Se 001 Se11 001

MWKL Job No.
5909-10 Doc No: SE-001-SE11-001

Client: Fatima Fertilizer Company Ltd. Revision: 1
Project: Ammonia Plant Basic Engineering Design Page 1 of 18
Location: Sadiqabad, Pakistan
FIRE PROOFING PHILOSOPHY
This document and the information/data contained therein is confidential, remains the
property of M. W. Kellogg and has been provided for use on the Fatima Fertilizer project
only. The use of this document and the information/data contained therein is governed
by the confidentiality and intellectual property provisions of the relevant Agreement(s)
between Fatima, Sojitz, K-Plant and M. W. Kellogg. It must not be otherwise copied,
loaned or transferred, used for any other purpose, nor must the information it contains
be disclosed to any other party, other than as required for the execution of the Fatima
Fertilizer project, without the written consent of M. W. Kellogg Ltd.
1 20 Dec 07 Issued for Design LSV MKD MJH

0 19 Oct 07 Issued for Client Comments LSV MKD MJH
Rev Date Reason for issue By Checked Approved
MWKL Job No. 5909-10 Doc. No.: SE-001-SE11-
001
Client: Fatima Fertilizer Company Ltd. Page 2 of 18
Project: Ammonia Plant Basic Engineering Design Revision: 1
Table of Contents
1.0 PREAMBLE ......................................................................................................... 3
2.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 3

2.1 Objectives ........................................................................................................... 4
2.2 Abbreviations...................................................................................................... 4
2.3 References .......................................................................................................... 4
3.0 HAZARD ASSESSMENT..................................................................................... 5

3.1 Fire Hazard Evaluation....................................................................................... 6
3.2 Protection of safety related valves and systems............................................. 7
4.0 FIRE RISK POTENTIAL....................................................................................... 7
5.0 DETERMINING FIRE PROOFING NEEDS .......................................................... 8

5.1 Extent of Fireproofing ........................................................................................ 8
6.0 FIREPROOFING INSIDE PROCESS AREAS ..................................................... 9

6.1 Protection of piping, ESD and blowdown valves........................................... 14
7.0 FIRE PROOFING MATERIALS ......................................................................... 15

MWKL Job No. 5909-10 Doc. No.: SE-001-SE11-001
1.0 PREAMBLE
This fire proofing philosophy is written on the request of the Client, Fatima Fertiliser Co.
Ltd. It covers standard fireproofing requirements for a process plant.
Fireproofing is installed in process plants to protect the plant against the effect of local pool
fires. The philosophy generally adopted ensures fireproofing is installed on equipment and
supporting structures to prevent failure of such equipment / structures engulfed by fire for a
pre determined period. Critical safety valves which must operate in the event of an
emergency shutdown or depressurisation operation must also be protected – this would
normally include any instrumentation tubing, cabling etc.
Such fires can be caused following major spill of combustible materials from any
equipment. In the ammonia plant, there is not much equipment identified from which
spillage could give rise to a pool fire. Only anhydrous ammonia and lube oil can be
classified as flammable liquids. Lube oil is class III liquid and not highly flammable,
anhydrous ammonia presents a low fire risk because due to its relatively high Lower
Flammability Limit (LFL) of 16%. (As a comparison, most hydrocarbons exhibit LFL in the
range 1 – 5%). In addition the minimum ignition energy is 680mJ (compared to 0.3mJ for
methane). Therefore, fireproofing may not be required in the ammonia production facility
except for a very small number of items.
There is a significantly higher risk of escape of highly toxic gases such as ammonia,
carbon monoxide and highly flammable gases such as hydrogen and methane. It is
recommended that prominence be given to installation of effective F&G detection and
firefighting systems.
2.0 INTRODUCTION
Fireproofing (called as Passive Fire Protection-PFP) is one of the options available to

mitigate damage caused by fire. It offers protection against the adverse thermal effects of
fire for a limited period and limited degree of heat flux exposure. It should not be
considered as a replacement for active fire fighting or lead to relaxation of normal design
requirements (spacing and layout considerations) and precautions in operation and
maintenance.
The identification of systems, equipment and structures that require passive fire protection
system shall follow a risk based design approach using API 2218 (Ref. 1) as a guideline.
The methodology adopted considers:
• Identification of potential fire hazards using the guidance given in API 2218.
• Establish fire scenarios including potential release rate and determining the dimensions of fire-
scenario-envelopes.
• Identify and locate safety critical systems and equipment, including vessels and buildings.
• Establish potential for impairment due to flame impingement and heat flux levels on critical
equipment, systems and structures.
2.1 Objectives
The principal objective of Passive Fire Protection (PFP) is to minimise the escalation of a
fire scenario and improve the survivability of critical items of equipment, (including
emergency systems), and for site personnel and fire fighters. Fireproofing is only effective
for a short period (30 to 90 Minutes) to allow personnel to escape and for firefighters to
arrive and initiate the firefighting. Passive fire protection forms only a part of the total fire
protection system measures employed on a plant. Additionally, active fire protection
systems are provided to fight the initial stages of fires. There shall also be a Fire and Gas
Detection System to alert the plant operators.
During a fire, steelwork temperature can reach the point where strength and rigidity of the
steel member is reduced. Fireproofing will sharply reduce the rate of temperature rise of
the structural members and thus delay or prevent the collapse of unprotected equipment
and structural supports, which could otherwise lead to further loss of hydrocarbon
containment and subsequent escalation
The objectives of this document are to Identify equipment which requires the application of
PFP and provide guidance of the expected extent of the fire scenario (fire envelope area),
and identify equipment which requires the application of PFP.
2.2 Abbreviations
ESD Emergency Shut Down
F&G Fire and Gas
FEED Front End Engineering Design
PFP Passive Fire Protection
BLEVE Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapour Explosion
FIR Field Instrument Room
MSDS Material Safety Data Sheet
NDT Non Destructive Testing
UL Underwriters Laboratory
2.3 References
1 API 2218 Fire Proofing Practices in Petrochemical and Processing Plants

2 API 2510 Design and Construction of LPG Installations (May 2001)
3 Liquid Petroleum Gas Vol 1: Large bulk pressure Storage &
IP Part 9
refrigerated LPG
4 V41-2D KBR Document – General Fireproofing Requirements

5 UL 1709 Fire Tests on Buildings and Structures
6 API 521 Guide for Pressure-Relieving and Depressuring (March 1997)
3.0 HAZARD ASSESSMENT
Hazards may arise where an accidental event could lead to the release of flammable
hydrocarbons. The form of release is dependent upon many factors including:
• Type of container and release point
• Release point size and profile
• Pressure and temperature
• Quantity of fuel
• Fuel type
Although both jet and pool fires can be a risk to steel elements the fireproofing is only
applied to pool fire scenarios. It can be assumed that if a flammable liquid is accidentally
released and catches fire that the area engulfed in fire containing other equipments or steel
structures can be at high risk until the fire is controlled. Conversely, it is expected any jet
fire due to gaseous release of flammable materials can be isolated, shutdown and
depressurized within 15-30 minutes of the incident thus reducing the risk of structural
failure. However PFP against jet fires may be applied in exceptional situations where,
equipment contains liquefied flammable gases of sufficient volume to pose BLEVE risk.
Either quantitative or qualitative risk assessment shall be used to assist in the hazard
identification and risk evaluation. Each item of equipment will be evaluated to determine its
potential fire hazard scenario, i.e. the location and types of fire hazard areas identification.
These potential fire hazard scenarios will be used to form fire scenario envelopes, following
the guidelines quantified in API 2218.
It must be emphasised that the scope of API 2218 relates only to property loss protection
for pool fire scenarios and does not apply to jet fires or vapour cloud explosions.
API 2218 has suggested methods of evaluating fire hazards. The details of evaluation in
later sections will be adopted as part of this design philosophy. This will be used as the
determining criteria for PFP requirements, otherwise the following flow diagram, (Diagram
1-Selecting Fireproofing Systems), will be used as a guide.
START
HAZARD EVALUATION Equipment List

Layout -HAZID
-QRA
Identify Fire Potential Equipment
Define Fire Scenario Envelop
Identify Exposed Elements

-Equipment
-Structures
- Critical Equipment
Select Appropriate
Fireproofing material
Apply fireproofing according to

the guide (API 2218)
Diagram 1 - Selecting Fireproofing System
3.1 Fire Hazard Evaluation
From the design guidelines, the fire hazard envelope shall be determined within each fire
area with consideration to the hazardous equipment contain therein. The PFP is based on
design code API 2218 [Ref 1], which specifically addresses property loss protection for
pool fires scenarios, but which does not consider jet fires or vapour cloud explosions.
The most effective mitigation methods in the event of a jet fire is to shutdown and isolate
the fuel supply, and depressurise the contents of the relevant plant section to flare as per
API 521 [Ref 6], thus reducing the pressure which will cause a reduction in jet fire flame
length, and eventual extinguishment of the fire, once the fuel is consumed.
3.2 Protection of safety related valves and systems
The operation of emergency valves and valve actuators in areas exposed to fire is
essential to shutting down units safely, depressurizing equipment, or isolating fuel feeding
a fire.
4.0 FIRE RISK POTENTIAL
API 2218 guidelines categorises Fire Potential Equipment as High, Medium, Low Risk and
Non–Fire potential. These categorisations are based on experience which show that some
type of equipment have a higher potential than others, based on historical incident
frequency and / or severity. These fire potential definitions are intended for most types of
hydrocarbon handling equipment that can release appreciable quantity of flammable or
combustible fluids [Ref 1].
High Fire Potential Equipment

The following are examples of equipment considered to have a high fire potential:
• Fired heaters that process liquid or mixed-phase hydrocarbon at pressure and flow
rates that are capable of causing large spills before the heater can be isolated.
• Pumps with a rated capacity over (45 m3/h) that handle flammable or combustible
liquids above or within 8°C of their flash point temperature.
• Compressors, together with related lube-oil systems. (Although compressors do not
have a high liquid fire potential, they can generate a fire scenario envelope if there is a
prolonged release of gas and an intense fire in the vicinity of important structural
supports).
• Vessels, heat exchangers (including air-cooled exchangers), and other equipment
containing flammable or combustible liquids over 315°C or their auto-ignition
temperature, whichever is less.
Medium Fire Potential Equipment

The following are examples of equipment considered to have a medium fire potential:
• Accumulators, feed drums, and other vessels that may leak as a result of broken
instrumentation, ruptured gaskets, or other apparatus.
• Columns that may leak as a result of broken gauge columns or gasket failure on connected
piping and bottom re-boilers.
• Air-cooled fin fan exchangers that handle flammable and combustible liquids.
Low Fire Potential Equipment

The following are examples of equipment considered to have a low fire potential:
• Pumps that handle Class IIIB liquids below their flash points.
• Piping within battery limits which has a concentration of valves, fittings and flanges.
• Heat exchangers that may develop flange leaks.
Non Fire Potential Equipment

Non fire potential equipment has little or no chance of releasing flammable or combustible
fluids either prior to or shortly after the outbreak of a fire. Piping and other equipment that
handles non combustible fluids are considered to be non fire-potential equipment.
5.0 DETERMINING FIRE PROOFING NEEDS
Determining fireproofing requirements involves experience-based or formal risk-based

evaluation that includes developing fire scenarios from which the needs analysis evolves.
An approach for selecting fireproofing systems includes the following:
• Quantification of inventories
• Fire scenario envelope and potential release rate
• Fireproofing material
• Technical, economical and environmental consideration.
5.1 Extent of Fireproofing
Fire scenario envelope

The fire scenario envelope is the three-dimensional space into which fire-potential
equipment can release flammable or combustible fluids capable of burning long enough
and with enough intensity to cause substantial property damage. An integral part of
defining the fire-scenario envelope is determining the appropriate dimension to use for
planning fire protection. The nature and severity of potential fire within the envelope will be
the basis to decide the amount of fire proofing required.
For liquid hydrocarbon fuels, a frequently used frame of reference, as per API 2218, for the
fire-scenario envelope, is one that extends 6 m to 12 m horizontally and vertically from the
source of liquid fuel. In many cases it can be assumed that candidate equipment within an
envelope is 9 metre horizontally and 9 metre vertically has to be fireproofed. For pool fires,
the source is considered to be at the periphery of the fire, which is delineated by dikes,
bunds or kerbs. A 90 minutes protection for vessels, pipe supports, ESD valves, and a 15
to 30 minutes protection for critical wiring and control systems are recommended in API
2218.
5.1.1 Fire Envelope Dimensions

The following tables have been extracted from API 2218. Refer to Table 1&2 within API
2218 for reference.
Hazard Concern Horizontal Vertical

A fire scenario source of liquid fuel 6 to 12 m 6 to 12 m
release-general
Fire potential equipment 6 to 12 m Up to highest level
supporting equipment
Non fire potential equipment above 6 to 12 m 9 m above grade
fire potential equipment
LPG vessels as potential source Pipe supports within 15 m or Up to level nearest 9 m
exposure within spill containment area above grade
Fin-fan coolers on pipe racks 6 to 12 m All support members up to
within fire scenario envelope coolers
Rotating equipment 6 to 12 m from source of 6 to 12 m
leakage
Tanks, spheres containing liquid Up to dike wall or 6 m from 6 to 12 m
flammable material other than LPG vessel (the greater distance is
used)
Marine docks where flammable 30 m from manifold or loading From the water surface up
materials are handled connection to dock surface
Table 1 Dimensions of Fire-Scenario Envelope
Equipment Protection Level

Vessels, Pipe supports, ESD valves 90 minutes
Critical wiring and Control systems 15 to 30 minutes
Table 2 Level of Fireproofing Protection in Fire-Scenario Envelope
6.0 FIREPROOFING INSIDE PROCESS AREAS
Structures which support process equipment, which has been identified as having a degree
of fire potential, shall be considered for fireproofing, especially the vertical and horizontal
steel support members from grade up to the highest level at which the equipment is
supported. When equipment or similar vessels are installed on the supporting protected
steel, fireproofing shall be considered for equivalent protection of supporting steel brackets,
lugs, or skirts (see Figures 1 to 4). To maintain the structural integrity, it is very important to
consider the insulating effect of the fireproofing material in the design of supports for
vessels that operate at high temperatures.
Steel structures (including component structural columns, cross members and bracing)
supporting process vessels, columns or exchangers located within a fire envelope shall be
fireproofed when one or more of the following criteria apply:
1. Sudden failure of the structure may cause danger to personnel.
2. The supported equipment contains a total of more than 2 tonnes of flammable
product.
3. The supported equipment has a total mass (including contents) of more than 10
tonnes.
4. The supported equipment contains toxic material.
5. Failure of the steel structure and supported equipment may lead to consequences
beyond the property limit, including environmental damage.
Multilevel Equipment Structures

When structures support equipment that has the potential to add fuel or escalate the fire,
fireproofing will be considered for the vertical and horizontal steel support members from
grade up to the highest level at which the equipment is supported (see Figure 1).
Collapse of unprotected structures that support other high risk equipment within the fire
scenario envelope could result in substantial escalation. To mitigate against any further
escalation, fireproofing will be considered for the vertical and horizontal steel members
providing load bearing from grade level up to and including the level that is nearest to 9 m
elevation above grade (see Figure 2). Elevated floors and platforms that could retain
significant quantities of liquid hydrocarbons will not be designed on this project. All elevated
platforms will be of the grated flooring type.
Figure 1 Structure Supporting Fire-Potential and Non Fire-Potential Equipment in a Fire-Scenario

Area. (Extracted from API 2218 Figure 4)
Steel Supports for Pipe Racks

When a pipe rack is within a fire scenario envelope, fireproofing will be considered for
vertical and horizontal supports, up to and including the first level, especially if the
supported piping contains flammable materials, combustible liquids or toxic materials. If a
pipe rack carries piping with a diameter greater than 150 mm, at levels above the first
horizontal beam, fireproofing shall be considered up to and including the level that is
nearest to a 9 m elevation (see Figure 3).
If air fin-fan coolers are installed on top of a pipe rack within a fire-scenario envelope,
fireproofing will be considered for all vertical and horizontal support members on all levels
of the pipe rack, including support members for the air fin-fan coolers, regardless of their
elevation above grade (see Figure 4).
.
Figure 2 Structure support Non fire Figure 3 Piperack without pumps in a
potential equipment in a Fire Fire Scenario Area (Extracted from
Scenario Area (Extracted from API API 2218 Figure 7).
2218 Figure 6).
Fireproofing for Air Coolers

When air fin-fan coolers in liquid hydrocarbon service are located at grade level within a
fire-scenario envelope, fireproofing shall be considered for their supports.
Fireproofing shall be considered for the structural supports of all air-cooled exchangers
handling flammable or combustible liquids at an inlet temperature above their auto-ignition
temperature, or above 315°C, whichever is lower.
When air-cooled exchangers are located above vessels or equipment that contain
flammable materials, fireproofing shall be considered for the structural supports located
within a 6 m –12 m horizontal radius of such vessels or equipment, regardless of height
(see Figure 4).
If air coolers are handling gas only, and are not exposed to a fire from other equipment
below them, fireproofing the support structure may not provide added value if, when the
gas coolers fail, the fire will be above the coolers, and without the potential to jet
downwards and cause flame impingement.
Figure 4 Pipe Rack Supporting Fin-Fan Air Coolers in a Fire Scenario Area. (Extracted
from API 2218 Figure 9)
Columns and Vessel Skirts within a Fire Scenario Envelope

Fireproofing shall be considered for the exterior surfaces of skirts that support columns and
vertical vessels. Consideration shall also be given to fireproofing interior surfaces of skirts if
there are flanges or valves inside the skirt, or if there are unsealed openings exceeding
600 mm equivalent diameter in the skirt. Consideration shall be given to minimizing the
effects of draft through vent openings and space that surround pipe penetration in the skirt.
Fireproofing shall be considered for brackets or lugs that are used to attach vertical re-
boilers or heat exchangers to columns or column skirts.
Leg Supports for Columns and Vessels within a Fire Scenario Envelope
If columns or vessels are elevated on exposed steel legs, fire proofing will be considered
for the leg supports to their full load bearing height.
Fireproofing of Saddles within a Fire Scenario Envelope

Fireproofing will be considered for steel saddles that support horizontal heat exchangers,
coolers, condensers, drums, receivers, and accumulators that have diameters greater than
750 mm, if the narrowest vertical distance between the concrete pier and the shell of the
vessel exceeds 300 mm.
Fired Heaters within a Fire Scenario Envelope

Structural members supporting fired heaters above grade shall be fireproofed for heaters
handling flammable or combustible liquids.
6.1 Protection of piping, ESD and blowdown valves
This section considers requirement for the application of a PFP system to:
• Piping associated with ESD and blowdown systems.
• ESD system and valves
• Blowdown system and valves
• Fire and gas detection systems
• Fire and gas general alarm systems
• UPS System
ESD and Blowdown Piping Systems

ESD valves, including their supports, should be located such that they can not be impaired
by a loss of hydrocarbon containment in the section of plant that it is isolating. If this can
not be achieved then the valves and ancillary control equipment shall be protected from
thermal radiation where the equipment is not designed to be fail safe to the extent required
by API 2218 (Ref. 1), i.e. 90 minutes protection. This shall also apply to piperacks and
support steelwork for the ESD and blowdown system valves.
Piping for blowdown systems shall in general not require passive fire protection, however
the pipe supports for flare and blowdown lines that could be engulfed in a fire shall be
protected.
Valves and Actuators

Passive fire protection shall be provided for valve limit switches (without affecting operation
or maintenance) and associated wiring for both ESD and Blowdown valves to provide
reliable indication of valve status from the Central Control Room.
ESD Valves and actuators

As a minimum valves shall be certified and fire tested by a recognised institute to prevent
seal failure when exposed to hydrocarbon fire, or until blow-down has been successfully
completed. ESD valves shall be equipped with spring return pneumatic actuators and fail
close on loss of air supply or signal. As a result, ESD valve actuators and solenoid valve
wiring will not require passive fire protection. A fusible plug shall be installed in the ESD
valve air supply which will melt in the event of fire and fail the valve closed
Blowdown valves and actuators

Blow-down valves shall be equipped with spring return pneumatic actuators and fail open
on loss of air supply but remain closed on loss of signal (energize to open). Dual solenoid
valves shall be provided to ensure that the blow-down valve will open on demand.
It is a process control requirement to keep the blowdown valves operational during a fire;
as such a backup air supply shall be provided for each blowdown valve to provide a
minimum of three full strokes operation for up to 90 minutes at fire conditions. As a result,
all valve components, including the valve body, actuator, air accumulator, valve
accessories, associated tubing and control wiring shall be fire proofed.
Pneumatic and Hydraulic Control Lines

Pneumatic and hydraulic control lines associated with ESD and blowdown valve actuators
arranged for fail-safe operation will not require PFP if the following criteria is met.
Pneumatic instrument lines that are manufactured from ASTM types 304,316 and 321
stainless steel tubing do not require protection with PFP materials as they are highly
resistant to the effects of a hydrocarbon fire (refer to API 2218, Section 6.1.8.2).
Cables and Cable Trays

Power and instrument cables servicing the following systems shall be fire resistant to the
conditions stated in UL 1709 or equivalent, i.e. IEC 60331/60332, unless the systems being
initiated are fail safe. Wiring should be protected for a period of 15 to 30 minutes.
• Fire and gas detection systems
• ESD and blowdown
• General alarm and Public Address systems
• UPS system
• Escape Lighting
• Aircraft Warning Lights
7.0 FIRE PROOFING MATERIALS
Materials with various chemical and physical properties are available in the market for fire
proofing, the material selected shall be appropriate for the intended application. Where
fireproofing coatings are applied directly to steel, most manufacturers recommend the use
of primers chosen for compatibility with the coating, and appropriate for corrosion control
and the environmental conditions. Consideration shall be given for the weight limitation on
the items to be fireproofed and expected fire exposure and temperature rise and its effects.
When selecting the material for the fireproofing of equipment and vessels supports,
saddles, lugs and skirts, it is important to consider the operating temperature of the
equipment and heat transfer to the supports themselves. Certain materials will be
unsuitable due to the operating temperatures involved which may either cause the PFP
material to crack and break off or, as with the case of intumescents, cause the PFP
material to become active. Insulating materials shall be considered where appropriate to
alleviate this problem, however, the preferred application of PFP will be of a singular and
uniform type without the need for overly complicated design which could cause difficulties
during the construction process and possibly affect the overall integrity of the PFP system.
Material Properties
Physical properties such as resistance to thermal diffusivity, strength, vibration resistance,
porosity for the materials are important in selecting a fire proofing material. However,
where any gases or vapours penetration into the fireproofing material is also important
when they exposed and its effects shall be considered in the selection of the fireproofing
material. During fires some fireproofing material generate smoke, the toxicity of heat-
exposed fireproofing material off-gases should be evaluated, if used in areas where
employee or responder exposure is a concern.
Bonding should be strong enough to ensure that fireproofing materials will withstand
mechanical impact and protect the substrate against corrosion. Poor bonding can
significantly reduce the service life of fireproofing materials, making them subject to total
failure if they are exposed to a stress such as a fire-hose stream. A standard bonding test
(ASTM E 736) is used for determining the “cohesion/adhesion” of spray-applied fire-
resistive materials, either fibrous or cementitious.
Type of Materials
Materials shall be selected from what is currently available in the market place to meet the
design criteria required within this specification. Materials to be considered will generally
fall into the following categories for technical and cost benefit evaluation:
• Concrete
• Mastics
• Cementitious
• Intumescent Epoxy
Consideration shall also be given to the effects of spalling. Fires involving concrete have
shown that the effect of spalling can create a hazard to fire fighting crews, preventing them
from approaching the fire area to carry out active fire fighting. The mix of aggregates and
curing times etc shall be carefully specified.
Concretes
Dense Concretes
Concretes made with Portland cement have a specific weight of 2200 to 2400 kg/m3.
Dense concretes can be formed in place, or pneumatically sprayed to the required
thickness using steel reinforcement. The corrosive effect of chlorides on the steel surface
in moist environments dictates the use of protective primers and topcoat sealers. It has
high durability and can withstand high temperatures and flame impingement but its weight
is a disadvantage for fireproofing.
Lightweight Concrete
Lightweight concrete uses very light aggregate, such as vermiculite or perlite (instead of
gravel), with cements that are resistant to high temperatures. Dry densities range from 400
to 1300 kg/m3. Lightweight concrete is usually sprayed on, but may be troweled or formed
in-place using reinforcing mesh. Pneumatically applied material is about 20% heavier than
poured-in-place lightweight concrete.
As with all concretes, moisture creates a corrosive condition at the surface of the steel.
Protective coating of the substrate surface is needed to protect against corrosion.
Mastics
Mastics provide heat barriers through one or more of the following mechanisms:
a. Subliming mastics absorb large amounts of heat as they change directly from a solid to
a gaseous state.
b. Intumescent mastics expand to several times their volume when exposed to heat, and
form a protective insulating ash or char at the barrier that faces the fire.
c. Ablative mastics absorb heat as they lose mass through oxidative erosion.
Mastics are sprayed on a substrate in one or more coats, depending on the desired
degree of fire resistance. Reinforcing fabric or wire (which may be rigidly specified) is
usually needed for fire-resistance ratings of 1 hour or more. Mastics may also be hand
troweled, if permitted in the manufacturer’s specifications. Substrate preparation is
important to achieve adequate bonding in applying coatings; a specific primer may be
required. After applying the mastic coat, some materials require a top-finish coat on
the surface to prevent moisture from penetrating.
Cementitious
A sprayed (or troweled) coating formulated from Portland cement and lightweight
aggregate or perlite provides excellent fireproofing insulation (up to 4 hours in UL 1709 or
functional equivalent tests) with durability in exterior applications. The properties of the
vermiculite allow it to dent rather than crack or shatter on impact. The material is relatively
lightweight at 700 to 800 kg/m3 and may not need a top-sealing coat.
Intumescent Epoxy
A wide range of intumescent epoxy coatings are available. These can be described as a
mix of thermally reactive chemicals in a specific epoxy matrix formulated for fireproofing
applications. Under fire conditions they react to emit gases, which cool the surface while a
low density carbonaceous char is formed. This char then serves as a thermal barrier.
These coatings have excellent bonding and corrosion protection. They are typically
lightweight and durable under nonfire conditions. Certain materials have demonstrated
exceptional durability in severe jet-fire tests. They can withstand thermal shock and high-
pressure hose streams.
Maintenance
As fireproofing materials age, problems can develop that affect the function of the system
or coating and possibly weaken the protected structural supports. Periodically inspection
shall be made to discover problems in physical property of the material. Any fireproofing
material is subject to degradation over time; however, some applications have been known
to fail at a rapid rate. Cracking or bulging of the surface of the material is an early sign of a
problem. If the problem is not corrected, moisture, chemicals, corrosive vapour, or marine
condensation could enter and lead to corrosion of both the substrate and the reinforcement
materials.
Inspection of Fireproof Coatings
Periodic inspection and testing maximizes the useful life of the fireproofing system. The
manufacturer or applier may be invited to participate in the inspection. An inspection and
testing program should include the following steps:
• Survey coatings for surface cracking, delamination, rust staining, or bulging.
• Survey coatings for signs of weathering (color change, powdering, thinning of coat).
• Selectively remove small sections of fireproofing to examine conditions at the face of
the substrate and the surface of reinforcing wire. Repair the inspection area.
• Visually check for the loss of fireproofing materials as a result of mechanical abuse.
• When the fireproofing material is applied, coat and set aside several pieces of structural
steel for periodic fire-testing over the expected life of the coating. (This is not necessary
with rigid box or flexible containment systems.)
• Inspect to make sure that the fireproofing hasn’t been removed for maintenance and
not replaced.

Se 001 Se11 001

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Se 001 Se11 001

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

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

Se 001 Se11 001

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MWKL Job No.

5909-10 Doc No: SE-001-SE11-001

FIRE PROOFING PHILOSOPHY

1 20 Dec 07 Issued for Design LSV MKD MJH

1.0 PREAMBLE ......................................................................................................... 3

2.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 3

3.0 HAZARD ASSESSMENT..................................................................................... 5

4.0 FIRE RISK POTENTIAL....................................................................................... 7

5.0 DETERMINING FIRE PROOFING NEEDS .......................................................... 8

6.0 FIREPROOFING INSIDE PROCESS AREAS ..................................................... 9

7.0 FIRE PROOFING MATERIALS ......................................................................... 15

Fireproofing (called as Passive Fire Protection-PFP) is one of the options available to

1 API 2218 Fire Proofing Practices in Petrochemical and Processing Plants

4 V41-2D KBR Document – General Fireproofing Requirements

3.0 HAZARD ASSESSMENT

HAZARD EVALUATION Equipment List

Identify Fire Potential Equipment

Define Fire Scenario Envelop

Identify Exposed Elements

Apply fireproofing according to

Diagram 1 - Selecting Fireproofing System

3.1 Fire Hazard Evaluation

3.2 Protection of safety related valves and systems

4.0 FIRE RISK POTENTIAL

High Fire Potential Equipment

Medium Fire Potential Equipment

Low Fire Potential Equipment

• Heat exchangers that may develop flange leaks.

Non Fire Potential Equipment

5.0 DETERMINING FIRE PROOFING NEEDS

Determining fireproofing requirements involves experience-based or formal risk-based

5.1 Extent of Fireproofing

Fire scenario envelope

5.1.1 Fire Envelope Dimensions

2218 for reference.

Hazard Concern Horizontal Vertical

Table 1 Dimensions of Fire-Scenario Envelope

Equipment Protection Level

Table 2 Level of Fireproofing Protection in Fire-Scenario Envelope

6.0 FIREPROOFING INSIDE PROCESS AREAS

Multilevel Equipment Structures

Figure 1 Structure Supporting Fire-Potential and Non Fire-Potential Equipment in a Fire-Scenario

Steel Supports for Pipe Racks

Fireproofing for Air Coolers

Columns and Vessel Skirts within a Fire Scenario Envelope

Fireproofing of Saddles within a Fire Scenario Envelope

Fired Heaters within a Fire Scenario Envelope

6.1 Protection of piping, ESD and blowdown valves

ESD and Blowdown Piping Systems

Valves and Actuators

ESD Valves and actuators

Blowdown valves and actuators

Pneumatic and Hydraulic Control Lines

Cables and Cable Trays

7.0 FIRE PROOFING MATERIALS

Inspection of Fireproof Coatings

You might also like