Thank you
This live web event has ended. Thank you for attending.
Description
| Design, Maintenance, and Safety of Silos and Air Material Separators | |
| John elaborated on the design criteria and special considerations for bins, hoppers, and silos as outlined in section 8.6. John also discussed the challenges of maintaining venting efficiency when the silo is filled to its maximum and the importance of personnel protection from flame extension. They further emphasized the need for proper maintenance for the dust collector to prevent dust accumulation in the clean air plenum. Lastly, John shared the calculations used to determine the vent area for air material separators and the potential obstruction of filter media to the flow of combustion products. | |
| Dust Explosion Risks in Bucket Elevators | |
| John discussed the potential for dust explosions in bucket elevators, emphasizing the importance of determining the terminal settling velocity to assess the risk of a deflagration. They highlighted the significance of keeping the Reynolds number greater than 2 to prevent dust accumulation, and suggested several ways to mitigate the risk, such as using polymeric buckets instead of steel ones to avoid sparks. John also discussed the design and safety considerations for bucket elevators, emphasizing the importance of vent areas being at least equal to the leg cross-sectional area. They cautioned against placing vents on roofs in environments with snow and ice accumulation. John addressed the issue of discrepancies with local authorities regarding silos, bins, and bunkers, and highlighted the potential danger of radiant flux from an exploding dust collector. | |
| Vessel Pressure Hazards and Analysis Challenges | |
| John discussed various aspects of vessel pressure and its potential hazards. They explained an equation to calculate D for vessels under specific conditions and the impact of external pressure on equipment and personnel. John highlighted the toxic effects of deflagrations, emphasizing the need to manage pressurization to minimize the risk of exposure to toxic materials. They also discussed the challenges of analyzing interconnected piping systems, noting the potential for detonations and the limited guidance available. Lastly, John touched upon Chapter 9 of Nfp. 68, emphasizing its limited data set and lack of development in recent years, before moving on to discuss a design example. | |
| Dust Collector Design and Testing Discussion | |
| John discussed the specifications and design of a dust collector, focusing on its efficiency in handling wood particulates and the importance of the mass median diameter in determining the Pm max. They also discussed the dimensions of the dust collector, which stands 20 feet tall with a cross-section of 10 feet. John emphasized the importance of defining the desired P. Red and the choice between designing based on yield or ultimate strength of the vessel. They also highlighted the importance of precision in their work and the potential challenges of sourcing specific vent sizes from vendors. There was also a discussion about the imprecision associated with testing for Kst and the need for designers to account for this and document their decision-making process. Elizabeth asked about the inclusion of the additional clean air plenum in the calculations, which John confirmed. Travis inquired about the correct percentage to use, which led to a clarification from John that it should be 141% due to the imprecision in testing. | |
| Vent Area Importance and Calculations in Systems and Vessels | |
| John discussed the importance of vent area in various systems and vessels. They emphasized the potential risks of insufficient vent area and their conservative approach to ensuring enough vent area, recommending the use of the upper bound for the required vent area. John explained the need to adjust vent area based on initial pressure and the impact of turbulence and initial internal suspension velocities on vent area. They highlighted the calculations for determining the mass correction needed for a panel based on the KST value and the potential need for corrections in high inertia events and when the panel mass exceeds 40 kilograms per square meter. John also discussed the use of vent ducts and their limitations, stressing the importance of calculating the friction factor. They demonstrated a practical example where the final vent area was determined to be 3.41 square meters, requiring two vents each with a minimum area of 1.71 square meters. | |
| Venting in Combustible Dust Scenarios: Risks, Design Challenges, and Limitations | |
| John discussed the importance of venting in combustible dust scenarios to prevent fires and protect people. They highlighted the potential risks of deflagration, including the threat to employees, passers-by, and the community. John also emphasized the need for designing venting systems that take into account all correction factors to ensure the pressure stays below the yield strength of the vessel. They noted the challenges of adjusting vent sizes based on available space and the potential need to revise the design. John stressed the importance of involving clients in the design process and managing expectations to mitigate E&O liability. They also touched upon the issue of determining when a building compartment is a deflagration hazard and the criteria for protecting employees from a flash fire. Towards the end, they discussed the limitations of building compartment venting, particularly in terms of its impact on occupants. | |
| Dust Suspension Volume and Ventilation in Buildings | |
| John discussed the process of determining the volume and volume fraction occupied by the maximum anticipated dust suspension in a building. They explained the use of specific parameters and boundary conditions in the calculation and highlighted the importance of using a bounding value for K. Sub. ST to ensure enough vent area. John concluded that the minimum vent area to achieve the desired limitation is 49.7 square meters. However, John made an error in a calculation, which was acknowledged by Elizabeth, Patrick, and Gregory, resulting in a misinterpretation of the need for venting. After correcting the calculation, John confirmed that venting was indeed necessary. They emphasized the importance of controlling the fraction of the building compartment volume that can support a dust deflagration. | |
| Measuring Fuel Fraction for Explosion Prevention | |
| John emphasized the importance of measuring the entrainable dust area to accurately estimate the fuel fraction. They explained the FM Global method and the need for representative samples of floor dust and upward-facing surfaces. John also discussed potential sources of additional mass to be included in the calculation, such as open processes, episodic spills, and packaged materials. They highlighted the application of NFPA 68, noting its calculations have not been experimentally validated for all particulate types. John concluded by mentioning ongoing research and hinted at a potential final quiz for the seminar. They also mentioned the next session would focus on venting ducts and explosion prevention systems. |