Can packaging reduce the fire hazard of hazardous chemicals? ? ?
Thread Content
Yesterday, I received a task to conduct a safety assessment for a pharmaceutical trading company. Their warehouse for hazardous materials stores 95% ethanol, and according to building codes, it should definitely be classified as a Class A warehouse. His hazardous materials warehouse is adjacent to other warehouses, which certainly does not comply with the regulations; moreover, the wall between the two warehouses is not a fire wall. Now the question is: First, is there any regulation stating that hazardous materials can have their hazard level reduced by being transported in bulk? Because I’ve heard that paint is classified as Category A, but when packaged in iron drums, its storage category is reduced to Category C. II: If it cannot be reduced, can building a firewall between the two databases meet the requirement? Three: If nothing else works, the only option is to move the database
This post was last edited by rjs999 on 2012-5-23 at 17:28. 1. I don’t think the claim that the hazard level can be reduced by storing in bulk is valid; however, storing in a scattered manner can indeed reduce the hazard level. In other words, it involves distributed storage; as long as the quantity stored after distribution is below the lower limit specified for hazardous sources, the requirements are met. Because once an accident occurs, especially when it is not possible to access the accident site to remove the remaining hazardous materials, the packaging format becomes less relevant. 2. The risk level can be reduced by installing firewalls, but higher standards must be set for the fire-resistant capabilities of these firewalls; the flame-retardant time required should be no less than the time it takes for the stored goods to burn out. As a result, the cost of this firewall won’t be very low either. 3. The best approach is to move the database; safety cannot be compromised.
I agree with the view from the second floor. In fact, don’t we carry out the production of hazardous chemicals in sealed containers? This does not reduce the classification of fire hazards. The main risk comes from fires that occur as a result of leaks.
There are too few conditions to determine whether it violates the rules. It’s completely absurd to claim that the total storage volume remains unchanged and can be reduced from Class A to Class C solely through bulk handling. The description isn’t clear; do you mean that they are right next to each other or is there some distance between them? If two warehouses share a partition wall, then they are in the same building, not two separate warehouses. In the same warehouse, items with different fire hazards can be stored, and the fire hazard level shall be determined by the highest one among them. For example, in the case of an alcohol warehouse you mentioned, if it is single-story and its floor area is 750 square meters or less, with each fire compartment having an area of 250 square meters or less, then it will meet the requirements.
If the amount stored exceeds the limit, you also need to consider whether it constitutes a major hazard source
According to GB17914-1999 \"Technical Requirements for the Storage and Maintenance of Flammable and Explosive Goods\", 3.3.2.3: \"All flammable liquids may be stored in the same warehouse.\"； However, methanol, ethanol, and propanol should be stored in dedicated warehouses. ”So the original poster had better move the database.
What you say is correct, but it’s not a mechanical application. The original intention of the provision is not to have separate databases for methanol, ethanol, and propanol individually. They are stored in a dedicated warehouse here because their fire extinguishing method is quite special, requiring the use of water-resistant foam. It is explained separately because only a small portion of flammable liquids are soluble in water. Take a look at Appendix B and you’ll understand. It’s also okay for me to store isopropyl alcohol and acetonitrile in the warehouse.
If two warehouses share a partition wall, then they are considered to be in the same warehouse building, not two separate warehouses. Which standard specifies this? Eager to know