SFPE
‘Technology Report 81-10
FIRE PROTECTION IN COAL HANDLING FACILITIES
NEW AND RETROFIT
KW. Dungan, PE.
President
Professional Loss Control Inc.
Oak Ridge, Tennessee
SOCIETY OF FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEERS
60 Batterymarch Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02110
Price $3.25ABSTRACT
As coal becomes an increasingly important fuel source in process industries as
well as for the generation of electricity proper fire protection of coal handling
facilities becomes essential. The problems of spontaneous combustion, coal dust
accumulation and methane and CO emmission are discussed, Protection measures for
storage facilities, conveyors, transfer equipment, process equipment, receiving and
reclaiming areas are suggested. Control of hazards can be accomplished when clear cut
design objectives are established and proper protection measures provided.FIRE PROTECTION IN COAL HANDLING FACILITIES
NEW AND RETROFIT
(originally presented at the 1981 SFPE
Fire Protection Engineering Seminars, Dallas Convention
Introduction
one of the largest available and
readily retrievable energy resources in
the U.S. is coal. In the interest of
utilizing these resources and reducing
dependence on foreign oil, the U.S. is on
the threshold of an industrial coal util~
ization boom. This coal "panacea" is not
without its challenges however. Safety,
healtn, environmental, and fire protec~
tion concerns must be met, The major
euphasis in this paper is the fire pro-
tection problem, its potential solution
and the impact on this problem and solu~
tion ‘on other loss control concerns for
the storage and handling of coal for use
ae a fuel or feed stock.
Goal-—-Its Physical and Chemical Prospec~
tives
Everyone has an appreciation for, if
not an accurate understanding of, what
coal is. Coal as referenced by Charles
Dickens was the valuable fuel that pro-
vided a meager amount of heat to
Serooge's counting house and most other
buildings in Victorian London. Coal is
the fuel which powered the industrial
revolution from steel mills to steam
engines and more recently, generation of
electricity. But the broad term "coal"
covers a wide variety of solid hydro-
Center, Dallas, Texas, May 18-21, 1981)
K. W, Dungan, P.E.
President
Professional Loss Control Inc.
Oak Ridge, Tennessee
carbon fuels with dramatically differing
physical and chemical properties.
Numerous publications address the
physical and chemical natures of coal.
See references 1, 2, 3, and 4. The im-
portant parameters which will be dis~
cussed here are those which effect the
fire and explosion hazards of coal.
Spontaneous Heating
Spontaneous heating occurs in coal by
the oxidation of freshly exposed coal
surfaces. How rapidly this oxidation
occurs and whether sufficient heat builds
up to create an ignition depends on the
chemical and physical nature of the par~
ticular coal. All coals are not equal.
The chemical properties of coals which
effect spontaneous heating are oxygen
content, moisture, impurities, especially
sulfur in the form of pyrites, and vol-
atiles. The physical properties are size
and friability or breakability., For
spontaneous heating to lead to ignition,
sufficient air must be present and in
contact with fresh (unoxidized) surfaces,
yet without sufficient air movement to
carry away built-up heat. The time to
ignition of a mass of coal from spon-
taneous heating is not a readily identi-
fiable or consistant parameter. A time
often quoted for bituminous coal is 90 to120 days. Western coals, however, have
been reported to ignite in as little as
one week.
Numerous attempts have been made to
rank coals based on propensity for spon-
tancous heating (31 8, these have
been useful in evaluating transportation
hazards and coal mining hazards but not
readily applicable to pile or bunker
storage. These approaches do help to
identify the important parameters af fect-
ing spontaneous heating.
Bmition of Gases Ciy and
Freshly mined coal, especially those
with high volatiles, will emit methane
gase either entrained or chemically bound
to the coal(7), these amounts are
minor but cannot be ignored or allowed to
collect. Since the lower explosive Limit
of methane is around 5 percent by volume,
explosive mixtures can be reached if con-
trol features are not included in facili-
ties design.
More importantly, during spontaneous,
heating, coal will emit carbon monoxide.
his evolved carbon monoxide can create
serious health and explosion hazards if
allowed to collect. The explosive range
of CO is 12.4 percent to 74 percent. The
toxicity effects start as low as 0.1 per~
cent with 1 percent being fatal in one
minute. OSHA established a threshold
limit | valve (TLV) of 50 ppm — for
col,
Goal Dust Characteristics
Goal dust characteristics also vary
from coal to coal. Coal dust generation,
particle size, density, ignitibility, and
explosive pressure are important para~
meters which must be evaluated for the
coal in question, These characteristics
not only effect the hazard associated
with the coal, but also affect the
methods applied to control those haz~
ards. Studies indicate that the explo-
sive range and ignition energies for coal
dust-air mixtures are greatly in-
fluenced by dust particle size and im
purities (chemical structure) of the
coal (10),
Goal Storage and Handling
The hazards of coal storage and
handling which must be controlled are
fire and explosion. these incidents may
be either the direct hazard of the coal
in use or of the equipment required for
its use. For example, general fire haz
ards include coal fires and coal handling
equipment fires (conveyor belts, moni-
tors, etc.)
Storage
The major hazard of coal storage is
spontaneous heating as outlined above,
Spontaneous heating creates fire poten-
tial in both outdoor storage piles and
inside storage in bunkers, bins, or
silos. The consequences of such fires
may not appear serious at first glance.
However, these storage fires can lead and
have led to spreading fires and explo-
sions in coal handling and processing
systems.
The most effective way of controlling
spontaneous heating is to prevent it
through proper design and operation. ‘The
major controllable parameters available
for preventing spontaneous heating are
minimizing duration of storage, air
movement through storage, and wetting of
coal.
In large uncovered piled storage of
coal, duration may not be controllable
In such cases, empahsis is placed on pre~
venting air movement through the pile and
Limiting moisture percolation through the
pile. This is accomplished by layering
and compacting coal into tightly con-
pressed piles.
The control of moisture is very im-
portant since the heat of wetting itself
can be greater than the heat of oxidation
for some coals. This is considered in
coal preparation where washing and drying
SFPE TR 81-10are conducted. Dried coals should not be
mixed with wet coals,
Another trend in coal use is
"blending." Blending of coals to achieve
the correct level of sulfur content and
higher heat value is being practiced as a
means, to use high sulfur astern
coal), storage of high sulfur coal
(high in pyrites) with low sulfur Western
coal (high in moisture and 07) can
greatly increase the rate of spontaneous
heating, The most successful means of
storage is to keep separate piles and
silos and blend only at end use.
In smaller piles where compacting is
not applied, frequent turnover of the
coal can be used to prevent any heat
buildup in the pile from spontaneous
heating. Such turnover using bulldozers
or similar equipment is costly and inef-
ficient for longterm storage, so com
pacting is favored.
When fires do occur in storage piles,
that can best be handled by removing the
burning coal. In the case of compacted
piles, if fires occur they will normally
be on’ the edges of the pile where coal is
difficult to compact but readily acces-
sible for removal. For these reasons,
separation from other hazards, such as
tank farms or buildings, should be main-
tained from the pile and accessibility to
all edges of the pile should be main-
tained.
For storage in bins, bunkers, or
silos or other "implant" storage facili-
ties, spontaneous heating is controlled
by limiting the duration of storage.
Since this coal is normally considered
"in use" the volume of storage is limited
to the amount required for a specific
duration of operation (8 hours on the low
end to one week on the high end). The
additional precaution, then, is to limit
the "hang up" of coal in this storage
container. ‘This is accomplished by the
design of the container. In the case of
coals readily susceptible to spontaneous
heating, cylindrical silos with conical
SFPE TR 81-10
hoppers are normally recom- mended to
eliminate corners where coal can
collect. The angles of the walls of the
conical hopper are kept as steep as
required for the coal (normally greater
than 60° from the horizontal). In
extreme cases, mechanical vibrations of
air blast cannons may also be used to
assure free moving coal(l2), 1g air
blast cannons are to be applied, care
must be exercised to assure they are not
operated on low coal levels where they
could create a large cloud of coal dust
in the silo.
As discussed above, with container
storage of coal, the hazards of gassing
(Gly and CO) must be evaluated and con-
trolled. Control normally consists of
adequate venting from the storage ves-
sel. Where plant design and operation
require that personnel work at or near
the tops of storage containers, it is
strongly recommended that carbon monoxide
monitoring be provided at the top of the
containers(13), This CO —_ monitoring
will alert plant personnel to potential
health hazards, and will give early in-
dication of spontaneous heating in the
storage.
An additional consideration to con~
trol spontaneous heating is the provision
of C02 inert ing( 14 Although it is
extremely difficult to extinguish a
smoldering coal fire with C0), such
imerting is effective in preventing
spontaneous heating by limiting the air
available for oxidation. Where inerting
can be helpful is when process equipment
is taken out of service because in-plant
storage containers are full and it is
desired to leave the fuel until startup.
As with coal pile storage, a fire in
4 storage container is most effectively
controlled by removal of the burning
coal, This must be done as safely as
possible and should be considered in the
early phase of design and through the
development of operating precedures and
pre-fire plans. Alternate chutes or
hatchways should be designed into thestorage facilities which allow for re-
moval of coal. Likewise, conveyors or
chutes should be provided to remove (and
reclaim) the coal to a safe location.
Handling and Preparation
‘The single greatest hazard of han-
dling and preparation of coal is the
potential for coal dust explosions. Dust
hazards common to receiving, reclaiming,
transfer, and preparation of coal must be
controlled for safe and efficient opera-
tions.
Often it appears that the require-
ments of the EPA, OSHA, fire protection
engineer and plant operator are in con-
flict. In fact, the objective of all is
to control the emission of dust (both as
a nuisance and a hazard) to the atnos~
phere and to the plant environment.
Where conflicts occur is in the design
approaches to achieve this objective. To
reduce emissions of fugitive dusts, en-
closures are erected around dust pro-
ducing operations and, in some cases,
even around storage piles, Such struc-
tures often provide’ the containment
necessary for a dust cloud explosion and
in many cases provide a path for fire or
explosion propagation. A notable example
of this is the most recent explosion and
fire at the Powerton Power Plant in
Pekin, 1linois(19), The ~—_ following
discussion of coal handling and prepara~
tion processes and equipment will em-
phasize this objective.
General Requirements
The control of the dust explosion
hazards of coal handling and preparation
can be accomplished by applying a combin-
ation of the following methods: 1) dust
collection, 2) dust suppression, 3) igni-
tion control, 4) explosion relieving con-
struction, or 5) open air construction.
The optimum combination would be to sup-
press dust generation, collect what dust
is produced, control ignition sources and
provide open air construction where dust
clouds cannot accumulate.
Dust collection has been used exten~
sively but with little success in con~
trolling coal dust generation. ‘The
reasons for this lack of success are poor
design and operation and the inherent
difficulties with coal dust. The concept
of dust collection is good but systems
must be properly sized and operating with
correct capture velocities and dust
velocities.
Success has been achieved with dust
suppression using detergent or water
sprays. Spraying must be done judi-
ciously, however, to avoid the spon-
taneous heating problem described above.
The major method of controlling
potential ignition sources is the selec~
tion and design of electrical equipment
suitable for coal dust environments,
Class II, Group F., as defined in NFPA
70. Other ignition sources such as
static electricity and mechanical energy
(Eviction, sparks, etc.) may also pose
design and operating problems. Friction
will be discussed later under conveyors.
Explosion venting of dust enclosures
is an area of technical debate. Vent
sizing is dependent on the explosion
pressure development and rate, volume of
the enclosure, and explosion resistance
of the structure. Recommended rates of 1
ft2 vent for 80 ft? volume appear in
NFPA #653 for coal preparation plants.
small seale tests indicate the many coal
dusts that will generate unvented pres-
sure of 86 psi and pressure of 5 psi when
vented 1 £t2 per 80 £t3, For these
reasons, large vent ratios (1 ft? per
65 ft will limit pressure to 1 psi),
or self-venting construction (Light
weight steel siding) should be used for
enclosure.
Receiving and Reclaiming
Receiving and reclaiming facilities
are vital to the continued operation of
the plant. In many plants, coal may be
received by any one or a combination of
rail cars, trucks, barge, and in a few
SEPE TR 81-10cases, pipeline. A logistical problem
which’ affects the protection of these
facilities is often created by their
location ~ remote from general plant
areas.
Fire protection for coal receiving
operations can be discussed in three
categories: operation, construction, and
fire suppression. As with many opera~
tions, good housekeeping can help control
fire ‘problems at coal receiving facili-
ties. Accumulation of coal around and
under equipment must be prevented. Brush
and trash should also be cleared away
from receiving equipment to prevent ex-
posure fires. Access roads should be
properly maintained to allow timely re-
sponse to emergencies. In addition to
housekeeping, adequate training of opera~
tions personnel is important to ensure an
adequate level of safety. Well trained
personnel can prevent excessive coal
spillage by properly handling unloading
equipment. As previously discussed, fine
coal and coal dust in storage increases
the chances of spontaneous heating. Im
proper use of receiving equipment can in-
crease the generation of fine coal during
unloading.
Fire suppression for most receiving
facilities can be adequately provided by
manual fire fighting. Other facilities
such as scale houses and enclosed coal
conveyors may require automatic sprinkler
protection. Sufficient fire hydrant pro~
tection as outlined in NFPA 24, “Outside
Protection," must be provided to facili-
tate manual fire suppression efforts.
For highly automated operations, addi-
tional automatic fire detection and fire
suppression equipment may be necessary.
Reclaiming facilities often include
pits and tunnels or aboveground equipment
such as stacker reclaimers. In the case
of reclaiming, pits and tunnels and the
major problems of conveyors and accessi-
bility must be addressed. ‘These will be
discussed under transfer equipment.
SEPE TR 81-10
Above ground operation using
stacker-reclaimers, bucket wheel re~
claimers, scrapers or other large ex-
pensive pieces of equipment, introduce
some interesting fire protection prob-
lems. Large machines are mobile and may
have conveyors, electrical equipment, in-
ternal combustion engines, hydraulic sys~
tems and other inherent’ fire problems.
Several coal fires either on belts or
spills have caused damage to track (rail)
mounted reclaimers. Although @ water
suppression system is often preferred for
these types of exposures, the mobile
nature of the equ’pment complicates de~
sign. One method to control these fire
problems is a fixed pipe water spray sys-
tem with a quick connect hose which is
tied in when the reclaimer is idle.
Another method is to install a small
pressurized tank on the equipment to sup-
ply the water spray system. Often the
electrical equipment enclosures are
protected with gaseous suppression agents
such as halon 1301 or CO.
Transfer Equipment
The primary means of transferring
coal has been with conveyors. Other
methods used have included pneumatic
transfer and slurry pipeline transfer,
In addition to the coal dust hazards
referenced previously, the conveyor belts
themselves can create fire hazards.
Spills of coal, susceptible to spon-
taneous heating and friction, between
belts and drive pulleys are among the
more common ignition sources.
Statistics in the coal mining indus-
try from 1951 to 1969 indicated that 91
of the 134 conveyor fires reported re-
sulted from friction heating. These
normally occur with a slipping belt and a
moving drive pulley. The incidence of
conveyor fires in the mining industry has
dropped significantly since initiation of
requirements for fire resistant belt
material, and zero speed cutoff switches
on conveyorsThe use of fire resistant belts does
not eliminate the conveyor fire problems,
however. These belts, although more
difficult to ignite, will burn with in-
tense heat and smoke. The inaccessi-
bility of below grade and inclined con-
veyors further complicates manual fire
suppression activities. The hazard of
belts under tension adds to the danger of
manual fire fighting. For these reasons,
enclosed conveyors should be provided
with automatic sprinkler or water spray
protection.
Many methods of design have been
tried with little testing or operating
experience for justification, The Bureau
of Mines has sponsored some —re~
search(17, 18, 19), This testing in-
dicates that closed head systems will
activate and suppress a fire. The im-
portant parameters of design are head
temperature rating, head spacing, and air
velocity in conveyor housing. Several
facilities have opted for dry pipe or
pre-action systems because of freezing
problems. Others have elected water
spray or deluge systems. No consensus
exists, but the author recommends closed
head sprinkler systema.
Water delivery rates between .15 gpm
and .72 gpm/ft2 have been applied. The
author recommends .25 gpa/ft2 with
heads above and below belts wider than
48", based on the limited testing drive.
Higher densities and the use of deluge ot
water spray systems create large water
supply demands but do not produce a
significant benefit over closed head sys~
tems.
An important aspect of conveyor pro-
tection is fire detection. Detection is
required to activate pre-action or open
head systems and to shut down belts. As
with suppression systems, little testing
has been done to compare spot type and
line type detection. Linear detection
appears to offer greater sensitivity and
flexibility. The various levels of
sophistication available introduce
additional confusion. The author recom
mends thermostatic cables as the more
cost-effective system.
It is important to stress the shut-
down of belts involved in a fire. All
belts feeding the involved belt should be
stopped or diverted to prevent
cumulation of coal in the fire area.
Pneumatic transfer systems create a
potential for dust explosions in the
transfer piping. A major design objec-
tive must be to vent the transfer piping
to a safe outside location. ‘The rupture
of piping and release of an ignited dust
cloud could create a catastrophic ex-
plosion inside plant structures.
Slurry transfer has been used with a
transfer medium of either water or
methanol, Water slurry transfer has lit~
tle fire hazard associated with it, but
great operating problems of de-watering.
Methanol is a very effective solvent for
coal(20), This type of transfer in-
troduces a flammable liquids storage and
transfer hazard.
Process Equipment
The end use of coal will dictate the
process equipment requirements.
Crushers, pulverizers, driers, boilers,
reactors, and similar process equipment
must be evaluated based on the specific
tasks to be performed, the type of coal
to be used and the plant layout and con-
struction requirements. Attention in
design must focus on the coal dust haz~
ards enunerated above.
Conclusion
The increased use of coal will in-
troduce a need for more testing and re~
search regarding the successful control
of fire and explosion hazards. Much can
be done to control dust emissions and
suppress equipment fires after clear cut
design objectives and design criteria
have been established.
SFPE TR 81-106.
Le
12.
16.
or
18,
19,
20.
References
Steam, Its Generation and Use, Babcock and Wilcox, 39th Edition, New York, 1978.
Power Engineering, December 1979, pp. 42-50.
“power from Goal, Part 1, Part II, and Part 111", Power, February 1974, March
1974, April 1974,
Van Krevelen, D. W., Coal, EL
ew, New York 1961, p. 133.
Kim, A., "Laboratory Studies on Spontaneous Heating of Coal: A Summary of
Information in the Literature," BuMines I¢ 8360, 1977.
Kuchta, J. Ms, V.R. Rowe and D. $. Burgess, "Spontaneous Combustion Susceptibility
of U. 3. Coals," BuMines RI 8474, 1980.
Matta, J. E., J. C. LaScola, and F. N. Kissel, "Methane Emissions from Gassy Coals
in Storage Silos," BuMines RI 8269, 1978.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 1910.93 Subpart G, Federal
Register, Wednesday, October 18, 1972, Vol. 37, No. 202, Part II.
McKinnon, G. P., editor, Fire Protection Handbook, 14th Edition, NFPA, Boston 1976.
Hertzberg, M., et al, "The Flammability of Coal Dust—Air Mixtures: Lean Limits,
Flame Temperature, Ignition Energies aid Particle Size Effects," BuMines 8360,
1979, 70 pp-
Barr, P.$., "Control of Coal Quality Through Blending," Power, March 1981.
Tubbs, D. E., "Fire Protection Design for Utility Coal Handling,” presented at
waTtec Conference, February 1979, Knoxville, TN.
Professional Loss Control, Inc., "Coal Fired Power Plants," Ghapter 1, Fire
Protection of Utility Generating ns, PLG 1979.
Williamson, H. V., "How to Use COg for Coai Bunker Fire Protection," Power
Engineering, July 1958.
+ Chicago Tribune, October 14, 1980.
Gode of Federal Regulations, 30 CFR 75.1100.
Kirchta, J. M., Fire Protection for Mine Conveyor Belt systems, Coal Mine Fire &
Explosion Prevention, Proceeding BuMines, Pittsburgh 1978.
Mitchell, D. W., ec al, Pire Hazards of Conveyor Belts, BuMines RI 7053, 1967.
Warner, B.L., Suppression of Fire On Underground Coal Mine Conveyor Belts, BuMines
Open Fire Report 27-76, 1974.
Chemical Engineering, Vol. 83, No. 8, pp. 67-70, April 12, 1976.
SFPE TR 81-10 ZTR
TR
TR
TR
TR
TR
TR
TR
TR
81-1
81-2
81-4
81-5
81-6
81-7
81-8
81-9
81-10
Technology Reports Available - 1981 Series
New Developments in Bulk Storage of Flammable Liquids,
Donald W. Johnson, P.E., Chief Fire Protection Engineer,
Standard 0i1 Company of California, San Francisco, CA $2.50
Estimating the Magnitude of Macro-Hazards, John A.
Campbell, P.E., Manager, Gage-Babcock & Associates,
Inc., Elmhurst, Illinois $3.75
The "Whys" Behind Testing Standards for Solid Fuel
Burning Appliances, Ben A. Zimmer, Senior Staff Engineer,
Underwriters Laboratories, Northbrook, I11inois $3.50
Gaseous Fire Protection Extinguishing Agents for Offshore
Platforms, John E. Echternacht, P.€., Manager, Wormald
Fire Engineering, Houston, Texas $3.25
Fire Protection for Synfuels, Donald N. Meldrum,
Chairman, National Foam System, Inc. and Louis R. DiMaio,
Manager, Mobil Research and Development Corp., Paulsboro,
New Jersey $3.25
Effects of Thermal Insulation on Fire Resistive
Assemblies, Kenneth J. Schwartz, Fire Protection Engineer,
Portland Cement Association, Skokie, Illinois $4.00
Loss Prevention and Fire Protection for Oil Refineries,
Norman R. Lockwood, P.£., Consultant, Mobil Research and
Development Corp., Princeton, New Jersey $3.25
Explosion Venting Tests in a Municipal Solid Waste
Shredder, Robert G. Zalosh, P.£., PhD, Manager, Factory
Mutual Research Corp., Norwood, Massachusetts $3.75
Fire Protection in Coal Handling Fa
etrofit, K.W. Dungan,
Loss Control, Inc., Oak Ridge, Tennessee $3.25
SFPE TR 81-10PUBLISHER'S NOTES
This report is furnished for the in-
terest of those seriously studying the
fire problem. The views presented are
those of the author and do not carry the
endorsement of the Society of Fire Pro-
tection Engineers. The Society is not
responsible for the technical accuracy
or the content of this report.
The publisher invites contributions
of material for Technology Reports as
well as comments on the content of this
report.
The publication is copyrighted @
1981, Society of Fire Protection Engi-
neers, 60 Batterynarch Street, Boston,
Mass. 02110. Those desiring permission
to reproduce the material in whole or in
part shall consult the Society of Fire
Protection Engineers.SOGIETY OF FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEERS
60 Batterymarch Street
Boston, Mass. 02110
617-482-0686
ABOUT THE SOCIETY
Organizad sn 1950, the Sovioty of Fire Protoction Enyineors is thy profassional soetoty for
onginoors involved in the multifacatad fold of fire protection enginoering. Tha purposes of the Sock
ety are to advanee the att and science of fire protection engineoring and its allied fields, to maintain
‘high ethical standing among its members, and to foster fire protection engineering raucation. [is
Wworl-wide members include engineers in private practic, in industry, in local, regional, and na-
tional governmont, es well as technical membors ofthe insurance industry. Chaptors of the Society
are located in the United States, Canada, Europe, and Australia.
‘Momborship in the Socioty is opon to those possessing engineering or physical sefence qualilica
tions coupled with experience in the field and to those in associated professional fialds.
Bonofits of membership inelude:
Rocognition of your pr “Yearbook” — bivanial diraetory
fessional qualifications ‘of mombors,
bby your peors
Attendance at Annual Mooting
American Association of and Seminars,
Eingineering Socistios
representation Insurance plan
Chapter meatings, Gontinning professional
development program
Bulletin" — Newsletter
with regular features Profile surveys
“Technology Reports” Sharing in activities of
‘commitloes at national lavel
Public Information
program Awards program
SEPE is the international cloaring house for fire peotection engineering state of the art advanoos
and information. In addition to the “Bulletin” and “Technology Reports”. the Society also publishes
occasional special reports.
For additional information about the Society of Fire Protection Engineers... membership
publications... Anaual Meetings ... chapter activities... contact the Executive Dirwctor at the
above address