Skip to main content

Safety Systems for Petroleum Processing

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Petroleum Processing

Abstract

The processing of petroleum can be an inherently hazardous activity. The processes we use are handling a flammable material. They use strong, often hazardous, chemicals and employ high pressures and temperatures to convert the oil into finished products. All these factors present safety risks for both personnel and those living near a process facility. Still, the industry experiences very few incidents while processing millions of barrels of oil each day. Refineries place a high value on safety. This chapter discusses four key areas which contribute toward safety performance: personal protective equipment and systems, Process Safety Management (PSM), pressure safety, and temperature safety. A relief valve sizing example is presented.

David S. J. Jones: deceased.

Steven A. Treese has retired from Phillips 66.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 849.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 999.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

PSM and Related Programs

  • American Petroleum Institute, Management of Process Hazards, API Recommended Practice 750 (1990, Since Withdrawn)

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Atherton, F. Gil, (AIChE CCPS, 2008), Incidents that Define Process Safety (American Institute of Chemical Engineers, Center for Chemical Process Safety/Wiley, New York/Hoboken,, 2008)

    Google Scholar 

  • Center for Chemical Process Safety (CCPS), American Institute of Chemical Engineers, New York, several references

    Google Scholar 

  • J. B. Christian, (Osram Sylvania Inc., 1997), Combine fault and event trees for safety analysis, Chem. Eng. Progress. 72–75 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  • M.M.R. Eastman, J.R. Sawers (Knowledge Technologies, 1998), Learning to document management of change. Chem. Process. 15–22 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  • K.A. Ford, A.E. Summers, (Triconex, 1998), Are your instrumented safety systems up to standard? Chem. Eng. Progress 55–58 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  • R.W. Garland (Eastman Chem. Co., 2012), An engineer’s guide to management of change. Chem. Eng. Progress 49–53 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  • L. Goodman (Fluor Daniel, 1996), Speed your hazard analysis with the focused what if? Chem. Eng. Progress 75–79 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  • W.K. Goddard (Solutia Inc., 2007), Article: Use LOPA to determine protective system requirements, Chem. Eng. Progress, Feb, pp. 47–51 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  • R.K. Goyal, (BAPCO, 1993), FMEA, the alternative process hazard method. Hydrocarb. Process. 95–99 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  • R.K. Goyal (BAPCO, 1994 and 1995), Understand quantitative risk assessment. Hydrocarb. Process. 105–108 (Dec 1994), 95–99 (Jan 1995)

    Google Scholar 

  • ISA, Standard: Application of Safety Instrumented Systems for the Process Industries, ANSI/ISA-SP 84.01-1996 (ISA, Research Triangle Park, 1996)

    Google Scholar 

  • R.E. Knowlton, (Chemetrics, 1987), An Introduction to Hazard and Operability Studies: The Guide Word Approach. (Chemetrics Int’l, Vancouver, 1987)

    Google Scholar 

  • H. Ozog, H.R. Forgione, (ioMosaic Corp., 2012), OSHA’s new chemical NEP: how to make the grade and earn extra credit, Chem. Eng. Progress 27–34 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  • K.E. Smith, D.K. Whittle (EQE Int’l, Inc., 2001), Six steps to effectively update and revalidate PHAs. Chem. Eng. Progress 70–77 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  • R.P. Stickles, G.A. Melhem, (Arthur D. Little, Inc., 1998), How much safety is enough?, Hydrocarb.. Process. 50–54 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  • Wikipedia, several articles on www.wikipedia.org. Accessed Feb 2014

Oxygen Deficient Environments

  • J. Cable, NIOSH report details dangers of carbon dioxide in confined spaces. Occup. Hazards. (30 Dec 2004)

    Google Scholar 

  • National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Guidance Document: Criteria for a Recommended standard, Occupational Exposure to Carbon Dioxide (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Menlo Park, 1976)

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Health risk evaluation for carbon dioxide (CO2). (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, Bulletin: Hazards of nitrogen asphyxiation, Safety Bulletin No. 2003-10-B, June 2003 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

Confined Space Entry

  • U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Standard: Permit-Required Confined Spaces, Standard No. 1910.146. www.osha.gov

Facility Siting Hazards and Consideration

  • BP USA, Public report: Fatal Accident Investigation Report, Isomerization Unit Explosion, Final Report, Texas City. (BP, Texas, 2005)

    Google Scholar 

  • S.R. Brahmbhatt, (MG Ind., 1984), Are liquid thermal relief valves needed? Chem. Eng. 70 (1984)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Steven A. Treese .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendix: Example Calculation for Sizing a Relief Valve

Appendix: Example Calculation for Sizing a Relief Valve

Problem

A vessel containing naphtha C5–C8 range is uninsulated and is not fireproofed. The vessel is vertical and has a skirt 15′ in length. Dimensions of the vessel are I/D 6′0″, T-T 20′0″, and liquid height to HLL 16′0″. Calculate the valve size for fire condition relief. Set pressure is 120 psig.

Solution

Latent heat of naphtha at 200 °F is 136 Btu/lb=H L

Q = 21,000 FA0.82

A = Wetted area and is calculated as follows:

$$ \begin{array}{l}\mathrm{Liquid}\ \mathrm{height}\ \mathrm{above}\ \mathrm{grade}=15+16\ \mathrm{ft}\\ {} =31\ \mathrm{ft}\end{array} $$

Therefore wetted surface of vessel need only be taken to 25 f. above grade which is 25–15 = 10 f. of vessel height:

$$ \begin{array}{rl} {\rm Wetted}\,{\rm Surface} &= \pi D \times 10{\rm ft}\,{\rm for walls} \cr &= 188.5 \, \text{sq ft plus} \, 28.3 \, \text {sq ft for bottom} \cr &= 216.8 \, \text {sq ft} \cr Q &= 21,000 \times 1.0 \times (216.8)^{0.82} 1.729 \times 10^6 {\rm Btu/h} \cr Q/H_{\rm L} &= {{1.729 \times 10^6 } \over {136}} = 12,713\,{\rm lbs /h = }W \cr A &= {{W\sqrt T \sqrt Z } \over {CKP_1 K_{\rm b} \sqrt M }}\end{array} $$

where:

  • A = effective discharge area in sq in.

  • W = flow through valve in lbs/h, 12,713.

  • T = absolute temp of inlet vapor, 460 + 200 = 660 R (Bubble point of C5-C8 at, say, 10 psig).

  • Z = 0.98 (nC5).

  • C = 356.06 (based on C A /C V = 1.4).

  • K = 0.65 (typical coefficient of discharge).

  • K b = 0.9

  • M = 100 (use C7).

  • P 1 = set pressure of valve, 134.7 psia.

$$ \begin{array}{l}A=\frac{12,713\times 25.7\times 0.99}{356\times 0.65\times 134.7\times 0.9\times 1}=1.153\ \mathrm{in}{.}^2\\ {} \mathrm{nearest}\ \mathrm{orifice}\ \mathrm{size} = `J' \mathrm{at} 1.287\ \mathrm{in}{.}^2\end{array} $$

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this entry

Cite this entry

Jones, D.S.J., Treese, S.A. (2015). Safety Systems for Petroleum Processing. In: Treese, S., Pujadó, P., Jones, D. (eds) Handbook of Petroleum Processing. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14529-7_20

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics