CTA Report, Draft 1, ISP Review - US Chemical Safety and Hazard ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Figures B-1 and B-2 show test overpressures and rates of pressure rise as a function of concentration, respectively. The highest values of each over the entire concentration range determined Pmax and (dP/dt)max. For comparison, Figure 14 (Section 7.2) shows explosion severity data for polyethylene, Pittsburgh coal dust, and cornstarch. Rate of Pressure Rise [psig/sec] Explosion Pressure [psig] 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Concentration [g/m³] Figure B-1. Durite SD-52SS overpressure versus concentration. 10000 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Concentration [g/m³] Figure B-2. Durite SD-52SS rate of pressure rise versus concentration. 104
B.2 Minimum Explosible Concentration Minimum explosible concentration (MEC) is the minimum concentration of a combustible dust cloud that is capable of propagating a deflagration through a uniform mixture of dust and air under specified conditions. MEC data provide a relative measure of the minimum concentration of a dust cloud necessary for an explosion. The values obtained are specific to the sample (particularly particle size distribution) and test method. MEC values are not to be considered intrinsic material constants. The test was performed per ASTM E1515-00, Standard Test Method for Minimum Explosible Concentration of Combustible Dusts (2000b), using the U.S. Bureau of Mines 20-liter explosibility chamber. Figure B-3 compares MECs for the Borden Chemical SD-52SS phenolic resin, Pittsburgh coal dust, polyethylene dust, and cornstarch. MEC (g/m³) 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 28 50 60 60 Cornstarch Pittsburgh Pulverized Coal Dust SD-52SS + Carbon Black #2 Polyethylene Figure B-3. Minimum explosive concentration of Durite SD-52SS compared with other common combustible dusts. 105
Page 1 and 2:
KEY ISSUES: U.S. CHEMICAL S AFETY A
Page 3 and 4:
5.1.2 Line 405 Oven Temperature Con
Page 5 and 6:
9.1 FM Global Guidelines...........
Page 7 and 8:
Figures 1 Simplified Layout of CTA
Page 9 and 10:
ACC American Chemistry Council Acro
Page 11 and 12:
Executive Summary A February 20, 20
Page 13 and 14:
1.0 Introduction At approximately 7
Page 15 and 16:
2.0 Key Findings 1. Combustible phe
Page 17 and 18:
3.0 Facility Description 3.1 CTA Ac
Page 19 and 20:
eams. Nonload-bearing masonry block
Page 21 and 22:
Thirteen-foot-high freestanding enc
Page 23 and 24:
4.0 Process Description The product
Page 25 and 26:
4.1.2 Mat-former and Baghouse In th
Page 27 and 28:
Circulating fans and dampers direct
Page 29 and 30:
• Manually striking baghouse bags
Page 31 and 32:
5.0 Incident Description 5.1 Pre-In
Page 33 and 34:
• The line was one week past due
Page 35 and 36:
forklift with a semi-enclosed cab d
Page 37 and 38:
panels and lights down inside the b
Page 39 and 40:
occurred in the southeast corner of
Page 41 and 42:
5.3.3 Firefighting Activities 5.3.3
Page 43 and 44:
5.4 Incident Aftermath The CTA inci
Page 45 and 46:
6.0 Understanding Combustible Dust
Page 47 and 48:
As depicted in Figure 11 (Eckhoff,
Page 49 and 50:
Figure 12. Mechanism for a dust fir
Page 51 and 52:
7.0 Reconstructive Analysis To dete
Page 53 and 54: urned clean but otherwise intact an
Page 55 and 56: 7.1.2 Other Possible Initiating Eve
Page 57 and 58: Table 3 Borden Chemical Black Pheno
Page 59 and 60: 7.3 Line 405 Equipment Testing CSB
Page 61 and 62: determine if those products are haz
Page 63 and 64: that the phenolic resin could explo
Page 65 and 66: A 1998 internal Borden Chemical mem
Page 67 and 68: • Characterize new and existing p
Page 69 and 70: CTA that phenolic resins, when susp
Page 71 and 72: CTA department supervisors were res
Page 73 and 74: 8.5 Work Practices 8.5.1 Production
Page 75 and 76: operating the oven with the doors o
Page 77 and 78: 8.7 Incident Investigations The inc
Page 79 and 80: • Excessive accumulations of comb
Page 81 and 82: Data Sheet 6-9 also states: Clean o
Page 83 and 84: Table 5 Insurance Company Dust Issu
Page 85 and 86: standards (Appendix D). Kentucky OS
Page 87 and 88: 10.2.2 Division of Building Codes E
Page 89 and 90: 11.0 Combustible Dust Hazard Study
Page 91 and 92: 4. The Borden Chemical product stew
Page 93 and 94: 13.0 Recommendations CSB developed
Page 95 and 96: Kentucky Office of Occupational Saf
Page 97 and 98: BY THE U.S. Chemical Safety and Haz
Page 99 and 100: Lawson, Robert G., 1984. Beverly Hi
Page 101 and 102: APPENDIX A: Fire and Explosion Dama
Page 103: APPENDIX B: Laboratory Testing of P
Page 107 and 108: B.4 Propagating Brush Discharge Ign
Page 109 and 110: Material Corona Charge Voltage (kV)
Page 111 and 112: APPENDIX C: Equipment Testing Line
Page 113 and 114: II controllers, only manufactured a
Page 115 and 116: Therefore, at any given time, it wa
Page 117 and 118: APPENDIX D: NFPA Guidelines In prom
Page 119 and 120: D.2 Other Pertinent NFPA Codes D.2.
Page 121 and 122: APPENDIX E: HMIS Rating System The
Page 123 and 124: APPENDIX F: Simplified Organization
Page 125 and 126: Subtree A Second dust explosion abo
Page 127: Subtree C Most CTA personnel had a
show all

CTA Report, Draft 1, ISP Review - US Chemical Safety and Hazard ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?