Dow Fire and Explosion

Index (FEI)
Dick Hawrelak

Presented to ES317Y in 2001 at UWO

 Introduction
 V1.0 was first Issued in 1964 By Bill Braise
(RIP).
 V7.0 was last issued in 1994 and is now
marketed by the AIChE ($50/copy).

FEI is widely used outside of Dow.

FEI is the leading hazard index methodology
recognized by the chemical industry.

V7.0 is available on my CD in Folder (9) as
Dow FEI V1.3.
 What is the Dow FEI?

The Dow FEI is a ranking system
that gives a relative index to the
risk of individual process units due
to potential fires and explosions.
 What is the Primary Purpose
of the Dow FEI?

It serves as a guide for the selection of
fire and explosion protection methods.

It assists in determining the spacing
between adjacent process units within
the ISBL.

It is a guide for insurance agencies to set
insurance rates.

It ranks individual process units where
special safety attention can be focused.
When should one perform an FEI?


Late in Phase III Engineering after:
 P&IDs have been completed,
 Equipment has been sized,
 A trial equipment layout has been done,
 A DFC estimate has been completed.
Who Usually Performs the FEI?

Generally a senior process engineer, who
is acquainted with the details of the
project, is assigned the task.

Occasionally, different groups tackle the
assignment and results are compared for
consensus building.
What Does the FEI Consider?


Six general process hazards.

Twelve special process hazards.

Nine process control credit factors.

Four material isolation credit factors.

Nine fire protection credit factors.
General Process Hazards

Exothermic reactions.

Endothermic processes.

Material handling and transfer

Enclosed or indoor process units.

Access.

Drainage and spill control.
Special Process Hazards

Toxic materials.

Sub-atmospheric pressure (<500 mmHg).

Operating in or near flammable range.
 Tank farm storage flammable liquids.
 Process upset or purge failure.
 Always in flammable range.

Dust explosion.

Pressure.
Special Hazards Cont’d


Low temperature.

Quantity of flammable/unstable
material.
 Liquids or gases in process.
 Liquids or gases in storage.
 Combustible solids in storage.

Corrosion and erosion.
Special Hazards Cont’d

Leakage – joints and packing.

Use of fired equipment.

Hot oil heat exchanger system.

Rotating equipment.
Process Control Credit Factors


Emergency power.

Cooling.

Explosion control.

Emergency shutdown.

Computer control.
Process Control Factors Cont’d


Inert gas.

Operating instruction procedures.

Reactive chemical review.

Process hazard analysis.
Material isolation Credit Factors

Remote control valves.

Dump or blow down control.

Drainage.

Interlocks.
Fire Protection Credit Factors

Leak detection.

Structural steel .

Fire water supply.

Special systems.

Sprinkler systems.

Water curtains.

Foam.

Hand extinguishers.

Cable protection.
 FEI Example

DOW FIRE AND EXPLOSION INDEX 7th Edition, J anuary, 1994 dB No. = 1 (1,6,16)

Area / Country Division: WC Location Date

Site Mnfg Unit: LHC#1 Process Unit C2 Splitter
Prepared By Appr'd By Building
Reviewed By Mgt Review By: TC Review By: S&LP
Materials In Process Ethylene
State Of Operation Design Startup Norm Opn Shutdown
Basic Materials For Material Factor Ethylene
Material Factor (See Table 1 or Appendix A or B) Note temperature requirements when unit temperatures over 140 °F = 24
 General Process Hazards

Penalty Penalty
1 General Process Hazards Factor Factor
Range Used
Base Factor 1.00 1.00
p-16 A Exothermic Chemical Reactions Type = None 0.3 - 1.25 0.00
p-17 B Endothermic Processes Type = None 0.2 - 0.4 0.00
p-17 C Material Handling & Transfer (Table 1) Type = None 0.25 - 1.05 0.00
p-17 D Enclosed or Indoor Process Units Type = Open 0.25 - 0.9 0.00
p-18 E Access Type = Two Sides 0.2 - 0.35 0.00
p-18 F Drainage and Spill Control Notes Meets NFPA 30? No USG = 1.73E+05 0.25 - 0.5 0.50
General Process Hazards Factor (F1) = 1.50
 Special Process Hazards
2 Special Process Hazards

Base Factor = 1.00 1.00

p-20 A Toxic Material(s), Use (0.2)(Nh) Nh = 1.00 Note 0.2 - 0.8 0.20
p-20 B Sub-Atmospheric Pressure (<500 mm Hg) Possible vacuum? No Penalty 0.50 0.00
p-21 C Operation Near In or Near Flammable Range Padding? None Penalties
p-21 1 Tank Farms Storage Flammable Liquids Note C1: 0.50 0.00
p-21 2 Process Upset or Purge Failure Note C2: 0.30 0.00
p-21 3 Always in Flammable Range Note C3: 0.80 0.00
p-21 D Dust Explosion (See Table 3) Type = None Micron Sz = 0 Inerted? No 0.25 - 2.0 0.00
p-22 E Pressure (See Fig. 2) Operating Psig = 58.4 Relief Set psig = 125 0.16 - 1.5 0.24
p-25 F Lowest Temperature = -155 °F Material Suitable ? = Yes 0.2 - 0.3 0.00
p-25 G Quantity of Flammables / Unstable Material lb = 217,000 Heat Comb BTU/lb = 20,800
p-26 1 Liquids or Gases In Process (See Fig. 3) Penalty = 2.18 2.18
p-28 2 Liquids or Gases in Storage (See Fig. 4) Type = A Penalty = 0.96 0.00
p-30 3 Combustible Solids in Stg (See Fig. 5) lbs = 0 Density = 0 0.00
p-32 H Corrosion and Erosion Rates = 0.00 mil / Yr. Penalty = 0.00 0.1 - 0.75 0.00
p-33 I Leakage - J oints and Packing Type = Minor Penalty 0.1 - 1.50 0.10
p-33 J Use of Fired Equipment (See Fig. 6) Dist = 600 ft. Penalty Curve A-2 0.10
p-35 K Hot Oil Heat Exchange System (See Table 5) Volume = 0.00 Penalty 0.15 - 1.15 0.00
p-36 L Rotating Equipment Type = Comp Penalty 0.50 0.50
Special Process Hazards Factor (F2) 4.32
Process Unit Hazards Factor (F1 x F2) =F3 = 6.47

Fire and Explosion Index (F3 x MF =FEI) = 155.36

Fire and Explosion Class (See Table 6) = FEI Range = 128 - 158 Heavy
 Fig 8: Damage Factor
Figure 8 - Damage Factor

1.200

1.000
F3 = 1
F3 = 2
0.800
F3 = 3
Damage Factor

F3 = 4
0.600 F3 = 5
F3 = 6
F3 = 7
0.400 F3 = 8
Case Pt.

0.200

0.000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Material Factor (MF)
Process Control Credit Factors
1. Process Control (C1)
a) Emergency Power 0.98 .98
b) Cooling .97 - .99
c) Explosion Control .84 - .98
d) Emergency Shutdown .96 - .99
e) Computer Control .93 - .99 .93
f) Inert Gas .94 - .96
g) Operating Instruct/Proc .91 - .99 .91
h) Reactive Chemical Review .91 - .98 .91

C1 = .75
Material Isolation Factors
2. Material Isolation (C2)
a) Remote Control Valves .96 - .98 .96
b) Dump / Blowdown .96 - .98 .96
c) Drainage .91 - .97 .95
d) Interlock 0.98

C2 = .88
Fire Protection Credit Factors
3. Fire Protection (C3)
a) Leak Detection .94 - .98 .98
b) Structural Steel .95 - .98 .97
c) Buried Tanks .84 - .91
d) Water Supply .94 - .97 .94
e) Special Systems 0.91
f) Sprinkler Systems .74 - .97 .97
g) Water Curtains .97 - .98
h) Foam .92 - .97
i) Hand Extngshrs / Mntrs .95 - .98 .97
j) Cable Protection .94 - .98 .94
C3 = .79
 Credit Factor Summary

Process Control, C1 =0.75

Material isolation, C2 = 0.88

Fire Protection, C3 = 0.79

C1xC2xC3 = (0.75)(0.88)(0.79) = 0.52
 Process Unit Risk Analysis Summary
UNIT ANALYSIS SUMMARY

Credit Factor =C1 X C2 X C3 = .52

A-1. F & E I 152.05

A-2. Radius of Exposure 127.7 ft Radius of Exposure =0.84*FEI
A-3. Value of Area of Exposure 19.16 $MM
B. Damage Factor (Fig 8) 0.85 Fr Special Fig 8 Interp'n Routine
C. Base MPPD ( A-3 X B ) 16.19 $MM
D. Credit Factor 0.52
E. Actual MPPD ( C X D ) 8.46 $MM
F. Days Outage ( MPDO ) 74 Days Outage =EXP(3.0489+0.58925*LN(H30))
G. Bus. Interruptn Loss (BI) $MM
Plot
Plan
Summary
 Features Not Used In V7.0
Dow Separation Distance vs FE Index - 4th Edition (1979)
100
Separation Distance, Ft.

VCM
10 EO
Best Fit

1
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
F&E Index
 Limitations of Dow FEI

No scientific basis for many of the
features can be found in Dow records. Fig
8 is an example. (RAH study – 1993).

Does not correlate well with known plant
disasters (Flixborough, Phillips, Norco).

While explosion damage is fairly
advanced (Flixborough – 1974), fire
damage alone is more difficult to predict.

Not scenario driven as in recent QRA
work in Holland and the U.K.
Recent Trends

Insurance companies are looking at
Maximum Foreseeable Loss, (MFL), based
on Baker‘s- 1994 blast technology for
Detonations and Deflagrations as applied
to plant equipment layout.

There is a trend toward higher insurance
premiums as insurance companies adjust
their actuarial data.

Many chemical companies may follow
Exxon’s trend to insure themselves.
 End Of Show

Your Department should have a
copy of the 7th Edition available for
further examination and application
to your projects.