Demonstrating the Flashpoints of Various Chemicals - Assignment Example

rtfоliо Аssignmеnt Author’s Name: Instructor’s Name: Course Details: Institutional Affiliation: Date of Submission: REPORT 5A: Flammability Limits Abstract This paper is a report that is comprehensive in demonstrating the flammability limits through putting to task the Bang Box experiment. This research report is divided into 9 sections which include the introduction, Aims and Objectives, Hypothesis, Background, Methods, Materials and Equipment, Results and Discussion, Conclusion and Recommendations and finally the References. The Introduction section gives a general outline of what the whole experiment entails. It is important in giving any reader a quick orientation on what flammability limits necessitate. The aims and objective section identifies the specific goal of the experiment performed, The Bang Box- Flammability Limits. Hypothesis Formulation involves providing a forecast in regard to the expected results. The Background comprises of the key basis to the experiment work. Introduction When discussing flammability limits it is always significant to note that not all mixtures of air or fuel are flammable. Mixtures of these specific flammable gases will only be able to burn suppose the full concentration is within a distinct parameter which is well defined. These limits are referred to as the upper and lower explosive (or flammability) limits. This is to imply that a mixture of fuel-air ought to possess a concentration that falls in the range of the Lower Flammable Limit (LFL) and the Upper Flammable Limit (UFL) so as to be ignited. This flammable range if dependent on fuel. The extension of the flammable range can be through pressure elevation and subsequent elevation of temperatures. Aims and Objectives To identify the relationship between the volumes of fuel required to attain a combustion concentration regarded as optimum. Hypothesis Initial experiments indicate that flammable ranges are always considered to fall in between 4 % v/v and 75 % v/v in air. Subsequently the Upper Flammable Limit in oxygen turns out to be 95% v/v. the specific limits of flammability can accurately be identified by experiments. Nevertheless, these parameters are reliant on the setup of the experiment, for instance whether the propagation of the flame is either downwards or upwards. Background The Bang box experimental method is applied in identification of the flammability of a given mixture i.e. whether or not it is flammable. Acetone, which is a flammable fuel, is put in the cylinder using a dropper. This subsequently blended with air. A source of ignition is introduced and when an explosion occurs or when the flame propagates, the mixture is passed to be flammable. This is to mean that its constituents falls within the flammability range. Methods i. Turn the bang box on. ii. Put fuel in the cylinder by use of a dropper. iii. Put the top of the cylinder quickly. iv. Run the fan continuously for about 5 seconds, then put it off. v. Press the ignition button vi. If and when the explosion takes place, establish the following elements: Height observed Distance travelled Materials and Equipment Tape measure Gloves Goggles Sound level meter Stopwatch Bang box Fuel Results and discussion / analysis Outcome: Flame propagates through the mixture in the cylinder Discussion: First this is an indication that the mixture is flammable and that it composition falls in between the flammability limits. A flammability limit refers to the parameters of composition through which a self-sustaining flame can propagate and, for that reason, they are considered to be vital strictures within any reflection of explosion and fire related with a specific system of fuel oxidant. The limits which have been measured are not dependent of energy emerging from the source of ignition. For the reason that burning takes place in the vessel which is closed, the consequential rise in temperature correspondingly results to pressure escalation. Practically, the maximum degree of pressure was expected to be slightly lower due to loss of heat to the vessel walls. However, if the vessel had not been designed in a way that it could sustain such pressures it could have ruptured explosively. This specific outcome can be appreciated by the realization that normally there exist more than sufficient oxygen for the combustion process at the lower flammable limit. Contrary to this, it is observed that there exists less than the stoichiometrically needed oxygen at the upper limit. For this reason it is justifiable that additional oxygen at the lower limit precisely replaces inert gases while additional oxygen at the upper limit participates in the combustion process. The LFL is subsequently unresponsive to the pressure and this excludes pressures adequately below atmospheric. Such in insensitivity is shared by the UPL but at the sub-atmospheric pressure. Conclusion and recommendations It is important to note that limits considered to be flammable are a function of pressure and temperature in addition to inert concentrations and oxygen. Limits are proportionally changed with a reduction of the concentration of inerts. However the lower limit is comparatively unchanged. References Sinnott, R. K., Coulson, J. M., & Richardson, J. F. (1993). Coulson & Richardson's chemical engineering: Vol. 6. Mannan, S. (2012). Lees' loss prevention in the process industries: Hazard identification, assessment and control. S.l.: Butterworth-Heinemann. In Kent, J. A. (2012). Handbook of industrial chemistry and biotechnology: Volume 1 and 2. New York: Springer. Riegel, E. R., & Kent, J. A. (2007). Kent and Riegel's handbook of industrial chemistry and biotechnology. New York: Springer. Glassman, I., Yetter, R. A., & Glumac, N. (2014). Combustion. Amsterdam: Academic Press. REPORT 5A: Flashpoint Abstract This paper is a report that is comprehensive in demonstrating the flashpoints of various chemicals such as xylene and paraffin. This research report is divided into various sections which include the introduction, Aims and Objectives, Hypothesis, Background, Methods, Materials and Equipment, Results and Discussion, Conclusion and Recommendations and finally the References. The Introduction section gives a general outline of what the whole experiment entails. It is important in giving any reader a quick orientation on what flashpoints necessitate. The aims and objective section identifies the specific goal of the experiment performed, test of flashpoints. Hypothesis Formulation involves providing a forecast in regard to the expected results. The Background comprises of the key basis to the experiment work. Introduction A flashpoint of a specific chemical refers to the smallest level of temperature where an ignitable vapor is released from the particular compound. It is worth noting that every chemical has a flashpoint and this is useful in the assessment of the hazard posed by ignitable chemicals. Even though ignitable vapors are released, this does not necessarily imply that the produced vapor has the capacity to spontaneously ignite at this temperature. However, it means that only a flame, a local source of heat or even a small arc can ignite it. A flashpoint is identified by putting little quantity of the sample to be tested into the testing cup apparatus. Cooling or heating is done till the expected temperature, i.e. the lowest temperature level whereby there is release of ignitable vapor. A flame is introduced to the sample thus bringing about a little flash over the liquid. Aims and Objectives To study various solvents having different flashpoints. Hypothesis The flashpoint of kerosene is much higher compared to that one of xylene. Background Methods Switch on the apparatus Set temperature dial to desired temperature With the probe, check the temperature till it is stable. Regulate the temperature dial if needed to reach the desired temperature. Set the timer to 5 minutes Fill syringe with 2m of the appropriate solvent. Close and lock lid. Press start. Technician to light pilot and test flames. Size of the set flame to be set to a diameter of about 4mm. Test flame to be applied to sample after the timer beeps. This should be done by gradually and uniformly opening and closing the shutter. Incase observation is by eye, the flash at the cup opening should be closely watched. Sample is considered to have a flashpoint if a big flame emerges and immediately propagates over the surface of the sample. Press reset, turn off the gas and remove sample. Chemicals tested in ascending order of flashpoint, therefore apparatus will not need to be cooled between samples. Materials and Equipment Temperature gauge Sample syringe Stanhope seta, seta flash point (closed up) Safety visors, apron and gloves Results and discussion / analysis Xylene Temperature in degrees Celsius observation 32.3 Flashpoint 29.5 Flashpoint 25.0 No flashpoint Kerosene Temperature in degrees Celsius observation 30.1 No flashpoint 34.8 No flashpoint 42.3 No flashpoint 44.8 No flashpoint 45.3 No flashpoint 56.8 No flashpoint 67.5 Flashpoint 62.9 Flashpoint 58.8 Flashpoint The lowest temperature where an ignitable vapor is released from the kerosene is 58 while that one for xylene is 29. This is to imply that xylene has a lower flash point compared to that of kerosene. From the performance viewpoint, paraffin is one of the ideal fuels. It is generally accepted even by the most preventive fire departments. It’s very high flashpoint is an implication that it generally won’t burn on the body of an individual. Very Low Hazard Flash point greater than 93oC (200oF) Moderate Low Hazard Flash point ranging from 66oC to 93oC (150oF to 200oF ) High to Moderate Hazard Flash point ranges from 38oC to 66oC (100oF to 150oF) Extreme to High Hazard Flash point ranging from -18oC to 38oC (0oF to 100oF) Extreme Hazard Flash points greater than -18oC (0oF) Very Low Hazard Flash points greater than 200oF (93oC) Conclusion and recommendations It is important to note that chemicals with higher flash points are considered to be less hazardous or flammable than those chemicals having lower flash points. References Sinnott, R. K., Coulson, J. M., & Richardson, J. F. (1993). Coulson & Richardson's chemical engineering: Vol. 6. Mannan, S. (2012). Lees' loss prevention in the process industries: Hazard identification, assessment and control. S.l.: Butterworth-Heinemann. In Kent, J. A. (2012). Handbook of industrial chemistry and biotechnology: Volume 1 and 2. New York: Springer. Riegel, E. R., & Kent, J. A. (2007). Kent and Riegel's handbook of industrial chemistry and biotechnology. New York: Springer. Glassman, I., Yetter, R. A., & Glumac, N. (2014). Combustion. Amsterdam: Academic Press. Read More