codes and standards for layout design - fire clearance for refinery 3

[chinwar]

could any one tell me which codes (api or ul, i am not sure and do not know what number) i shall refer to for equipment layout design for refineries regarding the minimum clearance between different equipment and/or units such as furnaces, air coolers, roads, reactors, battery limits etc, for the consideration for fire safty?
(for example, i knew i need to use nfpa30 to consider the clearance for some kinds of storage tanks)

thanks a lot.

 

[1969grad]

In addition to the NFPA 30 for tank spacing there is a PIP publication from API which addresses this issue. Also, see the Industrial Risk Insurers (IHI) guidelines for equipment spacing.

 

[chinwar]

thanks, grad. could you tell me the links to PIP and IHI (should be IRI?) because i could not find them after searching internet or could you tell me the codes' numbers so i can search our local authority?

 

[owg]

Check out

http://entri.cheque.uq.edu.au/teachingroom/CHEE4001/Website/processplantlayoutB&W.pdf

slide 4. The spacings may be hard to read, but the reference from ccps is given and is legible. I think I have that book at the office and I will check and post.

HAZOP at

http://www.curryhydrocarbons.ca

 

[owg]

Sorry I don't have that book. I think GE bought IRI and most of the data is on a charge basis now. IRI was formed to compete with Factory Mutual, so you could try a search for Factory Mutual.

HAZOP at

http://www.curryhydrocarbons.ca

 

[jte]

chinwar-

The link for the PIP's is

http://www.pip.org/index.html.

I poked around there a bit but didn't see any practices related to equipment spacing. We have our own internal guidelines which we use at my work, but I don't know if it's based on some national standard.

jt

 

[1969grad]

PIP PNC00003
Process Unit and Offsites Layout Guide
Web site listed previously
Have to buy it and API is very proud of this publication

IRI IM.2.5.2
Oil and Chemical Plant Layout and Spacing
Also have to purchase this publication.

For flares you might want to look at the API recomended practice for the heat affected zone. Cannot remember the number as I am not in the office as I write this post. (Maybe 520 or 521).

There is also a 3 volume book by Lee and others which seems to be more European code orientated. Cannot remember the title but it is one of those $600 or more books. I borrowed the book from a university library and was not really impressed with it as a working document for engineers.

 

[Guidoo]

1969grad,

You seem to refer to:

Frank P. Lees "Loss Prevention in the Process Industries". It costs $625 at Amazon.com, so this could be the one...

 

[1969grad]

Guidoo: Yes that is the book.

 

[chinwar]

thanks all!
some usefull links:
1. Factory Mutual

http://www.fmglobal.com/approvals/resources/resources.asp

but unfortunately I did not find any information about equipment spacing.
2.the link to AICHe on-line catalog

http://www.aiche.org/pubcat/

I found the brief about "Guidelines for Engineering Design for Process Safety".
3.Piping Support Documents from PIP

http://www.pip.org/practices/piping/supportdocs/index.html#Eng

I found the abstract for PNC00003. Lots of other useful documents for piping design can be found here.
4.GE standard

http://www.geercgroup.com/ci/resource_center/risk_management/resource_standards.shtml

I found this document which maybe repalced IRI IM.2.5.2
GAP.2.5.2 OIL AND CHEMICAL PLANT LAYOUT AND SPACING — (9/3/01)

Now I am studing the layout for a propylene plant which include feedstock pretreatment unit, selective hydrogenation unit, olefins conversion unit. The final product is polymer grade propylene. The plant inculdes most common equipment for petrochemical plant such as furnaces, exchangers, fanned air coolers, reactors, distillation towers, pumps, etc. Client already issued preliminary equipment layout in Basic Engineering Package. It is reauired that we must study and revise the plan again but the client did not indicate which codes shall be applied for the layout design. (I am not very sure what's the common way to rise up this issue to the client. I found normally clients would like to say "What's your recommendations?" if you ask them a question.) that's why I need to know which codes we normally used for layout design. But it looks there are lots of references from different organizations. I am appreciated if some of you can advise how I choose one of them ( or just ask the client what they want).

By the way, I knew different country maybe has their own codes and practice respectively. I would like to go deep further and am all ears if anyone from different countries can tell me more about yours.

thanks a lot

 

[1969grad]

In the end, equipment spacing is based on experience in designing plants and other facilities. There are lots of guidelines as noted previously but other than NFPA 30 I do not know of any codes in the US.

A hazop study should be performed on the preliminary layout and P and ID in the Basic Engineering package. Most companies outside of the US do one and in the US I believe that a hazop study is required by OSHA. A hazop study is nothing more than a methodogy to consider what events outside of normal operations could transpire and what the corrective action would be.

I would suggest that the hazop study be done jointly with the client's engineering and operations staff.

As an alternative, there are a number of companies who specialize in doing risk analysis of all types. If your company does not have the expertise then perhaps you should contract with one of these speciality companies.

You should also realize that most companies are self insured which is a factor. No company will admit it in public but there is a cost for any property loss and safety, including loss of life, which is taken into account in any risk analysis.

Given that your initial post was March 4 and on March 8 you are moving on to another project, EXACTLY what is your level of involvement and responsibility in the project?

 

[chinwar]

grad:
thanks a lot first.
I knew the spacing is a part of consideration for insurance and some countries also have the special codes for the requirements for spacing regarding the fire protection. Spacing is also under the fire authority in some countries.

we also do hazop study here, but only process design team is required to join in.

The problem for me is the plant mentioned hereinabove shall follow Shell specs and maybe some Japanese codes. (I do know know how they want to combine them.) I can not find any clues about spacing requirements from Basic Engineering Package. After studing the layout, I can say at least they already considered the following aspects based on the common engineering practice:

Wind - decides locations for the furnaces
Process flows - decide the sequences for the equipment

but I found some problems for the layout:
1. they did not put pumps under the pipe rack, which need extra area. it is empty under the pipe rack.
2. during the maintenance, they pull out the exchanger tubes which shall go above the road.
3. some tower is too far from pipe rack. supporting shall be a problem.
4. from what i did before, reactors can be put with furnaces together. this consideration is for economical purpose because the pipeline linking reactors and furnaces normally is ss.

ok, in my company, i am a piping engineer and supposed to consider everything about design except drafting. from layout to pipe routing, ISO to supports etc., I need to consider all but not so detailed as our designers do. I need to lead them to finish work. Was it ok to give a clear picture of what i am for you? and anyway, It is not possible to get an extra layout engineer here, who our company never pays for. and it is impossible to quest some external expertise because our project team will not want to pay. everything is on me.

I already told my project manager that I am not clear what client prefers to. guess what he said: "ok, go for Shell specs and Janpanese codes." - we even do not any Shell spec.

appreciated if you could advise what I can do.

 

[1969grad]

One cost of doing business is to buy the applicable codes and standards. If your company cannot afford to purchase a code or standard necessary to perform the work then the company cannot aford to be in that business.

So if your supervisor wants you to design to the Shell specs and your company does not have a copy then tell him he needs to buy them. They are available for purchase.

The four points you listed above are economical issues and not safety issues.

Finally, if you were not invited to the hazop meeting then you are not in the loop concerning risk prevention or reduction issues. Reading between the lines your supervisor only wants you to be concerned with the most economic equipment and piping layout and not any hazop issues.

 

[chinwar]

we know there are rules for a game.
in my company, different PMs have different rules to apply, different projects have different rules to be followed as well. it looks no choice for me. everthing is about costing. everyone likes to earn without pay. hehe . (maybe I am wrong.)

in fact, if i did not say anything about the layout, nobody will care. I am afraid some problems shall delay or cost us later, and those problems will come to me sooner or later - i am in charge of piping team.

I already found some books on process plant layout from my university's library. they will keep me busy for several weeks.

anyway, i learnt lots here.

 

[LSThill]

Team Member's & chinwar (Civil/Environme)

Chapter 1 The Basic of Plant Layout Design
Chapter 2 Plant Layout Specification
Chapter 3 Plot Plans

Client and compay Engineering design Guides and Specification, OASH, NFPA 59 FOR LNG

Process Plant Layout and Pipng Design by Ed Bausbacher (BECHTEL) & Coger Hunt by Society of Piping Engineer & Designer at University of Houston.

Leonard Thill

http://www.thill.biz