Level 2 - Course 4b - Unit 5 - Slides
Level 2 - Course 4b - Unit 5 - Slides
Narration:
[No narration]
Narration:
[No narration]
You may recall this flammability diagram from the SAChE Fire Hazards course. When dealing
with flammable materials, fire and explosions may be prevented by avoiding the flammable
zone shown in red in the diagram.
Purging to replace the contents of a tank or vessel with inert can be accomplished in a number
of ways. Specific guidance on these methods is provided in the National Fire Protection
Association’s Standard 69 (NFPA 69).
Narration:
[No narration]
• Open flames;
• Combustion engines;
• Hot work;
• Hot surfaces;
• Smoldering; and
• Electrical and static discharges.
Hot work is typically managed through close supervision, permitting, testing for flammable
atmospheres, and training. All hot work within a chemical processing facility should be carefully
controlled via a rigorous Safe Work Practices/Hot Work Permit system.
For example, electrical components may be required to be placed in sealed, pressurized, and/or
purged boxes to prevent flammables from coming in contact with potential sparks inside the
box.
This can happen when fluids flow through a pipe, an aerosol forms, or a fluid is agitated in a
vessel. Incidents have most often been associated with the transfer of materials.
On the next two slides, we’ll examine each of these in more detail.
Always ground all equipment containing flammables. This includes reactors, storage tanks,
drums, trucks and railcars.
Unlike grounding, which allows the static charge to drain away, bonding equalizes the potential
charges but does not eliminate the static charge.
Narration:
[No narration]
This option is adequate for explosion protection; however, this may not protect from leaks in
the process that may result in flammable or toxic releases to the environment. If such incidents
are possible, then the design needs to be sufficient to prevent the vessel from leaking.
Each type of isolation equipment has specific uses and limitations. For a more complete
explanation of isolation, refer to NFPA 67 and NFPA 69.
[Female voice]
Click the buttons for examples of each.
Another active isolation technique makes use of fast-acting mechanical valves. These valves
close the path of deflagration propagation in a pipe or duct in response to detection of a
deflagration upstream.
• Deflagration and detonation arresters: These devices stop the combustion process while
allowing flow. There are two general categories of these arresters:
• Flame front diverters: These are devices that open in response to the pressure wave preceding
the flame front of the deflagration, thereby venting the pressure wave and flame front.
• Rotary valves: These must be designed for explosion isolation. A rotary valve is a rotating
paddle that moves solid particulate material from the bottom of an enclosure to the next
conveying device. Rotary valves designed for explosion isolation with extra sturdy housings
In this case, the elevated pressure in the latter compartment becomes the starting pressure for
a further deflagration. This effect is known as pressure piling, or cascading.
Narration:
[No narration]
A flame arrester is a device whose intended function is to allow flow but prevent the
transmission of flame from a deflagration. There are in-line and end-of-line arresters.
Arresters are rated for their ability to withstand continued exposure to a standing flame.
Narration:
[No narration]
Spring-actuated relief valves – commonly used to protect vessels from mechanical overpressure
– do not respond quickly enough to effectively relieve the pressure from a deflagration.
When panels are used for venting, the weight of the panel needs to be as low as practical to
minimize the inertia of the panel reducing the effectiveness of the vent.
NFPA 68 is an excellent resource to understand explosion vent sizing and design criteria.
We’ll learn about rooms designed to vent explosion effects in a preferred direction in the next
section.
Consider a dust collector with all vent panels on one side (which is not unusual). When an
explosion occurs, venting causes significant reaction forces on the support structure holding the
dust collector. Venting could cause the dust collector to collapse backwards from the direction
of venting.
The support structure needs to be designed for these reaction forces. Methods to calculate the
reaction forces may be found in NFPA 68.
Narration:
[No narration]
“Construction of equipment (or a building) with weak sections to limit the damage to the
equipment (building). The weak sections fail early and prevent damage to the rest of the
equipment (building).”
This is explosion venting, but where very large vent areas are required. In order to be effective,
the weak sections must be placed on external walls.
Excluding full containment structures, most structures attempt to direct the forces of the
explosion (blast waves and missiles) away from other process equipment or potentially occupied
areas.
• Testing; and
Testing is typically costly but can be done if the circumstances are unique. The scale of the test is
important in that combustion events are often influenced by scale.
Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) programming codes are available that are designed
specifically to model vapor cloud explosions (VCEs) and other types of explosions. These models
have been tested and validated for explosions and are in wide use across industry. This type of
modeling involves using a three dimensional representation of the area of interest where
different accidental release and explosion scenarios are modeled and hazards from flame and
blast are quantified; the results are used to improve the facility design.
These methods are used to size and design explosion vents and to evaluate the consequences of
explosions so that people, buildings, and equipment are located such that the operating risk is
tolerable.
[Female voice]
Click the CFD image to watch a brief visualization of a blast wave from a vapor cloud explosion
(VCE).
Narration:
[No narration]
Personnel who do not regularly need to go to the manufacturing area should not, as a general
rule, be located near the facility such that they are potentially impacted by fire or explosion
hazards.
• Collapse of walls, and especially roofs – these are major hazards to building occupants;
Window hazards; and
The blast, equivalent to about 635 kilograms of TNT, damaged buildings and injured off-site
office workers over 100 meters away.
While current methods for estimating the consequences of bursting vessels do not use TNT
equivalence, the quantification of the explosion energy in these terms is helpful to convey the
relative severity potential of an explosion.
Narration:
[Use video’s CC feature to read transcript of narration embedded in video]
• API 753: Management of Hazards Associated With Location of Process Plant Portable
Buildings;
• API 756: Management of Hazards Associated With Location of Process Plant Tents;
• UK Chemical Industries Association, 2010, Guidance for the Location and Design of
Occupied Buildings on Chemical Manufacturing Sites.
You can click the images of the documents to learn about them.
Narration:
[No narration]
• NFPA 67: Guide on Explosion Protection for Gaseous Mixtures in Pipe Systems;
• NFPA 68: Standard on Explosion Protection by Deflagration Venting;
• NFPA 69: Standard on Explosion Prevention Systems; and
• NFPA 497: Recommended Practice for the Classification of Flammable Gases, Liquids or
Vapors and of Hazardous (Classified) Locations for Electrical Installations in Chemical
Process Areas.
On the next slide, we’ll take a brief look back at the main topics we covered in this course.
• You learned how to categorize a potential explosion scenario by the type of explosion;
and
• You learned how to identify the source of the explosion energy, given a potential
explosion scenario.
And as we just summarized on the previous slide, this final unit presented ways in which
explosion hazards can be prevented and protected against.
Before closing the course, please take the Unit 5 quiz. The quiz introduction is on the next slide.