F&G Mapping using

DETECT 3D
A study on software working, advantages & comparison
 Fire & Gas Mapping

Fire and Gas mapping study is defined as science of positioning flame and gas
detectors

 Taking in account the Upstream, Midstream and Downstream sectors gas releases are prone to happen in
new and existing plants.
 On new platforms, the most likely source is mechanical failure, particularly flanges and for existing
facilities it is commonly pipeline corrosion
 A study suggest that approximately 100 major and significant gas releases per year in the UK alone.
 1/3 of Major and 2/3 of Significant gas release are not detected by the gas detection systems.
 Introduction to Detect 3D

 A modern windows-based software for accurate F&G mapping analysis

 Has been used on major projects for BP, Shell, PETRONAS, ADNOC, GASCO and many more
 Integration with 3D CAD
 Uses Ray Casting for detectors field of view
 The coverage of gas detector layouts is calculated based on the “design gas cloud” approach popularized
by the UK HSE, BP and Shell
Diagramming Options
 Methods

Geographical Based

 Provides acceptable results for F&G Mapping based on years of experience and research.
 Is accepted by many authorities.
 Does not account for any physical effects such as wind speed, with direction, gas cloud, fire.
 Normally used in highly congested environment
 Methods

Scenario Based

 Takes in account the physical effects such as wind direction and speed
 Relatively complex task, more than 10,000 scenarios per module
 Requires CFD analysis
 The most likely way forward is to use a combination of geographical and scenario based
modeling, based on the strengths of each method.
 Features

 Perform fire and gas mapping studies in-house optimally positioning detectors to comply
with industry performance standards
 Reduce project duration by 80% of the time typically required by other solutions available
on the market
 Better manage costs through the project lifecycle through our licensing structure, which
allows unlimited design changes
 Share design updates between project teams
 Analyze complex detector layouts and geometries without the need to invest in additional
hardware – Detect3D is designed for Windows-based laptops and workstations
 Detectors

Fixed

 Permanently installed at fixed location

 Gives early warning of leaks of flammable gasses or vapors
 Fixed detectors are particularly useful where there is the possibility of a leak into an enclosed
or partially enclosed space where flammable gases could accumulate.
 Detectors

Open-Path or Point

 Measure the concentration of the gas at the sampling point of the instrument.
 The unit of measurement can be:
• % volume ratio
• % lower explosion limit (LEL) for a flammable gas
• ppm or mg/m3 for low level concentrations (primarily used for toxic gases).
 Detectors

Selection on the basis of type of Gas

Combustible Gas Toxic Gas Flame

Point Catalytic Bead Electrochemical ECC MSIR
Point IR Solid State (MOS) DFIR
Open Path IR Photoacoustic – IR (PIR) UVIR/UVIR - H₂
Ultrasonic UV
 Software Comparison

Detect 3D Effigy HazMap 3D AMNIS

Characteristics

3D files import    
3D interface
 x  
working
Ray Casting
 x x x

Geographical Geographical Both Both Geographical

&Scenario
based
 Software Comparison

Detect 3D Effigy HazMap 3D AMNIS

Characteristics

Easy user
 x  x
interface
 Gas Dispersion

 Process hazard analysis and gas dispersion modeling holds great significance in Process Safety
sector.
 EPC sectors continuously requires accurate simulations to carry out precise analysis of hazards
associated with different processes.
 Some of the most widely used dispersion simulations tools are:

• In: flux
• DNV PHAST
• SHELL FRED
• TNO EFFECTS
 In: flux

 CFD based software

 Interface directly with many CAD formats

 All boundary conditions, and numerical setup is automated.

 Once the process is understood, multiple simulations can be set up very quickly as simulations
are automatically scheduled without the need of scripting.
 DNV PHAST

 Examines the progress of a potential incident from the initial release to far-field dispersion
analysis including modelling of pool spreading and evaporation, and flammable and toxic
effects. It 
  Integrated models are constantly validated and verified

  Various release types and sources can be modelled, e.g. from leaks, pipework, pipelines,
ruptures, relief devices, vessel ruptures and more

 Predefined linking of discharge, dispersion, pool, flammable and toxic effect calculations for
ease of use

 Different modules available for special applications

 Shell FRED

 The FRED software gathers in one tool state-of-the-art Fire, Release, Explosion and Dispersion
models that predict consequences of accidental and design releases of products from process,
storage, transport and distribution operations.

 Draws on Shell’s and Gexcon’s vast R&D knowledge and integrates Shell’s operating
experience

 Allows users to easily generate fast and reliable consequence predictions

 Transparency of the integrated models gives confidence to the users on the reliability and
consistency of the results
 TNO EFFECTS

 EFFECTS is an advanced software tool that allows you to model the behavior of toxic and/or
flammable gases, liquefied gases and liquids.

 EFFECTS calculates heat radiation from fire, over-pressures from explosions, toxic
concentrations and doses due to dispersion, and much more

 EFFECTS contains more than 2200 known chemical component

 With more than 70 models, EFFECTS simulates a wide variety of scenarios: from leaks and
ruptures in pipelines, pressure valves, vessels and storage tanks, to confined gas explosions,
BLEVEs, drifting toxic clouds and jet-, pool-, rim-, bund-, or rooftop fires, just to name a few.
 Integral vs CFD

Integral

 An integral tool is based on reproducing experimental tests by use of simplified algebraic (non-
physical) equations.

 Integral tools are robust and extremely quick to use (simulation time is in order of seconds).

 Integral tools can not include effects of physical obstructions or terrain (there are parameters
that can be used to emulate an average effect of buildings or trees).
 Integral vs CFD

Computational Fluid Dynamics

 CFD tools (computational fluid dynamics) are based on solving physical equations (Navier
Stokes) of the fluid flow on a computer

 CFD tools are also validated against experimental test, but they solve all physical effects in the
computational domain and are therefore more reliable than integral models

 CFD tools are more complex to use than integral methods, and the simulation time is much
longer than for integral tools (typically hours or days)

 CFD tools can predict the effects of physical obstructions and terrain, and is therefore
applicable for more types of leak events than integral tools.
 Integral Tools

 DNV PHAST

 TRACE
 CFD Tools

 In: flux

 FLACS

 KFX
 Consequence Modeling

The consequence analysis involves the following:

 To characterize the release of material or energy due to the hazards being identified, through the
use of experiments and analysis models that have been developed for consequence analysis.
 To measure/estimate the release/propagation of the material/energy in the environment on the
target of interest.
 To quantify the safety, health, environmental and economical impacts on the target of interests,
in terms of the number of fatalities and injuries, amount of materials released to the
environment, and the dollar values lost.
 Consequence Modeling

 There are large uncertainties in the consequence estimates due to differences in time-dependent
meteorological conditions, basic uncertainties in physical and chemical properties, and model
uncertainties.

 Consequence modeling addresses the question: How severe can a process safety incident be? It
does not address: How often could it happen?
 Consequence Modeling

 Effigy by Kenexes

 DNV – PHAST

 HazMap 3D

 SHELL FRED

 TNO EFFECTS