Page 657 - Dust Explosions in the Process Industries
P. 657

624  Dust Explosions in the Process Industries


             discussed by Roser et al. (1999), whereas Vogl and Radandt (2001, 2002) presented
             new experimental data on minimum pipe diameters for transmission of dust explosions
             from one process unit to another. It was found that dust flame transmission could occur
             in pipes of surprisingly small diameters. For example, with a wheat flour of Ks, = 100
             bar.m/s, the dust flame was able to propagate through a 27 mm diameter pipe of at least
             12m length. Based on another extensive series of experiments,Roser et al. (2001) devel-
             oped empirical correlations for predicting the time that a dust explosion in a process unit
             of a given volume would need to propagate through a given distance of a duct of a given
             diameter connecting the process unit to another, neighboring unit. Knowing this time is
             critical in the design of effective explosion isolation systems to be installed in pipes and
             ducts connecting to process units in which dust explosions can occur.
               Wiemann and Faber (1996) studied experimentally the propagation of dust explosions
             in a fully closed, coupled system consisting of a 1 m3vessel and a 5 m3vessel connected
             by a 10m long straightpipe of internal diameter 400,200, or 100mm. Considerablepres-
             sure piling effects were observed, and with maize starch, with ignition in the 5 m3vessel,
             a maximum pressure of nearly 18 bar was observed in the 1 m3vessel. Kubainsky et al.
             (2001)presented results from a series of full-scale experiments,which showed that a dust
             explosionin a vented filter enclosure can give rise to substantial dust flame propagation
             back into the upstream raw gas duct, in the direction oppositethat of the normal raw gas
             flow into the filter, It was concluded, therefore, that, in such systems, the installation  of
             effective explosion isolation equipment in the upstream raw gas duct is required.
               Various passive and active techniques for interruptingexplosions in pipelines have been
             developed, but there is room for further improvement. If adequate performance can be
             achieved,passive techniques are clearly more attractive than active ones. Zellweger (per-
             sonal communication with J. Zellweger, Rico-Sicherheitstech, St. Gallen, Switzerland,
              1992)described work to improvepassive and active isolation valves of the VENTEX type.
             Closing times (from sensing of the explosion to valve is fully closed) down to 12ms were
             obtained for active valves. A simplifiedVENTEX valve, operating in one direction only,
             has also been developed. Passive explosion interrupters and diverters based on venting
             at a 180"bend have been in use for some time. However, therc is a need for further explo-
             ration of the potential and limitations of this attractive, simple principle of explosion
             isolation. A new low-pressure-drop design of  this kind of diverter was described by
             Alfert and Fuhre (1992) and Wingerden and Alfert (1992). Glor (personal communica-
             tion with M. Glor, Ciba-Geigy AG, Basle, Switzerland, 1993)reported on work on the
             performanceof explosionbarriers in ducts connectedto vessels with venting or automatic
             explosion suppression. Klincewicz and Kordylewski (1993) described a new design of
              an active explosion diverter for interrupting explosionsin pipelines. The new design avoids
              the pressure drop created in normal operation by passive divertersbut requires active txig-
             gering. Moore and Siwek (1996) investigated experimentallythe performance of automatic
              explosion suppression systems for interrupting explosions in pipelines and ducting
             between process units. Some quantitative design guidelines were given.
               Cybulskiet al. (1994b),Lebecki et al. (1998,2000, 2001), developing systemsfor inter-
             rupting coal dust explosions in coal mine galleries, used solar panels for automaticdetec-
             tion of the coal dust flame and simultaneous actuation of water barriers. The water was
             contained in plastic bags or containers,opened by a detonating cord or charge triggered
             by the flame-generated power from the solar panel.
                Siwek (1996c), in a comprehensive paper covering both dust and gas explosions,
             reviewed the wide range of isolation techniques available for preventing dust explosions
   652   653   654   655   656   657   658   659   660   661   662