BrittleSteel
Chemical
- Jun 23, 2023
- 3
Hi everyone,
I was reading this CSB report that came out last year:
One of the issues they mentioned in the report is that since the vessels were made of SA-212B and SA-201, brittle fracture occurred instead of a fish mouth rupture thus pieces of steel may dangerous projectiles.
My understanding is that this explosion occurred due to a fire case not because of a blocked discharge.
My first question is, did the metal projectiles get its energy from the heat generated rather than pressure? usually when some think about projectiles from a vessel failure many think of an overpressure scenario.
My second question is if the pressure vessel was designed for a fire case, would this failure still had occurred?
Last question is any pressure vessel that is made of a brittle material can fail in a similar manner if it's possible that enough energy is generated in the vessel to exceed its energy dissipation capacity. Is this correct?
I was reading this CSB report that came out last year:
One of the issues they mentioned in the report is that since the vessels were made of SA-212B and SA-201, brittle fracture occurred instead of a fish mouth rupture thus pieces of steel may dangerous projectiles.
My understanding is that this explosion occurred due to a fire case not because of a blocked discharge.
My first question is, did the metal projectiles get its energy from the heat generated rather than pressure? usually when some think about projectiles from a vessel failure many think of an overpressure scenario.
My second question is if the pressure vessel was designed for a fire case, would this failure still had occurred?
Last question is any pressure vessel that is made of a brittle material can fail in a similar manner if it's possible that enough energy is generated in the vessel to exceed its energy dissipation capacity. Is this correct?