×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Snuffing steam for sulfur storage tanks

Snuffing steam for sulfur storage tanks

Snuffing steam for sulfur storage tanks

(OP)
This question involves ongoing practices with respect to supplying snuffing steam to sulfur storage tanks.  According to NFPA 655 (2001), if used, snuffing steam should be provided at a rate of 8 lb/min per 100 ft³  of EMPTY tank volume.  For a tank measuring 30 ft OD x 16 ft high, that amounts to something on the order of ~54,000 lb/hr, which in turn mandates a 12" line for 50 psig steam.  That's pretty big.

What I would like to know is what others have encountered in terms of snuffing steam line size for a given tank size.

Thanks.

RE: Snuffing steam for sulfur storage tanks

Don't know how you got a 12" line in your estimations.  I ran some numbers through the FLowserve sizing program and show that a 6" high-performance butterfly would have enough capacity + change.  THe flow downstream would be sonic, and it would make over 100 dB, but that's not bad because it would be only momentary. An audible alarm is a good thing to have when yur sulfur supply is on fire, anyway.  

RE: Snuffing steam for sulfur storage tanks

Found the report of the Committee on Handling and Conveying of Dusts, Vapors and Gases.  The requirement of NFPA 655 4-4.1 (b) is based on the following:

"This recommendation brings the steam flooding requirements in line with NFPA 86.  The recommendation is based on 1934 FMRC fire test of a gasoline fire where the steam was applied above the gasoline fire and combustion air was introduced below the steam injection point.  It in essence requires supplying 200 ft3/min steam for every 100 ft3 of enclosure volume.  For hot enclosures (above 220 deg F) where the steam is injected at the surface of the liquid sulfur, a supply capable of 4 ft3/min per 100 ft3 of enclosure volume would be satisfactory.  This requirement ensures that the available steam supply is adequate to furnish enough steam at a rate sufficient to extinguish the fire."

There is a big difference between the stated 200 ft3/min and the 4 ft3/min that is deemed adequate for the liquid sulphur application.

RE: Snuffing steam for sulfur storage tanks

Further to my previous reply.  A sulphur storage tank designed for a small acid plant located in Canada was equipped with four (4) 2" dia. nozzle for snuffing steam.  The nozzles are located on the tank roof.  The tank is 30 ft dia. x 26 ft high.  I don't know the basis for the number and size of nozzle.

RE: Snuffing steam for sulfur storage tanks

(OP)
Interesting note about that plant in Canada: the diameter of the tank in question is essentially the same as the one I'm dealing with.  Would it be possible to find out the identity of that plant so that I can pick their brains a bit?

Note to Jim Casey: my comment about a 12" line was based on a quick glance at some of Sarco's steam line sizing tables which are, of course, intended for continuous process-related use (and therefore relatively low velocities) rather than intermittent/one-time emergency use.  In the latter case, sonic flow is of course appropriate; therefore, my comment about a 12" line was tantamount to going off half-cocked.  Your point is well-taken.

RE: Snuffing steam for sulfur storage tanks

The plant is a small sulphur burning plant operated by Cameco in norther Saskatchewan, Canada.  Sorry no contact information.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources