Explosion protection

Stanley Grossel, President, Process Safety Design, Inc. Fellow, American Institute of Chemical Engineers Member, American Chemical Society Member, The Combustion Institute Member, Explosion Protection Systems Committee of NFPA (Section 26, Process Safety)... [Pg.11]

Richard Siwek/ M S / Explosion Protection Manager, Corporate Unit Safety and Environment, Ciba-Geigy Ltd., Basel, Switzerland. (Dust Explosions)... [Pg.2263]

Explosion prevention by inerting has several advantages over explosion protection techniques, such as explosion venting. For example, with successful inerting, fires or business interruptions cannot occur. Nevertheless, beware of the potential of asphyxiation with inerting proper vessel entry procedures must be implemented and occasionally it may be prudent to monitor for oxygen in workplaces. [Pg.2316]

Explosion protection encompasses the measures implemented against explosion hazards in the handhng of combustible substances and the assessment of the effectiveness of protective measures for the avoidance or dependable reduc tion of these hazards. The explosion protection concept is vahd for all mixtures of combustible substances and distinguishes between ... [Pg.2323]

Preventive Explosion Protection The principle of preventive explosion protection comprises the reliable exclusion of one of the requirements necessary for the development of an explosion. In pictorial terms, therefore, at least one of the sides of the hazard triangle shown in Figure 26-33 will be broken open. [Pg.2323]

FIG. 26-33 Hazard triangle principle of preventive explosion protection. [Pg.2323]

Depending upon the design criteria of the installed suppression system, an unsuppressed explosion overpressure of around 7 to 10 bar is reduced to a suppressed reduced explosion overpressure which lies in the range of Fred,max = 0-2 to 1 bar. Thus, vessels need to be explosion resistant for an overpressure of maximum 1 bar (ISO Standard 6184/4, Explosion Protection Systems Paii 4 Determination of Efficacy of Explosion Suppression Systems, Geneva, 1985). [Pg.2327]

For any proposed suppression system design, it is necessary to ascribe with confidence an effective worst-case suppressed maximum explosion overpressure Pred.max- Provided that the suppressed explosion overpressure is less than the process equipment pressure shoclc resistance and provided further that this projected suppression is achieved with a sufficient margin of safety, explosion protection security is assured. These two criteria are mutually independent, but both must be satisfied if a suppression system is to be deployed to provide industrial explosion protection. [Pg.2330]

The combination of explosion safety technologies can provide more effective safety than is possible by deploying just one safety measure. In this respect, the improved capabilities of explosion suppression further enhance overall explosion protection capabihty. [Pg.2330]

Comparison of E] q)losion Protection Design Measures In Table 26-24, comparison is made of the explosion protection design measures of containment, explosion venting, and explosion suppression. Regarding the effectiveness of the different explosion design measures, all three techniques are equal if the design of these measures is performed properly. [Pg.2330]

TABLE 26-24 Comparison of Explosion Protection Design Measures... [Pg.2330]

Finally, it must be pointed out that all devices suitable for use in explosion isolation—or, quite generally, all explosion protection devices used in practice—may be used only when their pressure rating, ignition breakthrough protection, and reliability have been proven in suitable investigations by competent bodies. [Pg.2332]

Lapp, K. and Werneburg, H. 1999. Detonation Flame Arrester Qualifying Application parameters for explosion Protection m Vapour Handling Systems./. Can. Petrol. TechuoL, Special Edition 1949-1999, Paper 94-58. [Pg.74]

Kuchta, J. M., Cato, R. J., and Gilbert, W. H. 1970. Flame Arrester Materials for Fuel Tank Explosion Protection. Safety Research Center Report No. S4/38. Safety Research Center, Bureau of Mines, Pittsburgh, PA. [Pg.135]

Thomas, G. O. 1998. Explosion Arrester Testing State of the Draft European Standard. Paper presented at the 3rd Worldwide Seminar on Explosion Phenomena and Application of Explosion Protection Techniques m Practice, February 8-12, 1998, Europex, Ghent, Belgium. [Pg.166]

Forster, H. 2001. Flame Arresters—The New Standard and the Consequences. Paper presented at the Inti. European Safety Management Group Sympos.-Process Safety and Industrial Explosion Protection, March 27-29, 2001, Nurnberg, Germany. [Pg.194]

Section 7.4 presented tlwee major types of explosion. Tliis section more closely examines plant-related explosions, focusing on causes, results, and damage potentials. The means for explosion protection and prevention arc the subject of a subsequent chapter. [Pg.229]

Supporting material on explosion protection methods against dust explosions is available for review at NFPA Headquarters, Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02269. [Pg.507]

Swift, I., Developments in Explosion Protection, Ibid., p. 159. Freeman, R. A. and Shaw, D. A., Sizing Excess Flow Valves, Ibid., p. 176. [Pg.544]

Bartknecht, Explosionsschutz (Explosion Protection), Springer, Berlin,... [Pg.15]

Protective measures Inerting or containment). constructional explosion protection (e.g.,... [Pg.17]

See also in sourсe #XX -- [ Pg.319 ]

See also in sourсe #XX -- [ Pg.729 ]

See also in sourсe #XX -- [ Pg.170 , Pg.171 , Pg.172 , Pg.173 , Pg.174 , Pg.175 , Pg.176 , Pg.177 , Pg.178 , Pg.179 , Pg.180 , Pg.181 , Pg.182 , Pg.183 , Pg.184 , Pg.185 , Pg.258 , Pg.259 , Pg.260 , Pg.261 , Pg.262 , Pg.263 , Pg.264 , Pg.265 , Pg.266 , Pg.299 ]

See also in sourсe #XX -- [ Pg.127 , Pg.129 ]

Big Chemical Encyclopedia

Chemical substances, components, reactions, process design ...