When there’s an emergency, upset condition, operational error, instrumentation malfunction, fire, or other credible scenario, the proper processes and systems must be in place to quickly and efficiently respond. Our professionals leverage their experience to accomplish the design, evaluation, revalidation, and consequence modeling of pressure relief and flaring systems in a cost-efficient manner.
Our Methodology
All equipment and piping systems should be protected when internal pressure can exceed the design conditions of the system. Our processes for pressure relief and flare studies are designed to document relevant assumptions and intermediate calculations, allowing for a thorough investigation of specific scenarios to identify potential improvements. All BakerRisk studies follow the applicable industry adopted guidelines and specific codes, including:
Our Specialists
Related Resources
BakerRisk is pleased for the opportunity to participate at the Mary Kay O’Connor Process Safety Symposium (MKOPSS) 2020 Virtual Conference.
It is crucial for Process Hazard Analysis (PHA) teams to be aware that the mere presence of a pressure relief device does not necessarily constitute a valid safeguard against all overpressure scenarios for the protected system. This paper will present the following ten most important questions for a PHA team to ask when considering pressure relief systems as safeguards.
Industry personnel often perceive low pressure tanks as being less dangerous than pressure vessels, particularly due to their less stringent standards for design and construction. However, this approach is mistaken as it overlooks the fact that a typical low pressure tank can often contain more material and be more easily opened to the atmosphere in response to a process upset when compared with a typical pressure vessel. This paper will discuss types of safeguards to prevent overpressure and vacuum of low pressure tanks, identify the strengths and weaknesses of these safeguards using consequence modeling techniques where applicable, and recommend overall safeguarding strategies in order to best utilize the strengths and mitigate the weaknesses of the available safeguards.
For Layers of Protection Analysis (LOPA) scenarios involving overpressure of equipment, pressure relief systems are often given significant Independent Protection Layer (IPL) credit, and in most cases this is appropriate. However, LOPA teams need to be aware of the many factors of design, installation, and maintenance of these systems that must be properly addressed in order for this IPL credit to be valid. These factors are represented in the context of generic IPL criteria of Independence, Functionality, Integrity, Reliability, Auditability, and Management of Change. Additionally, appropriate IPL credit for multiple relief devices and the use of rupture disks in combination with pressure relief valves is defined, and best practices are presented for developing recommendations that most effectively address identified LOPA gaps.
Contact: +1 (210) 824-5960
