![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Peter Skelton" wrote in message ... On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 15:33:05 +0100, "Keith Willshaw" wrote: For the plant it might be, and there might be casualties there, but, because the gas is over its ignition temperature, it can't BLEVE. You get a fire burning the material in the pipe. There wouldn't be effect beyond the fence. If the plant systems functioned properly, the outage might be less than two weeks. BTW, how would you go about breaking this line? A buldozer isn't going to get there. These lines are fairly robust and plant's just in case defenses against leaks are considerable. Oh come on Peter. There are LPG lines all over the dammed place on any refinery and a major leak is bloody hard to contain. Go and look at the report on what happened at Flixborough (I can think of much worse scenarios, but not ones started by a bulldozer that begins outside the fence. They start with operator or maintenance error compounded by control room error.) In the case of the Flixborough accident in the UK a pressure vessel was bypassed by the maintenance dept using pipes and bellows units. Unfortunately the bypass was not properly anchored and a slug of liquid caused the bypass to tear loose. Flixborough happened in 1974. At that time, I was employed by DuPont at Maitland ON, a plant that has a very large Cyane oxidation unit so we had passing interest in the event. IIRC, they were using a temporary bypass that had been constucted without engineering assistance. A slug of process fluid, caused by a process upset, tore a bellows that was improperly installed. Gee I just said that There was no automatic shut-off upstream. The plant lacked modern process controllers[3] and was, even by standards of the day, not centrally controlled. Quite so , not that it would have helped much The explosion was 15 tons equivalent of the BLEVE [1] type, the fire lasted days becuase about 10% of the plant inventory had to be allowed to burn out [2]. There was minimal effect past the fence. Wrong. Even though the explosion occurred on a rural site 53 members of the public received major injuries and hundreds more sustained minor injuries. The plant was destroyed as were several others on the same site and close to two thousand houses, shops, and factories were damaged with some 3000 residents being left homeless No part of the plant met modern standards. There are plenty of 1970's pterochem plants still out there and the best control system in the world doesnt help when you dump 50 tons of Cyclohexane into the environment. The causes of the event were internal to the plant. The process affected was obsolete and hazardous at the time and recognized as such. A bulldozer tearing open a line would have had the same effect. The situation you describe is nothing like this. In your case vapour burns as soon as it finds an oxidizer, mixing is not possible. Shut-offs would function automatically and limit the amount of fuel. There will be no big bang, although there would be one hell of a whoosh. You are assuming no coincident or consequential damage occurs, this is a POOR assumption. What structures are being weakened by that flame and what happens when they fail. It is such risks that are rarely analysed and often provide the nasty shock when an incident occurs One of the worst industrial Bleve's happened on a french plant where a small fire started at a faulty valve. Trouble is the flame impinged on a LPG storage sphere BANG Keith ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|