|
|
xiii | |
|
|
xv | |
Acronyms And Abbreviations |
|
xvii | |
Glossary |
|
xix | |
Acknowledgments |
|
xxiv | |
Preface |
|
xxvii | |
|
|
1 | (4) |
|
|
1 | (1) |
|
|
2 | (2) |
|
|
4 | (1) |
|
|
5 | (20) |
|
2.1 Nature of the Dust Fire and Explosion Problem |
|
|
5 | (5) |
|
2.1.1 Dust Explosion Statistics |
|
|
5 | (1) |
|
2.1.2 Case Study: Hoeganaes Corporation |
|
|
5 | (5) |
|
|
10 | (1) |
|
2.2 Requirements for Dust Fires and Explosions |
|
|
11 | (4) |
|
|
12 | (1) |
|
2.2.2 Flash Fires and Explosions |
|
|
12 | (3) |
|
2.3 Combustibility and Explosivity Parameters |
|
|
15 | (6) |
|
2.3.1 Explosibility Screening Test |
|
|
15 | (3) |
|
2.3.2 Deflagration Index, Kst (bar-m/sec) |
|
|
18 | (1) |
|
2.3.3 Maximum Pressure, Pmax (Bar) |
|
|
18 | (1) |
|
2.3.4 Minimum Explosible Concentration, MEC (g/m3) |
|
|
19 | (1) |
|
2.3.5 Minimum Ignition Energy, MIE (mJoules, mJ) |
|
|
19 | (1) |
|
2.3.6 Minimum Auto Ignition Temperature, Cloud, MAIT (°C) |
|
|
20 | (1) |
|
2.3.7 Layer Ignition Temperature, LIT (°C) |
|
|
20 | (1) |
|
2.3.8 Limiting Oxygen Concentration, LOC (vol% O2) |
|
|
20 | (1) |
|
2.3.9 Volume Resistivity (Ohm-m) |
|
|
20 | (1) |
|
2.4 Comparison to Combustible Vapors |
|
|
21 | (1) |
|
|
22 | (1) |
|
|
22 | (1) |
|
|
23 | (2) |
|
3 The Hazards Within - Dust Inside Equipment |
|
|
25 | (20) |
|
3.1 Methods of Prevention, Protection, Mitigation |
|
|
25 | (5) |
|
|
26 | (2) |
|
3.1.2 Inerting/Oxidant Control |
|
|
28 | (1) |
|
3.1.3 Combustible Concentration Control |
|
|
28 | (1) |
|
3.1.4 Deflagration Venting |
|
|
28 | (1) |
|
3.1.5 Deflagration Suppression |
|
|
29 | (1) |
|
|
29 | (1) |
|
3.1.7 Deflagration Isolation |
|
|
30 | (1) |
|
|
30 | (12) |
|
3.2.1 Air/Material Separators |
|
|
32 | (2) |
|
3.2.2 Size Reduction Equipment (grinders, mills, etc.) |
|
|
34 | (1) |
|
|
35 | (1) |
|
|
36 | (1) |
|
3.2.5 Portable Containers |
|
|
37 | (1) |
|
|
38 | (3) |
|
|
41 | (1) |
|
3.2.8 Feeding into Vessels Having Flammable Vapor Atmospheres |
|
|
41 | (1) |
|
|
42 | (1) |
|
|
42 | (3) |
|
4 Hazards of Dust External to Equipment |
|
|
45 | (10) |
|
4.1 Case Study -- Imperial Sugar |
|
|
45 | (3) |
|
4.2 Issues Inside a Room or Building |
|
|
48 | (1) |
|
4.3 Methods of Prevention and Protection |
|
|
49 | (3) |
|
4.3.1 Control of Dust Deposits Outside of Equipment |
|
|
49 | (3) |
|
|
52 | (1) |
|
4.3.3 Damage Limiting Construction |
|
|
52 | (1) |
|
|
52 | (1) |
|
|
53 | (2) |
|
5 Traditional Approach to Hazard Assessment and Control |
|
|
55 | (14) |
|
|
55 | (1) |
|
5.1.1 Process Safety Information (PSI) |
|
|
55 | (1) |
|
|
56 | (1) |
|
5.2 Steps to the Traditional Approach |
|
|
56 | (11) |
|
5.2.1 Step 1 - Is a combustible dust involved? |
|
|
57 | (1) |
|
5.2.2 Step 2 - Determine Which Standards Apply |
|
|
58 | (4) |
|
5.2.3 Step 3 - Determine Where Fire/Explosion Hazards Exist |
|
|
62 | (1) |
|
5.2.4 Step 4 - Review Unit Operation vs. Standard Requirements for Prevention and Mitigation of Fires/Explosions |
|
|
63 | (2) |
|
5.2.5 Step 5 - Make Recommendations |
|
|
65 | (1) |
|
5.2.6 Step 6 - Document the DHA |
|
|
65 | (1) |
|
5.2.7 Step 7 - Implement the Recommendations |
|
|
66 | (1) |
|
|
67 | (1) |
|
|
68 | (1) |
|
6 Risk-based Approach to Dust Hazard Analysis |
|
|
69 | (18) |
|
|
69 | (1) |
|
6.2 Technique for a Risk-based DHA |
|
|
70 | (12) |
|
6.2.1 Step 1: Identify Failure Scenarios |
|
|
70 | (1) |
|
6.2.2 Step 2: Evaluate the Consequences |
|
|
70 | (3) |
|
6.2.3 Step 3: Are the Consequences Tolerable? |
|
|
73 | (1) |
|
6.2.4 Step 4: Estimate Likelihood and Risk |
|
|
73 | (5) |
|
6.2.5 Step 5: Is the Risk Tolerable |
|
|
78 | (2) |
|
6.2.6 Step 6: Recommend and Evaluate Solutions |
|
|
80 | (1) |
|
6.2.7 Step 7: Is the Mitigated Risk Tolerable? |
|
|
81 | (1) |
|
6.2.8 Step 8: Document Results |
|
|
81 | (1) |
|
6.3 DHA Risk Assessment, Additional Requirements |
|
|
82 | (1) |
|
6.3.1 DHA Leader Competency |
|
|
83 | (1) |
|
|
83 | (1) |
|
6.4 Managing Change and Updating Risk Assessment |
|
|
83 | (1) |
|
|
83 | (1) |
|
|
84 | (3) |
|
7 Special Considerations: Combustible Dust Issues in Existing Facilities |
|
|
87 | (8) |
|
|
87 | (1) |
|
7.2 Existing Facilities and Combustible Dusts |
|
|
87 | (5) |
|
|
87 | (4) |
|
|
91 | (1) |
|
|
92 | (1) |
|
|
92 | (1) |
|
|
93 | (2) |
|
|
95 | (96) |
|
|
95 | (1) |
|
|
95 | (74) |
|
8.2.1 Process Description - Example 1 |
|
|
95 | (1) |
|
8.2.2 Traditional DHA - Example 1 |
|
|
95 | (17) |
|
8.2.3 Risk-based DHA - Example 1 |
|
|
112 | (55) |
|
8.2.4 Comparison of Traditional vs. Risk-based Approach - Example 1 |
|
|
167 | (2) |
|
|
169 | (8) |
|
8.3.1 Process Description 2 |
|
|
169 | (2) |
|
|
171 | (2) |
|
|
173 | (3) |
|
8.3.4 Comparison of Traditional vs. Risk-based Approach - Example 2 |
|
|
176 | (1) |
|
|
177 | (11) |
|
8.4.1 Process Description - Example 3 |
|
|
177 | (2) |
|
8.4.2 Traditional DHA - Example 3 |
|
|
179 | (2) |
|
8.4.3 Risk-based DHA - Example 3 |
|
|
181 | (7) |
|
|
188 | (1) |
|
|
188 | (3) |
|
Appendix A Regulations and Codes |
|
|
191 | (6) |
|
|
191 | (1) |
|
|
191 | (1) |
|
|
191 | (1) |
|
|
192 | (5) |
|
|
195 | (2) |
|
Appendix B Additional Resources |
|
|
197 | (4) |
|
|
197 | (1) |
|
B.2 U.S. Chemical Safety Board Reports |
|
|
197 | (1) |
|
|
198 | (1) |
|
|
199 | (2) |
|
Appendix C Data for Risk-based DHA |
|
|
201 | (10) |
|
C.1 Probability Assessment of Process Unit Fire or Dust Explosion |
|
|
201 | (8) |
|
C.1.1 Initiating Event Frequencies |
|
|
204 | (1) |
|
C.1.2 Ignition Probabilities |
|
|
205 | (2) |
|
C.1.3 Protection Layer PFDs |
|
|
207 | (2) |
|
|
209 | (2) |
|
Appendix D Good Practices |
|
|
211 | (8) |
|
|
211 | (2) |
|
|
213 | (4) |
|
D.2.1 Combustible Dust Housekeeping Inspection Checklist |
|
|
215 | (2) |
|
D.3 Explosion Protection Methods |
|
|
217 | (2) |
|
|
219 | (4) |
|
|
221 | (2) |
Index |
|
223 | |