application of factorial experimental design to determine...

1
Background and Motivation Equipment description 36L Dust Explosion Vessel Control system Application of Factorial Experimental Design to Determine the Optimum Test Parameters for a 36 L Dust Explosion Equipment D. Castellanos, V.H. Carreto, C.V. Mashuga, M.S. Mannan Between 1980 to 2005, several dust explosions in US have resulted in more 100 deaths and Equipment capabilities Control system Remote control using LabView as interface Manual control (1) vacuum system (2) Air reservoir (3) Fast acting valve (FAV) (4) Dust container (5) Rebound nozzle (6) Electrodes and igniters (7) Pressure transducers. *Imperial Sugar company dust explosion: Savannah, Georgia. February 7, 2008 13 d h 40 k ij d LabView allows: Precise timing control for FAV time and ignition delay Data analysis, saving and exporting options FAV and ignition delay pulses are connected to LabView “counters” which are simultaneously activated b t l AC i l K St is calculated by recording pressure profile and calculating the slope every 10 data points. Maximum slope value represents (dP/dt) max which is subsequently corrected by th l l (36 Lit ) In attempting to identify dust explosion hazards and reduce these type of accidents, different explosion apparatus have been designed. Accurate calibration of the test equipment is essential to obtain reliable information that is independent of the equipment used. Lack of systematic calibration guidelines, and the great amount of influencing factors on explosive characteristics increase the number of tests and time required to 700 injuries (CSB)*. Equipment capabilities Basic fundamentals Property Definition Standard Industrial application P max Maximum explosion overpressure generated in the test chamber ASTM E 1226 (Thermodynamic parameter) Used to design enclosures and predict the severity of consequence. (dp/dt) max Maximum rate of pressure rise ASTM E 1226 (Kinetic parameter) Predicts the violence of an explosion. Used to calculate K St K St Dust deflagration index ASTM E 1226 Measure the relative explosion severity compared to other dusts. Minimum explosive Measure the minimum amount of dust K St values Clarification 0 St0 0-200] St1 [200-300] St2 > 300 St3 Common dusts can explode, including: Organics (sugar, flour, grains, milk), plastics, metals (magnesium , aluminum), coal . Combustible solid small particle size (<63um)/within flammable limits Oxygen concentration sufficient to sustain the flame propagation I iti b Mi i I iti A dust explosion requires 5 elements within specific ranges: 13 deaths, 40 workers were injured * Source: U.S. Chemical Safety Board by an external AC signal. the vessel volume (36 Liters). complete the calibration process. OBJECTIVE: Guide the calibration process using 2 k factorial to define proper operation conditions of a 36L vessel. Determination of proper equipment operation conditions MEC Minimum explosive concentration ASTM E 1515 dispersed in air required to initiate an explosion. Increasing Explosibility Ignition source above Minimum Ignition Energy) (MIE). Th f (A B C) d l l f h f l d d hi ff i ifi MATERIAL: Corn Stage 1. Semi-quantitative analysis Stage 2. Turbulence analysis at different operation conditions MATERIAL: Niacin 60 20 60 20 OBJECTIVE: Refine calibration process and define the optimum fast acting valve ignition delay times. I A B C AB AC BC ABC yi (bar-m/s) 1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 13.8 1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 7.44 1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 6.78 1 1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 6.62 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 12 27 2 k factorial approach: recommendations and conclusions ݎݐ 2 3 ݍ ܣ2 + ݍ ܤ2 + ݍ ܥ2 + ݍܣ ܤ2 + ݍܣ ܥ2 + ݍ ܥܤ2 + ݍܣ ܥܤ2 Three factors (A, B, C) and two levels for each factor were selected to studytheireffect in a specific variable “y” (in this case y =K St value). Factors Low Level High Level A FAV Fast acting valve time, ms 300 400 B IG Ignition delay time, ms 20 50 C RP Reservoir pressure, psia 221 264 The factors are systematically combined through all the levels. Each combination of factors levels represents the set of operation conditions used during a dust explosion test. The variation of Y given by each factor is calculated by the following expression: 0 20 40 0 5 10 15 RP221 FAV200 IG20 RP221 FAV100 IG20 RP221 FAV75 IG20 RP264 FAV200 IG20 RP264 FAV100 IG20 RP264 FAV75 IG20 RP315 FAV100 IG20 RP315 FAV75 IG20 Kst [bar-m/s] P m [bar] 0 20 40 0 5 10 15 RP315 FAV100 IG10 RP315 FAV100 IG20 RP315 FAV100 IG30 RP315 FAV100 IG50 Kst [bar-m/s] P m [bar] Pmax KSt The 2 k factorial approach provided information of each independent factor effect and possible factors interaction effects on the observed The methodology finalized 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 12.27 1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 10.32 1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 6.84 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6.80 70.87 -16.79 -8.51 1.59 8.11 -1.11 4.53 -4.29 qi 8.86 -2.10 -1.06 0.20 1.01 -0.14 0.57 -0.54 Qi=qi/8 (Qi) 2 4.40 1.13 0.04 1.03 0.02 0.32 0.29 Y 61% 16% 1% 14% 0% 4% 4% 100% Stage 3. Results Validation and Conclusions This methodology guided the calibration process toward shorter FAV times. The results from this experimental analysis helped to identify FAV as the more influencing factor in the observed variable K St . Effect of FAV corresponds to 61%. - Dispersion time (FAV) of 50 ms - Ignition delay time between dispersion and ignition activation (IG) of 25 ms - Reservoir pressure (RP) of 314.7 psia factor effect, and possible factors interaction effects on the observed variable (K st ) guiding the calibration process toward FAV times shorter than 300 ms. Since the variable observed (K st ) does not have a linear behavior with the factors studied, the selection of a proper range between the levels for any of the three factors used in the analysis was essential to obtain useful results. If the range of the influencing analyzed is very short, not appreciable changes can be observed in K st . On the other hand, if the range is too long, high K st values can be under covered. with the following set of operations conditions Future Work : Dust explosion simulations with DESC METHODOLOGY Test # g/m 3 P ex P m bar (dP/dt) bar/s K St bar-m/s Deviation from reference value psia bar 1 550 131 8.0 8.5 747 247 K St = 239 bar-m/s 2 550 129 7.9 8.4 706 233 OBJECTIVE: Verify that the equipment operating conditions are useful to reproduce values from Round Robin tests. The optimal concentration for Pmax is 450 g/m 3 , and optimal concentration for K St is 550 g/m 3 . Use pressure-time profiles from dust explosions in both apparatus to analyze the effect of the vessel shape and size on the turbulence. Use FLACS and DESC simulations to calculate the decay of root meant square velocity and the turbulent length scale and compare them with experimental values. MATERIAL: Niacin (Calibration round Robin, Kühner 2003) OBJECTIVE: Compare the 36 L at the MKOPSC with an standard 20 L dust explosion equipment using CFD simulations. Dev = 8.45 % 3 550 130 8.0 8.5 715 236 4 450 131 8.0 8.5 671 222 P max = 8.6 bar Dev = 2.09 % 5 450 132 8.1 8.6 783 259 6 450 132 8.1 8.6 749 247 The calibration methodology was useful to determine the proper operating conditions of a 36 L dust explosion equipment reducing the number of test required. The results obtained were in good agreement with the values reported in the literature. Same methodology can be used as guide for calibrating other equipment with different configurations where the turbulence plays an important role on the explosion results.

Upload: others

Post on 03-Jun-2020

2 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Application of Factorial Experimental Design to Determine ...psc.tamu.edu/wp-content/uploads/HAZARDS-poster-v-110421.pdf · *Imperial Sugar company dust explosion: Savannah, Georgia

Background and Motivation Equipment description36L Dust Explosion Vessel Control system

Application of Factorial Experimental Design to Determine the Optimum Test Parameters for a 36 L Dust Explosion Equipment

D. Castellanos, V.H. Carreto, C.V. Mashuga, M.S. Mannan

Between 1980 to 2005, several dust explosions in US have resulted in more 100 deaths and

Equipment capabilities

Control systemRemote control using LabView as interfaceManual control(1) vacuum system

(2) Air reservoir(3) Fast acting valve (FAV)(4) Dust container(5) Rebound nozzle(6) Electrodes and igniters(7) Pressure transducers.

*Imperial Sugar company dust explosion:Savannah, Georgia. February 7, 2008 13 d h 40 k i j d

LabView allows:

Precise timing control for FAV time and ignition delay Data analysis, saving and exporting options

FAV and ignition delay pulses areconnected to LabView “counters”which are simultaneously activatedb t l AC i l

KSt is calculated by recording pressure profileand calculating the slope every 10 datapoints. Maximum slope value represents(dP/dt)max which is subsequently corrected byth l l (36 Lit )

• In attempting to identify dust explosionhazards and reduce these type of accidents,different explosion apparatus have beendesigned.• Accurate calibration of the test equipmentis essential to obtain reliable information thatis independent of the equipment used.• Lack of systematic calibration guidelines,and the great amount of influencing factorson explosive characteristics increase thenumber of tests and time required to

700 injuries (CSB)*.

Equipment capabilities

Basic fundamentals Property Definition Standard Industrial application

Pmax

Maximum explosion overpressure generated in the test chamber

ASTM E 1226 (Thermodynamic parameter) Used to design enclosures and predict the severity of consequence.

(dp/dt)maxMaximum rate of pressure rise

ASTM E 1226 (Kinetic parameter) Predicts the violence of an explosion. Used to calculate KSt

KSt Dust deflagration index ASTM E 1226 Measure the relative explosion severity compared to other dusts.

Minimum explosiveMeasure the minimum amount of dust

KSt values Clarification0 St0 0-200] St1[200-300] St2> 300 St3

Common dusts can explode, including: Organics (sugar, flour, grains, milk), plastics, metals(magnesium , aluminum), coal .

Combustible solid small particle size(<63um)/within flammable limitsOxygen concentration sufficient tosustain the flame propagationI iti b Mi i I iti

A dust explosion requires 5 elements within specific ranges:

13 deaths, 40 workers were injured* Source: U.S. Chemical Safety Board

by an external AC signal. the vessel volume (36 Liters).complete the calibration process.

OBJECTIVE: Guide the calibration process using 2k factorial to define properoperation conditions of a 36L vessel.

Determination of proper equipment operation conditions

MEC Minimum explosive concentration

ASTM E 1515 dispersed in air required to initiate an explosion.

Increasing ExplosibilityIgnition source above Minimum IgnitionEnergy) (MIE).

Th f (A B C) d l l f h f l d d h i ff i ifiMATERIAL: Corn

Stage 1. Semi-quantitative analysis

Stage 2. Turbulence analysis at different operation conditions

MATERIAL: Niacin6020 6020

OBJECTIVE: Refine calibration process and define the optimum fast acting valveignition delay times.

I A B C AB AC BC ABC yi (bar-m/s)

1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 13.8

1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 7.44

1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 6.78

1 1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 6.62

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 12 27

2k factorial approach: recommendations and conclusions = 23 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 2

Three factors (A, B, C) and two levels for each factor were selected to study their effect in a specificvariable “y” (in this case y = KSt value).

Factors Low Level High LevelA FAV Fast acting valve time, ms 300 400B IG Ignition delay time, ms 20 50C RP Reservoir pressure, psia 221 264

The factors are systematically combinedthrough all the levels.

Each combination of factors levelsrepresents the set of operation conditionsused during a dust explosion test.

The variation of Y given by each factor iscalculated by the following expression:

0

20

40

0

5

10

15

RP221 FAV200

IG20

RP221 FAV100

IG20

RP221 FAV75 IG20

RP264 FAV200

IG20

RP264 FAV100

IG20

RP264 FAV75 IG20

RP315 FAV100

IG20

RP315 FAV75 IG20

Kst

[bar

-m/s

]

Pm

[bar

]

0

20

40

0

5

10

15

RP315FAV100

IG10

RP315FAV100

IG20

RP315FAV100

IG30

RP315FAV100

IG50

Kst [

bar-

m/s

]

P m[b

ar]

Pmax

KSt

The 2k factorial approach provided information of each independentfactor effect and possible factors interaction effects on the observed

The methodology finalized1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 12.27

1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 10.32

1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 6.84

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6.80

70.87 -16.79 -8.51 1.59 8.11 -1.11 4.53 -4.29 qi

8.86 -2.10 -1.06 0.20 1.01 -0.14 0.57 -0.54 Qi=qi/8

(Qi)2 4.40 1.13 0.04 1.03 0.02 0.32 0.29

Y 61% 16% 1% 14% 0% 4% 4% 100%

Stage 3. Results Validation and Conclusions

This methodology guided the calibrationprocess toward shorter FAV times.

The results from this experimental analysishelped to identify FAV as the moreinfluencing factor in the observed variableKSt. Effect of FAV corresponds to 61%. - Dispersion time (FAV) of 50 ms

- Ignition delay time betweendispersion and ignition activation(IG) of 25 ms- Reservoir pressure (RP) of314.7 psia

factor effect, and possible factors interaction effects on the observedvariable (Kst) guiding the calibration process toward FAV times shorterthan 300 ms.Since the variable observed (Kst) does not have a linear behavior with thefactors studied, the selection of a proper range between the levels for anyof the three factors used in the analysis was essential to obtain usefulresults. If the range of the influencing analyzed is very short, notappreciable changes can be observed in Kst. On the other hand, if therange is too long, high Kst values can be under covered.

with the following set ofoperations conditions

Future Work : Dust explosion simulations with DESC

METHODOLOGY

Test

#g/m3

Pex Pmbar

(dP/dt)

bar/s

KStbar-m/s

Deviation from

reference valuepsia bar

1 550 131 8.0 8.5 747 247 KSt = 239 bar-m/s2 550 129 7.9 8.4 706 233

OBJECTIVE: Verify that the equipment operating conditions are useful to reproduce valuesfrom Round Robin tests.

The optimal concentration for Pmax is 450 g/m3 , andoptimal concentration for KSt is 550 g/m3 .

Use pressure-time profiles from dust explosions in both apparatus to analyze the effect of the vesselshape and size on the turbulence. Use FLACS and DESC simulations to calculate the decay of root meantsquare velocity and the turbulent length scale and compare them with experimental values.

MATERIAL: Niacin (Calibration round Robin, Kühner 2003)

OBJECTIVE: Compare the 36 L at the MKOPSC with an standard 20 L dust explosionequipment using CFD simulations.

Dev = 8.45 %3 550 130 8.0 8.5 715 236

4 450 131 8.0 8.5 671 222Pmax= 8.6 barDev = 2.09 %5 450 132 8.1 8.6 783 259

6 450 132 8.1 8.6 749 247

The calibration methodology was useful to determinethe proper operating conditions of a 36 L dustexplosion equipment reducing the number of testrequired.The results obtained were in good agreement withthe values reported in the literature.

Same methodology can be used as guide for calibrating other equipment with different configurationswhere the turbulence plays an important role on the explosion results.