White Paper

Improving Prevention
and Detection of Fires and
Combustible Releases for
Chemical Plants and Refineries
Improving Prevention and Detection of Fires and Combustible Releases White Paper

Introduction
An integrated strategy calls for effective layers of protection for immediate detection
of dangerous conditions, and for dealing with actual outbreaks of fire.
There is an unfortunate truth that with a few minutes of online research, one can usually find
articles reporting several refinery or chemical plant fires during any twelve-month period, as these
occur frequently. Often such incidents are major catastrophes, but others go unreported because
they are more limited with less severe effects. In this white paper, we will examine how these
incidents start, what causes them to escalate, and how they can be contained, or better, prevented.

While spectacular incidents capture headlines, many fires are snuffed out quickly when a flame
detector activates an automated fire suppression system. The system cuts off the source of fuel
and extinguishes the fire, often using a special type of foam, to minimize equipment damage, harm
to personnel, and environmental impact. The supporting safety system also alerts first responders,
allowing them to arrive at the scene quickly and prepared.

Flame detectors alone cannot create an effective system, and no sensible safety engineer sees
them as the first line of defense for facility protection. They must instead be used in conjunction
with combustible gas and leak detectors to recognize when a product release has happened,
capable of escalating to a fire.

Safety system design must be carried out by professionals, and begin with an analysis of the facility,
paying specific attention to where flammable products are stored, processed, or transported.
In refineries and many other petrochemical facilities this is effectively everywhere, but in a more
general chemical processing plant, fire hazards tend to be concentrated in specific areas, including:

ƒ Large combustible liquid and gas storage tanks (Figure 1)

ƒ Clusters of valves controlling transfer lines
ƒ Compressor, pump, and strainer installations
ƒ Truck, railcar, and marine loading/unloading areas
Figure 1

Figure 1. Storage tanks are a prime location for fires,

therefore they must be protected against releases and actual fires.

2
White Paper Improving Prevention and Detection of Fires and Combustible Releases

Detecting Fire
Fire detection technologies take many forms. Residential and commercial spaces have smoke
detectors that look for specific combustion products or air opacity, but these depend on
closed spaces to accumulate detectable levels, plus enough elapsed time to reach threshold
concentrations. Heat detectors share the same problem. Since process plants are often open to
the outdoors, detecting smoke and heat are not practical as both tend to dissipate quickly in the
atmosphere.

The fastest way to detect a fire is to recognize flames. They form immediately when gases or liquids
combust, and there is no need to wait for accumulation of any specific combustion products or
heat. While the concept is clear, the ability to recognize flames quickly and positively is challenging.

Humans recognize fire by seeing smoke, the visible light it generates, and feeling radiant heat.
But anyone who has studied the nature of fire realizes that different fuels create much different
kinds of fires. For example, burning alcohol is almost invisible compared to burning oil. Fortunately,
instrumentation designed to detect flames can avoid the limitations of a human eye. Flame
detectors focus on emissions in different parts of the spectrum characteristic of specific fuels and
oxygen sources, and when placed effectively, can respond in a matter of seconds.

Most products we think of as combustible contain carbon and therefore generate carbon dioxide
as a primary effluent. However, carbon is not required for combustion as illustrated by the burning
of inorganic products such as hydrogen, ammonia, metal oxides, silane, and others. Many of these
contain hydrogen and therefore produce water vapor. Alcohols, hydrocarbons, and many other
fuels include both hydrogen and carbon, and therefore generate both effluents.

Regardless of the fuel source, flames and the resulting hot gases generate electromagnetic
radiation in a variety of wavelengths (Figure 2) from ultraviolet (UV), through the visible spectrum
and into infrared (IR). How much and in what wavelength depends on the fuel source.
Figure 2

Figure 2. Combustion of fuels containing hydrocarbons, hydrogen, and/or carbon create intensity peaks
in detectable wavelengths. Flame detectors, such as Emerson’s Rosemount™ 975 Series Flame Detectors,
respond to specific wavelengths produced by burning hydrogen- or carbon-based fuels.

Hot carbon dioxide has a strong peak at 4.2–4.5 µm with hot water vapor at 2.7–2.8 µm. Flame
detectors are typically designed to detect light emission at those wavelengths with intensity
patterns common to open flames, with dual sensors often required to cover the widest range of
possibilities. Different models are tuned to specific wavelengths (See Sidebar 1) to match the fuels
available at a given facility.

3
Improving Prevention and Detection of Fires and Combustible Releases White Paper

Seeing a Fire
Flame detectors work much like cameras—they require a clear line of sight to the fire to see and
detect critical radiation, so placement should follow many of the same basic concepts as with
surveillance cameras. For example, if a fire hazard exists on the front and back sides of a tank, two
flame detectors will be necessary. Ideally, the detector should be able to see the flames directly,
but in some situations, it can also respond to reflected radiation, however the sensitivity will be
much lower.

The distance between the detector and flame has a major effect on the detector’s ability to
recognize a developing fire. Using the camera analogy, if a photographer is taking a photo of
a scene with light source, doubling the distance between the camera and source results in one-
fourth the radiated energy reaching the camera. Staying in the same location and switching to
a wider-angle lens has a similar effect. Emerson’s Rosemount 975 Flame Detector series can
respond to a fire at a distance up to 300 feet, which extends placement flexibility, but it is not
advisable to depend on critical operation at the greatest limit.

So, since a flame detector works in much the same way as a camera, trying to cover a larger area
with a wide-angle lens, or simply moving the detector back, results in less sensitivity. Moreover,
as distance increases, coverage width falls off (Figure 3), so it is important to have appropriate
overlapping of multiple detectors when a large area requires coverage (Figure 4). A larger number
of detectors placed closer to the hazards will spot even the smallest fires more quickly.

Figure 3
Flame Detector 01

Figure 3. Coverage by a flame detector depends on clear sight lines to “see” the fire developing.
Physical obstructions are just as problematic as with a camera.

Figure 4

Figure 4. Effective understanding of coverage guides overlapping of multiple flame detectors

to provide complete coverage of a critical area.
4
White Paper Improving Prevention and Detection of Fires and Combustible Releases

Flame detectors can be blinded, to some extent, by their environment:

ƒ Dust can be deposited by wind and rain, obscuring the sensor element
ƒ Clouds of steam, oil mist, rain, and fog can reduce sensitivity
ƒ Sooty smoke from a nearby fire can obscure visibility in another area
ƒ Careless maintenance people can clean windows and optics inappropriately, interfering with
resolution and blocking specific wavelengths

Therefore, best practices for flame detection must not only include selection and installation of the
right detectors, but also proper ongoing maintenance (Figure 5), coupled with close observation
of operating conditions. Rosemount detectors learn light level characteristics and can trigger an
alarm if light attenuation caused by poor maintenance reaches a critical sensitivity threshold.

Figure 5

Figure 5. Flame detectors require maintenance to ensure the highest sensitivity.

Avoiding False Alarms

Safety system responses to a fire are generally disruptive, and may include clearing people from
a facility, to slamming valves shut and spraying extinguisher foam. Consequently, a false alarm can
create major problems. Unfortunately, a variety of conditions can cause them if a detector does not
have an effective built-in strategy for rejecting these false positives.

Some conditions that flame detectors are sensitive to may result from other activities, instead of
fires, including wavelengths present in normal daylight. For example, hot carbon dioxide and water
vapor can be created by the exhaust of a truck or stationary engine. UV light can be produced by
a welder or an odd flash of reflected sunlight. If a flame detector misinterprets these as an actual
fire, sounds an alarm, and engages the fire-suppression system, it can be enormously costly and
likely create a reportable environmental incident.

5
Improving Prevention and Detection of Fires and Combustible Releases White Paper

Some operators respond by simply detuning a flame detector to reduce its sensitivity, which is
certainly not recommended. Such an adjustment will likely reduce the potential for false alarms,
but it will also decrease the detector’s ability to recognize an actual fire. During a developing
incident, the fire will have to escalate to the point where it can trigger the detuned detector, making
it harder to battle and extinguish the flames.

A better but more instrument-intensive solution is to apply the tried-and-true method of using
multiple flame detectors in a voting scheme. This is common in other types of critical safety
instrumented functions, but it is of course more costly to deploy and integrate. Nonetheless,
deploying multiple detectors and supporting systems will usually be less expensive than dealing
with even a single false alarm.

The necessity to rely on either of these approaches has been reduced thanks to the growing
sophistication of flame detector signal processing systems, with their ability to distinguish between
an actual fire and other potential sources.

For example, is the source of UV radiation detected coming from a flame or a welder?
While the two may produce emissions in similar wavelength bands, the nature of the output in
intensity and variability are quite different, and Rosemount detectors are smart enough to identify
which is which.

Sensitivity does not need to be attenuated, retaining the ability to spot and correctly recognize
even a small fire quickly enough to prevent escalation. The quick response time possible with a
sophisticated high-sensitivity flame detector can be the difference between a disastrous incident
and a fire extinguished with minimal impact. These types of flame detectors also ensure production
is not interrupted by false alarms.

Importance of Speed
There are obvious reasons why it is important to have the fastest possible response time from
a flame detector. Older technologies that depended on heat or smoke to build up might allow a fire
to escalate for several critical minutes before it triggers an alarm. This allows more liquids inside
pipes and nearby vessels to heat up and create pressure, potentially adding fuel to the fire.

Similarly, a fire suppression system is likely designed and installed in sections to cover specific
areas, so the ability to respond when a fire is still limited can minimize the scale of disruption.
Fast response combined with high sensitivity makes it possible to respond to small fires quickly
and with the most focused response. This minimizes not only damage, but cleanup, and production
disruptions.

Part of a Larger Safety Picture

Earlier we made the point that a fire detection system must not be the first line of defense. To
see why, imagine this scenario: A major loss of containment event is underway due to a large
valve opened by mistake or an overfilling event. Gasoline is flowing inside a dike structure until
thousands of gallons have been released, creating a huge cloud of vapor. Once it finds a source
of ignition, it erupts into a major ball of fire. Flame detectors will see and respond, but by now it is
likely too late, and the fire suppression system may be overwhelmed. This may sound apocalyptic,
but there are many examples where just this sort of incident has happened.
6
White Paper Improving Prevention and Detection of Fires and Combustible Releases

Such a situation should have been prevented by detecting that a release was in progress, or by
preventing the release altogether. Let’s look at the bigger picture and unpack what’s happening.

Fires resulting from flammable liquid or gas breaking out of its containment may be caused by:
ƒ A leak in a pipe, processing vessel, or storage tank, typically resulting from corrosion
or poor maintenance.
ƒ An operator opens a wrong valve and allows a liquid transfer to be misdirected.
ƒ An operator allows a tank to overfill due to inattention or poor situational awareness caused by
malfunctioning instrumentation or ineffective human machine interfaces (HMIs) in the control
room.
ƒ An operator allows process equipment to overfill, such as a distillation column, due to its
incorrect operation. This can also be made worse by malfunctioning instrumentation or
ineffective HMIs.

Naturally, there are other possibilities, and each situation is different, but when examining actual
incident analyses, a researcher can find examples of each of those just mentioned. Note that three
of the four issues stem from human causes, often driven by a combination of inadequate training
or technical knowledge, made worse by general staffing problems.

During a release, liquid spills onto the ground. In a storage area or tank farm, there are usually
provisions for containing a spill, where tanks are surrounded by a dike or bund. However, if the loss
of containment is in a production area, it might flow into drainage ditches or pipes. Volatile liquids
turn into vapor creating a flammable cloud, much the same as leaking gas. If the cloud doesn’t
dissipate quickly enough, it will typically find an ignition source at some point—such as a moving
or idling vehicle, the flame of a nearby boiler or fired heater, maintenance welding, or an arc from
electrical switchgear. In one notorious incident, ignition of a gasoline vapor cloud was likely caused
by an arc from the motor turning on the fire suppression pump after the release was recognized.

Once a fire starts, an incident escalates very quickly because the heat it produces causes adjacent
equipment and vessels to join the conflagration. Hopefully, there is some type of fire suppression
system, but it must be triggered immediately for maximum effectiveness. The longer the fire burns,
the more parts of the plant will be involved with equipment damage, environmental releases,
injuries, and potential fatalities—and the greater the likelihood of an overwhelmed fire suppression
system.

Avoidance is Better
When it comes to fire, prevention is the best defense. In this context, that means avoiding
situations where there is a loss of containment. Going back to the list of causes just mentioned,
human operators figure into most of them. The answer is providing effective automation capable
of keeping an operator from trying to put 110,000 gallons into a 100,000-gallon tank, for example,
or realizing that a tank, thought to be empty, is actually already half full. An equally dangerous
situation can result from a malfunctioning distillation column, for example. An operator must be
able to recognize when a column has been completely swamped and is no longer separating
components, but simply filling with liquid.

7
Improving Prevention and Detection of Fires and Combustible Releases White Paper

Some of these points hinge on effective instrumentation. There are likely too many overfilling
incidents to count that were the result of malfunctioning level instruments. This is hard to
understand given the number of very accurate and reliable level measurement choices available
today (See Sidebar 2), but it remains a fact.

The way an HMI presents information may also be cumbersome, causing an operator to lose track
of what is happening. At the same time, an overfill protection system should be able to stop an
incompetent or careless operator from making such a mistake, but again, many incidents were
caused by poor design or malfunctions of such systems.

Is a Leak in Progress?
Most companies have been taking steps to reduce the necessity for human operators to be in
a plant environment. This is often for safety reasons, but also because most facilities simply have
fewer people available to work onsite. Consequently, the likelihood of someone discovering
a loss of containment incident by simply passing by is not high enough to be a meaningful layer
of protection. It is therefore necessary to use sensors able to detect combustible gases and vapors
in any areas where there is a potential source.

Combustible gas detectors (See Sidebar 3) are installed to recognize when flammable gases or
vapors have escaped their containment and might be drifting with sufficient concentration to burn
if they find an ignition source. Some designs can detect presence when the concentration is below
the lower explosive level (LEL), allowing responders to locate the source before a fire is possible.

Gas detectors use three main technologies (Figure 6):

ƒ Acoustic detectors, which listen for the characteristic noise of a compressed gas leak
ƒ Point detectors, using either catalytic bead or infrared sensors
ƒ Open-path detectors, which detect a target gas moving through a beam of light

Figure 6

Figure 6. Combustible gas detectors use different approaches, including (left to right):
acoustic (Rosemount Incus Ultrasonic Gas Leak Detector), point source (Rosemount Net Safety Millennium II SC310
Catalytic Bead Combustible Gas Sensor), and open path (Rosemount 935 Open Path Combustible Gas Detector).

Gas detectors are normally deployed around the same equipment as flame detectors, using a mix
of point source and open path designs (Figure 7).

8
White Paper Improving Prevention and Detection of Fires and Combustible Releases

Figure 7

Figure 7. Different sensor types should be deployed so that their abilities complement each other, thereby providing
the best total coverage, as shown here with point source sensors and open path detectors.

Fortunately, Emerson offers a variety of flame and gas detectors in a range of options to cover the
most complex and demanding applications. These components help ensure minimal damage in
the event of an incident, while protecting profitability through uninterrupted production.

Sidebar 1: Emerson’s Rosemount 975 Series Flame Detectors

Emerson offers four models in its Rosemount 975 Flame Detector series (Figure 1.1), each is solar
blind and designed to be highly responsive yet false-alarm resistant when matched with the likely
fuel sources in a facility. Each has the same form factor for easy mounting when covering multiple
locations and mixing coverages in a large facility. Robust construction allows mounting in difficult
and hazardous plant locations.
Figure 1.1

Figure 1.1. Emerson’s Rosemount 975 Series Flame Detectors rely on line-of-site detection of the radiation emitted
in the spectral bands to determine if a flame is real.

The first two models offer Rosemount’s most advanced technology with state-of-the-art sensors
and digital signal processing. Sensors are arrayed in two pairs, working side-by-side, to monitor the
critical wavelengths. Multiple times each second, the detection engine compares signal intensity
from the sensors to separate background interference or black-body radiation from characteristic
patterns resulting from an actual fire. This permits exceptionally high sensitivity and fast response
time, but without the fear of false alarms.

Rosemount 975MR Multi-Spectrum Infrared—Using Rosemount’s latest technology, this model can
detect hydrocarbon fuel and gas fires at long distances and over wide areas, while still providing
the highest immunity to false alarms with its multi-spectrum infrared design. Additionally, the
Rosemount 975MR-H flame detector can distinguish hot CO2 coming from exhaust pipes.
9
Improving Prevention and Detection of Fires and Combustible Releases White Paper

Rosemount 975HR Multi-Spectrum Infrared for Hydrogen—Using Rosemount’s pair-of-dual-

sensors concept, this model shifts its tuning to monitor wavelengths associated with hydrogen-
based fuels, along with common hydrocarbons. It also offers digital signal processing but focuses
its coverage to detect hydrocarbon and hydrogen fires simultaneously, with the same ability
to reject background interference and false alarms.

Two additional specialized models use Rosemount’s conventional technology for applications
with less common fuel sources.

Rosemount 975UR Ultraviolet Infrared—Dual UV and IR detector with sensors tuned to

0.185–0.260 µm and 4.4–4.6 µm respectively, suitable for detecting flames produced by clean
burning hydrocarbon fuels.

Rosemount 975UF Ultra-Fast Ultraviolet Infrared—Responds to a flash fire in 20 milliseconds.

Detects hydrocarbon fires plus hydroxyl, hydrogen, metals, and other inorganic fuels.

Emerson’s Rosemount 975 flame detectors can help ensure minimal damage in the event
of an incident, while protecting profitability through uninterrupted production.

Sidebar 2: Understanding Overfill Prevention

The most effective way to avoid an incident is to keep flammable liquids inside their containment.
The most common source of releases, outside of a pipe or valve failure, is overfilling. Such incidents
happen when operators do not have an accurate indication of a tank’s contents and end up forcing
in more liquid than it can hold. An effective overfill prevention system provides instrumentation
and a mechanism to implement a safety strategy.

In most situations, as a tank level nears capacity, the system will indicate a high-level alarm and
warn operators so they can stop the transfer. If they do not, at a high-high level point, the system
will trigger a safety instrumented function (SIF) to activate an emergency shutdown (ESD) of the
relevant pumps and valves, bringing the transfer to a halt. This is a disruptive act, so it is better
for operators to handle the situation before the high-high level is reached.

This approach calls for at least two separate level instruments: one conventional to send data to
the automation host system and operators, governed under API 2350. The second instrument
is certified to the required safety integrity level (SIL), compliant with IEC 61511, to provide the SIF.
The two systems are typically referred to as automatic tank gauging (ATG) and automatic overfill
prevention system (AOPS), respectively (Figure 2.1). These exist side-by-side, operating in parallel
to provide two layers of protection.

10
White Paper Improving Prevention and Detection of Fires and Combustible Releases

Figure 2.1

Figure 2.1. The ATG and AOPS exist side-by-side, but separately so they can function independently.
Emerson’s Rosemount™ 5900S Radar Level Gauge is available in conventional and SIL-rated versions for these types
of applications.

Sidebar 3: Combustible Gas Sensors

Instruments that can discover developing conditions capable of resulting in a fire, but before
a fire breaks out, help plants and facilities avoid damage and injuries. Combustible gas sensors
can determine when these conditions exist and warn operators to take action. Here are three
technologies available from Emerson.

Fixed point combustible gas detectors are the most common and use one of two sensor
technologies. Infrared sensors respond to the specific light wavelengths absorbed by the vapor
or gas (Figure 3.1). Catalytic bead sensors facilitate an internal chemical reaction in the presence
of a variety of gases and vapors, both hydrocarbon- and nonhydrocarbon-based. Both technologies
depend on a cloud drifting to the individual sensor, with sufficient concentration to be detected.

11
Improving Prevention and Detection of Fires and Combustible Releases White Paper

Figure 3.1

Figure 3.1. A fixed point combustible gas detector, such as Emerson’s Net Safety Millennium II Single Channel
Transmitter paired with the Net Safety Millennium II SC311 Infrared Combustible Gas Sensor, can detect a wide variety
of flammable gas types, with measurement of percentage of lowest explosive level.

Fixed point detectors are usually deployed where there is a concentration of equipment and
therefore multiple potential release points. Since ambient air movement affects where a cloud
might drift, several units are typically distributed around target areas.

Open path combustible gas detectors send a focused source of infrared light from a transmitter to
a receiver (Figure 3.2) to detect combustible gases moving through the line-of-sight path from the
transmitter to the receiver. These cover a wider area, at least in one direction, than a fixed-point
detector, and are therefore deployed like a fence around the perimeter of equipment and tank
clusters. Detection is subject to ambient air movement, so most facilities deploy multiple units.
Figure 3.2

Figure 3.2. An open path combustible gas detector, such as Emerson’s Rosemount 935,
can detect a cloud of gas moving through its line of sight from the transmitter to the receiver,
even if the cloud has diffused to a relatively low concentration.

12
White Paper Improving Prevention and Detection of Fires and Combustible Releases

Ultrasonic gas leak detectors should be deployed only where there are pressurized storage tanks
or piping systems. These devices listen for the characteristic sounds made by pressurized gas
leaks in frequencies above audible range (Figure 3.3). Using multiple piezoelectric sensors, such
instruments can respond to these specific sounds very quickly.

Figure 3.3

Figure 3.3. An ultrasonic gas leak detector, such as Emerson’s Incus Ultrasonic Gas Leak Detector,
can capture the sound of a compressed gas leak.

Response can be immediate as there is no need to wait until enough gas has escaped to reach
a threshold concentration. Their limitation is that they respond to any escaping pressurized gas,
so they cannot differentiate between escaping propane and a compressed air leak.

These are used in combination in most facilities, along with flame detectors.

For additional information on Emerson’s products,

visit Emerson.com/RosemountFlameAndGas

Linkedin.com/company/Emerson-Automation-Solutions

Twitter.com/Rosemount_News

Facebook.com/Rosemount

YouTube.com/user/RosemountMeasurement

Emerson Terms and Conditions of Sale are available upon request.

The Emerson logo is a trademark and service mark of Emerson Electric Co.
Rosemount is a mark of one of the Emerson family of companies.
All other marks are the property of their respective owners.
©2022 Emerson. All rights reserved.

00870-0200-4935 Rev AA, November 2022