The Credit of Fire and Explosion Index for Risk Assessment of Iso-Max Unit in an Oil Refinery

  • MOHAMMAD JAVAD JAFARI Mail Occupational Health Eng Dept, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
  • MOHSEN ZAREI Occupational Health Eng Dept, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
  • MOHAMMAD MOVAHHEDI Epidemiology Dept, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Keywords:
Iso-max, Index, Fire, Explosion, Risk

Abstract

The risks of fire and explosion in oil and gas industry need to be managed. The objectives of the present study were to assess the risk of fire and explosion in Iso-max unit of Tehran Oil Refinery using Dow’s fire and explosion index and to study the influences of the controlling methods. The latest version of DOW fire and explosion index guideline was applied to calculate the fire and explosion index at process subunits of Iso-max. The important process subunits in Iso-max unit were identified based on important affecting parameters such as process pressure, temperature and material value. In next step, the important parameters affecting the fire and explosion index were identified and estimated. The fire and explosion index was calculated for each subunit. Mean time, the controlling methods for each case was identified and its influences were studied. The results revealed that, 6 subunits out of 8 studied subunits had a sever fire and explosion risk. One subunit had a heavy risk and one had an intermediate risk of fire and explosion. The separating container at high pressure was the most critical subunit of Iso-max, holding an F&E Index of 220. The reactor feeding furnace was the least dangerous subunit with an F&E Index of 122. The study showed that the application of controlling methods could reduce the F&E Index extensively.

References

Crowl DA. Inherently safer chemical processes: A life cycle approach, New York, AIChE, 1996.

Suardina J, Mannana S and El-Halwagi M. The integration of Dow's fire and explosion index (F & EI) into process design and optimization to achieve inherently safer design. Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 2007; 20(1): 79-90.

Mansfield D, Cassidy K. Inherently safer approach and how this can be built into the design process. Institution of Chemical Engineers Symposium Series 1994; 134: 285-299.

Palaniappan C, Srinivasan R, Tan R. Selection of inherently safer process routes: a case study. Chemical Engineering and Processing 1997; 43: 647–653.

Wang Y. Development of computer–aided fault tree synthesis methodology for quantitative risk analysis in the chemical process industry. PhD thesis, A&M university college station, TX, 2004.

Hyatt N. Guidelines for Process Hazard Analysis, Hazard Identification & Risk Analysis, 3rd edition, Ontario, Canada, Dyadem press, 2003.

Siavapiraksam SP, Surianarayanan M, Swaminathan G. Hazard assessment for the safe storage, manufacturing and handling of flash compositions. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 2009; 22: 254-256.

jafari, MJ, Gharari N, Sheikhi HR. The reliability of a tunnel boring machine. IJOH 2009; 1: 19-24.

Khan FI, Sadiq R, Amyotte PR. Evaluation of Available Indices for Inherently Safer Design Options. Process Safety Progress 2003; 22(2): 83-97.

Hendershot D. Process minimization, making plants safety. Chemical Engineering progress. Jan 2000: 35-40.

Heillila AM. Inherent safety in process plant design: an index based approach. PhD thesis, Technical Research Center of Finland, VTT, Espoo; Finland, 1999.

Edward DW, Lawrence D. Assessing the inherent safety of chemical process routes: Is there a relation between plant cost and inherent safety? Trans IChem, PT. B (Process Safety and Environmental Protection), 71B, 252, 1993

Gentile M. Development of a hierarchical fuzzy model for the evaluation of inherent safety. PhD thesis, College Station, Texas A & M University, 2004.

Suardin J. The integration of Dow's Fire and Explosion Index into Process Design and Optimization to achieve an Inherently Safer Design. MSc thesis, Texas A&M University. Aug 2005.

Etowa CB, Amyotte PR, Pegg MJ, Khan FI. Quantification of Inherent Safety Aspect of the Dow Index. Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 2002; 15(6): 477-487.

Khan FI, Amyotte PR. How to make inherent safety practice a reality. The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering 2003; 81: 1-16.

Jensen N, Jorgensen SB. Taking credit for loss control measures in the plant with the likely loss Fire and Explosion Index (LL-F & EI). Trans IChem E, part B Process Safety and Environmental Protection 2007; Vol 85(B1): 51-58.

AIChE. Dow's Fire and Explosion Index Hazard Classification Guide. 7th ed. New York. AICHE. 1994: 1-64.

AICHE. Dow's Chemical Exposure Index Guide, 1st ed, New York. 1994

Ramezani A. Iso-max Unit No:1, Manual Operation –Tehran refinery:1990.

Gupta JP. The application of Dow’s fire and explosion index hazard classification guide to process plants in the developing countries. Journal of Loss Prevention. Process Industry 1997; 10 (1): 7-15.

Published
2015-10-11
How to Cite
1.
JAFARI MJ, ZAREI M, MOVAHHEDI M. The Credit of Fire and Explosion Index for Risk Assessment of Iso-Max Unit in an Oil Refinery. Int J Occup Hyg. 4(1):10-16.
Section
Original Article(s)