HCBBS Forum (English)
Submit Chemical Projects / Find Solutions
Amplify Your Requirements on a Broader Chemical Platform *Engineering · Technology · Equipment · Solutions*
Submit Request

Can intrinsically safe instruments replace flameproof instruments?

2023-12-12View Original

Thread Content

Can intrinsically safe instruments replace flameproof instruments?
Reply #22023-12-12
Not necessarily. In fact, most operating conditions can be replaced, but there are some special cases where design specifications still require explosion protection. Additionally, external inspections are generally carried out in accordance with design requirements; if any discrepancies are found, corrective actions are recommended. Additionally, the intrinsically safe circuit is completed, with the safety barrier cable of the control system and the instrument forming the intrinsically safe circuit.
Reply #32023-12-12
These are two different types of explosion-proof instruments; some can be substituted for each other, some are controversial in terms of substitution, and some cannot be substituted. In terms of safety levels, intrinsically safe instruments can be used in Zone 0, offering a wider range of applications. However, the low power consumption and simple functionality of intrinsically safe instruments limit their ability to meet the stringent requirements imposed by complex chemical processing processes on explosion-proof instruments in terms of functionality and performance capabilities, such as load-bearing capacity, multiple signal output options, and the ability to detect and display various types of information. Explosion-proof instruments can meet these requirements, but it is more difficult for intrinsically safe instruments. Just like Lu Bu in the Three Kingdoms era, those who could fight against him were Liu Bei, Guan Yu, and Zhang Fei; yet it was Diaochan who managed to get Lu Bu to fall out with Dong Zhuo. Diaochan is of the normal type, while Liu Bei, Guan Yu, and Zhang Fei are of the explosion-proof or positive-pressure purge type.
Reply #42023-12-12
From a safety perspective, they can be replaced as long as the explosion-proof requirements are met; however, in practical engineering applications, the client may not be willing to make such changes. For example, if the design is originally explosion-proof, then for an intrinsically safe instrument (which is not explosion-proof), the user still has to install a safety barrier and modify the wiring, and most customers are unwilling to do this.
Reply #52023-12-12
I understand it’s possible; intrinsically safe is versatile. When working on process design in a company, it is also the process engineering team that specifies the requirements regarding instruments and electrical systems; I specified that ananiline should be used along with safety barriers

Submit a Project

**Looking for Chemical Technology, Equipment & Solutions?** No Registration Required Broader Platform Exposure | Global Chemical Service Provider Connections

Submit Request — Free Consultation

Disclaimer

This is an automated machine translation of the original thread. Some technical terms may have inaccuracies; the original text shall prevail. Click "View Original" at the top right to access the source page, which supports IP-based automatic real-time language translation. Please watch out for contact details and sales inducements to prevent fraud. All content and translations are for reference only, representing solely the poster's personal views. For enquiries, email service@hcbbs.com.