What Are The Flash Point Calculation Methods
What are the Flash Level Calculation Strategies
This is a query generally asked of Technical Help – so i figured we would submit the answer right here to assist those that do not need to contact Technical Help.
Flash point – The minimal temperature at which a liquid provides off a vapor in enough focus to ignite when examined by the next strategies:
1.Tagliabue Closed Tester (See American Nationwide Customary Method of Take a look at for Flash Level by Tag Closed Tester, Z11.24 1979 [ASTM D56-79]).
2.Pensky-Martens Closed Tester (See American National Normal Technique of Take a look at for Flash Point by Pensky-Martens Closed Tester, Z11.7-1979 [ASTM D93-79]).
Three.Setaflash Closed Tester (See American National Standard Technique for Check for Flash Level by Setaflash Closed Tester [ASTM D 3278-78]).
Pensky-Martens (ASTM D93) is used for the flash point of gas oils as well as viscous supplies and suspension of solids.
Tagliabue (ASTM D56) is used for the willpower of the flash level of all mobile liquids flashing under 200F except products classed as fuel oil. The Tag technique is really useful for liquids having viscosities lower than 5.5 cSt at 40C that don’t include suspended solids or don’t tend to kind a surface film while under test.
(1003 12/15 TLM: Added D86 to the API technique under)
(1312 12/15 TLM: Added the edition and yr to API Information E-book below)
(1328 12/15 TLM: Modified the spelling of Pensky-Martens beneath)
In Professional/II and in ROMeo:
Flash point will be calculated by the Nelson method (FLPOINT=NELSON) or by the Pensky-Martens technique (FLPOINT=API). Nelson is the default.
Pro/II keyword syntax:
Methodology SYSTEM=……..FLPOINT=NELSON OR API
NELSON is default.
The opposite is API 2B7.1(Penske-Martins Closed Cup) .
The Nelson methodology is described in “Petroleum Refinery Engineering” by W.L. Nelson, 4th version, McGraw-Hill E-book Company, p 131-133. The reference doesn’t mention any restrictions on the range of applicability. I have copies of articles by Nelson within the 1944 Oil and Gasoline Journal during which he states his correlation is “probably not correct enough to differentiate between diferent sorts of flash points”.
For the Nelson technique, set T= (IP + 2 x 5%pt + 10%pt)/ four and then the FP= 0.64 x T – a hundred. Notice that T is a median T which may be defined otherwise by other implementations of petrochemical projects in southeast asia the Nelson flash level distilled fraction equation. The temperature is in F and the percentages are volume percents of the ASTM D86 distillation. Because the initial point for simulated refinery streams is notoriously inaccurate, I’m not stunned that inaccuracies are discovered within the Nelson method simulated outcomes.
The API Procedure 2B7.1 is found in the API Information E book, fifth ed. 1992 (API 2B7.1). This is the Pensky-Martens closed cup method. The advisable range of applicability is between -15F to 325F flash points.
For the API technique 1/FP = -zero.014568 + 2.84947/T1 + 1.903E-03 ln(T1) the place T1= ASTM D86 10% temperature for petroleum fractions or normal boiling level for pure compounds in degrees Rankine and FP is the flash petrochemical projects in southeast asia level in levels Rankine. There’s a Figure 2B7.2 in the API Knowledge Ebook that represents the equation written above.
A touch upon the correlation of plant information to predicted results…
The best any simulator can do is to “simulate” a lab process. ASTM Lab exams are quite specific as to time and temperature dealing with of samples. Errors can creep into the leads to taking and storing the sample as effectively as the actual lab analysis. I don’t understand how close the simulated results are to plant information, but for the D93 lab test itself, answers for duplicate samples analyzed at different labs are acceptable inside 6F.