On the Uncertainty of the Concentration Limits Value of Flame Propagation of Combustible Gas-Vapor Mixtures


Annotation:

Quantitative risk assessment is the main stage of a risk-based approach to industrial safety management of a hazardous production facility. The most important problems of this assessment: presence of uncertainty peculiar for risk indicators; quantitative assessment of this uncertainty and the current practice of ignoring both when making quantitative risk assessment. It is common practice to express quantitative risk assessments by point (scalar) numbers, however, due to the presence of uncertainty, their values are determined by intervals.

Among the parameters characterizing explosion-fire hazard of gas-vapor mixtures, the lower and upper concentration limits of flame propagation take the important place. Their values were published long ago for a vast majority of combustible substances, which as a result of an accident at a hazardous production facility can form explosive gas-vapor mixtures. In the reference literature, these quantities are traditionally given in the form of scalar numbers. However, the analysis shows that this is a very rough assessment: the values of lower and upper concentration limits of the combustible gases and vapors flame propagation vary in certain intervals or are not exactly known. The main sources of this uncertainty are specified:

  • uncertainty of measurement (if the value of lower concentration limit of flame propagation is obtained by the laboratory method);
  • type of ignition source (causes significant uncertainty);
  • air-fuel mixture parameters (temperature, pressure, oxygen concentration) — it was experimentally proved long time ago that the value of the lower concentration limit of flame propagation substantially depends on them. The thermodynamic conditions of emergencies at a hazardous production facility can vary significantly, so the value of the lower concentration limit of flame propagation will also be different.

In the experiments on a simple laboratory setup, different ignition sources were used — an electric spark, a heated nichrome wire. The influence was studied concerning the type of ignition source on the value of the lower concentration limit of air-vapor mixtures flame propagation — for flammable liquids: heptane, octane, ethyl acetate and ethanol. The difference (depending on the ignition source) was 1.5–2 times, and the boundaries of the interval values did not intersect.

References:
  1. Kolesnikov E.Yu. Interval-matrix method for quantitative fire risk assessment using liquid ammonia storage as an example. Problemy analiza riska = Issues of risk analysis. 2015. Vol. 12. № 4. pp. 28−41. (In Russ.).
  2. Kolesnikov E.Yu. Methods of Quantitative Assessment of Technogenic Risk Parameters Uncertainties. Bezopasnost truda v promyshlennosti = Occupational Safety in Industry. 2013. № 1. pp. 56−67. (In Russ.).
  3. Kolesnikov E.Yu. Uncertainty of the Estimates of Explosion Hazard on the Example of Textile Manufactures. Bezopasnost truda v promyshlennosti = Occupational Safety in Industry. 2017. № 11. pp. 23−29. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.24000/0409-2961-2017-11-23-29
  4. GOST 12.1.044—89. Fire and explosion hazard of substances and materials. Nomenclature of indices and methods of their determination. Available at:  http://docs.cntd.ru/document/gost-12-1-044-89 (accessed: December 12, 2019). (In Russ.). 
  5. Calculation of the main indicators of fire and explosion hazard of substances and materials: manual. Moscow: VNIIPO MChS Rossii, 2002. 77 p. (In Russ.).
  6. Baratov A.N., Korolchenko A.Ya., Kravchuk G.N. Fire and explosion hazard of substances and materials and means for extinguishing them: reference book in 2 parts. Pt. 1. Moscow: Khimiya, 1990. 496 p. (In Russ.).
  7. Baratov A.N., Korolchenko A.Ya., Kravchuk G.N. Fire and explosion hazard of substances and materials and means for extinguishing them: reference book in 2 parts. Pt. 2. Moscow: Khimiya, 1990. (In Russ.).
  8. Korolchenko A.Ya., Korolchenko D.A. Fire and explosion hazard of substances and materials and means for extinguishing them: reference book in 2 parts. Pt. 1. Moscow: Assotsiatsiya «Pozhnauka», 2004. (In Russ.).
  9. Korolchenko A.Ya., Korolchenko D.A. Fire and explosion hazard of substances and materials and means for extinguishing them: reference book in 2 parts. Pt. 2. Moscow: Assotsiatsiya «Pozhnauka», 2004. (In Russ.).
  10. GOST R 54500.1—2011. ISO/ IEC Guide 98-1: 2009. Uncertainty of measurement. Part 1. Introduction to guides on uncertainty in measurement. Available at:  http://docs.cntd.ru/document/1200088854 (accessed: November 27, 2019). (In Russ.).
  11. RMG 91—2009 GSI. State system for ensuring the uniformity of measurements. Joint use of concepts «error of measurement» and «uncertainty of measurement». General principles. Available at:  http://docs.cntd.ru/document/1200073886 (accessed: December 22, 2019). (In Russ.).
  12. Lees F. Lee’s Loss Prevention in the Process Industries. Hazard Identification, Assessment and Control. 3 Ed. Vol. 1. Elsevier, 2004. 3680 p.
  13. Determination of flame propagation concentration limits, minimum explosive oxygen content, minimum phlegmatizing concentration of at the elevated pressures and temperatures. Available at:  https://meganorm.ru/Data2/1/4293808/4293808259.htm (data obrashcheniya: 12.01.2020). (accessed: January 12, 2020). (In Russ.). 
  14. GOST 12.1.004—91. Fire safety. General requirements. Available at:  http://docs.cntd.ru/document/9051953 (accessed: January 9, 2020). (In Russ.).
  15. Guidelines for quantitative risk analysis of facilities handling hazardous substances. Report of Lloyd's Register for the Norwegian Directorate for Civil Protection (DSB) 2019.05.06. Available at:  https://www.dsb.no/rapporter-og-evalueringer/guidelines-for-quantitative-risk-analysis-of-facilities-handling-hazardous-substances/ (accessed: January 29, 2020).
  16. Flammability limit. Available at:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flammability_limit (accessed: January 31, 2020).
  17. Kolesnikov E.Yu. Illusion of precision. Khimiya i zhizn — XXI vek = Chemistry and Life — 21st Century. 2018. № 8. pp. 35–37. (In Russ.).
  18. Kolesnikov E.Yu., Telyakov E.Sh. Accidental Risk Quantitative Assessment: Assessment of Parametric Sensitivity of the Models and Conservativeness of the Adopted Assumptions. Bezopasnost truda v promyshlennosti = Occupational Safety in Industry. 2018. № 3. pp. 63–67. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.24000/0409-2961-2018-3-63-67
  19. Methodology for determining calculated values of fire risk at the production facilities: order of EMERCOM of Russia of July 10, 2009 № 404. Available at: http://docs.cntd.ru/document/902170886 (accessed: December 10, 2019). (In Russ.).
  20. Gases — Explosion and Flammability Concentration Limits. Flame and explosion limits for gases: propane, methane, butane, acetylene and more. Available at: https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/explosive-concentration-limits-d_423.html (accessed: February 1, 2020).
DOI: 10.24000/0409-2961-2020-6-89-94
Year: 2020
Issue num: June
Keywords : uncertainty accident with the release of combustible gases or vapors accidental risk assessment assessment of accident damaging factors flame propagation concentration limits quantitative assessment of uncertainty
Authors:
  • Kolesnikov E.Yu.
    Kolesnikov E.Yu.
    Dr. Sci. (Eng.), Prof. of the Higher School of Technosphere Safety, Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation