ioMosaic Corporation

Salem, NH, United States

ioMosaic Corporation

Salem, NH, United States
Time filter
Source Type

Singh S.K.,ioKinetic LLC | Huh R.,ioMosaic Inc.
Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries | Year: 2016

Incidents involving uncontrolled chemical reactions continue to result in fatality, injury and economic loss. These incidents are often the result of inadequate pressure relief system designs due to a limited knowledge of the chemical reactivity hazard. A safe process design requires knowledge of the chemical reactivity of desired as well as undesired chemical reactions due to upset conditions. Simplified, cost effective methods to relief system sizing are presented by The Design Institute of Emergency Relief Systems (DIERS). They require multiple experiments, and sizing is only valid for the system composition and thermal inertia represented by the small scale experiments. Results are often conservative, especially for gassy systems. Detailed, dynamic computer simulation is highly accurate and can be used for iterative design and multiple scenario evaluation. In this study, an accelerating rate calorimeter (ARC®) and a low thermal inertia calorimeter (automatic pressure tracking adiabatic calorimeter – APTAC™) were used to collect chemical reactivity data for the dicumyl peroxide and toluene system. Results of the pressure relief system sizing using the dynamic simulation method are presented and compared with DIERS simplified methods. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd

Melhem G.A.,ioMosaic Corporation | Houston C.,ioMosaic Corporation
Process Safety Progress | Year: 2017

Recent emphasis on Recognized and Generally Accepted Good Engineering Practices (RAGAGEP) increased the scope of relief systems risk factors that require evaluation to develop complete and compliant Pressure Relief and Flare Systems documentation. Failure to comply with RAGAGEP ((d)(3)(ii)) is the most cited element of the Process Safety Management requirements. This paper discusses how RAGAGEP considerations now require evaluation and proper documentation of risk factors that are often overlooked including but not limited to: dispersion analysis, thermal radiation, noise, vibration risk, reaction forces and structural supports, metal cold temperatures due to expansion cooling and two phase flow, hot temperatures due to fire exposure and/or runaway reactions, PRV stability, chemical reaction systems, and loss of high pressure/low pressure interface. Important RAGAGEP considerations for these additional risk factors are highlighted and discussed. Recommendations are provided on how to best address these factors in the evaluation and documentation of design basis. © 2016 American Institute of Chemical Engineers Process Saf Prog 36: 18–23, 2017. © 2016 American Institute of Chemical Engineers

Melhem G.A.,ioMosaic Corporation
28th Center for Chemical Process Safety International Conference 2013, CCPS - Topical Conference at the 2013 AIChE Spring Meeting and 9th Global Congress on Process Safety | Year: 2013

Current API, AIChE/CCPS, and AIChE/DIERS pressure relief and flare systems guidelines and standards do not formally address vibration risk. They do not offer specific guidance on velocity limitations other than backpressure calculations and they do not offer guidance on acoustic induced or flow induced piping vibration fatigue failure. This paper provides a summary of experience based methods for the estimation of vibration risk in relief and process piping. In addition, this paper extends the applicability of the experience based methods to two-phase flow. © 2013 ioMosaic Corporation all rights reserved.

Prophet N.,IoMosaic Corporation
Design Institute for Emergency Relief Systems (DIERS) 2015 - Topical Conference at the 2015 AIChE Spring Meeting and 11th Global Congress on Process Safety | Year: 2015

Ever since OSHA implemented their National Emphasis Program in 2007, facility's pressure relief systems design basis have come under increasing scrutiny. Recognizing that they may not be fully compliant, many companies are conducting audits of their relief systems design basis to determine their current state, identify gaps, and establish a path forward for compliance. ioMosaic Corporation is often called upon to conduct these audits, and in doing so, has developed a successful methodology to do this efficiently and effectively. This paper outlines how companies can conduct audits of their relief systems in a successful way. © ioMosaic Corporation. All rights reserved.

Dunjo J.,IoMosaic Corporation | Melhem G.A.,IoMosaic Corporation
49th Annual Loss Prevention Symposium 2015, LPS 2015 - Topical Conference at the 2015 AIChE Spring Meeting and 11th Global Congress on Process Safety | Year: 2015

Vessel rupture is typically caused by an increase in the internal energy of the vessel contents and insufficient emergency relief. Under fire exposure or internal heating by a runaway reaction, or both, the vessel wall temperature increases, the tensile strength of the vessel walls metal decreases, and resistance to internal pressure decreases. Vessel wall dynamics analysis is a valuable tool capable of predicting not only when the vessel is expected to fail (i.e., stress due to internal pressure is greater than the ultimate tensile strength) but also at what temperature, pressure, and fluid composition. These conditions form the basis for consequence analysis. The available internal energy in the system is a source of fragmentation and deformation energy for the vessel shell, kinetic energy imparted to contents and fragments, and blast wave energy. The present paper illustrates two selected systems under pool fire exposure. A detailed analysis is provided for the parameters that influence the predicted Time to Failure (TTF) and the internal available energy in the system when failure is predicted. Two key parameters that influence the expected level of vessel failure risk under fire exposure (i.e., TTF) include scenario frequency of occurrence and the available internal energy of the vessel contents.

Murphy M.R.,IoKinetic LLC | Melhem G.,IoMosaic Corporation
50th Annual Loss Prevention Symposium 2016, LPS 2016 - Topical Conference at the 2016 AIChE Spring Meeting and 12th Global Congress on Process Safety | Year: 2016

NFPA 68 provides simplified calculation methods for sizing deflagration vents for combustible dust explosions. These simplified methods apply to a limited set of process parameters and equipment. For applications outside those limitations, full-scale testing or a performance-based approach is needed. This paper presents a methodology for using burning rate models to predict explosion behavior in enclosed vessels. Measured deflagration index (KSt) values are used to determine an estimate of the burning rate. Once the burning rate of a material is known, application to various process parameters and equipment can be made using dynamic simulation. Predicted burning rates for one material will be presented. © 2016, Smith & Burgess, LLC.

Melhem G.A.,IoMosaic Corporation
Process Safety Progress | Year: 2013

The process industries are primarily concerned with the reliability, availability, auditability, and maintainability of relief and flare systems data. These data are critical component of process safety information and its lifecycle must be properly managed to ensure sound process safety management and loss prevention programs. For most large facilities, the process of managing the lifecycle of relief and flare systems data are complex and fraught with challenges and risks, whether the work is performed internally or contracted out. For existing large facilities, the process of relief and flare systems evaluations require mechanical and process data collection, field verification, up to date heat and material balances, information about process safeguards, scenario identification, establishing relief requirements, identification and risk ranking of deficiencies, and managing the corrective actions process for addressing deficiencies where applicable. Reliability is influenced by many technical and human factors including the quality of data, adequacy of tools used for analysis, the qualifications of the relief systems engineers performing the scenario identification, and relief and flare systems evaluations. Availability primarily deals with how quickly can one access accurate and up to date relief and flare systems data. This is especially challenging since relief systems data are not all "structured" data and are interconnected with other engineering data systems. Auditability involves version control and the management of revisions and/or modifications of relief and flare systems that typically result from plant/process modifications, process hazard analysis, incident investigations, etc. Maintainability requires keeping the relief and flare systems data forever green and enabling efficient reviews and revisions. This article describes a systematic web-based workflow methodology for managing the lifecycle of relief and flare systems data for a single site or at a corporate level. The workflow methodology breaks the flare and relief systems data lifecycle into discrete components and activities, with built-in review, approval, quality management, and reporting. Built-in business and engineering rules ensure that all activities can only progress when specific quality criteria are met. This system was developed based on our experience with the execution of many such large scale projects for refineries, chemical, and petrochemical facilities. © 2013 American Institute of Chemical Engineers.

Perry J.,IoMosaic Corporation | Myers M.R.,IoMosaic Corporation | Murphy M.,IoMosaic Corporation
Chemical Engineering Progress | Year: 2011

A methodology has been proposed for examining the risks associated with a facility's combustible dusts and identifying ways to mitigate those risks. This methodology involves reviewing the literature, testing dust samples, performing a preliminary audit, evaluating electrical classifications of processing areas and equipment, implementing interim measures, and performing detailed hazard analyses and risk assessments. The first step in understanding the risks involved with combustible dusts involves acquiring knowledge, and an appropriate self-taught approach. Dust samples from the plant need to be analyzed to determine their physical and chemical properties and to evaluate their combustibility. The most cost-effective way to gauge combustibility is to request information from each raw material supplier. Another alternative and cost-effective approach is to test a worst-case dust or mixture and design safeguards for the worst-case risks.

IoMosaic Corporation | Date: 2014-01-04

Software suite of applications used by process industry associations, major chemical, oil, and gas companies to comply with Process Safety Management (PSM) regulatory requirements; Computer software for pressure relief design and related piping isometrics, chemical reactivity assessment and management, consequence analysis and quantitative analysis, record and manage Process Hazard Analysis (PHAs) and record audit information related to PHAs, all for compliance in the oil, gas, petrochemical, chemical and energy industries.

ioMosaic Corporation | Date: 2015-09-21

Computer software for the collection, editing, organizing, modifying, book marking, transmission, storage and sharing of data and information.

Loading ioMosaic Corporation collaborators
Loading ioMosaic Corporation collaborators