Incident Report

Flare Flashback Explosion Incident

Date of Incident: 10 April, 2012

Report Issued: 29 May, 2012

Prepared by: R. Allen

Incident Report
Page 1 of 6
Incident Description
On the 10th of April, at approximately 4:00 AM, the stage 8 of the HP ground flare
experienced flashback explosion, which resulted in damage to the runner and 9 tips, as
shown in Fig. 1. The damage can be summarized as follows:
The runner was corrugated.
9 tips were wrinkled with several cracks at the side of the runner.

Fig. 1 Damaged Runner and Tips
The incident did not cause fatality and injury.
At approximately 11:00 AM, the stage 8 was isolated from service by closing the
corresponding block valve and spectacle blind.
Causes of the Incident
The vendor of the flare system was consulted for the causes of the incident. The main
points of the response from the vendor are summarized as follows:
The incident was a classic flashback explosion event. As illustrated in Fig. 2, the
explosion was caused by the ingress of air from the flare tip to mix with the flammable
gas. On emerging, the resultant explosive mixture was ignited by the standing pilot,
which presented a continuous ignition source.
Incident Report
Page 2 of 6

Fig. 2 Flashback Explosion
Since both the high performance butterfly valve and buckling pin bypass valve, as
shown in Fig. 3, were in the fully-closed position when the flashback occurred, there
should not have been big amount of waste gas in the runner. The vendor concluded
that either the high performance butterfly valve or the buckling pin bypass valve had
serious leakage.

Fig. 3 Staging Valve System
The leakage gas from the valve entered the runner. Part of the gas migrated into the
atmosphere due to buoyancy, and part of the gas met the air (oxygen) and created a
combustible mixture. Thats why the flashback explosion took place in the middle part
of the runner.
When the flare system was designed, the vendor expected that both valves would be
tight, and no continuous nitrogen purge after the staging valve system was defined.
Incident Report
Page 3 of 6
To verify which valve was leaking, the high performance butterfly valve (triple-offset
butterfly valve) and the buckling pin bypass valve, as shown in Fig. 4, were removed and
sent to a testing facility that could handle 12 valve. The valves were tested as per the
procedure provided by the flare vendor. And both seat leakage test and stem system
leakage test were performed, since the flammable gas monitoring system located around
the staging section ever alarmed in the past.

Fig. 4 High Performance Butterfly Valve and Buckling Pin Bypass Valve
For the high performance butterfly valve, the test results were shown in Tab. 1.
Tab. 1 Test Results for High Performance Butterfly Valve
Test
Pressure
(psig)
Medium
Duration
(minute)
Bubbles per
Minute
1 Seat 90 Air 60 0
2 Stem 90 Air 60 0
For the buckling pin bypass valve, the test results were indicated in Tab. 2.
Tab. 2 Test Results for Buckling Pin Bypass Valve
Test
Pressure
(psig)
Medium
Duration
(minute)
Bubbles per
Minute
1 Seat 15 Air 5 59
2 Stem 90 Air 60 2
From the above tables, it could be seen that the leakage gas was from the buckling pin
bypass valve, which was manufactured by BS&B.
Incident Report
Page 4 of 6
Failure Analysis of Buckling Pin Bypass Valve
After the valve was tested, the seat was flushed with Valve Cleaner Plus from SEALWELD
for better visual examination. No obvious damage was found, as shown in Fig. 5.

Fig. 5 Seat Area of Buckling Pin Bypass Valve
To verify whether the leakage was caused by the dust and greasy dirt in the seat area or
not, the valve was tested again with air, and the result was shown in Tab. 3.
Tab. 3 2
nd
Test Results for Buckling Pin Relief Valve
Test
Pressure
(psig)
Medium
Duration
(minute)
Bubbles per
Minute
1 Seat 15 Air 5 41
It could be seen that the leakage was mitigated to some extent, but still unacceptable. The
conclusion was that the impurity in the seat area was the minor factor leading to leakage.
And then the sealing principle of the valve was analysed. As shown in Fig. 6, a sealing
element is embedded in the valve body. The sealing element has two thin projections,
which remain contact with the disk to maintain seal until the disk is rotated from the closed
position to the open position, and these projections are the true sealing elements.
The buckling pin bypass valve is an eccentric butterfly valve by nature, and all the
specialists present in the examination were surprised to see that such narrow sealing
elements were applied in the butterfly valve.
After discussion, the specialists realized the philosophy behind selecting such weak
Incident Report
Page 5 of 6
sealing elements:
The valve disk stem is located off-centre, causing the pressure force to be applied
unequally. This causes a torque on the stem, which is transmitted through a
complicated lever system to the buckling pin, located in the case on the side of the
valve. When the set pressure is reached, the pin buckles, the disk rotates to the
open position, and the system pressure is released. The offset is about 0.8, and
the torque generated by such an offset under 15 psig is about 110 lbf*ft. However,
the friction torque of a common eccentric butterfly valve with soft seat is, according
to the information from Metso, above 100 lbf*ft. If a standard seat of butterfly valve
were selected, the buckling pin bypass valve may not be opened at all.
To guarantee that the valve can be opened, and to satisfy the requirement on
tolerance, the friction must be minimized as much as possible. A narrow sealing
surface helps because the thinner the sealing surface, the smaller the pressing
force needed between the sealing elements when the sealing pressure is
guaranteed.
But the narrower the sealing surface is, the worse the sealing performance is, and
the easier to damage. Because the capillary existed between sealing elements will
be very short if the surface is narrow and this is detrimental to the tightness. A
difficult compromise between friction and sealing results in the poor and exotic
design of BS&Bs sealing structure, for both the seat and stem sealing system (as
illustrated in Fig. 6).
With such a weak sealing system, tightness is impossible after the valves are put
into operation.

Fig. 6 Sealing System of Buckling Pin Bypass Valve
All the specialists agreed that major factor which led to the leakage was the design of
Incident Report
Page 6 of 6
BS&B buckling pin bypass valve itself. Some specialists believed that BS&B also realized
that the valves sealing system was too weak to satisfy long term operation. And this is
why BS&B recommends to purchase spare seal for each valve (as illustrated in Fig. 7),
which will be a headache for the operator.

Fig. 7 One Paragraph of BS&B Catalogue 77-1015
Conclusions and Recommendations
The incident investigation highlighted the following:
The incident was a classic flashback explosion event.
The waste gas entered the runner because the buckling pin bypass valve had
serious leakage.
External leakage was also found in the pressure test of the buckling pin bypass
valve.
All the specialists agreed that the leakage was mainly due to the poor design of the
buckling pin bypass valve itself.
To prevent reoccurrence of similar incidents, the following recommendations were given:
Inspect the tightness of other buckling pin bypass valves, and replace the seal
to eliminate detected leakage.
Search for buckling pin bypass valves with better design to replace the installed
ones if really necessary.
Add nitrogen inject points after all buckling pin bypass valves to sweep any
waste gas and air that might enter into the runner. Minimum purge gas flow
rates can be provided by the flare vendor.
-END-