search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
SAFETY IN THE PLANT


ABOVE: Measures to mitigate the effects of explosions are the basis of explosion protection LEFT: Round venting system on a silo BELOW: A 5 litre bottle chemical supressor


Moreover, all parts of the


enclosure – including valves, access ports, ductwork, etc. – exposed to the explosion pressure, must be taken into account when estimating the design pressure of the vessel. Tis is to ensure that the relief of the explosion pressure is accomplished in a controlled manner. Venting does not prevent an explosion: it limits the explosion pressure. Hence, flame and pressure effects outside the enclosure and flying debris must be anticipated and accounted for. To preclude this, flameless venting devices may be used – this form of venting is particularly useful for plant sited in


(or close to) the middle of the work area; otherwise, long vent ducts would be required to safely vent the explosion outside the confines of the building.


As mentioned above, explosion


suppression does provide containment of the ‘reduced explosion pressure’ (Pred). Tis is achieved by detection of the incipient explosion (i.e. in its early stages). Whilst the combustion is taking place (most of the time quite rapidly over a few milliseconds), once detected, suppressant is injected in to the growing fireball to quench the flame. Te predominant effect is absorption of heat, temperature reduction and


stoppage of flame transmission. Once again, all components of the vessel must be taken into account when estimating the design pressure. In practice, the quantity of


suppressant (number of suppressors) and their location will depend on the violence of the explosion (Pred and Kst from dust testing), the geometry of the vessel and its design pressure. With the exception of some milling operations, as a safety concept, explosion pressure containment is less common. Tis is due to the high design strength needed – typically of the order 8-10 barg for dust explosion containment. Common gases and hydrocarbons have lower peak explosion pressures of about 6-8 barg. It is important to recognise,


however, that any explosion protection system must cover upstream and downstream interconnections.


www.engineerlive.com 55


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68