R

elief system design is an im-

portant engineering activity
throughout the chemical pro-
cess industries (CPI). The main
purpose of this task is to design a sys-
tem that protects process equipment
and piping against all possible causes
of overpressure. It should relieve the
excess pressure safely so as to protect
personnel working in the facility from
accidents, prevent damage to equip-
ment and adjoining property, and com-
ply with government regulations.
The principle causes of overpres-
sure and guidance of plant design to
minimize the effect of these causes
are discussed in-depth in API STD
521 [1]. Among these causes, the ex-
ternal pool fire is a contingency that
is very complex and dynamic in na-
ture. (A pool fire is a turbulent diffu-
sion fire burning above a horizontal
pool of vaporizing hydrocarbon fuel
where the fuel has zero or low initial
momentum.) Although it is very diffi-
cult to cover every aspect of this con-
tingency, important aspects are pre-
sented in this article for non-reactive
systems. Reactive systems are beyond
the scope of this article and interested
readers should refer to DIERS Meth-
odology [2]. A sample calculation and
modeling results using commercial
software are also presented at the
end of this article.
BACKGROUND
Relief system design involves enor-
mous efforts by process engineers who
need to refer to all major engineer-
ing documents [such as process flow
diagrams (PFDs), piping and instru-
mentation diagrams (P&IDs), heat
and material balance and layout] as
well as applicable codes, practices and
standards. Among the tasks involved
are the design of pressure relief de-
vices, inlet-outlet piping, knockout
drums, flares and vent stacks.
Codes and standards
The most important codes, standards
and recommended practices that pro-
vide basic information on relief system
design are as follows:
API ST 520 Parf I: SIzIng, soIoc-
tion, and installation of pressure-
relieving devices in refineries
API RP 520 Parf II: SIzIng, soIocfIon,
and installation of pressure-reliev-
ing devices in refineries
ANSI/API ST 521: Prossuro-roIIov-
ing and depressuring systems
API ST 2000: VonfIng afmosphorIc
and low-pressure storage tanks
IRS TochnoIogy: morgoncy
relief-system design using DIERS
(Design Institute of Emergency Re-
lief System) Technology [2]
N!PA 30: !IammabIo and combus-
tible liquids code
In addition to these, other API, ASME,
N!PA and OSHA sfandards, codos as
well as local codes are also used in re-
lief system design.
Most process engineers base their
relief-system calculations on API stan-
dards and recommended practices.
Guidelines and equations from these
standards are referred to in this article,
but no attempt is made to cover each
design situation or confirm any design
standard or recommended practice.
Important definitions
The definitions of important terms
used in this article are as follows:
Relieving pressure is the pressure
at the inlet of the pressure-relief de-
vice during relieving conditions and
is equal to the sum of the valve set
pressure and the overpressure. Refer
fo API ST 520 Parf I |3] to deter-
mine the relieving pressure during
present contingency.
Relieving temperature is the tem-
perature at the inlet of the pressure re-
lief device during relieving conditions.
Effective fire height is the height up
to which the area is to be considered
for fire exposure. This is based on the
assumption that flames of a pool fire
are not likely to impinge for long dura-
tions above this height.
Fire zone is an area of the process
plant where fire is assumed to be pre-
vailing at one instance. That means all
equipment in this area are assumed to
be engulfed by fire at once.
Fire case consideration
Considering the significant damage
caused by fires, designing each pressure
relief system for the fire contingency is
a musf. Howovor, basod on ongInoorIng
practices, fire contingency can be omit-
ted in some of following circumstances:
Whon oquIpmonf Is nof Iocafod In or
adjacent to areas containing flam-
mable chemicals
Whon oquIpmonf Is Iocafod abovo a
certain level from the grade or plat-
form where potential accumulation
of flammable liquid may occur. Ac-
cording to API STD 521 [1] this level
is 7.6 m (25 ft) whereas according to
N!PA |4| fhIs IovoI Is 9.14 m |30 If)
Whon hoaf Inpuf Irom IIro Is InsuI-
ficient to vaporize the liquid in the
equipment within the reasonable
amount of time required for correc-
tive actions by operators
Whon oquIpmonf can bo ompfIod
safely when such fire occurs
Assumptions
The exact behavior of the system im-
pacted by an external pool fire is very
complex and is dependent upon vari-
ous factors, such as plant operation,
Feature Report
42 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING WWW.CHE.COM JANUARY 2010
Engineering Practice
Santosh Arvind Katkar
Jacobs Engineering Group Inc.
A practical overview of the important factors
that need to be considered when designing
a pressure relief system
Pressure Relief Requirement
During External Pool-Fire Contingency
fire detection philosophy, shutdown
procedure, fire-fighting system and so
on. Even though these topics are cov-
ered in standards and codes, there are
some conflicts in them and, moreover,
they cannot cover all situations in de-
tail. However, based on these standards
and engineering experiences, the fol-
lowing assumptions can be considered
in order to simplify the procedure to
determine the pressure relief load:
ach pIoco oI oquIpmonf onguIIod
in the fire is assumed to be isolated,
which means all heat and material
inputs and outputs are assumed
to be stopped. This assumption
is based on the general plant op-
erational practice to shut down the
plant whenever fire is detected
Tho aroa oxposod Ior IIro Is consId-
orod fho onIy aroa oI oquIpmonf fhaf
is within the effective fire height
PofonfIaI oxfornaI IIro Is assumod fo
occur in only one particular fire zone
In fho absonco oI any govornIng Iac-
tors, such as design and installa-
tion of a process facility, a fire zone
area is assumed to be 230 to 460 m
2

(2,500 to 5,000 ft
2
), as recommended
by API ST 521 |1]
AII oI fho roIIoI vaIvos In ono par-
ticular fire zone are assumed to re-
lieve at the same time and at their
maximum relieving flowrates. This
is an important assumption during
sizing calculations for relief-system
discharge piping
Tho amounf oI hoaf absorbod by
oquIpmonf oxposod fo IIro wIII do-
pend on many factors, such as type
oI IuoI, oquIpmonf shapo and sIzo,
fire proofing and so on. However,
heat input will be determined from
empirical correlations that are based
on test runs by applicable standards
SInco doprossurIzIng sysfoms and
procedures can fail in the event of a
fire, no credit for such system is rec-
ommended during sizing the relief
device for fire contingency
SImIIarIy, an oIIocfIvo wafor doI-
uge system depends on many fac-
tors, such as freezing weather, high
winds, clogged systems, reliable
wafor suppIy and oquIpmonf sur-
face conditions. Hence, no credit is
rocommondod by API ST 521 |1]
for environmental factors used in
fho oquafIons fo doformIno fho hoaf
load due to fire
CrodIf Ior InsuIafIon can onIy bo
taken if the insulation is a fire-
proofing insulation that meets cer-
tain criteria (discussed below)
RELIEF LOAD CALCULATION
quIpmonf confaInIng IIquIds or gasos
will behave differently under the ef-
Iocf oI IIro. quIpmonf confaInIng IIq-
uids with a reasonable boiling point
has the benefit of a good heat-transfer
rafo bofwoon fho oquIpmonf waIIs and
fho confaInod IIquId, rosuIfIng In a
slow temperature rise at the walls. On
fho ofhor hand, Ior fho oquIpmonf con-
taining gases, vapors or supercritical
fluids, there will be a poor heat-trans-
Ior rafo bofwoon fho oquIpmonf waIIs
and the contained fluid, which results
in a very rapid temperature rise of
oquIpmonf waIIs. ThoroIoro, soparafo
procedures are to be followed to deter-
mine the fire case relief loads for these
different situations.
Equipment containing liquid
The following procedure is adopted for
doformInIng fho roIIoI Ioads Ior oquIp-
monf confaInIng IIquIds:
1. Determination of wetted area.
AII ompIrIcaI oquafIons usod fo do-
termine the heat absorption rate are
based on the wetted surface area, A
ws
,
exposed to fire. As a general practice,
CHEMICAL ENGINEERING WWW.CHE.COM JANUARY 2010 43
TABLE 1. EFFECTIVE WETTED SURFACE AREA
No.
Type of
equipment Wetted Surface Area Remark
1
Liquid full
vessels
Total vessel surface area up to effective fire height -
2 Surge drums 50% of total vessel surface area Note 1
3
Knockout
drums
25% of total vessel surface area
Notes 1
and 2
4
Tray
columns
Surface area based on high liquid level in bottom
plus surface area corresponding to liquid holdup of
each tray up to effective fire height
-
5
Packed
column
Surface area based on high liquid level in bottom
plus surface area occupied by packing up to effec-
tive fire height
-
6
Horizontal
tanks
Greater of the wetted area is equal to 75% of the
total surface area or the surface area up to a
height of 9.14 m above grade

7
Vertical
tanks
Total surface area of the vertical shell to a height of
9.14 m (30 ft) above grade
Note 3
8
Spheres and
spheroids
Greater of the wetted area equal to 55% of the total
surface area or the surface area up to a height of
9.14 m (30 ft) above grade.
-
9
Shell-and-
tube heat
exchangers
(Note 4)
Safety valve on shell side: Surface area of ex-
changer based on higher liquid volume fraction in
shell side within effective fire height
Note 5
Safety valve on tube side: Surface area of channel
heads
Note 6
10
Air Coolers
(Note 7)
Bare area of tubes within the effective fire height
plus projected area of tube bundle (only for in-
duced draft type units) for tubes above effective
fire height
Note 8
Notes:
1. II IovoI Is confroIIod consIdor surIaco aroa up fo oIIocfIvo IIro hoIghf.
2. II no IIquId Invonfory, fhon shouId bo froafod as gas IIIIod vossoI.
3. Wetted area in contact with foundations or ground need not to be considered.
4. Prosonf confIngoncy fo bo consIdorod Ior shoII-and-fubo hoaf oxchangors dopondIng upon fhoIr
likelihood of getting blocked-in.
5. No credit generally taken for heat removal from tube side.
6. Any additional heat gain from shell side fluid also needs to be considered in calculations.
?. OnIy Ior IIquId cooIIng and condonsIng sorvIcos whoro IIquId In nof IIkoIy fo draIn In IIro
contingency.
8. For air coolers since fins are destroyed within the first few minutes of exposure to fire, bare tube
area is to be considered in calculations.
NOMENCLATURE
Q Heat input during external pool
fire, W
F Environmental factor
A
ws
Wetted surface area, m
2
k Thermal conductivity of insulation
at mean temperature, W/mK
T
f
Temperature of vessel contents at
relieving temperature, C
D
ins
Thickness of insulation, m
W Relief rate, kg/h
L Latent heat of vaporization, J/kg
M Molecular weight of fluid, kg/kmol
P
1
Relieving pressure (bara)
P
n
Normal operating pressure, bara
A Exposed surface area, m
2
T
w
Recommended maximum wall tem-
perature of vessel, K
T
1
Relieving temperature, K
T
n
Normal operating temperature, K
S Surface tension, kg/s
2

g Gravitational constant, m/s
2
R
L
Density of liquid, kg/m
3
R
V
Density of gas, kg/m
3
U
e
Kutateladze entrainment velocity,
m/s
h Free board height, m
44 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING WWW.CHE.COM JANUARY 2010
API STD 521 [1] guidelines can be used
to determine the wetted surface area.
Table 1 is a consolidated guideline for
wetted surface area to be considered,
based on available Refs. [1, 5 and 6]
and engineering practices. Engineer-
ing judgment, however, will be needed
by the design engineers in evaluating
the surface area exposed to fire.
Since the associated liquid-filled
piping will also contribute to vapor
generation, either the surface area
corresponding to larger diameter pipes
associated with process equipment or
1015% of the calculated wetted area
is to be considered in calculating the
total wetted surface area for fire.
2. Determination of heat absorp-
tion rate. Various empirical equations
to calculate the heat absorption rate,
Q, are available in the literature; the
appropriate equation based on appli-
cable conditions needs to be used. The
equations mentioned in API STD 521
[1] are for pressure equipment, and
equations mentioned in API STD 2000
[7] are for atmospheric and low pres-
sure tanks. The box above provides a
summary of the key equations based
on the API standard.
3. Determination of latent heat of
vaporization. Before determining
the final relief rate, the engineer has
the important task of determining the
latent heat of vaporization of the con-
tained liquid.
EQUATIONS FOR CALCULATING HEAT ABSORPTION RATE
I. Equipment with design pressure
greater than 1.034 barg (15 psig)
A. For equipment with adequate drainage
and fire fighting facility
Q F A
ws
43 200
0 82
,
.
(1)
B. For equipment without adequate drain-
age and fire fighting facility
Q F A
ws
70 900
0 82
,
.
(2)
Adequate drainage facility here can be
defined as the facility that shall be able to
carry the flammable/combustible liquid and
firewater away from the equipment. Ad-
equate fire fighting facility can be defined
as the facility that shall be activated as soon
as the fire begins.
The environmental factor F in equations
above and hereafter is the credit factor pri-
marily for fire proofing insulation and not
for general thermal insulation. The general
thermal insulation is destroyed by combus-
tion during first few minutes of exposure to
fire. The fire proofing insulation, however, is
such that it meets the following criteria:
Func|ions olloc|ivoly up |o |ho opproximo|o
temperature of fire for up to two hours
Sholl no| bo dislodgod by liro ligh|ing
streams
Table 2 is quick reference for environmental
loc|ors |o bo usod bosod on APl STD 521
[1]. Equation (3) is based on thermal con-
ductivity and thickness of insulation can be used to determine the
environmental factor.
(3)
F
k T
f
ins

( )

904
66 570 , o

II. Equipment having design pressure from
vacuum to 1.034 barg (15 psig)
A. For non-refrigerated aboveground tanks
i. For |onks wi|h wook rool|osholl o||ochmon|: Thoso |onks do
not require any emergency venting as roof to shell connection fails
preferentially to any other joints.
ii. For |onks wi|hou| wook rool|osholl o||ochmon|: Tho oquo-
tions in Table 3 can be used, depending on wetted surface area
and design pressure.
B. Refrigerated aboveground and belowground tanks
i. For singlowoll rolrigoro|od s|orogo |onks: Tho oquo|ions in
Table 4 can be used, depending on the wetted surface area and
design pressure.
ii. For doublowoll rolrigoro|od s|orogo |onks: Firo coso onolysis
of such tanks is very complex and very little information is avail-
oblo obou| |hom in li|oro|uro. During oorly s|ogos ol liro, hoo| goin
will be utilized for expansion of vapors between the walls. It will
take several hours for vaporization of liquid in these tanks.
III. Air Coolers
As suggos|od by APl STD 521 [1] the following equations are to
be used for air coolers in liquid cooling service.
A. For air coolers with adequate drainage and fire fighting
facility
Q A
ws
43,200
(4)
B. For air coolers without adequate drainage and fire fighting
facility
Q A
ws
70,900
(5)
Duo |o |ho lorgo surloco oroo ol oir coolors, |hoir hoo|obsorp|ion
rates are very large resulting in the requirement of extremely large
fire-case relief load. This is the reason process engineers employ
the other means of mitigating the fire relief for them, such as loca-
tion and an automatic water-deluge system. P
TABLE 2. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
Sr.
no.
Type of equipment
Insulation conduc-
tance, W/m
2
K
Factor
1 Bare Vessel / Tank 1.0
2 Insulated vessel / tank
22.7 0.3
11.4 0.15
5.7 0.075
3 Water Spray - 1
4 Depressurization and emptying facility - 1
5 Earth covered storage - 0.03
6 Below Grade Storage - 0
TABLE 3. FOR TANKS WITHOUT WEAK ROOF-TO-SHELL ATTACHMENTS
Wetted surface area, m
2
Design pressure, barg Heat input, W
A
ws
< 18.6 1.034 Q = 63,150A
ws
18.6 A
ws
93 1.034 Q =224 200A
ws
0.566
93 A
ws
< 260 1.034 Q = 630,400A
ws
0.338
260 A
ws
Between 0.07 and 1.034 Q =43,200A
ws
0.82
260 A
ws
0.07 Q = 4,129,700
TABLE 4. FOR SINGLE-WALL REFRIGERATED STORAGE TANKS
Wetted surface area, m
2
Design pressure, barg Heat input, W
A
ws
< 18.6 1.034 Q = 63,150A
ws
18.6 A
ws
< 93 1.034 Q = 224,200A
ws
0.566
93 A
ws
< 260 1.034 Q = 630,400A
ws
0.338
260 A
ws
1.034 Q = 43,200A
ws
0.82
Engineering Practice
CHEMICAL ENGINEERING WWW.CHE.COM JANUARY 2010 45
For equipment containing a single
component liquid, the latent heat
of vaporization can be easily deter-
mined based on relieving conditions.
The relieving conditions are the re-
lieving pressure and corresponding
boiling temperature.
However, for vessels containing
multi-component liquids, determin-
ing an accurate value of latent heat
of vaporization is quite difficult. For
such vessels, composition of liquid and
vapor changes as the lighter fractions
evaporate early during fire. Relief rate
and ultimately the relief device size
calculation that is based on initial
latent heat and other physical prop-
erties is not always conservative,
so a time-dependent model is recom-
mended by API STD 521 [1].
With computer simulation programs
readily available to todays process de-
sign engineers, latent heat of vapor-
ization can be easily and accurately
determined if proper care is taken
during the use of these programs.
Further information on getting con-
servative properties, including latent
heat of vaporization with step-by step
vaporization, can be found in Refs.
[6 and 15]. One simplified and fairly
conservative approach is to determine
the relief device area, considering that
the vessel is filled with a single com-
ponent each time, and selecting the
maximum relief area among them.
This approach is widely used for mul-
tipurpose vessels typically used in
pharmaceutical industries.
In case computer simulation pro-
grams are not available, Figure A.1.
from API STD 521 [1] can be used for
single component paraffins, mixtures
of paraffins that have slightly different
relative molecular weights, isomer hy-
drocarbons, aromatic compounds and
cyclic compounds. The vapor pressure
in this figure is the relieving pressure
of the system, and correspondingly the
relieving temperature and latent heat
is to be determined based on the aver-
age molecular weight of components.
In case of relieving conditions near
the critical region, the latent heat of
vaporization approaches zero as sen-
sible heat dominates. For such condi-
tions API STD 521 [1] suggests using a
minimum latent heat value of 115 kJ/
kg (50 Btu/lb) as an approximation.
4. Determination of relief rate. After
determining the of heat input, Q, the
relief rate, W, can be easily calculated
based on following simple equation:
(6)
W
Q
3 600 ,
i
Equipment containing gases,
vapors or supercritical fluids
As mentioned above, the heat trans-
fer between equipment walls and the
contained fluid is very poor when the
contained fluid is a gas, vapor or su-
percritical fluid. This results in a very
rapid temperature rise in the equip-
ment walls causing equipment failure
due to heat stress even before the in-
ternal pressure reaches the set pres-
sure of a pressure-relief safety valve.
Section 5.15.4.1 of API STD 521 [1]
clearly indicates that the pressure re-
lief device does not provide sufficient
protection from equipment rupture.
The other means of protection for such
vessels are as follows [1 and 13]:
CooIIng fho oquIpmonf surIaco by a
water-water deluge system
ProvIdIng aufomafIc vapor dopros-
surizing systems
LocafIng oquIpmonf such as fo oIIm-
inate or reduce the effect of fire
InsfaIIIng oxfornaI IIro-prooIIng
insulation
!sIng roIIabIo IIro-monIforIng sysfom
and a rapid-action fire-fighting team
Even though it is unlikely that a
pressure relief device will protect the
equipment, the empirical equation to
determine the relief rate as suggested
by API STD 521 [1] for this type of
equipment is as follows:
(7)
W MP
A T T
T
w


( )

]
]
]
]
2.77
1
1
1 25
1
1 1506
.
.
This equation is modified to suit the
unit system used in this article and
is based on various assumptions that
need to be consider before using it.
The temperature T
w
is the recom-
mended maximum wall temperature,
593C |1,100!), fhaf can bo usod Ior
carbon-steel plates. The exposed sur-
face area, A', is calculated in the same
way as the wetted surface area earlier,
based on possible source of fire.
Relieving conditions in this case
are the relieving pressure, as defined
earlier, while relieving temperature is
calculated by following equation.
(8)
T
P
P
T
n
n 1
1

|
(
'
'
`
J
J
J

Equipment that is internally insulated

and contains a single phase (above
critical point) at relieving conditions
has to be treated in the same manner
as the equipment containing gases.
Equipment containing
low liquid inventory
Low-IIquId-Invonfory oquIpmonf can
be defined as the equipment in which
all the contained liquid could vapor-
ize within 15 to 20 min. If the vessel
pressure when the last drop of liquid
vaporizes is less than the device set
pressure, then the relief load to be
considered is based on the procedure
for gas filled equipment. However, if
the vessel pressure when the last drop
of liquid vaporizes is more than relief
device set pressure, the relief load to
be considered will be the maximum of
relief load calculated based on consid-
ering liquid filled or gas filled vessel.
Refs. [13 and 14] can be consulted for a
more detailed description and the re-
quired equations for such vessels.
Equipment containing
high boiling liquids
This equipment behaves similar to
that containing gases, and a pressure
relief device is not likely to provide
sufficient protection from equipment
rupture. In order to protect equipment
in this situation, the design tempera-
ture must be higher than the boiling
temperature of the contained liquid at
relieving pressure. This is very rare,
and hence, other means of protection
need to be used, as discussed above
for gas filled equipment. The relieving
capacities, however, are determined
based on thermal expansion if the
vessel is liquid full, and a procedure
similar to those explained above are
adopted if the vessel is not liquid full.
Refer to API STD 521, section 5.14 [1]
for calculating the relief load due to
hydraulic expansion of liquid.
Mixed phase relief
One of the significant problems that
a process engineer needs to deal with
is to design the relief system in pres-
Engineering Practice
46 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING WWW.CHE.COM JANUARY 2010
ent contingency for single phase (vapor
or liquid) or for mixed phase (vapor-
liquid). Generally a mixed phase flow
requires a larger relief area than vapor
or liquid phase flow. Traditionally it has
been assumed that relief is generally a
vapor phase relief in the present con-
tingency. However, it has been found
that relief can be two-phase relief de-
pending upon the following factors:
1. Nature of liquid. It is the foamy
or non-foamy behavior of the liquid
that results in the possibility of hav-
ing mixed phases during pressure re-
lief. It has been observed that relief
from non-foamy liquid is generally a
vapor phase relief. API STD 521 [1]
also says that a relief system need not
be designed for two phases for non-
foamy systems. However, it is not pos-
sible to predict the foamy behavior of
liquid from mere physical properties;
hence the conservative approach is to
consider the liquid as foamy whenever
there is doubt. A few guidelines to
classify liquid as foamy are as follows:
LIquIds havIng vIscosIfy groafor
than 100 cP
LIquId confaInIng surIacfanfs
Irfy IIquIds confaInIng soIIds
MuIfI-compononf IIquIds wIfh wIdo
range of boiling points
ChomIcaIIy roacfIng IIquIds
LIquId wIfh moro fhan ono IIquId
phase
2. Initial fill level. Even though a
liquid might be non-foamy, it has been
observed that if the initial fill level
in the vessel is above a certain level,
pressure relief can be mixed phase.
So far there are no well defined stan-
dards available above which mixed-
phase relief is to be considered. Guide-
lines as provided in Ref. [8] however
can be used for non-reactive systems
for low-pressure storage tanks. A con-
servative approach is to consider the
two-phase relief when initial liquid
level is above 20% for foamy liquids
and above 80% for non foamy liquids.
However, small vessels having diam-
eters less than 3 m do require more
free board height.
Many roIoroncos aro avaIIabIo Ior
predicting the possibility of mixed
phase behavior. One of the simplest
approaches is as explained in Ref. [9].
This is based on calculating a mini-
mum free-board height, h, which is
the height between
the vessel nozzle on
which relief valve is
mounted and the liq-
uid level. If the fill
level at relieving con-
ditions is above the
calculated minimum
free-board height,
venting is to be consid-
ered as mixed phase
venting. The following
equations from Ref.
[10] are used to cal-
culate the minimum
free-board height.
(9)
In this equation U
e
is the entrainment
velocity known as the Kutateladze
entrainment velocity [11] and is
calculated from Equation (10).
(10)
Fire duration
One of the aspects that has not been
discussed much in the standards is
the need to consider the duration of
fire and the present contingency to-
gether. Based on the duration for a fire
fighting team to take an action against
present contingency, the fire duration
can be ignored if vessel pressure at
the end of this duration is not going to
reach the relief-valve set-pressure.
The duration for the fire fighting
team to take an action will depend
upon the complexity of the plant and
should not be more than 1520 min
[13]. This duration is based on the
fact that an un-wetted steel plate, 25
mm (1 in) thick, takes about 12 min to
roach 593C |1,100!) and 1? mIn fo
roach ?04C |1,300!) whon fho pIafo
is exposed to an open fire [1]. Hence,
present contingency can be eliminated
for those vessels having vessel pres-
sure at the end of 20 min, well below
the relief device set pressure. This du-
ration of 20 min needs to be confirmed
and mentioned in the relief system
design basis.
EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS
Two examples are illustrated here, one
for a vessel containing liquid and an-
ofhor Ior vossoI confaInIng gas. Com-
mercial simulation software is used to
generate the properties required. The
absolute barometric pressure for both
problems is assumed to be 1.0132 bar.
Vessel containing liquid
The first example concerns a horizon-
tal vessel containing benzene. The di-
mensions and other data needed for
fho caIcuIafIon aro shown In !Iguro 1.
Determination of wetted surface
area. Ref. [12] is used to determine
the wetted surface area of partially
filled vessels. The wetted surface area
of shell is given by
(11)
= 88.61 m
2
The wetted surface area of the two
elliptical heads is given by Equation
|12), |soo box, p. 4?), whoro F is the
fractional liquid level (= H/2R) and E is
the eccentricity of the elliptical head (=
0.866 for the common case of a 2:1 el-
lipse). Entering the values into Equa-
tion (12) gives 31.10 m
2
.
The wetted
area for the vessel is therefore 88.61 +
31.10 = 119.?1 m
2
. The wetted area for
the piping is assumed to be 10% of the

5 m
1 m
10 m
3 m


V-01
Data:
Placement . . . . . . . . . . . . . : Horizontal
Vessel type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Cylindrical with
ellipsoidal ends
Insulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . : None
Vessel radius R . . . . . . . . : 2.5 m
Vessel length (TL-TL) L . : 10.0 m
Vessel elevation. . . . . . . . : 1.0 m
Maximum initial liquid
Level H . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : 3.0 m
Fluid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : Benzene
Relief valve set
pressure Ps . . . . . . . . . . : 3.5 barg
Vessel design
pressure PD. . . . . . . . . . : 3.5 barg
ND 8 in. Sch 40
length 5.0 m
PSV-01
6 Q 8
ND 6 in. Sch 40
length 1.5 m
FIGURE 1. The vessel and data for Example 1
CHEMICAL ENGINEERING WWW.CHE.COM JANUARY 2010 47
calculated wetted area, or 11.97 m
2
, so
the total wetted area is 119.71 + 11.97
= 131.68 m
2
.
Determination of heat absorption
rate. Assuming that the facility has
adequate drainage and a fire fighting
system in place and the vessel is de-
signed for 3.5 barg pressure, Equation
(1) can be used here to determine the
heat input, Q:
Q F A
ws
= 43 200
0 82
,
.
Q = 43,200 (1)(131.68)
0.82
= 2,363,144 W
= 2,363.1 kW
Determination of the latent heat of
vaporization. Latent heat of vapor-
ization is obtained through commer-
cial simulation software at relieving
conditions, which are as follows.
Relieving pressure = P
1
= 1.21 P
s
(21% overpressure)
= 4.325 barg
Relieving temperature = T
1

= 145C (from simulation program)
Latent heat of vaporization = L
= 347 kJ/kg (from simulation)
Determination of relief rate. Input-
ting the values obtained above into
Equation (6), the relief rate, W, is
W = 3,600 Q/L
= 3,600 [(2,363.1)/347]
= 24,516 kg/h
A commercial simulation program is
available to simulate the vessel en-
gulfed in external fire. Figure 2 is
the vent flowrate for the above men-
tioned vessel with respect to time
using such a program. This program
works in rating mode, and hence, the
details of safety relief valve and in-
let-outlet piping as shown in Figure
1 are used to get the profile plotted
in Figure 2.
Vessel containing gas
The data for this second example are
listed in Table 5.
Determination of wetted surface
area: Equations from Ref. [12] are
again used to determine the exposed
surface area of vessels. The exposed
surface area of shell is the area of a
cylinder with radius R.
2RL = 2(1)(6) = 37.70 m
2
The exposed surface area of heads is
the area of a sphere
4R
2
=

4(1)
2 =
12.57 m
2
The exposed surface area for piping,
again assuming 10% of calculated
wetted area, is 5.03 m
2
. Therefore, the
total wetted surface area is
37.70 + 12.57 + 5.03 = 55.29 m
2
Determination of relieving condi-
tions. The relieving pressure, P
1
is
1.21 x P
s
(21% overpressure)
= 9.075 barg
The relieving temperature, T
1
, is de-
termined from Equation (8) to be
T1 = (P
1
/P
n
)T
n
= [(9.075 + 1.0132)/(5.5 + 1.0132)]
(35 + 273.16) = 477.3 K = 204.1C.
The relief rate, as determined from
Equation (7), is
W = 2.77[28.84 (9.075 + 1.0132)]
1/2

{55.2[(593 + 273.16) 477.3]
1.25
/
(477.3)
1.1506
}
W = 3,733 kg/h.
Edited by Gerald Ondrey
Relief flowrate
3, 000
8,000
13,000
18,000
23,000
28,000
33,000
38,000
43,000
0
2
0
4
0
6
0
8
0
1
2
0
1
4
0
1
5
6
1
5
7
1
7
2
1
8
6
1
9
0
1
9
4
1
9
8
2
0
1
2
1
4
2
1
8
2
2
2
2
2
6
2
2
8
2
4
0
Time, min
R
e
l
i
e
f

r
a
t
e
,

k
g
/
h
FIGURE 2. Simulation results for Example 1 showing the relief rate over time when
the vessel is engulfed in an external fre
Equation 12
References:
1. Pressure-Relieving and Depressuring Sys-
tems, ANSI/API Standard 521, 5th ed., Janu-
ary 2007.
2. Fisher, H. G., others, Emergency Relief System
design using DIERS Technology, AIChE, 1992.
3. Sizing, Selection, and Installation of Pres-
sure-Relieving Devices in Refineries, Part-I,
API Standard 520, 8th ed., December 2008.
4. Flammable and Combustible Liquids Code,
NFPA 30, 2008 ed.
5. Ludwig, E. E. Applied Process Design, Vol-
ume 1, 3rd ed., Gulf Publishing, 1995.
6. Wong W. Y., Fire, Vessels and Pressure Relief
Valves, Chem. Eng., May 2000, pp. 8492.
7. Venting Atmospheric and Low-Pressure
Storage Tanks, API Standard 2000, 5th Edi-
tion, April 1998.
8. Fisher, H. G., and others, Protection of Storage
Tanks from Two-Phase Flow due to Fire Expo-
sure, Process Safety Progress, July 1995.
9. Fauske, H. K. Properly Size Vents for Non-
reactive and Reactive Chemicals, Chem. Eng.
Prog., February 2000.
10. Epstein, M., others, The Onset of Two-Phase
Venting via Entrainment in Liquid-Filled
Storage Vessels Exposed to Fire, J. Loss Prev.
Process Ind., 2 (1), p. 45, 1989.
11. Kutateladze, S. S., Elements of the Hydro-
dynamics of Gas-Liquid Systems, Fluid Me-
chanics Soviet Research, 1, p. 29, 1972.
12. Doane, R.C. Accurate Wetted Areas for Par-
tially Filled Vessels, Chem. Eng, December
2007, pp 5657.
13. Wong W. Y., Improve the Fire Protection of
Fire Vessels, Chem. Eng., October 1999, pp.
193196.
14. Mofrad S. R. others, Designing for Pressure
Release during Fires Part 1, Hydrocarbon
Process, November 2007, pp. 6567.
15. Mofrad S. R. et. al. Designing for Pressure
Release during Fires Part 2, Hydrocarbon
Process, December 2007, pp. 117121.
TABLE 5. EXAMPLE 2 DATA
Placement Vertical
Vessel Type Cylindrical
with hemi-
spherical ends
Insulation None
Vessel radius, R 1.0 m
Vessel length (TL-TL)
L
6.0 m
Vessel elevation 2.0 m
Fluid Air
Relief valve set
pressure, P
s
7.5 barg
Normal operating
pressure, P
n
5.5 barg
Normal operating
temperature, T
n
35

C
Maximum wall tem-
perature, T
w
593

C
Author
Santosh Arvind Katkar is
a process engineer at Jacobs
Engineering Group Inc. (29,
International Business Park
#03-01, Acer Building, Tower
A, Singapore 6009923.
Phone: +65 6890 4967; Fax:
+65 6899 1619; Email: San-
[email protected]). He
has over 8 years of experience
in petroleum refining, petro-
chemical and other process
industries with leading engineering organiza-
tions such as Fluor Daniel India and Lurgi India.
He earned his M.Tech from Indian Institute of
Technology (Delhi) and B.Tech from University
Department of Chemical Technology (Jalgaon).