search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
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
EXPLORATION • DRILLING • FIELD SERVICES


Table: FM tested and approved data[2]


design of a DIFFS should incorporate a method of fire detection, typically optical flame detection, and be configured to avoid spurious trips. The system should also be capable of remote override. This article discusses the latest advances in optical flame detection for this application.


TRIPLE IR FLAME DETECTORS Triple IR (IR3) flame detectors are arguably the most used optical flame detector for hydrocarbon fires today. A triple IR detector has three


sensors, each sensitive to a different IR wavelength. The IR radiation emitted by a typical hydrocarbon fire is more intense at the wavelength accepted by one sensor, typically 4.5 microns, than the other two which monitor adjacent spectral bands (guard bands) for false alarms. “With other sources of radiation (e.g., heaters, lamps, sunlight) this is not the case, as. the intensity at 4.5 micron is no greater than the intensity of at least one of the guard bands. Electronic circuitry in the detector translates the information received into data that can be analysed for flame flicker analysis, threshold energy signal comparison, and mathematical ratios and correlations between various signals. Triple IR detectors are virtually


immune to false alarms and can have extremely long detection distances to some fire types. There are, however, wide performance variations from brand to brand as no two triple IR detectors are the same.


The presence of exhaust


(combustion) gases from helicopter engines is known to cause false alarms for some IR3 detectors, a special configuration, immune to these false positives, has been developed by FGD. False alarms offshore are a genuine


concern for production and safety. Should a helicopter engine downdraft induce a false alarm on approach to a helideck, the firefighting system could activate automatically and create a safety concern for all onboard the aircraft. The special FlameSpec


configurations have been independently tested and approved by Factory Mutual (FM). The table[2] shows the response data for one such configuration.


A TYPICAL HELIDECK INSTALLATION A typical helideck suppression system is activated by a standalone control system mounted close to the DIFFs skid in an ATEX-approved enclosure. This system automatically monitors


the helideck via three flame detectors, located at 120-degree intervals around the perimeter of the helideck. One such flame detector has an


embedded HD camera which can be viewed remotely from a control room or shore-based facility. This feature has been found to be particularly suited to remote NUI facilities. Many operators have noted the


benefit of having video and data of events stored quickly to non-volatile


memory locally for post incident investigation. Recordings start one minute before detection and continue for up to four minutes.


SUMMARY In this article, we have presented an innovative solution to help reduce false alarms from triple frequency infrared flame detectors in applications where exhaust gases from helicopter engines can exist. We have also discussed how the use of an integral HD CCTV camera can provide a live video feed with real- time incident status to operators who can make informed decisions and direct responders accordingly.


[1]


UK Civil Aviation Authority, Safety Regulation Group, CAP 437 ‘Standards for Offshore Helicopter Landing Areas’, Edition 8, amendment 02 July 2021


[2]


FlameSpec IR3-HD manual, document number F101V0020.06, published June 2021


[3] NFPA 409, 2016 edition


Dr Eliot Sizeland is vice president of business development at Fire & Gas Detection Technologies Inc. www.fg-detection.com


www.engineerlive.com 11


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