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.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
PSM and Related Programs
American Petroleum Institute, Management of Process Hazards, API Recommended Practice 750 (1990, Since Withdrawn)
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)
Center for Chemical Process Safety (CCPS), American Institute of Chemical Engineers, New York, several references
J. B. Christian, (Osram Sylvania Inc., 1997), Combine fault and event trees for safety analysis, Chem. Eng. Progress. 72–75 (1997)
M.M.R. Eastman, J.R. Sawers (Knowledge Technologies, 1998), Learning to document management of change. Chem. Process. 15–22 (1998)
K.A. Ford, A.E. Summers, (Triconex, 1998), Are your instrumented safety systems up to standard? Chem. Eng. Progress 55–58 (1998)
R.W. Garland (Eastman Chem. Co., 2012), An engineer’s guide to management of change. Chem. Eng. Progress 49–53 (2012)
L. Goodman (Fluor Daniel, 1996), Speed your hazard analysis with the focused what if? Chem. Eng. Progress 75–79 (1996)
W.K. Goddard (Solutia Inc., 2007), Article: Use LOPA to determine protective system requirements, Chem. Eng. Progress, Feb, pp. 47–51 (2007)
R.K. Goyal, (BAPCO, 1993), FMEA, the alternative process hazard method. Hydrocarb. Process. 95–99 (1993)
R.K. Goyal (BAPCO, 1994 and 1995), Understand quantitative risk assessment. Hydrocarb. Process. 105–108 (Dec 1994), 95–99 (Jan 1995)
ISA, Standard: Application of Safety Instrumented Systems for the Process Industries, ANSI/ISA-SP 84.01-1996 (ISA, Research Triangle Park, 1996)
R.E. Knowlton, (Chemetrics, 1987), An Introduction to Hazard and Operability Studies: The Guide Word Approach. (Chemetrics Int’l, Vancouver, 1987)
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)
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)
R.P. Stickles, G.A. Melhem, (Arthur D. Little, Inc., 1998), How much safety is enough?, Hydrocarb.. Process. 50–54 (1998)
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)
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)
U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Health risk evaluation for carbon dioxide (CO2). (2005)
U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, Bulletin: Hazards of nitrogen asphyxiation, Safety Bulletin No. 2003-10-B, June 2003 (2003)
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)
S.R. Brahmbhatt, (MG Ind., 1984), Are liquid thermal relief valves needed? Chem. Eng. 70 (1984)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
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:
Therefore wetted surface of vessel need only be taken to 25 f. above grade which is 25–15 = 10 f. of vessel height:
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.
Rights 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
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14529-7_20
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-14528-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-14529-7
eBook Packages: EnergyReference Module Computer Science and Engineering