2 replies to this topic

[Blank03]

hi good day
First and foremost i would like to say thank you to those who had helped me to improve my answer
 

and again, I would like to ask for some helping hand for this one. So this is the question:

 

a reactor is to be installed at a manufacturing plant. the P&ID indicates a rupture disk on the reactor with discharge noted as " Vent to safe location". Which is most likely to be regarded as a safe location for the event discharge?

- vertically 30ft above the reactor

- flare header

- blowdown tank vented to flare

- grade level adjacent to the reactor

 

my answer here is vertically 30ft above the reactor.

am I correct?
Thank you so much once again

[NathanMac]

No one can really give you a safe answer without knowing

 

* What the components in the reactor are (ie what hazard level?)

* What temp/pressure?

* What is the discharge rate of the rupture disk

* What is in the nearby area - Normally occupied?

 

Then you may need to complete consequence studies or dispersion modelling to determine what the likely concentration is from discharge at this height.

 

Discharge to flare header should usually be the safest option if the flare is able to handle these components, however when "vent to safe location" is written this usually implies vent to atmosphere rather than flare.

 

Also in the future it is far more useful for everyone if the post title uses a descriptive title of the actual issue and not just a generalised genre of the issue.

Edited by NathanMac, 04 June 2018 - 05:14 PM.

[Saml]

If you have an "Issued for construction" or similar P&ID (that is,it has been fully developed and is not preliminary), then it normally means that it is vented to atmosphere at a place where a discharge wont hurt anyone or damage anything nearby.

 

Those are typical for steam, cooling water, compressed air, etc.

 

However to get a more specific answer, the minimum you have to provide is the composition of what is being vented

 

Regards