Review of Explosion Modelling inputs and outputs

for Facility Siting.

22 August 2016

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016 SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER

General Structure

 Regulation Overview
 Explosion Models
– Congested region implementation
 Results
– Overpressure and Impulse Contours
– PI pairs
– Building Damage Level Curves
– Building Occupancy Risk

Ungraded

2 DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

Objective

Take a look at the API 752/753 regulations.

You will learn how DNV GL Software can help you in
complying with these regulations.

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

3
API 752/753 Background

Ungraded

4 DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

Why Bother with Facilities Siting?

Compliance with regulations.

 API 752, 753
 CIA, Building Standards Taskforce of the Chemical Industries Association (CIA),
“CIA Guidance for the location and design of occupied building on chemical
manufacturing sites”, 1998.
 ”RIGOS The Critical Separation Distance”, TNO PML 2002-C50, Rijswijk, NL.
Finance based decisions.
Good Practice.
Potential for escalation.
When it goes wrong it goes wrong in a big way.

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

5
Texas City (2005)
Blow down drum overfilled causing a vapor cloud.
This occurred in a congested area.

Wind

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

6
Texas City (2005)
Ignition by contractors truck.
Flame Expansion obstructed by congested region causing an explosion.

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

7
Texas City (2005)
Blast waves hit two trailers not designed to handle the over pressure.
People in a meeting killed immediately due to blunt force trauma from the explosion.
15 Killed and 100 injured.
$1.5B in loses.

Image from csb.gov

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

8
What does the guidance actually say?

Ungraded

9 DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

What Guidance is there?

As a reaction to Texas city:

API 752 – Permanent Buildings

API 753 – Portable Buildings

These will be our focus here but the methodologies are equally applicable to other
regulations.

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

10
Flow Chart

Set Scope

Which Buildings? What Effects?

The study

What consequences? What Risk?

Mitigation

Mitigate Consequences Mitigate the risk

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

11
Assessment Approach - 752

 a) The “consequence-based” approach takes into consideration the impact of

explosion, fire, and toxic scenarios. This approach shall be based on maximum
credible events (MCEs) for each building and type of hazard considered.
 b) The “risk-based” approach is quantitative and takes into consideration
numerical values for both the consequences and the frequencies of explosion, fire,
and toxic material release scenarios.
 c) The “spacing tables” approach uses established tables to determine minimum
separation distances between equipment and buildings intended for occupancy.

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

12
753 Approach

Uses Zones.
 Zone 1: Light wood trailers intended for occupancy shall not be located within
Zone 1 under any circumstances. All portable buildings intended for occupancy
other than light wood trailers require a Detailed Analysis as described in Section
3.2 and may house only essential personnel.
 Zone 2: Siting of all portable buildings intended for occupancy including light
wood trailers requires a Detailed Analysis as described in Section 3.2.
 Zone 3: Any portable building can normally be located in Zone 3.

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

13
API 753 – Occupied Temporary Buildings.

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

14
Approaches

SIMPLIFIED METHOD
Place temporary buildings in zone 3 only.
DETAILED ANALYSIS
Use either a consequence or risk based approach to decide where the building can
be located.

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

15
Assessment Approach

 a) The “consequence-based” approach takes into consideration the impact of

explosion, fire, and toxic scenarios. This approach shall be based on maximum
credible events (MCEs) for each building and type of hazard considered.
 b) The “risk-based” approach is quantitative and takes into consideration
numerical values for both the consequences and the frequencies of explosion, fire,
and toxic material release scenarios.
 c) The “spacing tables” approach is not valid for API 753

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

16
Consequence based

Phast can be used to do dispersion analysis for toxics, flash fire regions and
potential VCE explosion extent assessment.
It can take in to account in building calculations based on the ventilation rate.
We can look at radiation hazards using either the stand alone models or the linked
models to get jet fire, fireball and pool fire calculations.
We also have some stand alone explosion models that can be used to do explosion
analysis in line with detailed analysis for API 753.

Supporting documents – CCPS, coloured books, HSE publications

We will see all of these in the examples after the break.

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

17
Risk Based

The QRA approach.

Builds on top of Phast to add a layer of likelihood to the models.
Allows more variables to be considered and gives you credit for things not
considered by the consequence approach. Prevailing Wind etc.
Supporting documents – Purple Book, HSE
We will see all of these in the examples after the break.

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

18
Different technologies to handle this
analysis

Ungraded

19 DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

 Model Approach Assumptions Additional information

Linked Simple Assumes singular congested region at multiple

locations, all material available is involved and
the explosion is at the most conservative
location.
3D Phast Directional Calculates cloud overlap to locate the explosion Includes radiation and
Consequence at a specific location. No congestion = no toxicity
explosion.
Safeti EE Risk Builds on the above and considered frequency of
occurrence.

Ungraded

20 DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

Phast – Linked Model

Ungraded

21 DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

Linked Model – Late Explosion

Wind direction

Leak

10 m

10 m

10 m
30.0 m No Flammable Cloud = No explosion

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

22
Phast Explosion results

Ungraded

23 DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

Phast 3D

Ungraded

24 DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

Phast 3D - What about a deeper look at explosions?

Extended Explosion/ Phast 3D Tool.

The tool can;
 Define Ignition Sources
 Define Release Scenarios
 Allow you to define Obstructed Regions on the map.
 Allow you to look at specific categories of hazard.

Graphical Mapping of Results

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

25
Cloud steps

Wind Direction
Obstructed Target/Building
Region

Vessel Cloud

Time Step 1: cloud released, no contact with obstructed

region, therefore only Flash fire will occur if ignited.
(assuming no rainout). An unconfined Explosion can also
occur
Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

26
Cloud steps

Time Step 2: cloud released, contact with obstructed region,

therefore Flash fire will occur as well as Explosion, as the flame
accelerates due to the congestion in the obstructed area. Over
pressure received at the target/building is minimal.
Note the centre of the explosion is the centre of the overlapped
Ungraded
volume
DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016
27
Cloud steps

Time Step 3: Cloud released, the cloud envelopes the whole

Obstructed region and the highest over pressures are created.
Flash fire will occur as well as Explosion, as the flame accelerates
due to the congestion in the obstructed area. The target will
receive significant overpressures.
Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

28
Cloud steps

Time Step 4: Contact with obstructed region, therefore

Flash fire will occur as well as Explosion, as the flame
accelerates due to the congestion in the obstructed area.
Overpressure will be received at the building but also
flash fire effects will be received at the building.
Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

29
Cloud steps

Time Step 5: No Contact with obstructed region,

therefore only flash fire effects will be received at the
building

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

30
Cloud steps

Time Step 6: Eventually the cloud passes over the

building if ignited will only produce a flash fire, but not
impacting the building

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

31
Components involved in an explosion

Cloud in
Receptor
Release one of its Obstructed Ignition
with specific
source weather Region source
vulnerability
directions

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

32
This can get very complex!

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

33
Effects

Allows you to specify an effect of

interest.

Then draw contours for that effect taking

into account all of your models.

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

34
Outputs – Overpressure Contours

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

35
Phast Explosion results

Ungraded

36 DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

Safeti + Extended Explosion – Risk
Based

Ungraded

37 DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

Safeti + Extended Explosion

This approach allows us to look at the problem in a number of ways.

Consequence based
Pressure based at a certain location
Impulse Based at a specific location
Building Damage Level Curves

Risk Based
Pressure/impulse Exceedance
F-N Curves that incorporate building vulnerability.
Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

38
Impact at Building Location.

Ungraded

39 DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

Building Damage Level Contours

Ungraded

40 DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

 Lots of different explosions could hit the receptor
 Difference fuel
sources
 Different
dispersion
directions
 Different ignition
sources
 Different
obstructed
regions
 Outcomes have
different
likelihoods
Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

41
F-N Curve

Ungraded

42 DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

Phast Explosion results

Ungraded

43 DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

Phast 3D – Overpressure Contours

Ungraded

DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

44
Safeti Extended Explosion results

Ungraded

45 DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016

www.dnvgl.com

SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER

Ungraded

46 DNV GL © 2016 22 August 2016