You are on page 1of 22

LNG vapor dispersion from atmospheric relief valve

Main author
Jung Hyun, Yoon
HYUNDAI ENGINEERING CO., LTD.
KOREA
jhyoon@hec.co.kr
Co-author
Jung Chul, Ha
HYUNDAI ENGINEERING CO., LTD.
KOREA
jcha@hec.co.kr
Ju Chul, Park
HYUNDAI ENGINEERING CO., LTD.
KOREA
dicapark80@hec.co.kr

Page 2 of 22

1.

ABSTRACT
LNG vapor (or Boil-Off Gas) control is a major concern in LNG receiving
terminal design. The BOG generation cannot be prevented but it can be
minimized and recondensed by a BOG treatment system which will reduce the
LNG loss to atmosphere or flare.
Discharge of the flammable BOG to atmosphere is not recommended for safety
reason. BOG is generated during normal operation and instead of venting it can
be recovered in the BOG treatment system composed of BOG compressors and
a recondenser.
During abnormal or emergency operation, BOG can be produced excessively
which may exceed the capacity of the BOG treatment system in which case the
BOG can be partially vented out to the flare. Atmospheric relief valves are
installed on LNG storage tanks and vaporizers for venting the BOG to
atmosphere in case of such abnormal operation or emergency.
The BOG vented to atmosphere is flammable and it can linger around the LNG
terminal which presents potential explosion hazard. Flammable gas dispersion
modeling has been used to evaluate the safety distance from the potential
source of ignition to the point of BOG release in LNG receiving terminal
This paper evaluates the required minimum safety distance from the ignition
source and point of relief valve for the Incheon LNG Receiving Terminal in
Korea by using PHAST program and manual calculation.

Copyright 2008 IGRC2008

Page 3 of 22

CONTENTS

1.

Abstract ................................................................................................. 2

2.

Introduction........................................................................................... 4

3.

Dispersion Study .................................................................................... 4

3.1.

PSV on LNG Storage Tank ...................................................................................4

3.2.

PSV on Vaporizer ...............................................................................................4

4.

Study Basis ............................................................................................ 5

4.1.

Dispersion Scenario ...........................................................................................5

4.2.

Dispersion Calculation ........................................................................................5

4.3.

Weather Condition .............................................................................................5

4.4.

LNG Composition ...............................................................................................6

5.

Dispersion Modeling with PHAST............................................................ 6

5.1.

Scenario 1: PSV On LNG Storage Tank..................................................................7

5.2.

Scenario 2: PSV On Vaporizer..............................................................................9

6.

Dispersion Estimation by Manual calculation ....................................... 11

6.1.

STEP 1: Calculation of Released Gas Discharge Rate ............................................. 12

6.2.

STEP 2: Calculation of Concentration for Dispersed Gas (Gaussian Plume Model) ...... 16

6.3.

Comparison Table and Analysis.......................................................................... 20

7.

Conclusion............................................................................................ 20

8.

Reference............................................................................................. 21

9.

List of Tables........................................................................................ 21

10.

List of Figures ...................................................................................... 22

Copyright 2008 IGRC2008

Page 4 of 22

2.

INTRODUCTION
Incheon LNG Receiving Terminal has been built to send out 3,330 ton per
hour of natural gas in Korea. It has 18 LNG storage tanks, several HP
pumps and vaporizers. Nowadays, Phase II-4 expansion is under
construction with 2 inground tanks to meet the increased demand. In the
LNG terminal, pressure relief valves have been installed to protect the
equipment or piping from abnormal pressure build-up.
Generally, atmospheric vapor release is not recommended as it may create
flammable condition. Therefore most of the relief valve discharges are
connected to a flare system. In Incheon LNG Receiving Terminal, a flare
with a capacity of 140 ton per hour is in operation. However, atmospheric
vapor release is provided as the means in preventing any catastrophic
failure of the LNG tank when relief load exceeds the designed flare
capacity. Atmospheric PSV on LNG storage tank and on discharge line of
vaporizer can release flammable gas to the atmosphere which can cause
explosion or fire when it is ignited. Therefore, sufficient safety distance
should be secured between the relief valve and source of ignition, or the
ignition source should be eliminated from the beginning of the design
stage.

3.

DISPERSION STUDY

3.1.

PSV on LNG Storage Tank


LNG storage tank is equipped with low-pressure intank pumps for storing
and sending out the LNG. If the excessive BOG causes the increase the
internal pressure of tank to build, it is released to the flare stack or
atmosphere through a Pressure Relief Valve. According to the data of LNG
storage tank manufacturer, the maximum generation of BOG in the
200,000 m3 LNG tank of capacity is estimated to be about 66 ton/hr. As a
safety measure, when the pressure of the tank builds up to 265 mbarg,
BOG is released to the flare at a rate of 30 ton/hr. When the pressure
exceeds 290 mbarg, the BOG is released to the atmosphere at a rate of 40
ton/hr

3.2.

PSV on Vaporizer
LNG is sent out from the storage tank through a low-pressure intank
pump, and then it is pressurized by a high pressure pump. The pressurized
LNG is then sent to Vaporizer. High pressure atmospheric relief valve, sized
for block out case, is installed on the discharge pipe of each vaporizer.
Therefore, the capacity of each PSV should be same as that of vaporizer.
Two PSVs are installed on each vaporizer; one is operational and the other
one, stand-by. The PSV should be located at a safe location considering the
dispersion of the relief gas.

Copyright 2008 IGRC2008

Page 5 of 22

4.

STUDY BASIS

4.1.

Dispersion Scenario
BOG release to the atmosphere has been studied for the following two
cases.
1) PSV on LNG Storage
Two pilot type PSVs (1 Operation + 1 Stand-by) are installed on LNG
storage tank. When the BOG compressor system fails, the excessive BOG
will be released through the PSV to the atmosphere at a rate of 40,794
kg/hr when the internal pressure reaches 290 mbarg. The PSV size is 10
inch for inlet and 14 inch for outlet.
2) PSV on Vaporizer
Two pilot type PSVs (1 Operation + 1 Stand-by) are installed on the
Vaporizer. Their setting pressure is 125.2 barg and the required relieving
rate is 99,000 kg/hr. The PSV size is 4 inch for inlet and 6 inch for outlet.

4.2.

Dispersion Calculation
Vapor dispersion is calculated in two ways; 1) Using PHAST 6.53 of DNV 2)
Manual calculation. PHAST simulation program is used worldwide for
Consequence Analysis which can estimate the consequences of release of
toxic or flammable materials. The model includes accidental releases from
catastrophic ruptures, leaks, line ruptures, relief valves and rupture disks.

4.3.

Weather Condition
Weather condition of this study is based on the project design data of the
Incheon LNG Receiving Terminal. According to the design data, average
wind velocity of the terminal location is 3.7m/s and prevailing direction is
NW or WNW. The air temperature is 35.2 C maximum, and -19 C
minimum with annual mean temperature of 11.4 C. The relative humidity
is 70%.

Copyright 2008 IGRC2008

Page 6 of 22

4.4.

LNG Composition
The following table is a typical composition of natural gas handled in
Incheon LNG Terminal. However in this modeling, to simplify the
simulation, it is assumed that vapor to be released is 100% methane.
Table 1.

5.

LNG Composition

Component

Unit Molecular
Weight

Composition

Methane

16.043

88.3371

14.172

Ethane

30.069

9.5239

2.864

Propane

44.096

1.5434

0.680

i-Butane

58.123

0.2517

0.146

n-Butane

58.123

0.3346

0.195

Nitrogen

28.013

0.0093

0.003

Total

(mol%)

100.0000

MW (kg/kg-mol)

18.060

DISPERSION MODELING WITH PHAST


The dispersion calculations show estimated areas affected by the LNG
vapor dispersion and also the forecasted average vapor concentrations.
The simplest calculations require an estimate of the release rate of the gas,
atmospheric conditions, surface roughness, temperatures, pressures and
release diameters.
Weather conditions at the time of the PSV release have a major effect on
the extent of dispersion. The primary factors are the wind speed and the
atmospheric stability. Atmospheric stability is an estimate of the turbulent
mixing; stable atmospheric conditions lead to the least amount of mixing
and unstable atmosphere conditions, to the most amount of mixing.
Wind speed is a significant impact on the dispersion of the released gas.
The LNG vapor will first be diluted and mixed with air and as the wind
speed increases, the released gas will move downwind faster, and the
dispersed gas will be diluted by even a larger quantity of air.
In this modeling, three cases have been studied as below table.
Table 2.

Applied Air Condition


Wind Speed
Case
(m/s)
A
B
C

1.5
5
3.7

Pasquill-Gifford
Stability Class
F (Very Stable)
D (Neutral)
D (Neutral)

Remark
Severest Case

With regard to the concerned concentration limits, 0.1 LEL, 0.5 LEL, 1.0
LEL have been considered for each case.
Copyright 2008 IGRC2008

Page 7 of 22

5.1.

Scenario 1: PSV On LNG Storage Tank


In addition to the above weather data, design data are also required for
modeling such as PSV hole size and relieving height or orientation. In case
of inground LNG tank of Incheon terminal, the PSV is installed vertically.
The height of discharge point is 19.2 meters from the ground level and
hole diameter is 250 mm.

5.1.1.

Simulation Result
The calculated relieving rate from the PSV is 11.4 kg/s.
1) Case 1A - Wind velocity 1.5m/s, Stability: F (Stable)
The 1.5/F condition is used for the most conservative night time
condition. Lower wind speed and stable atmospheric condition can cause
the explosive vapor cloud to travel over the longest distance among all
the conditions.

Figure 1 A. Case 1A Modeling Result [Wind velocity 1.5m/s, Stability: F


(Stable)]

2) Case 1B - Wind velocity 5m/s, Stability: D (Neutral)


The 5/D condition is used for the neutral daytime condition. Medium
wind speed and neutral stability condition can lead to show a typical
modeling results in most simulations.

Copyright 2008 IGRC2008

Page 8 of 22

Figure 1 B. Case 1B Modeling Result [Wind velocity 5m/s, Stability: D


(Neutral)]

3) Case 1C - Wind velocity 3.7m/s, Stability: D (Incheon Design Condition)


3.7/D condition is used for the Incheon design condition case. This
weather condition shows a typical dispersion of LNG in the Incheon LNG
terminal area.

Figure 1 C. Case 1C Modeling Result [Wind velocity 3.7m/s, Stability: D


(Incheon Design condition)]

Copyright 2008 IGRC2008

Page 9 of 22

The range of 0.1 LEL (4,400 ppm) is shown in black on the above graph.
Gray color shows 0.5 LEL (22,000 ppm), and white color shows actual 1.0
LEL (44,000 ppm). Among the three cases, case 1A shows the largest
flammable cloud. The severest dispersion case is case 1A (1.5 m/s wind
speed, F condition) among the three cases. It is due to relatively low wind
speed and stable air condition. In this case, 0.1 LEL range can be reached
240 meters horizontally and up to 65 meters vertically.
If ignition source exists within the LEL range, there will be a possibility of
jet, flash or explosion. Thus, every potential ignition source has to be
placed outside of this range or every electrical apparatus in the range has
to be explosion proofed.
In case of Incheon LNG terminal, the whole process area has been
classified as hazardous area. And flare (flare is open ignition source) is
located more than 300 meters away from the LNG storage tank.
According to the Korean City Gas Law, the safety distance between the
LNG storage tank and plant boundary is determined based on the stored
volume of LNG storage tank. In case of inground LNG tank which has
200,000 m3 capacity, the minimum distance is specified as 85 meters. In
the above dispersion results, dispersion range of 1.0 LEL in horizontal
direction is less than 10 meters, which is within the regulatory minimum
distance.
5.2.

Scenario 2: PSV On Vaporizer


The discharge point of PSV which is installed on outlet line of vaporizer is
19.6 meters from the ground level. The PSV discharge direction is vertical
and hole diameter of this PSV is 48mm. This system has higher pressure
and temperature compared to PSV on LNG storage tank. Therefore,
different results can be expected.

5.2.1.

Simulation Result
1) Case 2A: Wind velocity 1.5m/s, Stability: F (Stable)
The 1.5/F condition is used for the most conservative night time
condition. Lower wind speed and stable atmospheric condition can cause
the explosive vapor cloud to travel over the longest distance among all
the conditions.

Copyright 2008 IGRC2008

Page 10 of 22

Figure 2 A. Case 2A Modeling Result [Wind velocity 1.5m/s, Stability: F


(Stable)]

2) Case 2B: Wind velocity 5m/s, Stability: D (Unstable)


5/D condition is used for the neutral daytime condition. Medium wind
speed and neutral stability condition leads to show a typical modeling
result in most simulations.

Figure 2 B. Case 2B Modeling Result [Wind velocity 5m/s, Stability: D


(Neutral)]

3) Case 2C: Wind velocity 3.7m/s, Stability: D (Incheon Design Condition)


3.7/D condition is used for the Incheon design condition case. This
weather condition shows a typical dispersion of LNG in the Incheon LNG
terminal area.

Copyright 2008 IGRC2008

Page 11 of 22

Figure 2 C. Case 2C Modeling Result [Wind velocity 3.7m/s, Stability: D


(Incheon Design condition)]

The range of 0.1 LEL is shown in blue, 0.5 LEL in green and actual 1.0 LEL
in yellow on the above graph. The severest dispersion case is case 1A (1.5
m/s wind speed, F condition) among the three cases. It is due to relatively
lower wind speed and stable air condition. In this case, 0.1 LEL range can
reach to 240 meters. Compared with the result of PSV on the LNG tank,
relatively high pressure gas is released to atmosphere. Therefore, released
gas can reach up to 115 meters vertically due to high momentum. After
that, gas disperses to atmosphere by mixing with air.
According to the Korean City Gas Law, equipment which contains
flammable fluid should be maintained a safety distance from the battery
limit. The safety distance is determined based on the volume of gas
contained in the equipment. In case of one vaporizer, safety distance is 28
meters in compliance with the regulation. However this regulation also
describes if calculated distance is less than 50 meters, 50 meters should be
kept as a minimum. According to modeling result, LEL and 0.5 LEL are
ranged within 50 meters.

6.

DISPERSION ESTIMATION BY MANUAL CALCULATION


The purpose of this section is to compare previous dispersion modeling
with Gaussian Plume theory. There are two steps in estimating the
concentration of dispersed gas at the concern point.
Step 1: Calculation of Released gas discharge rate
Step 2: Calculation of concentration for dispersed gas

Copyright 2008 IGRC2008

Page 12 of 22

6.1.

STEP 1: Calculation of Released Gas Discharge Rate


There are two regimes for flow of gases through an orifice; sonic (or
chocked) for higher internal pressures, and subsonic flow for lower
pressures. The step-1 calculation determines regime of flow present. The
step-2 calculation estimates the release rate of gas, using the equation for
the specific flow regime. The following equation defines the pressure at
which the flow regimes change from sonic to subsonic:

2 1
P
) CR = (
)
Ps
+1
... (4-1)

Discharge rate can be obtained by the following two equations:


Discharge of gases at sonic velocity through an orifice can be calculated as
below:

Q = C D APS

g C MW 2

RTS + 1

( +1)
( 1)

, for

Pa P

Ps Ps CR

(4-2)

Discharges of gases at subsonic velocity though an orifice can be calculated


as below:
( +1)
2

P P
2 g C MW Pa Pa

, for a >
RTS 1 Ps Ps
Ps Ps CR

Q = C D APS

.. (4-3)

where
Q
CD
gc
MW
A
PS
TS
R

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Pa

: Specific heat ratio (CP/CV)


: Atmospheric pressure (Pa)

Table 3.

Gas discharge rate (kg/s)


Discharge coefficient (-)
Gas constant (1kg m/N sec2)
Molecular Weight (kg/kmol)
Cross section area (m2)
Storage absolute pressure (Pa)
Storage temperature (K)
Gas constant, 8314 (J/kmol K)

Mass Discharge Coefficient CD

Release Assembly

CD

Venturi Meter / Nozzle

0.95 ~ 0.99 for Sonic & Subsonic


0.61 ~ 0.67 for Subsonic

Orifice

0.75 for near sonic


0.84 for Sonic

Copyright 2008 IGRC2008

Page 13 of 22

It is noted that below assumptions and limitations to be considered for use


of the above equations.
z Ideal gas
z No friction flow
z No heat transfer
z Single component gas
1) Discharge Rate Calculation for PSV on LNG Storage Tank
A. Determine the flow regime, sonic or subsonic.

2 1
P
( ) CR = (
)
Ps
+1

= 1.371

(PRO/II Simulation Value)

1.371
2
P
) CR = (
) 1.3711 = 0.5332
1.371 + 1
Ps

Pa = 1 atm
Ps = 1.3 atm

Pa 1
= = 0.78 > 0.5332 Subsonic Flow
Ps 1.3
B. Apply to the subsonic flow Equation (4-3)
2
( +1)

P P
2gC MW Pa Pa

Q = CD APS
, for a >

RTS 1 Ps Ps
Ps Ps CR

C D = 0.67 (Table 3)
A = 0.049 m 2
Ps = 130325 Pa

= 1.371
g C = 1 kg m / N sec 2
MW = 16 .04 kg / kgmole
R = 8314 J / kgmole K
TS = 157 o C = 116 K
(1.371+1)
2
1 1.371

1.371
(
2
)(
1
)(
16
.
04
)
1
.
371
1

Q = (0.67)(0.049)(1.3 105 )
(8314)(298) 1.371 1 1.3

1.3

= 10.3 kg/s
Copyright 2008 IGRC2008

Page 14 of 22

Copyright 2008 IGRC2008

Page 15 of 22

2) Discharge Rate Calculation for PSV on Vaporizer


A. Determine the flow regime, sonic or subsonic.

2 1
P
( ) CR = (
)
Ps
+1

= 1.816
(

(PRO/II Simulation Value)

1.816
2
P
) CR = (
) 1.816 1 = 0.307
1.816 + 1
Ps

Pa = 1 atm
Ps = 126 atm
Pa 1
=
= 0.008 < 0.307 Sonic Flow
Ps 126
B. Apply to the sonic flow Equation (4-2)

( +1)

Q = C D APS

g C MW 2 ( 1)
P P

, for a
RTS + 1
Ps Ps

CR

C D = 0.84 (Table 3)
A = 0.0018m 2
Ps = 1.26 10 7 Pa

= 1.816
g C = 1 kg m / N sec 2
MW = 16.04kg / kgmole
R = 8314 J / kgmole K
TS = 0 o C = 273K
(1.816 +1)

(1.816)(1)(16.04)
2
(1.816 1)
Q = (0.84)(0.0018)(1.26 10 7 )

(8314)(273) 1.816 + 1
= 37.8 kg/s

Copyright 2008 IGRC2008

Page 16 of 22

6.2.

STEP 2: Calculation of Concentration for Dispersed Gas (Gaussian


Plume Model)
The plume model describes a continuous release of material. The solution
depends on the rate of release, the atmospheric conditions, the height of
the release above ground, and the distance from the release. The
equations for the average concentration for each case are:

A)

z < 1.6 H m
Q

C(x, y, z : HE ) =

2y zu

exp[0.5(

+ {exp[0.5(
+ exp[0.5(

2iHm HE + z

HE z

)2 ] + exp[0.5(

)2 ] + exp[0.5(

2iHm HE z

)2 ]{exp[0.5(

2iHm + HE z

i =1

B)

)2 ] + exp[0.5(

2iHm + HE + z

HE + z

)2 ]

)2 ] .................(4- 4)

)2 ]}}

z 1.6 H m

C ( x, y , z , H E ) =

C) If

Q
2 y H m u
1

exp[0.5(

) 2 ]........................................................(4 5)

HE, z, z < 0.4Hm, the equation can be simplified as:

C(x, y, z : HE ) =

2yzu

y
H z
H +z
exp[0.5( )2 ]{exp[0.5( E )2 ] + exp[0.5( E )2 ]}........
...(4 6)

where,
C(x,y,z)
Q
Hm
HE
U
y
z
x
y
z

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Copyright 2008 IGRC2008

Average concentration (kg/m3)


Continuous release rate (kg/s)
Mixing height (m)
Effective release point height (m)
Wind speed at the height of release point (m/s)
Dispersion coefficient in the y direction (m)
Dispersion coefficient in the z direction (m)
Wind direction distance (m)
Cross wind direction distance (m)
Distance above the ground (m)

Page 17 of 22

D) HE (Effective release height)

H E = H S + H DW + H M .......... .................... .................... ...........( 4 7)


where,
H S = Actual release height
H DW = Down force effect length
H M = Momentum effect length

H DW = 2 1.5 d for v < 1.5u


u

H DW = 0 for v 1.5u
H M =

3dv
u

1) Assumptions and Limitations


Generally, Gaussian plume models are applicable in risk analysis for neutral
and positively buoyant emission. The models have been validated over a
wide range of emission characteristics and downwind distances (0.1 to
10km). However, in the beginning stage of gas dispersion, initial
momentum of the gas will dominate the dispersion before turbulent mixing
occurs. In case of the LNG dispersion in this study, since the concentration
of Lower Explosive Limit which has relatively short distance from release
point, Gaussian model is not desirable for this study. Therefore 0.1 LEL
dispersion case is assessed to meet this assumptions and limitations for the
Gaussian plume models in this study.
2)

Dispersion Coefficient (Briggs Rural Coefficient)


Dispersion coefficient (y and z) shall be selected for dispersion manual
calculation. In this study, Briggs Rural coefficient which is recommended by
AIchE/CCPS is applied as shown in below table;
Table 4. BR (Briggs Rural) Coefficient

3)

Stability

0.08 x (1+0.0001 x)-1/2

0.06 x (1+0.0015 x)-1/2

0.04 x (1+0.0001 x)-1/2

0.016 x (1+0.0003 x)-1

Calculation
To calculate the longest dispersion distance of 0.1 LEL, we can assume that
x direction is variable, y direction is 0 and z direction is equal to HE (HE is
the Plume center line). Q (discharge rate) is determined at 5.1) and y, z
are shown in table 4.2.
Concentration of 0.1LEL can be calculated from the following equations.

Copyright 2008 IGRC2008

Page 18 of 22

(1) Dispersion Calculation (PSV on LNG Storage Tank)


A) Substitute y=0 and z=HE to Equation (4-6)

C ( x ,0 , H E : H E ) =

Q
2 y z u

{1 + exp[ 0 .5 (

2H E

) 2 ]}

B) Determine the y, z value from table 4.2 (x=192, D condition,


when C=0.1 LEL) - x value to be calculated by trial and error

y = 0.08x(1 + 0.0001x)

1
2

z = 0.06x(1 + 0.0015x)

1
2

= (0.08)(192)(1 + 0.0001(192))

= (0.06)(192)(1 + 0.0015(192))

1
2

1
2

= 15.21
= 10.15

C) Determine the HE value from Equation (4-7)

H E = H S + H DW + H M
3dv
,
u
Q
10.3
v=
=
= 124m / s
A (1.7)(0.049)
H E = 19.2 + 0 +

d = 0.25 m
u = 3.7 m / s
H E = 19.2 + 0 +

(3)(0.25)(124)
= 44m
3.7

D) Find the x value (0.1LEL distance) when C=0.1 LEL

C ( x,0, H E : H E ) =
C (192, 0, 44) =

Q
2 y z u

Copyright 2008 IGRC2008

2H E

) 2 ]}

10.3
2(44) 2
{1 + exp[0.5(
) ]}
2 (15.21)(10.15)(3.7)
10.15

= 4400 ppm
x = 192m

{1 + exp[0.5(

Page 19 of 22

(2) Dispersion Calculation (PSV on Vaporizer)


A) Substitute y=0 and z=HE to Equation (4-6)

C ( x ,0 , H E : H E ) =

2 y z u

{1 + exp[ 0 . 5 (

2H E

) 2 ]}

B) Determine the y, z value from table 4.2 (x=392, D condition,


when C=0.1 LEL) - x value to be calculated by trial and error

y = 0.08x(1 + 0.0001x) 2 = (0.08)(392)(1 + 0.0001(392)) 2 = 30.76


1

z = 0.06 x(1 + 0.0015x) 2 = (0.06)(392)(1 + 0.0015(392)) 2 = 18.66


C) Determine the HE value from Equation (4-7)

H E = H S + H DW + H M
3dv
H E = 19.6 + 0 +
,
u
Q
37.8
v=
=
= 182.6m / s
A (115)(0.0018)

d = 0.05 m
u = 3.7 m / s
H E = 19.6 + 0 +

(3)(0.05)(182.6)
= 27m
3.7

D) Find the x value (0.1LEL distance) when C=0.1 LEL

C ( x,0, H E : H E ) =
C (360, 0, 27) =

Q
2 y z u

Copyright 2008 IGRC2008

2H E

) 2 ]}

37.8
2(27) 2
{1 + exp[0.5(
) ]}
2 (30.76)(18.66)(3.7)
18.66

= 4400 ppm
x = 392m

{1 + exp[0.5(

Page 20 of 22

6.3.

Comparison Table and Analysis


Table 5.

Comparison of Discharge Rate


Scenario

PHAST 6.53

Manual calculation

PSV on LNG Storage Tank

11.4 kg/s

10.3 kg/s

PSV on Vaporizer

51.9 kg/s

37.8 kg/s

Operating condition, hole size, and mass discharge coefficient (CD) are the
major factors that effect the discharge rate. The different result between
PHAST and manual calculation may be mass discharge coefficient (CD).
Although this value was determined from Table 3, it is not only a reference
but also sensitive value according to flow type. Some references
recommend that this value be 1.0 for the sonic flow on orifice.
Table 6.

Comparison of Dispersion Distance (3.7/D condition)


Scenario

PHAST 6.53

Manual calculation

PSV on LNG Storage Tank

110 m

192 m

PSV on Vaporizer

120 m

392 m

Dispersion distance obtained by manual calculation is much longer than


PHAST simulation. In manual calculation, it is assumed that the plume
disperses in a direction perpendicular to effective release height (HE) and
then spread along the wind direction. But actual plume disperses in a
diagonal direction due to the light density of Methane. As a result, it can
produce two different results with the same condition.

7.

CONCLUSION
In LNG terminal, generally BOG release to the atmosphere is least
recommended for safety reason as natural gas is very flammable. However,
in case of abnormal operation or emergency, release of BOG to the
atmosphere is necessary to release the pressure inside the equipment and
plant facilities, and to prevent catastrophic accident of the LNG terminal.
In case of such inevitable release of BOG, vapor dispersion modeling can
enable estimation of safety distance required between the point of BOG
release and ignition source. Based on such study and estimation, safety
requirement should be clearly defined and enforced by low.
According to the above assessment, dispersion range of lower explosive
limit is ranged within plant boundary. Also, modeling result satisfies the
safety distance which is defined by the Korean City Gas Law.
There are some deviations between the modeling result and the manual
calculation result. The manual calculation result gives more conservative
figures than PHAST model result. This means that manual calculation can
be used as preliminary determination for dispersion. However, for exact and
efficient assessment, consequence analysis should be conducted through

Copyright 2008 IGRC2008

Page 21 of 22

using a professional simulation program. This modeling can also be used to


examine any occupational risk.

8.

REFERENCE
Hyundai Engineering Co., Ltd.,(2005) Technical Review Report for Incheon
LNG Receiving terminal.
Korea Gas Cooperation (2004) Calculation Report for Relief Valve for TK217, 218
Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency (2008) Consequence risk
analysis
CCPS (2000) Guidelines for Chemical Process Quantitative Risk Analysis
API RP 520 (2000) Sizing, Selection and Installation of Pressure Relieving
Devices in Refineries
DNV PHAST Version 6.5 Training Manual

9.

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. LNG Composition ............................................................. 6
Table 2. Applied Air Condition ....................................................... 6
Table 3. Mass Discharge Coefficient CD ........................................ 12
Table 4. BR (Briggs Rural) Coefficient ......................................... 17
Table 5. Comparison of Discharge Rate ....................................... 20
Table 6. Comparison of Dispersion Distance (3.7/D condition) ... 20

Copyright 2008 IGRC2008

Page 22 of 22

10.

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 A.

Case 1A Modeling Result [Wind velocity 1.5m/s


Stability : F (Stable)] ................................................ 7

Figure 1 B.

Case 1B Modeling Result [Wind velocity 5m/s,


Stability : D (Neutral)].............................................. 8

Figure 1 C.

Case 1C Modeling Result [Wind velocity 3.7m/s,


Stability : D (Incheon Design condition)] ................. 8

Figure 2 A.

Case 2A Modeling Result [Wind velocity 1.5m/s,


Stability : F (Stable)] .............................................. 10

Figure 2 B.

Case 2B Modeling Result [Wind velocity 5m/s,


Stability : D (Neutral)]............................................ 10

Figure 2 C.

Case 2C Modeling Result [Wind velocity 3.7m/s,


Stability : D (Incheon Design condition)] ............... 11

Copyright 2008 IGRC2008