I IRVING HARTMANN and JOHN NAGY
Central Experiment Station, U. S. Bureau of Mines, U. S. Department of the Interior, Pittsburgh, Pa.
Venting Dust Explosions
Adequate explosion vents in plants are highly
effective in reducing structural damage
D u s r EXPLOSIONS are rapid uncon-
trolled combustion of dust in air, char-
acterized by evolution of heat, high
flame speeds, and increased pressure.
Pressure increase results chiefly from
heating and expansion of air in the ex-
plosion space; but with some dusts it
is caused partly by generation of new
gases during combustion.
.4t the start of an explosion the pres-
sure rises slowly. Time is required to
disperse the dust, mix it in proper pro-
portion with air, and preheat part or
all of the mixture to ignition tempera-
ture. Furthermore, during the initial
stage of most dust explosions there is
an induction or ignition lag period some-
times attributed to the initiation of a
chain reaction. After this stage, rates
of chemical reaction and pressure rise
in most explosions are greatly accel-
erated. It is important, therefore, that
alleviating measures against explosions
are taken during the initial phase.
T o prevent dust explosions, all po-
tential sources of ignition should be
eliminated from dusty areas of plants,
and good housekeeping should be prac-
ticed so that combustible dust is not
disseminated and allowed to collect
on exposed surfaces. particularly on
elevated surfaces. Other helpful meas-
ures under some conditions are limiting
production of fine dust; keeping con-
centrations of dispersed dust below- the
lower explosive limit; using inert gas
for processing highly combustible dusts;
diluting combustible dust with non-
combustible dust; pulverizing or proc-
essing the powder or dust under a
liquid; and/or treating the surface of
the particles with a protective film to
prevent rapid -oxidation.
In addition to preventive steps, pre-
cautionary measures to limit structural
damage from potential dust expiosions
are essential in many industrial opera-
tions. These include segregating haz-
ardous processes from the main plant
area; batch handling of combustible
powders to limit the fuel available in an
explosion; making the equipment and
other affected structures strong enough
to withstand maximum explosion pres-
sures; providing chokes, diverting gates,
or quick-acting shut-off valves to limit
1734 INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
spread of explosions; cooling or other-
wise quenching the flames; and installing
explosion vents in equipment and rooms
to be protected.
Function of Explosion Vents
Adequate explosion vents in plants
are highly effective in reducing struc-
tural damage from dust explosions. The
purpose of venting is to promote rapid
release of heated gases. flame, and
burned and unburned dust from an en-
closure during an explosion. By thus
removing heat energy and fuel from the
explosion space, rate of combustion is
reduced and development of destructive
pressures can be prevented.
Free or unrestricted openings gen-
erally provide the most effective vents.
However, because of protection needed
against weather changes. or escape of
dust and vapor from equipment during
normal operation, or for other reasons,
it is rarely feasible in practice to use
free vents. Therefore, it is necesary
to cover the vent openings with dia-
phragms or bloivout disks, poppet-type
closures, louvers, hinged panels, hinged
windows with proper latches, scored
glass panes, light sections in wall or
roof surfaces, or other rapidly opening
devices. For the best effect. the equip-
ment to be vented should be located
as near as possible to outside walls or
to the roo€ in a plant. \Vhere this
cannot be arranged, ducts must be con-
nected between the vents and the outer
atmosphere.
The proper areas of vents and suit-
ability of vent closures depend on sev-
eral factors-strength of equipment or
structure being vented; intensity of an
expected explosion, particularly maxi-
mum explosion pressure and rates of
pressure rise produced by the dust
being processed; position of the vent
relative to the origin of an explosion;
bursting strength of the vent closure or,
if movable as a whole, minimum pres-
sure required to open closure; inertia of
the vent closure; and length of ducts
attached to the vents.
Intensity of explosions and venting
requirements are affected by chemical
and physical characteristics of the dust
The Bureau of Mines used these gal-
leries, shown in their open shelter, to
study dust explosion venting. The gal-
lery in the foreground has a volume
of 64 cubic feet and that in the back-
ground, 2 16 cubic feet
which in turn determines rate of com-
bustion and heat generation. Such char-
acteristics are composition of the dust,
its affinity for oxygen, particle size and
shape, ease of dispersion, volatile con-
tent, and moisture content; concen-
tration of the dust cloud; composition
of the surrounding atmosphere, espe-
cially its oxygen content; nature of the
ignition source; size, shape, and sur-
face characteristics of the explosion
space, and the distribution of dust
therein. Importance of these factors
has been discussed (7, 9. 77).
Until now little progress has been
made toivard a sound, theoretical solu-
tion of venting requirements in either
dust or gas explosions. A number of
proposals have been advanced for com-
puting vent areas to limit pressures,
but the computations are based on over
simplified and unrealistic assumptions-
e.g., that no unburned fuel escapes
through the vent and no heat is lost
from the explosion space; that the fuel
burns at a uniform rate, and that no
gases are generated or consumed during
the explosion.
Knowledge of the mechanism of
dust explosions is limited, and does not
provide a sound basis for solving the
complicated problem of venting which
 This atomized aluminum powder explosion was released f r o m the 2 1 6-cubic-foot gallery through vents in two sides
involves a thermochemical process that
results in heat generation, gas develop-
ment or consumption in some instances,
and simultaneous flow of heat, gas, and
dust from the combustion space. For
the time being, therefore, aside from
empirical methods (74) useful for specific
situations, design of explosion vents
must be based on experience and on
experimental evidence such as is pre-
sented in this report.
Scope and Design of Experiments
Systematic experiments on venting
dust explosions have been limited.
Studies of venting grain dust and corn-
starch explosions were performed by
the U. S. Department of Agriculture
more than 20 years ago (I). Venting
tests and other explosibility studies on
various dusts have been performed a t
laboratories of industrial insurance as-
sociations (3, 4,5). Venting cork dust
and aluminum powder explosions in
cylindrical chambers and ducts have
been studied in England (2).
Explosion venting studies were begun
in the Bureau of Mines’ laboratories
about 13 years ago. Initially, the ex-
periments were conducted in a cubical
chamber or gallery having a volume of
64 cubic feet and equipped with vents in
three vertical sides and the roof (8, 72).
Dust clouds were formed by dispersion
of weighed quantities of dust from hemi-
spherical cups with jets of compressed
air; the resulting explosions were mild.
In a later study (73),the relative effective-
ness of unrestricted vents and of paper,
cloth, metal foil and other diaphragms,
hinged doors or panels, and several
kinds of scored and unscored glass
panes were investigated.
Recently, venting requirements of dust
explosions were studied in cubical gal-
leries having volumes of l , 64, and 216
cubic feet, with and without ducts at-
tached to the vents. Parameters in-
vestigated include particle-size distribu-
tion of dust, concentration of dust clouds,
and admixture of inert with combus-
tible dust; manner of dispersing dust
into a cloud; nature of igniting sources
and their timing with formation of
clouds; size, number, shape, and loca-
tion of vents; length, shape, cross-
sectional area and orientation of ducts,
bends and diaphragms in ducts, pres-
ence of dust on the duct floor, secondary
vents in ducts, and weatherhoods in
ducts. Also, venting finite volumes to
large adjoining chambers (70), preven-
tion of secondary explosions, and simul-
taneous venting and flame quenching
of dust explosions were investigated (6).
In most experiments, only a single
vent, generally in a vertical wall, was
used in all three galleries to limit the
explosion pressure. Vents of circular,
square, and rectangular shapes were
studied. For comparing and plotting
the test data, it was useful to divide
the areas of vents by the volume of the
explosion chamber and to express the
resulting “vent ratio” in square feet
per 100 cubic feet.
In this investigation, the vent ratios
generally ranged from less than 1 to
about 10 to 15 square feet per 100 cubic
feet. I n a few experiments with mag-
nesium and aluminum powders, vent
ratios as high as 25 to 30 square feet
per 100 cubic feet were used. Most
tests with diaphragm- and hinged-panel-
type vent closures were made in the
64-cubic-foot gallery. Effects of square
ducts (18 X 18 inches, up to 32 feet
long) and rectangular ducts (18 X 30
inches, up to 12 feet long) were studied
for explosions in the 64-cubic-foot gallery.
Similar studies were made in the 1-cubic-
foot gallery with square (37,’s inches), rec-
tangular (2l/4 X 6I/2 inches), and cir-
cular (4I/q- and 53/4-inch diameter)
ducts, ranging u p to 17 feet in length.
VOL. 49, NO. 10
Vent characteristics of explosions of
15 different dusts and powders were
studied; for a number of materials
several samples were used. They were
commercial products and by-products
formed in processing the bulk solids
and included atomized aluminum, flaked
or stamped aluminum, milled magne-
sium, cocoa, cornstarch, sugar, soybean
protein, bituminous coal dust, cork,
wood flour, sodium lignosulfonate, soap
powder, cellulose acetate, phenolic resin,
and polystyrene copolymer.
For the aluminum powder explosion
illustrated, all particles in the samples
passed through a No. 20 U. S. Standard
sieve (840 microns). I n most samples
95 to 100% by weight of the particles
passed through a No. 200 sieve (74
microns); and in a few samples, 85
to 95y0 passed through a No. 200 sieve.
One coarse, milled magnesium powder
tested in the early investigation, con-
tained only 51.6% of particles finer
than 74 microns. A limited number of
tests were made to study the effect of
particle size on explosion venting.
When tested, all dusts contained less
than 7Yo moisture and most less than
5%.
Dust clouds were formed in the 1-cubic-
foot gallery by directing a timed jet of
compressed air downward against the
dust in a hemispherical cup in the gallery
floor. For this small enclosure this
was a fairly efficient procedure. I n the
larger galleries the weighed dust was
placed in one to eight paper bags sus-
pended in several positions at one or
two levels. Within the dust in each
bag was placed an electric detonator,
the firing of which dispersed but did
not ignite the dust.
For some tests in the 1-cubic-foot
gallery, a high-voltage, electrical induc-
tion spark ignited the dust cloud. I n
others the flame of the small tuft of gun-
cotton carefully timed with the dust cloud
OCTOBER 1957 1735
was used. I n the larger galleries ignition
in all except early experiments was ac-
complished by guncotton flame.
T o evaluate the relative effectiveness
of various venting devices and arrange-
ments, pressure-time records of the ex-
plosions were obtained a t one or two
positions in the gallery, and in some tests
also a t various positions in ducts. I n
many special experiments, flame speeds
of the explosions propagating through
the duct were determined (6). Pressure
manometers used were of the diaphragm
type with optical magnification of the
diaphragm deflection ( I I). Timing of
the guncotton ignition and starting and
stopping of the recording pressure ma-
nometers and other instruments were ac-
complished by electronic and mercury-
switch timers.
Test Parameters
The experiments were planned to
advance knowledge of the general prin-
ciples of venting, rather than to furnish
definitive design data for particular
plant conditions. The recorded pres-
sures would be different if, for example,
two samples of a given material with
different particle shapes. fineness, and
surface characteristics were tested. Fur-
thermore, in performing repetitive tests
it is difficult to produce two dust clouds
of the same uniformity and to ignite,
explode, or vent them exactly alike.
Certain parameters that have been
studied intensively are important for
the careful conduct of meaningful ex-
periments, but in general, plant de-
signers and operators can exercise little,
if any, control over them. These param-
eters include :
1. Method of Dispersion. This fac-
tor is important because it affects uni-
formity of the dust cloud and therefore
intensity of the explosion. I n the 64-cubic-
foot gallery, dispersion by compressed
air gave the least uniform clouds; dis-
persion with a detonator from one bag
or container gave a better cloud. Si-
multaneous dispersion from eight bags
produced the most uniform dust clouds
and the strongest explosions.
2. Ignition Source. Size, duration,
and intensity of the ignition source affect
the lower explosive limit of the dust cloud
and have an important role in initiating.
developing, and venting an explosion.
For most dusts studied, a flame was more
potent than a high-voltage electrical in-
duction spark. I n two otherwise identi-
cal series of cellulose acetate tests in the
64-cubic-foot gallery, with vent ratios be-
tween 2.3 and 5.3 square feet per 100
cubic feet, the dust clouds were ignited
by flame from 5 - and 15-gram tufts
of guncotton. Maximum pressures pro-
duced by the larger flames were from
20 to 100% higher than in the corre-
sponding weaker explosions.
3. Concentration of Dust Cloud.
1736 INDUSTRIAL A N D ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
Dust clouds like gas-air mixtures have
well defined lower explosive limits, but
their upper limits are indefinite. Be-
tween these two limits is an optimum con-
centration at which the strongest ex-
plosions are produced. This is generally
higher than the stoichiometric concentra-
tion of the dust. In this study, the op-
timum concentration was determined ex-
perimentally for each dust, and most
tests were made at these concentrations.
Exceptions were a number of tests with
aluminum and magnesium powders,
which, because of strength limitations
of the galleries, were performed at low
concentrations.
4. Timing. Dense, explosive clouds
of relatively coarse dust particles studied
cannot be kept in uniform suspension for
longer than a fraction of a second.
Therefore, to achieve ignition a t the
optimum concentration, it is important
that ignition and dust dispersion be
carefully coordinated. Proper timing
for each dust and each gallery was de-
termined in preliminary experiments.
5. Size of Explosion Gallery. Several
dusts were tested in all three galleries,
partly to determine what scaling factors
could be used and partly to obtain
venting information for much larger
chambers in commercial plants. Theo-
retically, similar explosions in large
enclosures should produce higher pres-
sures and higher rates of pressure rise
because as the volume increases, heat
lost to the surroundings, which is a
function of the surface-to-volume ratio
of the enclosure, decreases.
However, with increased volume, it
becomes more difficult to produce uni-
Vent Ratio, Sq.
Figure 1. Effect of unrestricted vents on pressures produced by
explosions of various dusts
form dust clouds that fill the chamber.
I n the experiments, this second factor
was more important than the former, and
with several dusts, stronger explosions
were produced in the 1-cubic-foot gallery
than in the 64-cubic-foot gallery. These
were, in turn, somewhat stronger than
explosions in the 21 6-cubic-foot gallery.
With some dusts, these differences were
slight, and in one complete series of
cornstarch explosions, no measurable
differences were observed.
Venting of Mild and
Strong Explosions
By varying the foregoing parameters,
particularly method of dispersion and
gallery size, data were obtained on vent-
ing requirements for relatively mild,
strong, and some intermediate explosions
of several dusts through unrestricted
vents directly to the outside atmosphere.
Mild explosions were produced in the 64-
cubic-foot gallery by dust clouds formed
by compressed air jets, and the strong
explosions were for the most part pro-
duced in the 1-cubic-foot gallery.
Figure 1 is a semilogarithmic plot of
the pressure-vent ratio relations for mild
explosions of nine dusts. Figure 2
shows the relationship for strong explo-
sions of 12 dusts. The relationships
follow straight lines within an appre-
ciable range of the test data, but the
lines cannot be extrapolated to zero vent
ratio nor to high vent ratios where zero
pressure is approached. The equation
of the lines can be
log P = log A - Kr (1)
where P = maximum pressure, 7 =
Ft. per 100 Cu. Ft.
mild
 S A F E T Y I N CHEMICAL I N D U S T R Y

3,000

2,500

i
L L

g 2,ooc

24

2ai-
v1
1,50(
0
L
0-

;
I-

X
LOO(

2
50C

'Grain
5 10 15 20 5
Vent Ratio, Sq. Ft. per 100 Cu. Ft.
Figure 2. Effect o f unrestricted vents on pressures pro- Figure 3. Relative effectiveness o f circular, square,
duced by strong explosions of various dusts and rectangular vents for relieving cellulose acetate
dust explosions from the 1-cubic-foot gallery

vent ratio, A and K are empirical con-
stants, A is the intercept on P axis, and
K is the slope of the line = (log P1 -
log P2)/(rz - T I ) .
The pressure-vent ratio relations can
also be expressed by the equation
p = Ae-kr (2)
where e = base of natural logarithms
(2.71828), and k . logloe = 0.4343k =
K in Equation 1.
Test data and equations show that
maximum explosion pressure decreases
exponentially with increased vent ratio.
Therefore, a small increase in the vent
area at low vent ratios results in a much
greater reduction in the explosion pres-
sure than at high vent ratios.
To limit the maximum pressure to 2
pounds per square inch (288 pounds per
square foot), for mild explosions of coal
dust or wood flour, the vent ratio should
be approximately 1.5 square feet per
100 cubic feet and for strong explosions
it should be 5.5 to 6.0 (Figures 1 and 2).
Similarly, for mild explosions of soybean
protein or cornstarch, the vent ratio
corresponding to a maximum pressure of
2 pounds per square inch, is about 1.75.
However, for strong explosions of soy-
bean protein, the required vent ratio
is 8.5, whereas for cornstarch it is 13.0.
Shape and Location of Vents
Unrestricted circular, square, and
rectangular openings of equal areas
were equally effective in venting explo-
sions. When the openings were sealed
by strong paper, empire cloth (varnished
cambric), or other diaphragms, rec-
tangular vents were slightly more
effective than square vents, and both
were more effective than circular vents
of like areas (Figure 3). This is prob-
ably because at equal pressures, stresses
are higher at midpoints of the sides in
rectangular and square diaphrams than
in circular diaphragms.
In a few tests with cornstarch explo-
sions in the I-cubic-foot gallery, effective-
ness of circular vents was increased (maxi-
mum pressure reduction of 10 to 30%)
when the internal edge of the vents in
l/d-inch thick brass wall plates was
rounded to promote streamline flow
of the combustion products.
In the relatively small, cubical explo-
sion chambers used, position of vents,
whether in vertical walls or in the top,
was immaterial. Two or more open-
ings were as effective as a single vent of
the same total area. However, in much
larger or elongated enclosures, location
of vents relative to the source of ignition
is important. In long chambers several
vents in various positions are more
effective than a single large vent.
Fineness of Dust and
Admixture of Inert Matter
Explosion hazards of combustible
dusts increase with decrease in particle
size for a number of reasons. Therefore,
venting requirements should be more
severe as the dust becomes finer. T o
verify this, a number of experiments were
performed with two samples of cellulose
acetate dust which contained 85 to 9470
of particles which passed through No.
200 U. S. Standard sieve. Explosions
of finer dust produced between 30 and
50Y0 higher pressures than the coarser
dust (Figure 4A).
I n another set of experiments, explo-
sions of cork dust having particle sizes
with sieve numbers ranging from 100
to 140 (149 to 105 microns), 140 to
200 (105 to 74 microns), and through
No. 200, were produced in the l-cubic-
foot gallery to which an 11-foot duct was
attached. The maximum pressure de-
creased considerably with increase in the
average diameter of the dust particles
(Figure 4B).
In certain industrial processes, non-
combustible and combustible powders
are blended. Sometimes it may be pos-
sible to distribute an inert dust, such as
pulverized limestone, near an operation
where highly combustible dust is proc-
essed. Then when ignited, the com-
bustible and noncombustible dusts be-
come mixed by the initial disturbance.
When the noncombustible dust consti-
tutes an appreciable proportion of the
total mixture, it exerts an important
effect in reducing the explosion hazard.
Figure 5 shows the effect of increasing
proportions of finely divided, calcined

VOL. 49, NO. 10 OCTOBER 1957 1737

 U. S. STANDARD SIEVE SCALE pressures. Hinged steel doors, ' / 4 inch
thick, on vents in the 64-cubic-foot gallery
increased maximum pressure in coal
dust explosions about two to three times
and in soap powder explosions to nearly
twice the pressures developed with un-
restricted vents of similar dimensions.
In rapid explosions such as atomized
aluminum powder, even light-weight
swinging doors result in increased
pressure.
When using swinging doors or panels.
unless the equipment is quickly flooded
with carbon dioxide or other gas for
fire fighting, provision should be made
to prevent development of destructive
negative pressure (partial vacuum).
This may occur soon after the outflow
0 50 100 150 of combustion products when the door
A, Vent Ratio, Sq. Ft. per 100 Cu. Ft. 6. Average Particle closes and cooling takes place. It can
Diameter, Microns be prevented by quickly equalizing the
Effect of particle size on explosions in vented 1-cubic-foot gallery
internal and external pressure or by pro-
Figure 4.
viding stops or louvers to avoid complete
A, ce!lulose acetate relieved through unrestricted vents; B, cork dust vented through a duct 4I/4 inches closure of the door. However, after
in diameter and 1 1 feet long the initial explosion, closing the vent
opening is sometimes desirable to pre-
fuller's earth in mixtures with cork and the diaphragm thickness increased and, vent inrush of fresh air that might cause
cellulose acetate dust on maximum pres- as mentioned before, shape of the dia- a second explosion.
sures developed by explosions in the phragm-covered vent also had an effect. In Great Britain and Germany, a
64-cubic-foot gallery equipped with vents Nature of the vent closure was less im- combined bursting diaphragm and
of three sizes. portant in rapid aluminum powder hinged door is sometimes used. The door
explosions than in slower coal dust ex- is normally held open by a weighted
plosions. To facilitate rupture of strong bell crank. If an explosion occurs,
Effect of Diaphragms and Hinged
diaphragms at low pressures, cutters the diaphragm breaks and the door,
Panels
can be placed near their outer surfaces lifted slightly off its support, then drops
Diaphragms, hinged panels, and other and arranged so that when an explosion into a closed position ovex the vent
closures on explosion vents restrict starts the diaphragm is pierced or weak- opening.
efflux rate of combustion products from ened.
an enclosure and reduce effectiveness of Comparatively slow explosions of coal
dust and other dusts were vented nearly Venting Explosions through Ducts
vents (Figure 3). Various diaphragms
(73) had pressure-relieving capaci- as effectively through lightweight (l/~e- In many plants ducts through which
ties about inversely proportional to the inch thick sheet metal) swinging panels explosion products must flow are needed
static bursting strengths of the diaphragm or doors as through unrestricted openings. between equipment to be vented and
materials. Effectiveness decreased as Heavy doors, however, resulted in higher the roof or outside wall of the building.
This reduces effectiveness of the vent
1,500 because of the time required to move
the column of air within the duct and
Vent ratio, 3.5sq. ft. per 100 cu. ft. because of frictional resistance of the
Vent ratio, 5.0sq. ft. per 100 cu. ft. duct surfaces to the flow.
+ 1,250
L For unrestricted ducts attached to
U the explosion galleries, maximum pres-
P sure increases appreciably and directly,
5 1,000 though not quite linearly, with increase
W'
CY
in length of duct (lower curve. Figure
3
v)
6A). Effects of ducts with circular.
750 square, and rectangular cross sections
CY
[L of equal areas were virtually identical.
z
3
Empire-cloth diaphragms between the
I gallery and duct had a greater effect
3 500
than moderate increase in the length of
I
the duct (Figure 6 4 . For cornstarch
explosions, a diaphragm set in a duct
250 11 feet long at various distances from
the gallery caused pressure increases
up to 20% with increase in distance.
0 I n some industrial processes, vent
Combustible 100 90 80 70 60 100 90 80 70 60
diaphragms are exposed to corrosive
I I I I 1 1 I I I I fumes or high temperatures that tend to
Fullers earth 0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40
MIXTURE COMPOSITION, PERCENT
weaken them. In such instances, two
closely spaced diaphragms have been con-
Figure 5. Effect of inert dust on explosions of cork and cellulose acetate dusts in sidered. I n experiments with cornstarch
vented 64-cubic-foot gallery explosions in the 1-cubic-foot gallery with

1738 INDUSTRIAL A N D ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY

 SAFETY I W CHEMICAL INDUSTRY

5,000 The upper curve in Figure 6B shows

pressures developed in explosions when
cellulose acetate was distributed uni-
4,000 formly along the duct floor. These
pressures are higher than those without
Ei
Y, dust in the duct, but such increase (if
2 3,000
2
any) depends to an important degree
on the dust concentration in the explosion
ai-
L space, along the duct, and on availability
3
D of sufficient oxygen for the combustion.
al Increase in the cross-sectional area of
& 2,000
ducts attached to vents of like areas in

9.-I
the explosion galleries was accompa-
nied by reduction in maximum pressure.
1,000 This was true for unrestricted ducts and
also those with a kraft paper diaphragm
a t the vent. Because in many types
of industrial equipment it is impossible
0 5 10 15 20 to use vents of recommended size, a study
A.
Length o f Duct, Ft. 6. Distance of Vent from Gallery, Ft. was made of the effect of connecting a
Figure 6. Cellulose acetate dust explosions vented from the 1 -cubic-foot gallery small vent through a truncated-cone
through 3'/*-inch square ducts shaped funnel with a larger duct through
Dust concentration in aallery. 0.50 oz./cu. foot. A. effect of duct length; E , effect o f 4-inch square which the explosion products would
unrestricted vent location in i;-foot d u l t flow (Figure 7). With unrestricted
vents and ducts, a 6-inch long truncated
an 1 1-foot duct attached, two diaphragms inches square was attached. The maxi- cone between a 41/4-inch diameter vent
1 foot apart at various positions along mum gallery pressure was approximately in the I-cubic-foot gallery and a 53/4-inch
the duct resulted in pressures virtually 3000 pounds per square foot, and the diameter duct was nearly as effective
identical to rhose from a single dia- corresponding pressures in the duct were in limiting the explosion pressure in
phragm. 2700 at 4 feet from the gallery, 2600 a t the gallery as a 53/4-inch diameter duct
Limited experiments with vertical 8 feet, 2250 at 12 feet, 1600 a t 14 feet, on a vent of the same size (Figure 7 A ) .
and horizontal ducts ranging from 2 to and 800 at 16 feet. When a diaphragm was placed at the
16 feet long and attached to an explosion T o limit pressure in the gallery it is wide (outer) end of the truncated cone,
gallery. showed that they were equally occasionally advisable to provide one the combination of small vent, cone, and
effective in releasing explosions. or more secondary vents in the duct. large duct was nearly as effective as a
In a number of tests pressures were The effectiveness of such vents decreases large duct and large vent (Figure 7B).
measured in the ducts as well as in with increased distance from the source When the vent diaphragm was placed a t
the explosion gallery. This was done, of the explosion (lower curve, Figure 6B). the narrow end of the cone near the
for example, in cellulose acetate explo- For these tests, area of the secondary gallery, the combination was less effective
sions in the 1-cubic-foot gallery to which vent, placed in one side of the duct, but still better than a narrow duct.
an unrestricted duct 17 feet long and 4 was equal to the duct area. In venting explosions through ducts,
attempts are generally made to avoid
turns, particularly sharp changes in
5,000 direction. This cannot always be ac-
complished. T o evaluate the effect
I of bends, experiments were made with
4-inch square ducts of 3- to 7-foot lengths
connected to the 1-cubic-foot gallery, the
ends of which had 45-, 90-, 1 3 5 , and
180-degree turns with average radii of
7 inches. In some tests. additional
straight lengths of duct were connected
beyond the bends. In explosions of
cellulose acetate 45-degree bends at the
-1 ends of 3- and 6-foot ducts raised the
gallery pressures in pounds per square
foot from 1000 (without a bend) to
1350 (with a bend), and from 1600 to
about 2000, respectively. Further in-
crease in the bend to 90, 135, and 180
degrees caused little change in pressure.
0 5 10 15 20
With bends from 0 to 180 degrees at
A B the end of 10-foot long ducts, a small
Length of Duct, Feet gradual increase occurred in gallery
pressure-from 2400 to 2700 pounds
Figure 7. Venting cornstarch dust explosions from 1-cubic-foot gallery through
per square foot. With 17-foot ducts,
circular ducts
the effect of bends was barely measur-
A, unrestricted vents; 6, vents with k r a f t p a p e r diaphragms able; the pressures ranged from 2900
---4 I / d n c h vent plus 4l/d-inch duct
-.- 4l/4-inch vent plus 6-inch truncated cone plus 53/a-inch duct to 3000 pounds per square foot. I n
-- 5'/4-inch vent plus 5a/4-inch duct general, the effect of a 90-degree benp

VOL. 49, NO. 10 OCTOBER 1957 1739

 5,000 I
25
Z &
zxi
Sodium lignosulfonate
-Cocoa
0 5 10
Max. Pressure in Vented Gal-
lery, Lb./Sq. Inch (Vent Ratio, 5
Sq. Feet/l 00 Cu. Feet)
Figure 8. Explosion pressures in
vented 1 -cubic-foot gallery compared
with average rates of pressure rise in
1.3-liter laboratory bomb
about equaled that of an additional
straight duct whose length is two to three
times that of the bend.
Bends in the ducts had a greater
effect on pressure near the outer end
of the bend and in the duct beyond it.
This pressure increased nearly linearly
with the degree of bend from 0 to 180
degrees. I n several tests, pressure be-
J'ond a 90 degree bend was nearly
three times as great; and beyond a
180-degree bend it Ivas five to six times
as great as at the corresponding duct
position without any bend. In some
plants long ducts contain S-shaped off-
sets, and secondary vents are provided
a t the bends in line with each straight
section of duct.
Correlation of Test Data from
Vented and Unvented Explosions
One effect of venting is to change the
pressure-time characteristics of explo-
sions. Comparison of tests in vented
explosion chambers with tests of corre-
sponding dusts in the sealed 1.3-liter.
cylindrical. laboratory test bomb shows
that the time required for an explosion
to reach maximum pressure (which for
most dusts studied ranges from less
than 10 to about 100 milliseconds)
does not differ appreciably with and
without vents. However, in sealed
chambers, the rates of pressure rise
(a few hundred to several thousand
pounds per square inch per second) are
a hundred times greater than those in
the vented explosion galleries.
A fairly good correlation exists be-
tween pressures developed in vented
chambers and pressures, and particularly
average rates of pressure rise produced
in sealed test bombs (Figure 8).
Venting tests are relatively time-con-
suming and expensive; therefore, they
cannot be performed on a large number
1740 INDUSTRIAL A N D ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
I of industrial dusts, whereas tests in
small, sealed test bombs can be per-
formed more readily on a wide variety
of samples. Because such test data
can be correlated, venting requirements
of dusts on which only laboratory tests
had been performed can be estimated
with some degree of certainty. The
relationship of small-scale laboratory
tests with cornstarch to results ob-
tained in a 4000-cubic foot vented ex-
plosion chamber has been shown ( 3 ) .
Concllusion
Venting requirements for explosions
of a number of inorganic and organic
15 20
dusts were studied, and pressure-vent
ratio relationships for relatively mild
and strong explosions of several dusts
were determined. Of the dusts investi-
gated, aluminum and magnesium pow-
ders were the most difficult to vent.
The nature of diaphragms, hinged
panels, and other closures on vent open-
ings is highly important. The fre-
quently necessary interposition of ducts
between vents and the outside atmos-
phere may greatly increase maximum
pressures. Secondary vents in such
ducts increase their effectiveness, es-
pecially when located near the poten-
tial source of an explosion.
Products of combustion should be
directed through vents in such a way
that neither personnel nor property
will be adversely affected and damage to
the vent closures by wind, snow. ice,
rust, or friction should be avoided.
These problems and general principles
of venting dust, gas, and vapor explo-
sions have been discussed ( 7 5 ) .
Although these experiments were done
to obtain knowledge of venting principles
rather than information for plant de-
sign, results from relatively small ex-
plosion chambers can be useful for pro-
tecting equipment and also for larger
commercial structures. Venting re-
quirements based on these experimental
data, however, are generally too severe
for large rooms or structures; in the
latter, explosions of maximum violence
occur rarely-the entire volume is not
filled with a dust cloud of explosive con-
centration and ignitions do not occur
at the most hazardous moment. It
has been estimated (3) that in rooms
of manufacturing plants of ordinar)
size, it is improbable that more than one
sixth of the volume is filled with an ex-
plosive dust cloud.
By selecting vent ratios corresponding
to maximum pressures to which the
equipment can be safely subjected, these
test data can be used to obtain the re-
quired vent sizes for equipment of known
strength. Brick walls in most industrial
buildings may be destroyed by sustained
internal pressures of less than 1 pound
per square inch. The National Fire
Protection Association recommends vents
ranging in size from 1 square foot for
each 10 to 30 cubic feet for small en-
closures of light construction, to 1
square foot for each 80 cubic feet of
volume for large rooms lrith heav!-
reinforced concrete walls. The British
Factory Inspectorate suggests 5 square
feet of relief area for each 100 cubic
feet in systems subject to carbonaceous
dust explosions, and 10 square feet
when the risk is from magnesium or
aluminum dust.
I n most industrial equipment, it is
impossible to provide vents of the de-
sired or recommended areas because of
design or other limitations. I n such
instances, the largest possible vent should
be provided, even though it may
not be fully adequate. Even small
vents give great reduction in the maxi-
mum explosion pressures. Other re-
medial steps are increasing strength of the
equipment; reducing internal volume;
where ducts are needed, increasing di-
ameter of the duct by using an expand-
ing funnel-shaped section between the
vent and the duct; moving equipment
out-of-doors; using inert gas in proc-
essing highly explosive dusts; blending
incombustible dust with the combustible;
if possible, arranging the operation so
that the dust concentration is below the
lower explosive limit; and most im-
portant of all, practicing good house-
keeping and taking special care to pre-
vent ignitions.
Literature Cited
(1) Brown: H. R., Hanson, R. L.: .\'at/.
Fire Protect. Assoc. Quart. (April
1933).
( 2 ) Brown, K. C., British Safety in Mines
Research Rept. 22, 1951.
(3) Cotton, P. E., N a t l . Fire Protect.
Assoc. Quart. 45, 1957-64 (October
1951).
( 4 ) Factory Insurance Assoc., Special
Hazards Studv No. 4. 1940.
Ibid.. KO. 5.
Harfmann, Irving, Chem. Eng. Progr.
53, 107-11h4 (1957).
Hartmann, Irving IND.EXG. CHz:M.
40, 752-33 (1948).
Hartmann, Irving, Nutl. Fzre Pro-
tect. Assoc. Ouart. 40. 47-53 iJulv
1946).
( 9 ) Hartmann, Irving, Sci. .Vlonthly 79,
95-108 (1954).
(10) Hartmann, Irving, Jacobson, M.,
Williams. R. P , U. S. Bureau
Mines,.~Rept. Investigations 5052,
~
1954.
(11) Hartmann, Irving, Nagy, John, U . S.
Bureau of hfines. ReDt. Investi-
gations 3751, 1344. A
(12) Zbid., 3924, 1946.
(13) Nagy, John, Zeilinger; 3. E., Hart-
mann, Irving, Did., 4636, 1950.
(14) Natl. Fire Protect. Assoc., Code for
Prevention of Dust Explosions in
the Plastics Industry, NFPA 654-
1946, pp. 17-20.
(15) Natl. Fire Protect. Assoc. Guide for
Explosion Venting, NFPA 68,1954.
RECEIVED
for review March 21, 1957
ACCEPTED August 6 , 1957
Division of Industrial and Engineering
Chemistry, Symposium on Safety, 131st
Meeting, ACS, Miami, Fla., April 1937.