Chilworth Technology, inc Princeton Corporate Plaza 11 Deer Park Drive Monmouth Junction, Now Jersey 08852-1923 Preventing Explosion Hazards - Inert Gas Blanketing (First Published in Solids Handling, May/June 1994) Introduction Many materials handled in the chemical and process industries are capable of forming explosible atmospheres. Gases, solvent vapours, fine droplet mists and dispersed dusts can all give rise to a hazard in the right circumstances. It is important that measures are taken when handling explosible materials that will ensure safety in the process operations. Three components need to exist simultaneously for an explosion to occur, namely, 4. A flammable or explosible atmosphere. 2. An ignition source of sufficient energy. 3. An atmosphere that supports combustion. In theory, if one of these elements can be removed then the explosion risk can be avoided. A basis of safety for the process can then be defined. In practice, however, for many processes it is difficult to reliably remove the flammable material or avoid all potential sources of ignition. Explosion protection -for example relief venting, explosion suppression or containing the explosion pressure generated - is often used to achieve safety, ‘Asan alternative, inert gas blanketing can be applied to the process vessels to prevent an explosion occurring. This paper discusses the application of inert gas blanketing and the basic techniques involved. An extension of inet gas blanketing, partial inerting, will also be introduced, Equations derived by the author are included, however, a safety margin should always be applied if models are in use unless the model is validated in situ.Inert Gas Blanketing For a combustion process to occur, some oxidant is required. This is normally the oxygen in air but other oxidants such as chlorine or nitrogen dioxide may support combustion. ‘Safety can be achieved by reducing the oxidant concentration below a level that will no longer support combustion with the addition of an inert gas. This is known as inert gas blanketing. Nitrogen gas is the most commonly used inert gas, however, argon and carbon dioxide can also be used. The:concentration of oxygen in-air at which the atmosphere will no longer support combustion is known as the Minimum Oxygen Concentration (MOC) for combustion. MOC values vary cepending’on the material involved and the inert gas used. Some values of MOC are given in table 1. It can be seen after incorporating a safety factor a reduction of the oxygen concentration to 5% ('7,) using nitrogen as the inert gas will cover most cases. Hydrogen requires an oxygen concentration of 2% (“,) Flammable Material Minimum Oxygen Concentration (MOC) % (vv) Methane 2 Benzene 112 Ethylene 40 Coke Gas 7 Hydrogen 4 Barium Stearate 13 Organic Pigment 12 Methyl Cellulose 10 Sulphur 7 Aluminium 5 Table 1; Minimum Oxygen Concentrations for Gases, vapours and dusts’?It should be recognised that the MOC for a particular material is not only dependant on the material, but it is also dependant on the inert gas used (see table 2). MOC values are generally obtained using nitrogen as the inert gas, however, much data is. available using carbon dioxide as the inert gas. Relationships have been derived that allow the data with one gas to be used with the other, for example: N,=C,-2 and N,=19C,-63 fin doubt, the MOC for the material itself should be determined. If a gas is to be used that has a high level of oxygen in it, for example boiler flue gases, and the 5% criteria cannot be achieved, again the MOC should be obtained. In any event, itis likely that the MOC will be higher than 5% (‘/,), therefore cost'saving can be made by reducing the amount of inert gas used. Flammable MOC in MOC in Vapour or Gas | Nitroger/Air Carbon % (uly) Dioxide/Air % (vN) Acetone 135 18.5 Methanol 10 13.5 Hydrogen 75 11.5 Sulphide Carbon 5 8 Disulphide Caron 55 6 Monoxide Brown Coal 11.0 13.0 Table 2: Effect of the Inert Gas Used on the MOC?* The blanket will need to be established before flammable atmospheres are present and should be maintained throughout the process. Care should be taken to prevent the ingress of air after the blanket has been established, as this will negate the safety measiires. Particular care should be taken because of the pumping effect of mills and rotary valves as these will pull air into the unit, as wil the charging of powders to a blanketed vessel - powders typically contain about 50% air.‘There are three commonly used techniques for the blanketing of vessels; pressure purging, vacuum purging and flow-through purging. In addition, models can be developed for particular situations and, as an example, a model is given here for the charging of material to a vessel from containers. Pressure Purging The vessel is pressurised from atmospheric to a known elevated pressure’ ‘with an inert gas, then relieved via a vent. This procedure is repeated until the desired oxygen concentration is reached. The number of pressurisations required depends on the pressure obtained, the required oxygen content and the oxygen content of the inert gas according to the following relationship: Git es - on 23) P>P, Where C,= the oxygen concentration after n purges he initial oxygen concentration, normally 21% the oxygen concentration of the inert gas the purge pressure (atmospheres) the starting pressure, usually 1 (atmospheres) fhe number of pressurisations. If the oxygen concentration in the inert gas is negligible, this equation reduces to: If the equation is rearranged, the number of pressurisations required for a given system can be calculated: Cy 8G, _ eee) roo £) Vacuum Purging This technique is similar to pressure purging but thé vessel is evacuated from atmospheric to a known vacuum and then the pressure is raised back to ambient sing the inert gas. The corresponding equations are: 4seas] Vacuum purging tends to use less inert gas than pressure purging, but as it takes longer to pull a vacuum than it does to pressurise a vessel, it is more time consuming Flow-Through Purging Flowthrough purging (sometimes known as dilution purging) is effected by purging the vessel with @ continuous flow of inert gas. The gas should enter at one side of the vessel and exit at the other so that the inert gas travels the full length of the vessel Itis not acceptable to remove the inert gas at a point adjacent to the inlet- this will not allow the inert gas to mix in the vessel. An incident occurred in a vessel where the inlet and outlet were adjacent, therefore, the expected inert gas blanket was not present. Flow-through* purging can be modelled using the following formula Ge = G+ Ay ~ )exo{ Ze) Where t = the purge time (secs) C= the oxygen concentration after time t Qs the purge gas flowrate (m’ s") Ve the vessel ullage volume (1?) Re-arranging with respect to the purge time gives. v yf oe7 & e--¥ uf SS ON CEs GeThe above equation assumes that there is perfect mixing if the inert gas in the ullage volume of the vessel. In practice this is not the case and it is usual to add an additional safety factor to the purge time to take account of this. Other Models Models can be developed for a given situation where inert gas blanketing is used. Below is a model developed by the author for situations where powders is charged to a blanketed vessel from discreet packages, The vessel has a flow-through purge on it and it is desirable to ensure that this purge is sufficient to sweep out any air introduced into the vessel by the powder itself. The model is in two stages. In the first stage, the addition of a known aliquot of powder (eg a 25kg sackful) raises the oxygen concentration because of air introduced. This higher level can be estimated from the equation: cna 9)-2(4) Where C= the oxygen concentration after the bag has been loaded Gs the initial oxygen concentration V,= the volume of air in the powder (rm?) E the vessel ullage volume (1?) ‘Onoe the material has been loaded, the flow through purge will reduce the oxygen concentration according to the equation: =9t +) Where t is the time between each addition of powder and C, is the oxygen concentration before purging, given by C in the first equation. The next bag will then be loaded when the initial oxygen concentration is C,, therefore this is used for C, in the first equation as the oxygen concentration before the next bag is added, and so on Ce = C, + (C, - ©)exn| If these equations are programmed into a computer, the purging requirements can be estimated for sequential additions. An example of a printout is given as table 3 below.Table 3 - Example Purge Rate Calculation for Solids Charging Time between each addition (seconds) Purge gas flow rate (rr? s") Ullage space in the vessel (rr) Initial oxygen content in the vessel (%) Volume of air in the package (rm?) ‘Oxygen content of the purge gas (°%) 215 : 0.005 12 15 50.2 Number of Packages Oxygen Content Prior to | Oxygen Content After Added the Addition the Addition 1 5 66 2 6.39 7.85 3 7.60 894 4 8.65 9.88 § 9.56 10.70 6 10.34 11.41 7 11.03 12.02 8 11.62 12.56 9 12.13 13.02 10 12.58 13.42 11 12.96 13.77 12 13.30 14.07 13 13.58 14.33 14, 13.84 14.55 15 14.05 14.75, Important: See information in the text before applying the above dataIt is assumed that there is perfect mixing in the vessel and that the only air entering the vessel is from the powder. This is not the case in practice, therefore it would be prudent to validate the model or apply a suitable safety factor. PARTIAL INERTING Partial inerting is a term used to describe a system where the oxygen concentration in a potentially explosive atmosphere is reduced to a level that lies between the MOC and atmospheric concentrations. In this region the atmosphere will still be flammable, but the ignition sensitivity and the explosion severity of the Effect on Explosion Severity atmosphere will be reduced (see EstosonSovriy- Kat figures 1 and 2) This effect is °° seen with all flammable 20 atmospheres, however, it is 200 generally more marked with dust clouds. Figure 1 - Partial Inerting 921% Ongen 19% Omen 17% One Partial inerting can be used to ° reduce the ignition sensitivity and explosion violence of a flammable atmosphere. In some cases, this may mean that explosion protection is not required whereas it was considered necessary beforehand. It can also be used to reduce the extent of the protection measures, ie. a smaller vent size will be required in a partially inerted system. The use of ritrogen can introduce another hazard into the process - one of asphyxiation, A number of Figure 2 - Partial Inerting Effect on Ignition Senstivity ‘isn grton rar 42,000 2.000 6.000 Grsle) Simple? Samples people are killed every year due to the use of inert gas blankets in the process industries. The implementation of partial inerting in suitable situations means that very low oxygen concentrations are not required to achieve safety. 8This can be significant as the likelihood of asphyxiation depends, in part, on how low the oxygen concentration is. Table 4 shows the physiological effects of oxygen depleted atmospheres. As can be seen, oxygen concentrations above about 14% have litle effect whereas the effects below about 8% are severe. Partial inerting is effective above 14% and can reduce the risk from asphyxiation if used in place of ful inerting. Oxygen Content Signs and Symptoms of Air 42-14% | Respiration deeper, pulse higher, coordination poor. 10-12% Respiration fast and shallow, giddiness, poor judgement, lips blue. 810% Nausea, vorriting, unconsciousness, ashen face, 68% 8 minutes exposure - 100% fatal 6 minutes exposure - 50% fatal 4.5 minutes exposure - full recovery with treatment. 4% Coma in 40 seconds, convulsions, respiration ceases, death. Table 4: Physiological Effects of Oxygen Depleted Atmospheres. References 41. Explosions - Course Prevention Protection, W Bartknecht 2. Dust Explosions - Course Prevention Protection, W Bartknecht 3. Industrial Explosion Prevention and Protection, FT Bodurtha 4. Chilworth Technology Data