases which do not
reach a steady state, this approach to the modelling underestimates the overall entrainment rate and the
concentration calculated at a given downwind distance is likely to be too high. These challenges apply
also to releases with time-varying release rates or pool vaporisation rates; the total release duration
might be relatively long, but the length of time for which the release has a given rate is too short to
allow the cloud to reach a steady state for that particular rate.
The methods that were available for modelling such releases in previous versions had serious limitations,
taking a simplistic approach that introduced visible discontinuities in the dispersion results. A new
method is now available which has none of these limitations, but is a rigorous method that produces
smooth, consistent, time-dependent dispersion profiles that include all of the information required by the
risk calculations. This new method is called the along wind diffusion (AWD) method. It is set as the
default method, so it will be used for all new workspaces, and for all upgraded workspaces for which the
Dispersion Parameters are set to use the default method.
The along wind diffusion method will give differences in the concentration results for many continuous
releases and for releases with pool vaporisation. The technical documentation supplied with the program
includes a document entitled Results differences between Phast and Safeti versions that describes
the type of differences to expect.
Implementing the Along wind diffusion method has involved making changes in some of the concepts
underlying the dispersion calculations, and you will see the effect of these changes in the Reports and
Graphs, and also in the form of the input data for some types of Scenario. These concepts and the main
effects are described briefly below; for a fuller description, enter “Dispersion modelling overview” in the
Index tab of the online Help.
The main changed concept: the core dispersion calculations are now performed for “release observers”
instead of “release segments”
The core dispersion calculations model the changing conditions for observers that are released over the
course of the event to move downwind with the cloud. An observer can be imagined as a particle-sized
sensor that is released at the centreline of the cloud at a particular time and is then carried along with it.
The modelling considers two types of observer: instantaneous observers that are used to model the
start of an instantaneous release, and continuous observers that are used to model continuous
releases and the vapour generated by an evaporating pool.
| RELEASE NOTE | Phast version 8.0 Page 2

The observers used in the modelling of a particular Scenario and Weather are listed at the start of the
Dispersion Report, as shown below for an instantaneous release with rainout and evaporation.
The illustration above shows that each observer has a start time but no duration, and this is because
each observer is tracking the cloud from the specific conditions associated with its start time, in a release
that is recognised as being in a state of continuous change. This is different from the previous approach
using release segments, in which each segment had an associated duration because it was used to
represent the conditions over a particular period of the release, with the conditions assumed to be
constant over the duration of the segment. The Observer method is designed to be able to interpolate
between the results for the different observers to give smooth results for intermediate situations,
whereas the previous approach was only able to treat the release as a series of step-changes.
This difference can be seen in the graphs below for a 150 s hexane release that gives rainout and pool
vaporisation. Both graphs show the side view of the cloud at 150 s, and the v7.2 graph on the left shows
the discontinuities between the different release segments and a simplistic, linear profile at the front of
the cloud, whereas the v8 graph on the right has no discontinuities and has a rounded profile at the front
of the cloud showing the effects of the along-wind diffusion and spreading.
The fact that an observer does not have an associated duration means that any event that includes
continuous observers must always have at least two continuous observers: one released at the start of
the discharge or pool vaporisation, and one released at the end. This is the case even with the simplest
situation of a Scenario with a uniform discharge rate and no rainout: you will see in the Dispersion
Report that this type of Scenario has been modelled with two identical continuous observers, the first
with a start time of 0 s and the second with a start time equal to the duration. The final observer is
necessary to mark an end to the release and to allow the program to interpolate properly for
intermediate times before the end.

The modelling of along-wind effects is included in the core dispersion calculations for an instantaneous
observer, but for continuous observers it is performed in a new post-processing stage
The core dispersion calculations treat the modelling of along-wind effects in the same way as in previous
versions, which means that these calculations include these effects for an instantaneous observer, but
not for a continuous observer. For a continuous observer, the core dispersion calculations assume that
the observer is in a steady-state cloud in which the along-wind gradients in concentration and density
are small and not able to drive mixing of air in the along-wind direction, and so the mixing of air into the
cloud takes place only in the cross-wind direction.
The modelling of along-wind diffusion and gravity spreading for continuous observers is performed
instead through post-processing of the results of the core dispersion calculations, where the along-wind
diffusion is accounted for by a process of Gaussian integration of the concentrations calculated for the
observers. The type of post-processing that is performed depends on the settings in the Time-varying
and finite duration tab of the Dispersion Parameters. A range of options are provided for different
aspects of the post-processing, but the choice is provided mainly to allow comparison with earlier
versions of the program, and the options that will give the most accurate modelling of along-wind
behaviour are set as the defaults.
In some situations you may see the results for the core dispersion calculations referred to as the "pre-
AWD" results, or as the results "before along-wind-diffusion effects".
The Equipment Reports give concentration values from the core dispersion calculations, whereas the
Summary Reports and the Graphs give the results after the post-processing
In the group of Equipment Reports, the Dispersion, Commentary and Averaging Times Reports give the
results of the core dispersion calculations, without any post-processing, whereas the Summary Reports
and the Graphs give the results with post-processing.
For a Scenario that is modelled with only an instantaneous observer, the results in the three Equipment
Reports will match the results in the Summary Report and the Graphs, because the core dispersion
calculations for an instantaneous observer include the modelling of along-wind effects so no additional
post-processing is needed in this situation. However, if the modelling for a Scenario includes any
continuous observers, the different forms of results may show differences in the concentrations
calculated for a given downwind distance at a given time.
The size of the differences will depend on the time-scale for the event-duration compared with the
release duration that would be required for a steady-state, fully-developed cloud to become established.
For example, if a release duration of 600 s would be required for a cloud with a given mass-rate to reach
a steady state, then a Scenario that maintains that mass-rate for 600 s will show differences only at the
beginning and end of the release, whereas a Scenario that maintains the mass-rate for only 10 s will
show significant differences at all times and distances.

There have been some changes in the Dispersion Graphs as part of the new method
This can be seen in the illustrations of the Side View graphs on the previous page, where the list of
graphs are different in v7.2 and v8. The graphs of cloud concentration in the Dispersion group are now
as follows:
Graph Name Description Equivalent in

previous version
Mass Rate Shows the initial release rate, and if rainout occurs, the graph will None
also show the Rainout Rate and the Pool Vaporisation Rate. All
rates are shown as a function of time.
Max Conc vs Shows the maximum concentration reached at a given height as a None
Distance function of distance downwind, as calculated at a given averaging
time.
Conc vs. Time Shows the change in concentration during the course of the Concentration vs.
dispersion, measured at a location specified by a given downwind Time
distance and height above the ground, and calculated using a
given averaging time.
Conc vs Dist. at Shows the concentration at a given height and time as a function None
Height of distance downwind, as calculated at a given averaging time.
Animation is available for this Graph.
Footprint Shows the shape of the contours for up to four concentrations Footprint
inside the cloud, measured at a given height and time, and
calculated using a given averaging time. The graph also shows
the maximum extent reached by the liquid pool (if one is
formed).
Max Footprint Shows the shape of the contours of the maximum concentration Maximum
reached during the dispersion, for up to four concentrations inside Concentration
the cloud, measured at a given height and calculated using a
given averaging time. The graph also shows the maximum extent
reached by the liquid pool (if one is formed).
Side View Shows the shape of the contours for up to four concentrations Side View
inside the cloud, measured at a given time, and calculated using
a given averaging time.
There is no equivalent in v8.0 of the Centerline Concentration and Cross Section Graphs that were
available in previous versions. The Conc vs. Time and Side View graphs now always give the results
along the downwind axis, i.e. with a crosswind offset of zero, and there is now no option to specify a
different value for the crosswind offset.
In previous versions, a Dynamic Concentration Report was available for the Graphs that have animation
showing the details of the cloud concentrations at the time currently displayed. This Report is no longer
available.
For further details of the Graphs, enter “Graphs” in the Index tab of the online Help.

There are some changes to the Dispersion Parameters for the new method
Note for Phast Lite users: The dialogs shown in this section are not visible in the program, and the
default values that are shown in the illustrations are the values that will always be used in all
calculations in Phast Lite.
The Other tab in the Dispersion Parameters dialog has been replaced by two new tabs: Time-varying
and finite duration and Accuracy and speed. These new tabs contain fields that were previously on
the Other tab and also new fields related to the new method, as shown in the illustrations below. You
can click on the Help button in the dialog for details of the fields.
The Time-varying and

finite duration tab
allows you to choose the
methods to use for
different aspects of the
calculations. The default
settings are the
recommended settings,
but other options are
provided to allow
comparisons.
The list of options for the Method for non-instantaneous dispersion includes the methods QI without
duration adjustment, and Finite duration correction are methods that were available in previous versions.
However, the QI with duration adjustment method that was available in previous versions has been
removed because it was the most simplistic of all of the previous methods (e.g. the adjustments were
performed in a way that reduced the mass in the cloud).
In the Accuracy and

speed tab, the new
parameters are the
parameters in the
Concentration grid
definition group.
For both instantaneous

and continuous releases,
the program uses the
concentration grid in
calculating the size of effect zones for flammable and toxic effects and in preparing dispersion results for
plotting on Graphs. These calculations obtain the concentrations at the points on a four-dimensional grid
where the dimensions are x location, y location, z location and time. The same grid is used in the post-
processing that is performed for continuous observers.
You can use the parameters to change the resolution for different aspects of the grid, where increasing
the resolution will give smoother, more-accurate results, but will also make the calculations run more
slowly.

There have been some changes in the Pool Vaporisation Report for Source Scenarios
The change from release segments to release observers and the introduction of the concentration grid
for calculating effect zones required changes to some of the reports for Source Scenarios. In the process
of these changes, some aspects of the reporting were clarified and made more straightforward.
In previous versions the Pool Vaporisation report included details of the representative pool
vaporisation segments modelled. These are no longer relevant and the Pool Vaporisation report now
gives only a small amount of summary information about the pool vaporisation calculations.
1.2 Modelling of crater formation for breaches in long pipelines

The Long pipe tab of the
Long pipeline dialog now
includes a Crater
modelling group at the
bottom of the dialog as
shown.
If you check the box to

say that the pipeline is
buried, you must specify
the Depth of soil cover,
and choose the Soil cover type from the list shown.
The Scenario tab of the dialog for the

Location specific breach Scenario now
also includes a Crater modelling group
at the bottom of the dialog. If the
pipeline is set as being buried, then the
Accident type field for the Scenario
will be enabled and mandatory as
shown, and you must specify the type
of accident-geometry that you want to
model.
The Puncture options involve simple holes, whereas the Full bore rupture is a breach that propagates
along the pipeline for a distance set by the Fracture length, which is a new field in the Long pipe tab
section for both types of Breach Scenario. The Fracture length field is supplied with a default value that
is set in the Long pipe tab of the Discharge Parameters; the default value supplied with the program is
10 m, which is a typical distance between couplings in a long pipeline.
In the calculations for a buried pipeline, the program calculates the depth, width and length of the
crater, and it also calculates the mass-flow of air that is mixed in with the release inside the crater and
the velocity of the cloud as it leaves the crater, which sets the conditions for the start of the dispersion
calculations.
The dimensions calculated for the crater are given in the Location Specific Breach Report, and the
conditions for the start of the dispersion can be seen in the Dispersion Report.
The details of the calculations are given in the technical documentation supplied with the program.

1.3 Improvements in modelling and results for time-varying
discharge calculations
There have been several improvements that affect the Time-varying Leak and Time-varying short pipe
Scenarios.
The value for the inventory is now taken as the total inventory rather than the liquid inventory
The changes in the time-varying modelling did not involve any visible changes in the input fields, but the
interpretation of the inventory value in the Material tab for the Equipment item has changed.
In previous versions, the value given for the inventory was taken as the inventory for the liquid side
only, and the program would calculate the additional vapour mass needed to fill the vapour space. The
value is now taken as the total inventory of both liquid and vapour.
This change means that v8 will typically give less conservative results as there is less liquid to release
and the liquid level is more likely to be below the hole in the vessel.
Improvements in modelling for greater consistency and stability

The calculations have been improved in several areas:
 In previous versions, the entire liquid inventory would typically be released, even in situations in
which the liquid level fell below the height of the hole, and this has now been improved. For a
pressurised liquid vessel, the release will now stop when the liquid level drops below the height
of the hole, and for saturated conditions, the release will change from liquid to vapour.
 The modelling is more robust, and the calculations should no longer stop prematurely because of
issues with numerical convergence.
 The modelling is less likely to fail with conditions near the critical point. Some simplifying
assumptions have been made for conditions in the vicinity of the critical point, and these make
an error in the calculations much less likely.
 The removal of the velocity cap for expansion to atmospheric pressure.
Graphs of time-varying discharge results are now

available
In previous versions, the detailed results of the
time-varying discharge calculations were available
only in the Time-Varying Discharge Report. The
results are now also available in a new group of
graphs: the TV Discharge Graphs, as shown.
The Mass graph shows the mass remaining in the

vessel and the mass expelled, the Flowrate graphs
shows the release rate in the orifice, and the other
graphs show values in the vessel, in the orifice, and
after expansion to final conditions.

1.4 Time-varying modelling of fireball size and intensity
The Fireball model field in the dialog
for a flammable Source Scenario and
for a standalone Fireball Scenario allows
you to choose between a range of
correlations for calculating the size,
duration and intensity of the fireball.
The list for this field now includes the Martinsen time varying correlation, as shown.
The Martinsen time varying option has been set as the default option for v8, which is a change from the
previous default, which was the Roberts/TNO hybrid option referred to as the “Recommended” option in
the previous version. If you open an analysis from a previous version that contains Scenarios that are
set to use the default for the Fireball model field, these scenarios will now use the Martinsen time
varying correlation, and the results for fireball effects will change.
As shown in the graphs below, the Martinsen time varying correlation models the fireball radius as
increasing until the point when the fireball lifts off from the ground. The surface emissive power is
constant to the moment of lift-off, and then decreases.
The results for the modelling are reported in a new Report called the Dynamic Fireball Report. The
report that was called the Fireball Report in previous versions is now called the Static Fireball Report,
and this gives the results for the three other fireball correlations.

1.5 Improved options for modelling expansion at the beginning
of the release
In the Discharge parameters tab for a
continuous storage Scenario, the
Atmospheric expansion method field
gives a range of options as shown for the
modelling of expansion to atmospheric
pressure.
The option DNV GL recommended is a new

option that has been set as the default for
v8. If this option is selected, the calculations
will use the Conservation of momentum method for situations in which rainout will not occur, and the
Closest to initial conditions method for other situations. Rainout will not occur if the material is carbon
dioxide, or if multi-component modelling is selected for the Equipment item, or if the final liquid fraction
predicted by the Conservation of momentum method is zero.
In the Near field tab of the Dispersion

parameters, the Modelling of
instantaneous expansion field gives a
range of options as shown for the
modelling of the expansion of a
pressurised instantaneous release from
the storage pressure down to atmospheric
pressure.
The option New standard method is a new

option that has been set as the default for
v8. In previous versions, the modelling of
instantaneous expansion often underestimated rainout significantly, and the new option improves the
modelling of two-phase and liquid releases considerably, incorporating radial expansion of liquid droplets
within the release, and accounting for time-varying rainout.
1.6 Parallel processing available for dispersion and toxic

calculations
The Calculations and messages tab of the
Workspace dialog now includes the option
Enable multithreading for dispersion
and toxic calculations as shown.
If this option is checked, then these

aspects of the consequence calculations
for a given Scenario will be run
simultaneously on different CPU cores, which has the potential to allow the calculations to run more
quickly. If the option is not checked, the program will run all of the consequence calculations for a given
Scenario on a single core, with no parallel processing for any aspects of the consequence calculations.

2 NEW FEATURES APPLICABLE TO USERS OF THE FULL PHAST
PROGRAM
These features are not available in Phast Lite.
2.1 Warehouse Model for modelling toxic plumes from a

warehouse fire
The Warehouse Model considers a fire in a warehouse, and models the effects of the fire as a toxic plume
which contains a mixture of hydrogen chloride, nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide. This Model is an
updated version of the Warehouse Model that was present in versions of the program before v7.
The size and duration of the plume will depend on the amount and type of materials stored, on the
ventilation for the warehouse, and on the scale of the fire, i.e. on the way in which the fire develops, and
the effectiveness of the fire-fighting system.
To model a fire with a particular size and duration, you

generate or define a Fire Scenario which has an associated
probability or frequency; you can generate the PGS-15
Scenarios associated with the fire-fighting system for the
warehouse, or you can define any number of user-defined
Fire Scenarios for a particular warehouse. The illustration
shows a Warehouse Model that has two Fire Scenario nodes defined.
The input data for the Warehouse Model is more complex than for most of the Equipment items and
Scenarios in the program, since there are several stages in completing the input data, as described
below.
Stage 1: Defining Warehouse Materials

When you define a Warehouse, you specify which materials are stored in the warehouse, and you do this
by selecting them from a list of the Warehouse Materials that are defined in the program as part of the
Materials data. This means that you should make sure that all of the Warehouse Materials for the
warehouse are defined in the Materials tab before you complete the input data for the warehouse.
The input data for a Warehouse Material consists of the number of atoms of particular elements in the
average composition of the Warehouse Material, and of the molecular weight of the material.
Stage 2: Defining a Building type and a Building for the Warehouse

You must insert a Building type icon under the Buildings folder in the Map tab of the Study Tree, and
define the ventilation data for the warehouse.
You must then insert a Building under the Building type node, and define the location and dimensions of
the Warehouse Building by placing it on the Map.

Stage 3: Defining the Warehouse Model
There are four tab sections of input data in the dialog for a Warehouse Model:
 The Warehouse materials tab: You must set up a list of the Warehouse materials that are
stored in the Warehouse, giving the mass stored and the active mass fraction for each material.
 The Building tab: you must select the Building that contains the Warehouse. The Warehouse
might only occupy part of this Building, and you can specify whether this is the case, and give
the area and height of the Warehouse within the Building.
 The Fire scenarios tab: A given Fire scenario represents one possible development for a fire in the
warehouse. A fire may develop in different ways, with different consequences, depending on
where and how the fire started, and on the effectiveness of the fire-fighting response. You use
the Fire scenarios tab to supply the input data for the scenarios for the Warehouse Model.
 The Dispersion tab: This is the Dispersion tab that is common to all Source Scenarios, for
specifying concentrations and distances of interest.
Optional Stage 4: Generating the Fire Scenarios

After you have completed the input data for the Warehouse Model, you can generate the Fire scenario
nodes by right-clicking on the Warehouse Model and selecting Generate warehouse scenarios; a node for
each Scenario will be added underneath the Warehouse node as shown. You use the nodes to view the
Graphs and Reports for a Fire scenario, and you can also use them to run the calculations for an
individual Fire scenario.
Running the calculations and viewing the results

You do not have to generate the Fire scenarios yourself. If you have not already generated the nodes
using the option in the right-click menu, the program will generate the nodes automatically when you
run the calculations for the Warehouse Model, and it will then run the calculations for all of the
Scenarios.
There is a Report called the Warehouse Overview Report that is specific to the Warehouse Model itself,
giving details of the input data and of warehouse-level results. The Fire Scenarios have all of the Reports
and Graphs applicable to any toxic Source Scenario, and also a Warehouse Results Report that gives
input data for the Warehouse as a whole and for the Fire scenario, and details of the modelling of the
generation of the toxic plume.
For further details of the input data and the results, enter “Warehouse” in the Index tab of the online
Help The details of the calculations are given in the technical documentation supplied with the program.

2.2 Run in Parallel option for running consequence calculations
for multiple Scenarios at the same time
The Home tab of the
Ribbon Bar includes a
Run in Parallel option as
shown that uses parallel
processing to run the consequence calculations for multiple Scenarios at the same time
The Run in Parallel option will run the consequence calculations for multiple Scenarios at the same time
using parallel processing on multiple CPU cores. This parallel processing is performed by a special tool
called the Console that allocates the processing between the different cores and combines the results
when the calculations are complete. The parallel processing has the potential to run the calculations
more quickly than the Run option, although in a small analysis the calculations might in fact run more
slowly because of the additional time required for the Console to manage the processing between the
different cores.
The option will run the consequence calculations for the entire workspace, not just for the nodes that
are currently selected in the Models tab of the Study Tree. It will run the calculations for all Scenarios,
except for those that are set as excluded from the calculations and are greyed out in the Study Tree.
Note: The Run in Parallel option does not run the effects calculations, which are additional
calculations that are available if you have a license for the 3D explosion modelling. If you have this type
of license and you use the Run in Parallel option, the full range of calculations will appear to run and the
Effects option in the Home tab of the Ribbon Bar will become enabled, but there will not in fact be any
results available for you to view. In this situation you should exit from the program, restart it, and run
the calculations again using the Run option instead of the Run in Parallel option. The parallel running will
be extended to include the effects calculations in a later version of the program.
When you select the Run in Parallel option, a Console Runner window as
shown will appear in the centre of the program window. You will not be able
to perform any actions in the program window while the Console Runner
window is open, and you must either wait for the calculations to finish, or
click on Cancel to stop the processing and close the Runner window.
The Console Runner window will initially say that it is Preparing work and
will then move on to Running calculations, showing the status of the
calculations with a progress bar. When the calculations are complete, the
Console Runner will report that it is Combining results, and then it will
close and you will be able to use the program window again.
Apart from these simple messages about the stage of the processing, the Console does not interact with
the program window during the course of the calculations; there will be no messages about the
calculations for individual Scenarios written to the Output View, and the display of the calculation-status
of the Scenario nodes is not updated during the calculations. However, as soon as the Console Runner
window closes, the Study Tree display will be updated, and you can view the full list of calculation
messages for the Scenarios by right-clicking on the icon for any Equipment item or Scenario and
selecting Open parallel calculation log, which will open a file of calculation messages in a separate
Notepad window.

Note: The Run in Parallel option will run all of the consequence calculations for a given Scenario on a
single core, even if the option to Enable multithreading for dispersion and toxic calculations
option is selected in the Calculations and messages tab of the Workspace dialog. The parallel processing
performed by the Run in Parallel option involves running different Scenarios on different cores. To run
different aspects of the calculations for a given Scenario on different cores, you must use the Run option
with Enable multithreading for dispersion and toxic calculations selected.
Note: The Beta text in the Runner window and on the Run in Parallel icon shows that the parallel
processing functionality is still under development. It has been included in the program as a "beta"
feature with limited functionality, in the hope that users will experiment with it and will give feedback
about their experiences and about their priorities for the next stages of the development. The feature
has already received extensive testing during the development and the results for the calculations should
be identical to those with the Run option, but the feature might sometimes be unstable (e.g. the Console
Runner might stop working at some point in the processing), so it is advisable to save your workspace
before using the Run in Parallel option.

3 OTHER DIFFERENCES AND BUG FIXES
3.1 More options for specifying process flow conditions for

Short pipe Scenarios
In previous versions, you could give a value for the pump head for a liquid line rupture Scenario, but this
was the only way of describing the process flow conditions.
There are now several options

available the Short pipe Scenario,
presented in the new Flow
control group in the Scenario tab
as shown.
The option to specify the Flow

controller is available only if the
Scenario type is set to Line
rupture, and the details of the
options available depend on the storage conditions set for the Equipment and on the release phase set in
the Material tab for the Scenario:
Storage Conditions Phase to be released Options available for Flow controller
Padded liquid or pressurised gas Liquid None

Pump (liquid release)
Control valve
Vapour None
Compressor (vapour release)
Control valve
Saturated liquid Liquid None

Pump (liquid release)
Vapour None
Compressor (vapour release)
If there is no flow through the pipe or you do not want to model the flow, you should set the Flow
controller field to None.
If Flow controller is set to Pump (liquid release), the Input option field will give a choice between
Fixed flow rate and Pump head. If Flow controller is set to Compressor (vapour release) or Control
valve, the only option for Input option will be Fixed flow rate.
When specifying the Fixed flow rate, you must give the flow rate through the pipe under operating
conditions. If the flow controller is a pump or compressor, the program will calculate the upstream
pressure that would give this value for the fixed flow rate, and the discharge calculations will use this
pressure instead of the operating pressure that is set in the Equipment dialog. If the flow controller is a
control valve, the program will use the operating pressure that is set in the Equipment dialog as the
pressure upstream of the control valve, and calculate the pressure immediately downstream of the
control valve that would give this value for the fixed flow rate, and the discharge calculations use this
pressure. The Discharge Report gives the pressure that was used in the calculations.
For the Pump head, you must specify the equivalent head level for the energy added to the system by
the pump. As in previous versions, the pressure used in the discharge calculations will be the sum of the
operating pressure set in the Equipment item dialog, of the Pump head, and of the Tank head.
3.2 New option for modelling of a Standalone BLEVE Blast
explosion
In the BLEVE blast parameters tab for a
standalone BLEVE Blast Scenario, the Model
option field now has a third option: Brode
option (2017). This option is not selected by
default.
The Brode option uses the blast curves

published in the CCPS second edition, but
with scaled distances based on the Brode
energy rather than on the isentropic energy.
3.3 New option for modelling jet flames that impinge on the
ground
The Cone model data group is present in
Jet fire tab for a flammable continuous
source Scenario, as shown, and in the Jet
fire parameters tab for a standalone Jet
fire Scenario. This group now includes the
Flame-shape adjustment if grounded
option, which affects the calculations with
the Cone jet fire model for flames that
impinge on the ground.
If the option is checked, adjustments are made to the angle and/or elevation of the cone so that it does
not impinge on the ground, and this adjusted flame is the flame used in radiation and effect calculations.
Despite the wording of the option, these adjustments do not in fact affect the flame shape, and the
length and widths of the cone frustum are not changed.
3.4 New options for modelling a bund

The node that was called the Bund type node in previous versions is now called the Type of pool
substrate and bund node, reflecting the fact that it covers the definition of the surface on which a pool
will form, whether or not a bund is present.
The Bund properties tab for

this node has several new
and changed fields as shown.
In previous versions, a bund

would be modelled if you
supplied non-zero values for
the dimensions, but now you
must check the Specify a
bund field to state that the
node covers the definition of
a bund.

The list of options for Bund failure modelling has changed, with the addition of an option to force
rainout to occur inside the bund, and with changes to the wording to make the effect clearer.
The Bund area multiplier for catastrophic rupture is a new field. For a Rupture Scenario under a
Pressure Vessel, the calculations will apply this multiplier to the value for Bund area (internal) to
obtain an effective bund area for use in the rainout and vaporisation calculations.
3.5 Materials can be exported and imported between

workspaces
The Ribbon Bar now includes a Data tab as shown. This tab
includes the CAD and Excel options that were previously on
the Tools tab, and also some new Import and Export options
that allow you to export Materials data to a separate file called
a *.psie file, and then to import the data from these files into
another workspace. This gives an easy way of sharing Materials data between workspaces.
The Import option is enabled if the node selected in the Study Tree is the Physical Properties System node
or the Materials node, and the Export options are enabled if the node selected is the Materials node or
any node underneath the Materials node (e.g. a Component or a Materials Folder).
The Export option will export only the values for fields that have a non-default setting. This means that
when you import the data, the fields that had default settings will take the default values for the current
workspace, which may be different from those for the workspace from which you exported the data.
The Export with defaults option will export the values for all fields, including those that have default
settings. This means that when you import the data, none of the fields will be left with their values
unset, which means that none of the fields will be taking the default values for the current workspace.
3.6 Calculations for dispersion, flammable and toxic effects now

all use the same height of interest
In previous versions, the Parameters had three different fields for specifying a height of interest for
consequence results:
 Toxics: height for calculation of effects in the Toxic parameters, which was used for toxic
effects.
 Height for calculation of flammable effects in the Flammable parameters, which was used
for flash fire and radiation effects for source Scenarios.
 Height for concentration output in the General parameters, which was used in some
dispersion graphs.
For simplicity and consistency, there is now a single field for specifying a height of interest for
consequence results: the Height of interest field in the General parameters, which applies to toxic,
flammable and concentration results.
When you open a file created in a previous version, the Height of interest will be set to the value for
Height for concentration output. If the file you are upgrading contains a Parameter Set in which the
toxic or flammable height is not set to the same value as the Height of interest, messages will be
generated during the upgrade process saying that at least one Parameter Set will be affected by the fact
that the toxic height or flammable height is no longer used, and that the change will give differences in
results.

3.7 Building wake modelling now selected by default
In previous versions, the default value for the Building wake effect field in the Bund, building and
terrain tab for a Source Equipment item was None, but this has been changed and the default is now
Roof/lee. If you want to model in-building effects but not building wake effects, you must set the
Building wake effect field to None after you have selected the Release building.
Note: if you upgrade a file from a previous version that includes Equipment items or Models with the
option set to None, the Building wake effect field will be set to None on upgrade.
3.8 Baker-Strehlow-Tang explosions now involve entire cloud

volume
The Baker-Strehlow-Tang tab is present in the dialog for a flammable Source Scenario if the Explosion
method is set to Baker-Strehlow-Tang in the Explosion parameters tab. It contains input values for use
in the explosion calculations performed in the consequence calculations, which are separate from those
performed in the risk calculations.
The tab contains a Confined volume field for defining the maximum volume of the confined region of
the explosion. If the volume of the cloud is less than the value given for Confined volume, then the
program will use the volume of the cloud in the calculations.
In previous versions, the Confined volume field had a default value of 1 m3, which was non-
conservative. The default has been changed to zero, and with this value the entire volume of the cloud
will be used in the calculations.
3.9 Simplification of options for initial view time for Dispersion

Graphs
The Reports and graphs tab of the Workspace dialog contains the
group Initial view for Dispersion graphs, as shown. These fields
set the time used for the “initial view” of a cloud in the various
Dispersion Graphs i.e. the default view that the program displays
when it generates the Graph in the Graphs View.
In previous versions there were several different methods available

for choosing the initial view time, but the options have now been
simplified to the two fields shown.
For an instantaneous Scenario, the initial view will always be at the time set by the Initial view time.
For a continuous Scenario, the initial view depends on the setting for the option to Use release
duration for continuous releases. If the option is selected, the initial view will be at the last moment
of the release, but if the option is not selected, the initial view will be at the time set by the Initial view
time.
3.10 Simplification of consequence reporting for explosion

In previous versions there were four reports for explosion results, with a separate report for early
explosions for each explosion model, and a separate report for late explosions.
The distinction between early explosions and late explosions is no longer made in the program, and the
results for the different explosion models are now all presented in the same form, which means that the
reporting has been consolidated to give a single report called Explosion which covers all aspects of the
explosion calculations performed in the consequence calculations.

3.11 Simplification of some options for explosions
The options available for two input fields have been simplified.
Option for use of explosion mass modification factor

The Explosion parameters tab for a source
Equipment item or Scenario includes the
option Use explosion mass
modification factor as shown. For a two-
phase cloud, this factor is used in
calculating the mass of the cloud that is
involved in the explosion.
In previous versions this field gave the

choice between using the mass modification factor for both early and late explosions and using it only for
early explosions. The distinction between early and late explosions in no longer made in the program,
and the option has been changed to a choice between Yes and No. If the option is set to No, then the
explosion calculations will use the total flammable mass in the cloud, and if the option is set to Yes, then
the explosion calculations will use a reduced explosive mass that depends on the vapour fraction at the
time of the explosion.
Option for location of explosion

The Overpressures tab of the Explosion
parameters dialog includes the Explosion
location criterion field as shown.
In previous versions the list of options

included Cloud front (LFL), but this has been
removed, leaving the two options shown.
3.12 Some Long pipeline inputs simplified and clarified

These changes have been made in two areas:
Simplifying the Isolation option for the Location specific breach Scenario
The Scenario tab for the Location specific breach Scenario includes an Isolation field. In previous
versions this field was enabled if valves had been defined for the Long pipeline item, and you could
choose between four isolation scenarios, depending on whether or not valves upstream and valves
downstream operated successfully.
This field is now always disabled. If any valves are defined in the Long pipeline dialog, the field will set to
Full Isolation and all valves will be modelled as operating successfully. If no valves are defined, the field
will be set to No Isolation.

Clarifying the definition of the size of a Breach Scenario
In the Scenario tab for the Location specific breach, the behaviour of the Hole diameter and Relative
breach aperture (area) fields has been changed so that you can see more clearly the size of the
outflow that will be modelled in the calculations.
The size that you specify in the Scenario tab is the size of the outflow area that is to be modelled for the
breach, and in deciding how to define the size, you must consider the total potential outflow area for
the breach. For a given breach, the total potential outflow area will depend on the location of the breach
along the length of the pipeline, as specified by the Distance to break field. If Distance to break is at
the very beginning or the very end of the pipeline, the total potential outflow area will be equal to the
cross-sectional area of the pipeline, whereas if the Distance to break is at any intermediate point along
the length, the total potential outflow area will be twice the cross-sectional area of the pipeline, as
outflow can occur from both the upstream and the downstream branches of the pipeline.
In the discharge calculations for a Breach Scenario, the program has always interpreted the outflow size
in terms of the total potential outflow area, with its dependence of the location of the breach. This has
not changed, but additional information is now given in the Scenario tab to show you how the outflow
size that you have defined will be interpreted in the calculations. In the Breach data group in the
Scenario tab, either the Hole diameter field or the Relative breach aperture (area) field will be
disabled, depending on the setting for the Breach sizing method. In previous versions the field that was
disabled would be blank, but the disabled field now displays a value that gives you a measure of the
total potential outflow area for the breach Scenario.
If the Hole diameter field is

disabled, it will display the hole
diameter that corresponds with the
current setting for the Relative
branch aperture (area). The
Scenario shown is a 100% breach at
an intermediate position in a
pipeline with a diameter of 158.7
mm. For this situation the total
potential outflow area is twice the
cross-sectional area of the pipeline,
and the Hole diameter field is displaying a value of 224.4 mm because a circular hole with this
diameter has an area twice that of the pipeline cross-section. If the breach were at the end of the
pipeline, the Hole diameter field would show a value of 158.7 mm.
If the Relative branch aperture (area) field is disabled, it will display the relative aperture that
corresponds with the current setting for the Hole diameter. For a pipeline size of 158.7 mm and an
intermediate breach location, if the Hole diameter were enabled and set to 158.7 mm, the Relative
branch aperture would be showing a value of 0.5, i.e. half the total potential outflow area.

3.13 Bug fixes
The following bugs have been fixed in v8:
1 B-13586 Issues with reporting of Material to Track

Description Some reports of toxic and flammable effects included the value set for the material
to track, which could be taken as implying that the results in the reports were based
on the concentrations for that material. This is incorrect, as these results are always
based on the concentration for the whole mixture.
The value for material to track reported was the value set at the Equipment level,
not the value set at the Scenario level.
2 D-10757 Pool fire not modelled for a source Scenario when jet axis impinges on ground
Description If the axis of the jet flame impinges on the ground, the jet fire calculations will fail
and not produce results, and in this situation the program used to omit the
modelling of pool fires, even though this modelling should not have been affected by
the jet flame impingement.
Note: you can prevent the jet fire calculations from failing because of ground
impingement if you make sure that the new Flame-shape adjustment if
grounded option is checked. With this option, the position of the flame will be
adjusted so that the grounding does not occur, and the jet fire calculations will
produce results.
3 D-11050 Negative times in vapour discharge calculations for long pipeline

Description In some situations, the discharge calculations for a long vapour pipeline with valves
would produce results with negative times and give an error.
4 D-11066 Improved warning messages for Toxic Dose footprint graphs

Description When you view the graphs for a toxic Scenario, the initial levels used for the toxic
footprint graphs are those set in the Toxic parameters tab for the Scenario. For
probit and lethality, the default values for the levels cover the likely range of results
of interest, but for dose, the default values may be much lower than the levels
calculated for the Scenario because the toxic lethality for the Scenario had dropped
below the minimum level of interest when the dose level was still above the
maximum default level. In this situation the dose footprint graphs will initially be
blank, and a warning message about the lack of results will be written to the Output
View.
The warning message used to suggest reducing the minimum probability of death in
order to see dose footprint results. This would not be an efficient approach, as it
would be much easier to use the Edit Settings dialog in the Consequence tab of the
Ribbon Bar to increase the values for the dose levels that you want to plot for the
current Graph View. The warning message has been changed to be more helpful,
and now suggests increasing the target dose value.

5 D-11734 Negative concentrations in dispersion results
Description For a short-duration time-varying Scenario modelled with multiple rates, the
Dispersion Report could sometimes show negative values for concentration.

4 ALERTS AND WORKAROUNDS
There are some known bugs that have not been fixed in v8, and some aspects of the program that may
give behaviour that you do not expect, e.g. because of minor enhancements or minor changes in the
modelling that may produce slight differences in the results.
For the most up-to-date list of known bugs and other issues, you can access the Customer Portal using
the link in the Help tab of the Ribbon Bar. To log into the portal you must enter a valid user name and
password, which you can obtain from your local DNV GL Software office.
1 D-10289 Ruptures with rainout can leave gaps in the cloud
Description An instantaneous release with rainout and pool vaporization can sometimes produce
dispersion results with a large gap between the cloud from the initial release and the
cloud from the pool vaporization, e.g. the Footprint graph may show the
instantaneous cloud disappearing at, say, 200 s, and the cloud from the pool
vaporization not starting until 400 s.
For an instantaneous release, the dispersion calculations do not release observers

for pool vaporization until the cloud from the initial instantaneous release is no
longer over the pool. In some situations, the criteria that the calculations use to
define the edge of the instantaneous cloud are lower than the concentrations
displayed in the dispersion graphs, so the calculations regard the cloud as being
over the pool even though the graphs suggest that it has moved far from the pool.
2 D-11192 Scalloping in Max Footprint graph, depending on grid spacing
Description In some situations, the Max Footprint Dispersion Graph may show “scalloping”, i.e. a
“rippling” effect along the shape of the contours. The appearance of this effect
depends on the settings for the Concentration grid definition fields in the Dispersion
Parameters, and is most likely to happen when grid resolution is high.
3 D-11248 Bund modelling not conserving mass
Description In some situations the mass vaporized from the pool can be greater than the total
mass released.

4 D-11540 Upgraded standalone pool vaporization Models from v6 not included in any Model
Selection
Description If you upgrade a v6.54 or v6.7 file that includes a standalone Pool Vaporization
Model, the Model will be upgraded as a Spill Scenario under an AST Equipment item,
but it will be removed from the Model Selection which means that it will not be
included when you run the calculations, no matter which Run Row is selected.
The upgrade is handled in this way because the standalone Pool Vaporization Model
can not be used in the risk calculations, but the Spill Scenario can. The Spill
Scenario will be incomplete on upgrade because there is no event frequency
specified, and it is removed from the Model Selection so that it does not cause
problems with the risk calculations.
You should decide whether or not you want to include the Scenario in the risk
calculations. If you decide not to include it but you do want to be able to run the
consequence calculations for it, you should create a separate Model Selection and
Run Row for it, and only run the consequences calculations for that Run Row.
5 D-11858 Problem on changing Material when Material to Track is set
Description If a mixture was selected for an Equipment item, and one of the components of the
mixture was selected as the material to track for the Equipment or a Scenario, this
component will remain selected if you change the selection of Material to something
that does not include the selected component. The Equipment and Scenario will not
be shown as having an error in the input data, but the Scenario will give errors in
the dispersion calculations about the chosen component not being present in the
mixture.
6 D-12104 Dispersion Graphs are always present for time-varying Scenarios even if only the
discharge calculations have been run
Description If you set the Mode to Discharge in the Home tab of the Ribbon Bar, run the
calculations for a time-varying Scenario or a Long pipeline breach Scenario and then
view the Graphs, you will find that the full set of Dispersion Graphs are present,
though all of the graphs are blank except for the Mass Rate Graph.
7 D-12221 Reports flagged out of date when you change the averaging time for the graph
Description If you have both Reports and Graphs open for a Scenario, and you use the Edit
Settings dialog for the Graphs to change the selection of averaging time, you will
find that the Reports are shown as being out of date, even though the change to the
averaging time is only relevant to the Graphs.

8 D-12286 Some functions are disabled for a Warehouse Model created by copying and pasting
Description If you create a Warehouse Model by copying and pasting another Warehouse
Model, some functions will not work for the second Warehouse Model:
 If the Warehouse Model is in a folder and you right-click on the folder and
select Generate warehouse scenarios, Fire Scenarios will not be generated
for the second Warehouse Model. However, if you right-click on the second
Warehouse Model itself and select Generate warehouse scenarios, the Fire
Scenarios will be generated.
 The Run option will be disabled for the second Warehouse Model, although
it will be enabled for the individual Fire Scenarios under the Model.
9 D-12362 Jet Fire Contour graph for a standalone Jet Fire Scenario shown as out of date after
checking option to Show Flame Shape
Description If the option to plot side view contours is selected for a standalone Jet Fire
Scenario, the option to Show Flame Shape will be enabled in the Consequence
tab of the Ribbon Bar when the Jet Fire Contour Graph is selected. If you check this
option, the Graphs will be shown incorrectly as being out of date.
10 D-12390 Time-varying Scenarios not shown in the Study Tree as run successfully when the
Calculation Mode is set to Discharge
Description If the Calculation Mode is set to Discharge in the Home tab of the Ribbon Bar and
you run the calculations for a set of source Scenarios, the Scenarios whose
discharge calculations run successfully should be shown with green ticks in the
Study Tree. These green ticks are shown for most types of source Scenario, but not
for Time-varying leak Scenarios or Time-varying short pipe Scenarios.

15 D-12431 A User-defined Source Scenario generated from a Scenario with multi-rate time-
varying discharge results will give Jet Fire results that are different from those for the
original Scenario
Description The right-click menu for a source Scenario that has results present will include the
option to generate a User-defined Source Scenario. The discharge results for the
selected Scenario will be used as the definition of the release observers for the
User-defined Source Scenario.
If the original Scenario is a Time-varying leak Scenario, a Time-varying short pipe

Scenario or a Location specific breach Scenario, and the Method for calculating
average rate is set to Up to 10 rates in the Time varying releases tab section, then
if you compare the results between the original Scenario and the generated User-
defined Source Scenario, you will find that the results for dispersion, toxic results
and delayed flammable effects are identical, but that the jet fire results are
different. For the original Scenario, the jet fire calculations use discharge conditions
based on the full, detailed discharge results, whereas for the generated User-
defined Source Scenario, the calculations use discharge conditions based on the list
of release observers in the Scenario tab section. These discharge conditions can be
quite different between the two Scenarios, giving different jet fire results, especially
if the release rate changes rapidly at the start of the release. Typically, the
calculations for the User-defined Source will use a higher discharge rate and give a
larger jet fire with greater effect distances.
When you generate a User-defined Source Scenario from a Scenario that has
Method for calculating average rate set to Up to 10 rates, a warning message
about the differences in jet fire results will be written to the Output View.
16 D-12457 Consequence Summary Report gives explosion flammable mass as “n/a”
Description The Explosion Results section of the Consequence Summary Report includes a table
that gives details of the explosion scenarios that give worst case explosion results.
This table includes an Explosion flammable mass column, but this column does
not give the value for the mass and instead always gives it as “n/a”.
17 D-12478 Results for a User-defined Source Scenario are not cleared on changing the input data
Description If you run the calculations for a User-defined Source Scenario and then change the
input data for the Scenario, the results will not be cleared and the Scenario will be
shown with a green tick in the Study Tree, showing that it has results that the
program regards as up to date. To be able to rerun the calculations for the Scenario
with the changed input data, you must right-click on the Scenario and select Clear
results.

ABOUT DNV GL
Driven by our purpose of safeguarding life, property and the environment, DNV GL enables organizations to
advance the safety and sustainability of their business. We provide classification and technical assurance
along with software and independent expert advisory services to the maritime, oil and gas, and energy
industries. We also provide certification services to customers across a wide range of industries. Operating
in more than 100 countries, our 16,000 professionals are dedicated to helping our customers make the
world safer, smarter and greener.
SOFTWARE
DNV GL is the world-leading provider of software for a safer, smarter and greener future in the energy,
process and maritime industries. Our solutions support a variety of business critical activities including
design and engineering, risk assessment, asset integrity and optimization, QHSE, and ship management. Our
worldwide presence facilitates a strong customer focus and efficient sharing of industry best practice and
standards.

Phast 8.0 Release Notes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Phast 8.0 Release Notes

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Phast 8.0 Release Notes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What are the new features applicable to all Phast users?

What are the new features applicable to all Phast users?

What are the new features applicable to users of the full Phast program?

What are the new features applicable to users of the full Phast program?

RELEASE NOTES

Taking hazard and risk analysis one step further

Date: November 2017

Prepared by: DNV GL - Software

© DNV GL AS. All rights reserved

2 NEW FEATURES APPLICABLE TO USERS OF THE FULL PHAST PROGRAM .............................. 11

3 OTHER DIFFERENCES AND BUG FIXES ............................................................................ 15

4 ALERTS AND WORKAROUNDS ........................................................................................ 23

| RELEASE NOTE | Phast version 8.0 Page i

1.1 Improved dispersion calculations for short-duration releases

| RELEASE NOTE | Phast version 8.0 Page 2

| RELEASE NOTE | Phast version 8.0 Page 3

| RELEASE NOTE | Phast version 8.0 Page 4

Graph Name Description Equivalent in

Animation is available for this Graph.

Animation is available for this Graph.

Animation is available for this Graph.

| RELEASE NOTE | Phast version 8.0 Page 5

The Time-varying and

In the Accuracy and

For both instantaneous

| RELEASE NOTE | Phast version 8.0 Page 6

1.2 Modelling of crater formation for breaches in long pipelines

If you check the box to

The Scenario tab of the dialog for the

| RELEASE NOTE | Phast version 8.0 Page 7

Improvements in modelling for greater consistency and stability

 The removal of the velocity cap for expansion to atmospheric pressure.

Graphs of time-varying discharge results are now

The Mass graph shows the mass remaining in the

| RELEASE NOTE | Phast version 8.0 Page 8

| RELEASE NOTE | Phast version 8.0 Page 9

The option DNV GL recommended is a new

In the Near field tab of the Dispersion

The option New standard method is a new

1.6 Parallel processing available for dispersion and toxic

If this option is checked, then these

| RELEASE NOTE | Phast version 8.0 Page 10

2.1 Warehouse Model for modelling toxic plumes from a

To model a fire with a particular size and duration, you

Stage 1: Defining Warehouse Materials

Stage 2: Defining a Building type and a Building for the Warehouse

| RELEASE NOTE | Phast version 8.0 Page 11

Optional Stage 4: Generating the Fire Scenarios

Running the calculations and viewing the results

| RELEASE NOTE | Phast version 8.0 Page 12

| RELEASE NOTE | Phast version 8.0 Page 13

| RELEASE NOTE | Phast version 8.0 Page 14

3.1 More options for specifying process flow conditions for

There are now several options

The option to specify the Flow

Storage Conditions Phase to be released Options available for Flow controller

Padded liquid or pressurised gas Liquid None

Saturated liquid Liquid None

The Brode option uses the blast curves

3.4 New options for modelling a bund