MODEL CODE OF SAFE PRACTICE PART 19: FIRE PRECAUTIONS AT PETROLEUM REFINERIES AND BULK STORAGE INSTALLATIONS

from the fire.
Generally, applying water to equipment not
immediately involved in the fire may divert resources
from other more critical tasks. This should be continually
assessed during the emergency and tactics should be
changed where necessary to optimise available resources.
The rates shown below are for guidance only. If the
applied water does not evaporate from the surface it is
supposed to be protecting, the surface may not be hot
enough to warrant protection. If resources are limited and
under strain at the time, concentration on other, more
critical areas should then be considered.
Cooling may be required if the equipment is likely to
be exposed to heat fluxes in excess of 8-12 kW/m2.
Usually, the most appropriate way of determining the need
for cooling will be to carry out fire modelling calculations
as part of the fire scenario analysis to identify exposures
(see section 3.2).
Once a need for cooling has been identified, the
minimum application rates given in Table D.1 should be
used.
D.3 CONTROL OF BURNING
In some cases, water only may be used to control a fire
until extinguishment is possible. Although not usually
fully effective at extinguishing flammable liquid fires, the
water may slow fire development and spread as well as
providing valuable cooling to exposed equipment.
Although it is not possible to specify application rates for
all fire types (since these will depend on the petroleum
product type, fire size and presence of obstacles as well as
application equipment), the minimum application rate
range given in Table D.1 should be used.

Table D.1: Minimum application rates for water based systems

Application rate
(l/min./m2)
Process areas (Application rates based on ground area)
Process unit blocks 4
High density - stacked equipment 6-8
Cooling uninsulated equipment enveloped in flame
Process vessels, equipment, structural steel, pipe racks, fin-fan coolers etc. 10
Pumps handling flammable liquids in isolated areas [Note 1] 10
Pumps handling flammable liquids adjacent to cable runs, fin-fans, pressure equipment, pipe 20
racks etc. [Note 2]
Compressors handling flammable gases 10
Electrical and instrument cable trays, transformers, switchgear etc. 10
Cooling equipment exposed to radiant heat
Miscellaneous process equipment 2
Fixed [Note 3] and floating roof [Note 4] tanks containing Classes I, II and III liquids 2
Pressurised tanks (general) 10
LPG tanks 10
Buildings such as warehouses, offices and laboratories 2
Control of burning
Water spray for control of fire (application rate depends on product type) 10-20

Notes
1 Per square metre of horizontal area extending 0,6 m from the pump and driver's periphery
2 Total water application rate based on application equipment and run time
3 Consider roof and shell of fixed roof tanks
4 See D.5 for considerations on cooling tanks. Water spray should not be applied to the roof

102

Licenced to: Mrs Melissa van Velzen. Single user licence only.
IMPORTANT: This file is subject to a licence agreement issued by the Energy Institute, London, UK. All rights reserved. It may only be used in accordance with
the licence terms and conditions. It must not be forwarded to, or stored or accessed by, any unauthorised user. Enquiries: e: pubs@energyinst.org.uk t: +44 (0)207 467 7100
 ANNEX D
D.4 EXTINGUISHMENT USING WATER ONLY
The application rate of spray water for extinguishment will
depend on the circumstances of the fire and no precise
guidance can be given. If necessary, trials with actual
application equipment should be conducted to establish
required application rates. Actual application rates will
depend on factors such as nozzle type, spacing and
location, water pressure and flowrate etc. As noted in D.3,
water is not generally an effective extinguishing material
for fires involving Class I petroleum and its products.
D.5 STORAGE TANKS
(i) Considerations regarding the use of cooling water
for tanks on fire
The need for cooling a fire-affected tank shell above the
product level has been much debated. There is no known
incidence of tank shell failure leading to product release
under full surface fire conditions where cooling water was
not applied to the shell. However, there have been some
cases where it is thought that uneven application of water
to the tank shell has caused distortion in some areas and
consequent loss of product.
Tank shells are intended to fold inward under full
surface fire conditions instead of folding outward with
potential loss of burning product. Another factor is that
cooling the involved tank shell with uneven or erratic
water streams will lead to hot and cool zones on the shell
surface area which may lead to distortion and possible
product spill or overflow. Therefore, cooling water should
not be applied to the tank on fire.
However, it should be remembered that if
extinguishment is to be attempted, tank shell folds may
trap pockets of burning product that the foam blanket
cannot flow over. This may cause some difficulty in
achieving complete extinguishment. In addition, cooling
may be required to gain full extinguishment by giving the
foam a better chance to seal against the tank wall. (The
hotter the wall, the more difficult it is to seal against it.)
Therefore, cooling water, applied evenly around the
complete tank shell may be required towards the end of an
incident and calculations to determine maximum water
requirements should make allowance for it. In practice, it
may only be required at the latter stages of the fire in
which case cooling water on adjacent installations may no
longer be required, thus reducing total water flow demand.
103
Licenced to: Mrs Melissa van Velzen. Single user licence only.
IMPORTANT: This file is subject to a licence agreement issued by the Energy Institute, London, UK. All rights reserved. It may only be used in accordance with
the licence terms and conditions. It must not be forwarded to, or stored or accessed by, any unauthorised user. Enquiries: e: pubs@energyinst.org.uk t: +44 (0)207 467 7100
(ii) Cooling adjacent tanks
Cooling of heat-exposed tanks can be achieved through
the use of fixed or semi-fixed water spray systems, or by
mobile means. Table D.1 provides a summary of
minimum application rates.
For adjacent tank cooling, the required water flow
depends on the distance from the fire, wind direction, the
area exposed to radiation, the type of tank (e.g. fixed or
floating roof) and the intensity of the fire. The need for
fixed water-cooling can, if necessary, be assessed by using
appropriate fire modelling techniques, or otherwise at the
time of an incident if no fixed protection is provided.
Various publications provide guidance on water
cooling requirements for exposed tanks but a practical fire
ground method of checking whether an adjacent tank or
other plant/equipment is affected by radiant heat is to
sweep a water stream across the exposed structure or tank
shell above the liquid level; if it steams off, it needs
cooling. If not, heat input is minimal or non-existent and
therefore is not a hazard at that time. Regular checks
should clearly be made if in doubt about prolonged
exposure to radiant heat.
To avoid unnecessary wastage of water and the
potential problems of bund flooding or oil/water separator
overflow, if the water applied does not steam off, its
application should be stopped and tried again at regular
intervals.
Overall, the final decision as to whether or not to
apply cooling water should be the responsibility of the
person in charge of fire attack, and should be based on the
prevailing conditions.
Lessons learned from incidents include many cases
where water has been over-applied for cooling adjacent
tanks, leading to bund flooding, carry-over of product to
other areas and excessive discharge of contaminated water
offsite, as well as a shortage of water for more critical use.
For tank fire design events, radiant heat should be
calculated. Any exposures receiving more than 32 kW/m2
should be provided with fixed cooling water systems. Any
exposures receiving 8-32 kW/m2 may require cooling, but
this can be provided by mobile/portable means providing
that it can be deployed in a reasonable time.
A water application rate of 2 l/min./m2 is normally
sufficient; this removes 43 kW/m2 thermal radiation at
50% efficiency, 30 kW/m2 at 35%, or 69 kW/m2 at 80%
respectively. At many sites this may be the maximum
practical rate determined by supply and drainage
considerations. Rates higher than 2 l/min./m2 do not
provide a proportionate increase in protection.
 MODEL CODE OF SAFE PRACTICE PART 19: FIRE PRECAUTIONS AT PETROLEUM REFINERIES AND BULK STORAGE INSTALLATIONS

Box D.1: Example calculations sheet

Note: Data are nominal only and should not be used for design purposes

1. Spillage fire foam quantity:

Spillage area = 50 m2
Foam application rate (e.g. 3% FP foam) = 6,5 l/min./m2
Total application rate = 325 l/min.
Run time = 15 min.
Total foam concentrate = 325 x 0,03 x 15 = 146,25 l
Water requirement for foam application = 325 x 15 = 4 875 l (~5 m3)

2. Foam systems:
Tank area = 346 m2
Foam application rate (NFPA 11) = 4,1 l/min./m2
Total application rate = 346 x 4,1 = 1 420 l/min.
System run time (NFPA 11) = 55 min.
Foam concentrate quantity = 1 420 x 0,03 x 55 = 2 343 l
Foam solution quantity (water) = 1 420 x 0,97 x 55 = 75,8 m3 (~76 m3)

3. Water for cooling four adjacent tanks, based on typical tank dimensions of 20 m diameter x 10 m height and a
minimum application rate of 2 l/min./m2 over 50% of the height:

Each segment shell area = B x 20 x 10 = 157 m2

4
Each segment roof area = B x 202 = 78,5m2
4x4
Cooling on shell/segment = 0,5 x 157 x 2 = 157 l/min.
Cooling on roof segment = 78,5 x 2 = 157 l/min.
Total cooling/segment = 314 l/min.
Total for four segments = 1 256 l/min.

Run time = 2 hr.

Total quantity = 1 256 x 120 = 150 720 l (~ 151 m3)

Total quantities:
Maximum water flow for foam solution = 1 420 l/min.
(Bund spill extinguished first)
Total quantity of water for foam solution = 76 m3
Foam concentrate = 2 343 l
Maximum water flow for cooling = 1 256 l/min.
Total quantity of water for cooling = 150,72 m3 (~ 151 m3)

Therefore, calculation of required resources results in the following quantities required onsite:

Foam systems:
Foam concentrate = 2 350 l
Foam solution (water) flow = 1 420 l/min.
Foam solution quantity = 78,1 m3 (includes approximately 76 m3 water)

Water cooling:
Water cooling flow = 1 256 l/min.
Water cooling quantity = 151 m3

104

Licenced to: Mrs Melissa van Velzen. Single user licence only.
IMPORTANT: This file is subject to a licence agreement issued by the Energy Institute, London, UK. All rights reserved. It may only be used in accordance with
the licence terms and conditions. It must not be forwarded to, or stored or accessed by, any unauthorised user. Enquiries: e: pubs@energyinst.org.uk t: +44 (0)207 467 7100