YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASME
    • Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASME
    • Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    On the Transition From Non-BLEVE to BLEVE Failure for a 1.8M3 Propane Tank

    Source: Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology:;2006:;volume( 128 ):;issue: 004::page 648
    Author:
    A. M. Birk
    ,
    J. D. J. VanderSteen
    DOI: 10.1115/1.2349579
    Publisher: The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
    Abstract: A series of fire tests were conducted on nine, 1.8m3(500USgal) ASME code propane pressure vessels to study the significance of pressure relief valve behavior on tank survivability to fire impingement. In these tests three tanks ruptured (i.e., finite failure) and six boiling liquid expanding vapor explosion (BLEVEd) (total loss of containment). The difference between the BLEVE and non-BLEVE failures was due to a difference in the fire conditions. It is believed that these tests show some insight into the BLEVE process. In all tests the fire consisted of an array of nominal 590kW(2MBTU∕h) liquid propane burners. A pool fire was not used because of the uncontrolled nature of open pool fires. It was believed that very repeatable fire conditions could be achieved by using a series of burners. In the tests where the outcome was a non-BLEVE there were two burners mounted 30cm above the tank on the tank vapor space. These burners were used to weaken the steel and to initiate a failure. To heat the liquid, there were between 4 and 12 burners applied below the liquid level. When one burner was added on the vapor space, all of the remaining tanks BLEVEd. This was true over a range of fill levels (at failure) of between 10% and 50% by volume. It is believed this added burner was just enough to weaken the tank so that any initial rupture would grow towards a total loss of containment and BLEVE. This paper presents the details of this test series and shows how severely heated length and liquid energy affected the outcome.
    keyword(s): Pressure , Vapors , Failure , Fracture (Materials) , Rupture , Fire AND Performance ,
    • Download: (737.3Kb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Statistics

      On the Transition From Non-BLEVE to BLEVE Failure for a 1.8M3 Propane Tank

    URI
    https://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/134482
    Collections
    • Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology

    Show full item record

    contributor authorA. M. Birk
    contributor authorJ. D. J. VanderSteen
    date accessioned2017-05-09T00:21:19Z
    date available2017-05-09T00:21:19Z
    date copyrightNovember, 2006
    date issued2006
    identifier issn0094-9930
    identifier otherJPVTAS-28473#648_1.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/134482
    description abstractA series of fire tests were conducted on nine, 1.8m3(500USgal) ASME code propane pressure vessels to study the significance of pressure relief valve behavior on tank survivability to fire impingement. In these tests three tanks ruptured (i.e., finite failure) and six boiling liquid expanding vapor explosion (BLEVEd) (total loss of containment). The difference between the BLEVE and non-BLEVE failures was due to a difference in the fire conditions. It is believed that these tests show some insight into the BLEVE process. In all tests the fire consisted of an array of nominal 590kW(2MBTU∕h) liquid propane burners. A pool fire was not used because of the uncontrolled nature of open pool fires. It was believed that very repeatable fire conditions could be achieved by using a series of burners. In the tests where the outcome was a non-BLEVE there were two burners mounted 30cm above the tank on the tank vapor space. These burners were used to weaken the steel and to initiate a failure. To heat the liquid, there were between 4 and 12 burners applied below the liquid level. When one burner was added on the vapor space, all of the remaining tanks BLEVEd. This was true over a range of fill levels (at failure) of between 10% and 50% by volume. It is believed this added burner was just enough to weaken the tank so that any initial rupture would grow towards a total loss of containment and BLEVE. This paper presents the details of this test series and shows how severely heated length and liquid energy affected the outcome.
    publisherThe American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
    titleOn the Transition From Non-BLEVE to BLEVE Failure for a 1.8M3 Propane Tank
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume128
    journal issue4
    journal titleJournal of Pressure Vessel Technology
    identifier doi10.1115/1.2349579
    journal fristpage648
    journal lastpage655
    identifier eissn1528-8978
    keywordsPressure
    keywordsVapors
    keywordsFailure
    keywordsFracture (Materials)
    keywordsRupture
    keywordsFire AND Performance
    treeJournal of Pressure Vessel Technology:;2006:;volume( 128 ):;issue: 004
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian