Capability of GIS in the Analysis of Explosion Hazard from BLEVE Event in LPG Terminal

Authors

  • Sa’ari Mustapha Department of Chemical and Natural Resource Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University Putra Malaysia, 43400 UPM Serdang, Selangor D.E., Malaysia
  • Mohanad El-Harbawi Department of Chemical Engineering, College of Engineering, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Keywords:

LPG, GIS, BLEVE, Probit, Explosion.

Abstract

Geographical Information System (GIS) is getting  popular  in controlling  of risk in chemical installations for  handling hazardous substances. The capability of GIS is to combine image map with the corresponding information at each level offering is being recognized as  a new dimension to the management of industrial safety and environment surrounding. Catastrophic failure of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) terminal is always regarded to failure its storage tank. A BLEVE is recognized as one of the worst type accidents cause of life and property. Consequences of BLEVE event are rapid and include peak over pressure from the blast, missiles projection from ruptured vessels and broken structures. This paper emphasizes on a methodology to evaluate effects of peak over pressure and missiles events from the BLEVE hazard due to catastrophic failure of a storage tank which filled by  140 tons of LPG. TNT model and selected equations are  used to estimate the probability of fatality and structure damages and GIS techniques is used as a tool for analysis explosion due to a BLEVE event in LPG terminal. The developed technology capable to  estimate  explosion effects  from a BLEVE event in which the result of consequences are plotted by buffer zones 10%, 50%, and 90% likelihood for managing risk in an industrial zone. Stakeholders can make use the developed technology for mitigating risk  of LPG explosion in  a LPG terminal and also for future land development in the areas outside of  an industrial zone. 

References

[1] Pietersen, C., 1990. Consequences of Accidental Release of Hazardous Material. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 3, 136.
[2] DeMers, M.N,. Fundamental s of Geographic System, 2nd Ed., Wiley, New York, NY. 2000, .iii.
[3] Andersson P, Evaluation and Mitigation of Industrial Fire Hazards. Lund University. Sweden, Institute of Technology Department of Fire Safety Engineering. Report LUTVDG/(TVBB-1015) (1995).
[4] Brasie W. and Simpson D., 1968. Guidelines for Estimating Damage Explosion. Loss Prevention, 2, 91.
[5] Crowl D. and Louvar J., Chemical Process Safety: Fundamental with Applications. Prentice Hall PTR, USA. 2001, 225-283.
[6] Baker W., Cox P., Westine P., Kulesz J., Strehlow R., 1983. Explosion Hazards and Evaluation. Elsevier, New York.(http://mahbsrv.jrc.it/Proceedings/Greece-Nov-1999/I2-KYRANOUDIS-z.pdf). [Dec1, 2016].
[7] Lees F. Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2nd edn., Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, MA. 1996 17/5 -17/308.
[8] Kinney G. and Graham K., Explosive Shocks in Air, 2nd. Ed. Berlin: Springer. 1985, 18-34.
[9] Fugelso, L., Wenner, L., and Schiffman, T., 1972. Explosion Effects Computation Aids. GARD Prog. 1540. Gen. Am. Res. Div., Gen. Am. Transportation Co., Niles, IL.
[10] The Netherlands Organisation of applied scientific Research (1992). Method ofCalculation of Physical Effects, The Netherlands Organisation of Applied Scientific Research, Voorburg.
[11] Weber, D., Pietersen, C., and Reuzel, G., 1990. Consequences of Exposures to Toxic Gases Following Industrial Disasters. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 4, 272–276.MA, 2001. Estimation of Explosion Danger Areas. Technical Note 10.20/01.
[12] Schubach, S. 1995. Comparison of Probit Expressions for the Prediction of Lethality Due to Toxic Exposure. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 8, 197–204.
[13] Casal, J., Montiel, H., Planas, E., and Vilchez, J., 1999. Analisis Delriesgo en Instalaciones Industriales. Barcelona: Edicions UPC.
[14] Finney, D., 1971. Probit Analysis. London: Cambridge University Press.
[15] Eisenberg N., Lynch, C. and Breeding R., 1975. Vulnerability Model: A Simulation System for Assessing Damage Resulting from Marine Spills. Rep. CG-D-136-75. Enviro Control Inc., Rockville, MD.
[16] TNO, 1990. Methods for the Determination of the Possible Damage to Humans and Goods by the Release of Hazardous Materials (Green Book). The Hague: Dutch Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and Environment.
[17] Vílchez J., Montiel H., Casal J. and Arnaldos J., 2001. Analytical expressions for the calculation of damage percentage using the probit methodology. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, Vol. 14: 193-197.
[18] Birk A., 1996. Hazards from BLEVEs: An Update and Proposal for Emergency Responders, Journal of Loss Prevention for the Process Industry, Vol 9, No. 2, pp. 173-181.
[19] PSCMHC, 1994. Preparation of Safety Cases for Major Hazard Control, NPC Hotel, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia,
[20] Birk A., 1995. BLEVE Response and Prevention: Technical Documentation. http://dickatlee.com/issues/environment/tank/canadian_bleve_text [Dec1, 2016]
[21] TNMA, 2001. Estimation of Explosion Danger Areas. Technical Note 10.20/01.
[22] Richmond D. and Fletcher E., 1971. Blast Criteria for personnel in Relation to Quantity-Distance. Explosive Safety Board, Dept of Defense, Prc. Thirteenth Explosive Safety Seminar, p. 401.
[23] Caumont M., Ponthieeu, Safety Provisions and LPG 1997, Symposium Series, IChemE 605-618, 1997.

Downloads

Published

2016-12-23

How to Cite

Mustapha, S., & El-Harbawi, M. (2016). Capability of GIS in the Analysis of Explosion Hazard from BLEVE Event in LPG Terminal. American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences, 26(4), 343–363. Retrieved from https://asrjetsjournal.org/index.php/American_Scientific_Journal/article/view/2463

Issue

Vol. 26 No. 4 (2016)

Section

Articles

License

Authors who submit papers with this journal agree to the following terms.