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 $3.25ABSTRACT 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 to120 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 81-10are 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 thestorage 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 81-10cases, 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 conveyorsThe 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 81-106. 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 ZTR 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 81-10PUBLISHER'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