PROCESS SAFETY

(CEV654)

Chp. 6:
RISK ASSESSMENT AND
MANAGEMENT
FACULTY OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING
UiTM PULAU PINANG

1
 Course Outcome
Identify the basic principles of process hazard analysis and
safety related to the chemical engineering / environmental issues
(A4).
Explain the issues and solutions in managing the chemical
engineering / environment using the basic principles of process
hazard analysis and safety (C6).
Present solutions related to the chemical engineering /
environmental issues using the basic principles of process
hazard analysis and safety in a report (C6).

2
Course Learning Outcome
The student should be able to :
Illustrate the risk
Assess the acceptability criteria and safe distance
Evaluate Qualitative and quantitative risk assessment
(QRA)
Evaluate fire radiation
Evaluate explosion
Evaluate toxic release
Measure probit analysis
Analyze vulnerability models
Describe the operation of each equipments/ system.
Plan risk reduction and management.

3
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Definition of Risk
Risk = a measure of human injury, environmental
damage, or economic loss in terms of both the
incident likelihood and the magnitude of the loss
injury.
Risk can be assessed either qualitatively or
quantitatively.
Risk is considered proportional to the expected losses
which can be caused by an event and to the
probability of this event. The harsher the loss and the
more likely the event, the greater the overall risk.
4
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Risk = (Probability of Accident) x (losses per accident)

Risk = Likelihood x Severity
The probability is normally assessed by the frequency
of the past similar events.
We cannot eliminate risk entirely. Every chemical process
has a certain amount of risk associated with it.

We have to decide if the risks are acceptable.

5
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Likelihood
Likelihood = frequency values or with respect to how
easy it is for a person to exploit a threat.

For some threats, likelihood can be expressed in

terms of frequency or probability or can be related to
ease of misuse or mistake, or to motivation for
performing a malicious action.

6
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Likelihood levels

7
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Consequences/Severity
Described in terms of consequences for the patient (user) and
consequences for the service or the service provider.

8
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Example of severity ranking

9
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Risk level
Risk = Likelihood x Severity/Consequences
Three distinct levels for risks; Low, medium, and high.

Based on the acceptance criteria, the risk level High is

decided to be unacceptable.

Any threat obtaining this risk level must be treated in

order to have its risk reduced to an acceptable level.

10
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Different Risk Level

Example of Risk Matrix

11
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

A Risk is Acceptable When:

it falls below an arbitrary defined probability
it falls below some level that is already tolerated
it falls below an arbitrary defined attributable fraction of
total disease burden in the community
the cost of reducing the risk would exceed the costs
saved
the costs would be better spent on other, more pressing,
public health problems
public health professionals say it is acceptable
the general public say it is acceptable (or more likely, do
not say it is not)
politicians say it is acceptable.
12
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Acceptability of Risk
The acceptability of a risk depends on many factors.
In their everyday lives, people do not simply accept or
reject risks. Rather, they make choices among courses of
actions, whose consequences may include risks.
If people accept a course of action, like deciding to drive
somewhere, despite knowing about risks, then those
risks might be termed acceptable in the context of the
other consequences of that action.
A technology should be acceptable to an individual if it
creates an acceptable balance of personal risks and
benefits.
13
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Qualitative and Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA)

Qualitative Risk Assessments and Quantitative Risk
Assessments (QRA) are specialised methods for
calculating risks to individuals, public (societal risk),
the environment and/or assets.
As part of the formal safety assessment required in
the project HSE management, a QRA is highly
demanded by system owner to identify major
accident hazards and reduce the significant risk
contributor according to the As Low As Reasonably
Practicable (ALARP) principle.
14
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

What is ALARP?
Many regulatory authorities require that risks should be
within acceptable limits and As Low As Reasonably
Practicable (ALARP).
To demonstrate that risks are ALARP, one must show
that enough has been done to reduce risks.
In cases where the risks are well-defined, it is sufficient
to show that recognized good practices have been
implemented.
In more complex situations, i.e., where the technology is
new, to demonstrate risks are ALARP, one should show
that all reasonably practicable risk reduction measures
have been implemented.
15
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Pool Fire
Liquid spilled onto the ground
spreads out to form a pool.
Volatile liquid (e.g. petrol)
evaporate to atmosphere and soon
form flammable mixture with air.
Upon ignition, a fire will burn
over the pool.
The heat vaporizes more fuel and
air is drawn in round to the side to
support combustion.
Danger to people is by direct
thermal radiation and burn.
16
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapour Explosion
(BLEVE)
BLEVE, pronounced /blvi/ ("blevvy"), is an acronym
for "boiling liquid expanding vapour explosion".
It is the result of a liquid within a container reaching a
temperature well above its boiling point at
atmospheric temperature, causing the vessel to
rupture into two or more pieces.
A BLEVE can occur when fire impinges on the tank
shell at a point or points above the liquid level of the
contents of the tank.
This impingement causes the metal to weaken and fail
from the internal pressure. 17
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapour Explosion
(BLEVE)
BLEVEs can also be caused by an external fire near
the storage vessel causing heating of the contents
and pressure build-up.
Such explosions can be extremely hazardous.
BLEVEs can result from mechanical damage to a
tank, as well.
This damage can be the result of a train derailment,
traffic accident, or other physical shock.
When a BLEVE occurs, debris may travel hundreds of
feet, with tremendous force, and the escaping fuel
can ignite causing an expanding fireball. 18
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapour Explosion
(BLEVE)

If the vessel is ruptured the vapour portion may

rapidly leak, lowering the pressure inside the
container and releasing a wave of overpressure from
the point of rupture.
This sudden drop in pressure inside the container
causes violent boiling of the liquid, which rapidly
liberates large amounts of vapour in the process. 19
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapour Explosion (BLEVE)
The pressure of this vapour can be extremely high,
causing a second, much more significant wave of
overpressure (an explosion) which may completely
destroy the storage vessel and project fragments over the
surrounding area.
If the substance involved is flammable, it is likely that the
resulting cloud of the substance will ignite after the
BLEVE has occurred, forming a fireball and possibly a
fuel-air explosion, also termed a vapour cloud explosion
(VCE).
If the materials are toxic, a large area will be
20
contaminated.
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapour Explosion (BLEVE)

The most common type of BLEVE is caused by fire.
The steps are as follows:
A fire develops adjacent to a tank containing a liquid.
The fire heats the walls of the tank.
The liquid-filled portion stays cool due to heat-sink effects,
but the steel around the vapor space rapidly heats up.
If the flames reach the tank walls or roof where there is
only vapour and no liquid to remove the heat, the tank
metal temperature rises until the tank loses its structural
strength.
The tank ruptures, explosively vapourising its contents.
Often, the boiling and burning of liquid behaves as a rocket
fuel, propelling vessel parts for great distances. 21
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapour Explosion
(BLEVE)

22
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Jet Fire
High pressure release of gas from
a vessel or pipeline ignites almost
immediately.
This give rises to a giant burner or
flame length tens of meters.
Danger from thermal radiation
and also impingement on adjacent
pressurized vessel, such as LPG
vessel, heating the content
followed by pressure build up
causing boiling liquid expanding
vapor explosion (BLEVE). 23
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Pool Fire Model Burgess and Hertzberg

24
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Pool Fire Model

The flame length can be estimated using Thomas
Correlation :

25
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Jet Fire Model Cook, Baharami and
Whitehouse

26
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Fire ball from BLEVEs

The maximum diameter of the fireball is given by this
empirical relationship
D = 5.8M1/3
where D = maximum diameter of fireball, m
M = mass of fuel involved in the fireball, kg
Duration of the fireball in the air
td = 0.9M0.25
Where td = time in seconds

27
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
The heat flux received by the target at a distance
on the ground from the center of the fireball is
given as:
qe = EF21x103
Where:
qe = radiation heat flux received by the target (W/m2)
= atmospheric transmissivity (no units) = 1
E = radiation heat flux from the surface of the fireball
(kW/m2 or kJ/m2.s)
F21 = view factor, D2/4L2 (no units)
L = distance from the centre of the fireball (m)
28
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
The heat flux from the surface of a fireball
due to BLEVE
E = (RMHc) / (D2td)
Where:
E = radiation heat flux from the surface of the fire (kJ/m2s)
R = fraction of the heat combustion produced converted to heat flux (no
units)
= 0.3 for fireball from a vessel that fracture at a pressure lower then the set
pressure of the relief valve
M = initial mass of flammable material in the fireball (kg)
Hc = heat of combustion of the flammable material (kJ/kg)
= 45, 000 kJ/kg (assumed Hc for the hydrocarbon)
D = maximum diameter of the fireball (m)
td = time for fireball to last (s) 29
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Fire ball from BLEVEs

The maximum diameter of the fireball is given by this
empirical relationship
D = 5.8M1/3
where D = maximum diameter of fireball, m
M = mass of fuel involved in the fireball, kg
Duration of the fireball in the air
td = 0.9M0.25
Where td = time in seconds

30
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Probit for death due to thermal
radiation is given by:

Y = -14.9 + 2.56 ln [teqe4/3/104]

Where:
te = exposure time (s)
qe = radiation heat flux received by the
target (W/m2)

31
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

A storage facility stores 50,000 kg of flammable

material. Safety study shows that BLEVE and
fireballs are the likely incident scenarios for the
facility.

a) Determine the maximum size of the fireball

and the duration of the fireball in the air.
b) Determine the distances from the centre of
the fireball at which there will be 50% death.

32
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Solution
a)
D 5.8M1/3 5.8(50,000)1/ 3 213.7 m
t d 0.9M
0.25
0.9(50,000)
0.25
13.4 s

b)
RMHc
E
D2t d

E
0.3 50,000 45,000
351.107 kJ/m2s
(213.7)2 13.4

33
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Solution
b) qe EF21 103

1.00 351.107 (213.7)2 1000

qe
4L2
4.008 109
qe W/m2
L2

Y 14.9 2.56 ln t eqe
4/3
/ 10 4
Take te = 10 s, as it takes only 10 s for people to
evacuate
34
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Solution

b)
5.00 14.9 2.56 ln 10qe
4/3
/ 10 4

qe 60530 W/m2

60530L 2 4.008 10 9

L 257 m

35
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Explosion Calculation TNT Equivalent

Effect of explosion readily modeled by
analogy with TNT.
TNT equivalency is a simple method for
equating a known energy of a combustible
fuel to an equivalent mass of TNT.
The approach is based on the assumption
that an exploding fuel mass behaves like
exploding TNT on an equivalent energy
basis.
36
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
The procedure to estimate the damage associated
with an explosion using the TNT equivalent
method is as follows:
Determine the total quantity of flammable
material involved in the explosion.
Estimate the explosion efficiency, and
calculate the equivalent mass of TNT.
Use the scaling law to estimate the peak side
on overpressure.
Estimate the damage for common structures
and process equipment using table guide.
37
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
The equivalent mass of TNT

Another typical value for energy explosion of TNT

is 1120 calories/gram.
The heat of combustion for the flammable gas can be used in
place of the energy of explosion for the combustible gas.
38
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Estimation of peak overpressure
Scaled distance (Ze) in m/kg can be calculated from equation
below:
r = ground zero point of the explosion (m)
= equivalent mass of TNT (kg)

Having Ze, scaled overpressure can be estimated from the

following equation:

39
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
The scaled overpressure also can be estimated from the
figure below:
1000
Scaled overpressure, Ps

100

10

0.1

0.01
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Scaled distance, ze (m/kg1/3)

The side on overpressure Po can be computed from

equation below :
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Explosion Calculation TNO Multi-Energy
Method
TNO identifies:
The confined volumes in a process.
Assigns a relative degree of confinement.
The contribution to the overpressure from
this confined volume.
TNO is the Netherland Organization for Applied
Scientific Research.
Semi-empirical curves are used to determine
the overpressure.
47
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

TNO Multi-Energy Method Calculation:

Calculate the combustion energy E (J) for each blast by
multiplying the individual volumes of the mixture by 3.5 x 106
J/m3 (this value is typical for heat of combustion of an average
stoichiometric hydrocarbon-air mixture).

Sachs-scaled distance:

= 1
3

where
is the Sachs-scaled distance from the charge (dimensionless)
R is the distance from the charge (m)
E is the charge combustion energy (J)
Po is the ambient pressure (Pa)

48
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
TNO Multi-Energy Method Calculation:
Blast peak side-on overpressure:
=
where
Ps is the side-on blast overpressure (Pa)
is the Sachs-scaled side on blast overpressure (dimensionless)
is the ambient pressure (Pa)

Positive phase duration:

1/3

=

where
is the positive phase duration (s)
is the Sachs-scaled positive phase duration (dimensionless)
E is the charge combustion energy (J)
co is the ambient speed of sounds (m/s)
49
50
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Baker-Strehlow Methods
In the Baker-Strehlow method, the
important parameter in the selection
of the intensity of the explosion blast
is the flame propagation speed. This
is determined by
a) the way the flame front propagates,
b) the reactivity of the fuel, and
c) the density of the obstacles.

51
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Baker-Strehlow Methods
First the dimensions of the cloud will be
determined and then the energy of the
explosion exactly as it was carried out in
the case of the Multi-Energy method.
Following that the overpressure will be
calculated as a function of the scaled distance,
with the flame speed as a parameter.
The effects of the shock wave to people and
materials will be calculated, as a function of the
overpressure at a given distance.

52
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Baker-Strehlow Methods
Cloud Dimensions
The radius of the resulting cloud, R (m), is derived from the volume,
V (m3) of the cloud, being considered as a hemisphere, as

The volume, V (m3) of the resulting vapor cloud (composed of flammable

gas and air) is calculated from the reaction's stoichiometry, from which
the volume of the oxygen required is obtained and therefore the volume
of the required air.

In the case that the leaked fluid is in the liquid state (pool of flammable
liquid), then the liquid's evaporation rate must be multiplied with the
time until the explosion, so as to obtain the total amount of vapor that
participated in the development of the vapor cloud.

53
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Baker-Strehlow Methods
The parameters which influence the
flame speed according to the Baker-
Strehlow method [Baker et al. 1996,
Baker et al. 1998], are the way the
flame expands, the reactivity of the fuel
and the obstacle density.

54
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Baker-Strehlow Methods

55
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Baker-Strehlow Methods

56
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Baker-Strehlow Methods
Similar to the Multi-Energy method, in
the Baker-Strehlow method a scaled
pressure and a scaled distance is
defined as:

57
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Baker-Strehlow Methods
The calculation procedure is carried out in
the following steps:

1) For every region the flame speed is selected

(Table C3.4).
2) The energy, , released by the explosion in this
region is then calculated.
3) Following that, for a specific distance, x, the
scaled distance r', is calculated.
4) From the diagram in Figure C3.13, the scaled
overpressure that corresponds to this scaled
distance is obtained, and from this the
overpressure , Ps (MPa), of the explosion

58
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Toxic Release Calculation- Mass Dispersion
Model
Dispersion models describe the airborne transport of
toxic materials away from the accident site and into
the plant and community.
After a release, the airborne toxic is carried away by
the wind in a characteristic plume or a puff
The maximum concentration of toxic material occurs at
the release point (which may not be at ground level).
Concentrations downwind are less, due to turbulent
mixing and dispersion of the toxic substance with air.
59
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Plume

60
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Puff
Wind Direction

Concentrations are the Same on All Three Surfaces

Puff at time
t1> 0 Puff at time
t2> t1

Initial puff formed by

Instantaneous release
of Materials

Puff moves down wind and dissipates

By Mixing with fresh air

61
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Factors influencing Dispersion

Wind speed
Atmospheric stability
Ground conditions, buildings, water, trees
Height of the release above ground level
Momentum and buoyancy of the initial material
released

62
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Wind Speed

As the wind speed increases, the plume

becomes longer and narrower; the
substance is carried downwind faster but is
diluted faster by a larger quantity of air.

63
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Atmospheric Stability
Atmospheric stability relates to vertical mixing of the air.
During the day the air temperature decreases rapidly
with height, encouraging vertical motions.
At night the temperature decrease is less, resulting in
less vertical motion.
Temperature profiles for day and night situations are
shown in Figure 5.
Sometimes an inversion will occur. During and inversion,
the temperature increases with height, resulting in
minimal vertical motion. This most often occurs at night
as the ground cools rapidly due to thermal radiation. 64
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Figure 5: Day & Night Condition

Air temperature as a function of altitude for day and night conditions. The
temperature gradient affects the vertical air motion.
65
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Ground Condition
Ground conditions affect the mechanical mixing
at the surface and the wind profile with height.
Trees and buildings increase mixing while lakes
and open areas decrease it. Figure 6 shows the
change in wind speed versus height for a variety
of surface conditions.

66
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Figure 6: Effect of Ground Condition

Effect of ground conditions on vertical wind gradient.

67
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Height of the Release Above the Ground Level

The release height significantly affects ground level
concentrations.
As the release height increases, ground level
concentrations are reduced since the plume must
disperse a greater distance vertically. This is shown in
Figure 7.

68
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Effect of Release Height

Continuous Release Source Wind Direction

Plume

As Release Height Increases, This Distance

Increases. This leads to Greater Dispersion and
Less Concentration at Ground level

69
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Momentum and Buoyancy of the Initial Material

Released
The buoyancy and momentum of the
material released changes the effective
height of the release.
Figure 8 demonstrates these effects. After
the initial momentum and buoyancy has
dissipated, ambient turbulent mixing
becomes the dominant effect.

70
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Figure 8- Effect of Momentum and Buoyancy

Initial Acceleration
and dilution

Release
Source Dominance of
Internal Buoyancy Dominance of
Ambient
Turbulence

Transition from Dominance of

internal buoyancy to
dominance on Ambient
Turbulent

The initial acceleration and buoyancy of the released material affects the
plume character. The dispersion models discussed in this chapter
represent only ambient turbulence.
71
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Neutrally Buoyant Dispersion Model
Estimates concentration downwind of a
release
Two types
- Plume Model
- Puff Model
The puff model can be used to describe a
plume; a plume is simply the release of
continuous puffs.

72
 PROCESS HSAFETY
(CEV653)
Neutrally Buoyant Dispersion Model
Consider the instantaneous release of a fixed mass of material, Qm*,
into an infinite expanse of air (a ground surface will be added later).
The coordinate system is fixed at the source. Assuming no reaction or
molecular diffusion, the concentration, C, of material due to this
release is given by the advection equation.

C
t

x j
u jC 0 (Eq 1)

where uj is the velocity of the air and the subscript j

represents the summation over all coordinate
directions, x, y, and z.
73
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Case 1: Steady state continuous point release
with no wind
The applicable conditions are
Constant mass release rate, Qm = constant,
No wind, <uj> = 0,
Steady state, <C>/t = 0, and
Constant eddy diffusivity, Kj = K* in all directions.

2 C 2 C 2 C
0
x 2
y 2
z 2

Analytical Solution
C r
Qm
(15)
4K *r
C x, y, z
Qm
(16)
4K *
x y z
2 2 2 74
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Case 2: Puff with No Wind

The applicable conditions are -
- Puff release, instantaneous release of a fixed
mass of material, Qm* (with units of mass),
- No wind, <uj> = 0, and
- Constant eddy diffusivity, Kj = K*, in all directions.

1 C 2
C 2
C 2
C

K *
t x 2
y 2
z 2 (17)

75
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Case 2: Puff With No Wind
The initial condition required to solve Equation 17 is

C x, y, z 0 at t 0 (18)

The solution to Equation 17 in spherical coordinates is

Qm* r2
C r , t exp
*
(19)
8K *t 2
3
4K t

and in rectangular coordinates is

C x, y, z, t
Qm*
exp

x2 y2 z 2


8 K t*

3
2 4 K *
t (20)

76
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Case 3: Non Steady State, Continuous Point
Release with No Wind
The applicable conditions are
- Constant mass release rate, Qm = constant,
- No wind, <uj> = 0, and
- Constant eddy diffusivity, Kj = K* in all directions

C r , t
Qm r
erfc


(21)
4K r
*
2 K *t
Analytical Solution in rectangular coordinates is
x 2 y 2 z 2 (22)
C x, y, z, t
Qm
erfc
4K * x2 y2 z 2 2 K *t

As t , Equations 21 and 22 reduce to the corresponding
steady state solutions, Equations 15 and 16.
77
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Case 4: Steady State, Continuous Point Release
with No Wind
The applicable conditions are
Continuous release, Qm = constant,
Wind blowing in x direction only, <uj> = <ux> = u =
constant, and
Constant eddy diffusivity, Kj = K* in all directions.
For this case, Equation 9 reduces to

u C 2 C 2 C 2 C
(23)
K * x x 2
y 2
z 2

C x, y, z
Qm
4K * x2 y2 z2

exp
2K
u
*


x2 y2 z 2 x

(24)
78
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Case 5: Puff with no wind. Eddy diffusivity a
function of direction
This is the same as Case 2, but with eddy diffusivity a function o
direction. The applicable conditions are -
- Puff release, Qm* = constant,
- No wind, <uj> = 0, and
- Each coordinate direction has a different, but constant eddy
diffusivity, Kx, Ky and Kz.

C 2 C 2 C 2 C
Kx Ky Kz (28)
t x 2
y 2
z 2

1 x2 2 2
C x, y, z , t
Qm y z (29)
exp
8t
32
KxKyKz
4t K x Ky K z
79
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Case 6 Steady state continuous point source
release with wind. Eddy diffusivity a function of
direction
This is the same as Case 4, but with eddy diffusivity a function
of direction. The applicable conditions are
Puff release, Qm* = constant,
Steady state, <C>/t = o,
Wind blowing in x direction only, <uj> = <ux> = u = constant,
Each coordinate direction has a different, but constant eddy diffusivity, Kx,
Ky and Kz, and.
C 2 C 2 C 2 C
u Kx Ky Kz
x x 2
y 2
z 2
u y2 2
C x, y, z
Qm z
exp (31)
4x K y K z 4 x K y K z 80
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Case 7- Puff with no wind

This is the same as Case 5, but with wind. The applicable
conditions are
Puff release, Qm* = constant,
Wind blowing in x direction only, <uj> = <ux> = u = constant, and
Each coordinate direction has a different, but constant eddy diffusivity, Kx,
Ky and Kz,.

Qm*
C x, y, z, t
8t
32
KxKyKz

1 x ut
2
y2 z 2
exp (33)


4t K x K y K
z
81
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Case 8 Puff with no wind with source on
ground
This is the same as Case 5, but with the source on the ground. The
ground represents an impervious boundary. As a result, the
concentration is twice the concentration as for Case 5. The solution
is 2 times Equation 29.
Qm*
C x, y, z, t
4t
32
KxKyKz
u x2 y 2
z 2
exp
4t K x Ky K z (34)

82
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Case 9 Steady state Plume with source on

ground
This is the same as Case 6, but with the release source on the
ground, as shown in Figure 9. The ground represents an
impervious boundary. As a result, the concentration is twice the
concentration as for Case 6. The solution is 2 times Equation 31.

u y2 2
C x, y, z
Qm z
exp (35)
2x K x K y 4 x K y K z

83
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Case 10 continuous steady state source.

Source as height Ht, above the ground
For this case the ground acts as an impervious boundary at a
distance H from the source. The solution is

uy 2
C x, y, z
Qm
exp
4x K y K z 4K z x

2 2
exp
u
z H r exp u
z H r (36)

4K z x 4K z x

84
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Pasquill-Gifford Model
Cases 1 through 10 described previously depend on the specification of
a value for the eddy diffusivity, Kj.
In general, Kj changes with position, time, wind velocity, and prevailing
weather conditions and it is difficult to determine.
Sutton solved this difficulty by proposing the following definition for a
dispersion coefficient

with similar relations given for sy and sz.

The dispersion coefficients, sx, sy, and sz represent the standard
deviations of the concentration in the downwind, crosswind and vertical
(x,y,z) directions, respectively. Values for the dispersion coefficients are
much easier to obtain experimentally than eddy diffusivities
85
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Table 2 Atmospheric Stability Classes for Use with the
Pasquill-Gifford Dispersion Model

86
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Figure 10 Dispersion coefficient for Pasquill-Gifford plume model

for rural releases.
87
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Figure 11 Dispersion coefficient for Pasquill-Gifford plume model

for urban releases.
88
Figure 12 Horizontal dispersion coefficient for puff model. This
data is based only on the data points shown and should not be
considered reliable at other distances.
89
Figure 13 Vertical dispersion coefficient for puff model. This data is
based only on the data points shown and should not be considered
reliable at other distances.
90
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Table 3 Recommended Equations for Pasquill-Gifford
Dispersion Coefficient for Plume Dispersion (the downwind
distance x has unit of meters)

91
Stability
x (m) sz (m)
class
100 300 sZ = 0.087x0.88
A
300 3000 log10sz = -1.67 + 0.902 log10x + 0.181(log10x)
100 500 sZ = 0.135x0.95
B
500 2 104 log10sz = -1.25 + 1.09 log10x + 0.0018(log10x)

C 100 105 sZ = 0.112x0.91

100 500 sZ = 0.093x0.85

D
500 105 log10sz = -1.22 + 1.08 log10x - 0.061(log10x)
100 500 sZ = 0.082x0.82
E
500 105 log10sz = -1.19 + 1.04 log10x - 0.070(log10x)
100 500 sZ = 0.057x0.80
F
500 105 log10sz = -1.91 + 1.37 log10x - 0.119(log10x)

92
 Data for puff releases

x = 100 m x = 4000 m
Stability
condition
sy (m) sz (m) sy (m) sz (m)

Unstable 10 15 300 220

Neutral 4 3.8 120 50

Very stable 1.3 0.75 35 7

93
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Case 11 Puff. Instantaneous point source at ground level.
Coordinates fixed at release point. Constant wind in x direction only
with constant velocity u
This case is identical to Case 7. The solution has a form similar
to Equation 33.

z 2
2
Qm* y2
C x, y, z, t
1 x ut
exp


2 (38)
2 s xs ys z
32
2 s x s y s z
2

The ground level concentration is given at z = 0.

y 2
2
1 x ut
*
C x, y,0, t
Q m
exp

2

2 s xs ys z
32
2 s x s y
(39)
94
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

The ground level concentration along the x-axis is given at y =

z= 0.
* 1 x ut
2

C x,0,0, t
Qm
exp
2 s xs ys z
3 2
2 s x (40)
The centre of the cloud is found at coordinates (ut,0,0). The
concentration at the centre of this moving cloud is given by
Qm*
C ut,0,0, t (41)
2 3 2s xs ys z

The total integrated dose, Dtid received by an individual standing

at fixed coordinates (x,y,z) is the time integral of the concentration.

Dt id x, y, z C x, y, z, t dt
(42)

0
95
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
The total integrated dose at ground level is found by integrating
Equation 39 according to Equation 42. The result is -

Qm* 1 y2
Dtid x, y,0
(43)
exp
s ys z u 2 s y2

The total integrated dose along the x-axis on the ground is

Qm*
Dtid x,0,0 (44)
s ys z u

Frequently the cloud boundary defined by a fixed concentration

is required. The line connecting points of equal concentration
around the cloud boundary is called an isopleth.
96
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
For a specified concentration, <C>*, the isopleths at ground level are
determined by dividing the equation for the centreline concentration,
Equation 40, by the equation for the general ground level concentration,
Equation 39. This equation is solved directly for y.

C x,0,0, t
y sy 2 ln (45)
C x, y ,0, t

The procedure is
1. Specify <C>*, u, and t.
2. Determine the concentrations, <C> (x,0,0,t), along the x-axis using
Equation40. Define the boundary of the cloud along the x-axis.
3. Set <C> (x,y,0,t) = <C>* in Equation 45 and determine the values
of y at each centreline point determined in step 2.
97
The procedure is repeated for each value of t required.
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Case 12- Plume. Continuous, steady state, source at ground level,

wind moving in x direction at constant velocity u

This case is identical to Case 9. The solution has a form similar

to Equation 35.
1 y2 2
C x, y, z
Q z
exp 2 2 (46)
s ys z u 2 s y s z

The ground level concentration is given at z = 0.

y
2

C x, y,0
Q 1
exp
s ys z u 2 s y (47)

98
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

The concentration along the centreline of the plume directly

downwind is given at y = z= 0.

C x,0,0
Q (48)
s ys z u

The isopleths are found using a procedure identical to the

isopleth procedure used for Case 1.

For continuous ground level releases the maximum

concentration occurs at the release point.

99
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Case 13 Plume. Continuous, Steady State Source at Heignt H, above

ground level, wind moving in x direction at constant velocity u

This case is identical to Case 10. The solution has a form

similar to Equation 36.

2

C x, y, z
Qm 1 y
exp
2s ys z u 2 s y (49)


1 z Hr 1 z H
2

exp exp r


2 sz 2 s z

100
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

The ground level concentration is found by setting z = 0.

1 y
2

2

C x, y, z
Qm 1 Hr
exp s
(50)
2s ys z u 2 s y
2 z

The ground centreline concentrations are found by setting y =

z= 0.
1H
2

C x,0,0
Qm
exp r
s ys z u 2 s z (51)

101
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
The maximum ground level concentration along the x-axis,
<C>max, is found using.
2Qm sz
C (52)
max
euH r2 s y

The distance downwind at which the maximum ground level

concentration occurs is found from
Hr
sz (53)
2
The procedure for finding the maximum concentration and the
downwind distance is to use Equation 53 to determine the distance
followed by Equation 52 to determine the maximum concentration.
102
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Case 14 Puff. Instantaneous point source at height H, above

ground level. Coordinate system on ground moves with puff

For this case the centre of the puff is found at x = ut. The
average concentration is given by

y
2

C x, y, z, t
Qm 1
exp
2 s xs ys z
32
2 s y



1 z Hr
2
1 z H r

2

(54)
exp exp

2 s z 2 s z

103
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

The time dependence is achieved through the dispersion

coefficients, since their values change as the puff moves
downwind from the release point. If wind is absent (u = 0),
Equation 54 will not predict the correct result.

At ground level, z = 0, and the concentration is computed using

* 1 y 1 Hr
2 2

C x, y,0, t
Q m
exp (55)
2 3 2s xs ys z 2 s y
2 sz

104
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

The concentration along the ground at the centreline is given at

any y = z = 0,
* 1H
2

C x,0,0, t
Q (56)
m
exp

r

2 3 2s xs ys z 2 s z

The total integrated dose at ground level is found by application

of Equation 42 to Equation 55. The result is

* 1 y 1 Hr
2 2

Dtid x, y,0
Q m
exp (57)
s ys z u 2 s y 2sz

105
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Case 15 Puff. Instantaneous point source at height H, above ground

level. Coordinate system fixed on ground at release point
For this case, the result is obtained using a transformation of
coordinates similar to the transformation used for Case 7. The
result is

C x, y, z, t (Puff equations with moving coordinate

system, Equations 54 through 56) (58)
1 y
2

2
exp 1 Hr
2 s y s
2 z

where t is the time since the release of the puff.

106
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Using Probit to estimate the

impact of fire, explosion and
toxic release

107
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Probit equation
Y k1 k 2 ln V
Where:
Y = Probit Variable
k1 and k2 = constants
V = Causitive Variable

108
PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

109
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Example
A blast produces a peak overpressure of 47,000 N/m2.
a) What fraction of structures will be damaged by
exposure to this overpressure?
b) What fraction of people exposed will die as a result
of lung hemorrhage?
c) What fraction will have eardrums ruptured?
d) What conclusions about the effects of this blast can
be drawn?
110
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Solution
Probit Equation
Y k1 k 2 ln V
Structural damage:
Y 23 .8 2.92 ln Po
Death from lung hemorrhage:
Y 77 .1 6.91 ln Po
Eardrum ruptures:
Y 15 .6 1.93 ln Po
111
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Solution
For Po 47,000 N/m 2

Structural damage:
Y 7.61
Death from lung hemorrhage:
Y 2.76
Eardrum ruptures:
Y 5.163
112
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Conversion of Probit to Percentage

113
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)
Percent Affected
From probit-percentage conversion table

Percent Affected (%)

Structural Damage 99.6

Death (Lung Hem) 0 (Y is negative)

Eardrum ruptures 56

114
 PROCESS SAFETY
(CEV653)

Conclusion
The blast is not serious enough to expect fatalities,
but serious enough to cause extensive damage to
surrounding structures and to rupture eardrums of
more than half of the people exposed.

115