Control design for the first batch of hazardous chemical processes under key supervision
Thread Content
This post was last edited by eleg on 2009-8-18 at 14:00. The State Administration of Work Safety issued the “Notice of the State Administration of Work Safety on Publishing the List of Key Hazardous Chemical Processes Subject to Supervision” on June 12, 2009, under document number An Jian Zong Guan San [2009] No. 116. The forum address is http://bbs.hcbbs.com/thread-494054-1-1.html. For most traditional chemical enterprises, especially those older ones that do not have well-developed automatic safety interlock systems, let’s discuss what typical automatic control requirements apply to these 15 processes: phosgene and phosgenation processes, electrolysis processes (chlor-alkali), chlorination processes, nitration processes, ammonia synthesis processes, cracking processes, fluorination processes, hydrogenation processes, diazotization processes, oxidation processes, peroxidation processes, amination processes, sulfonation processes, polymerization processes, and alkylation processes.
Refer to the **Notice issued by the General Administration of Work Safety on June 12, 2009, titled “Notice of the General Administration of Work Safety on Publishing the List of Hazardous Chemical Processes Subject to Priority Supervision” – Annex 2: “Safety Control Requirements, Key Monitoring Parameters, and Recommended Control Plans for the First Batch of Hazardous Chemical Processes Subject to Priority Supervision”. The details are clearly explained there.
I have seen Annex II. I would like to know what specific actions your company has taken to meet the requirements outlined in the document issued by the Safety Supervision Bureau, taking into account these fifteen process characteristics.
In the safety assessment projects I have worked on, there are two scenarios: in one case, companies implement advanced automatic control systems for hazardous processes during the design and construction phases; this is a proactive approach on the part of the companies, and their automatic control and interlock systems are often more sophisticated than what is required by regulations (as is the case with many large-scale projects)； Another scenario is driven by the requirements for obtaining permits, as businesses try to appease evaluation agencies, review experts, and safety supervision departments; in such cases, they do whatever it takes to save money – they install automatic control systems but don’t use them, or if they do use them, it’s only temporarily, as a mere formality to meet inspection requirements.
Fully agree! In a few days, the provincial safety supervision agency is coming to our company for a safety inspection, and it’s a rather thorough inspection. We’re all worried that what we’ve done so far isn’t good enough and that the documents we’ve prepared won’t meet the requirements. So, if any fellow sea traveler has relevant information to share, please do so. If we come across better solutions, we will report them to the company’s management to help improve the current situation.
Let me start with a brief introduction: it involves instrument control. At that time, we had a product for which purity was increased through distillation; to do this, we used **a little over twenty distillation columns**. Later, we realized that this approach wasn’t effective, so we introduced a continuous distillation column with four control points: the temperature of the reactor bottom, the liquid level in the reactor bottom, the liquid level in the reflux tank, and the preheating temperature of the raw material. As a result, both purity and production volume improved. From this experience, I understood the advantages of automatic control – the cost isn’t very high; a single control system costs around 10,000 yuan, and the savings in energy usage alone are sufficient, not to mention the significant reduction in labor costs. Due to my lack of expertise in this field, my description isn’t very clear; I’m not an expert in control systems, so I welcome feedback from those who are more experienced. I need to learn more as well*; thank you.
The Work Safety Supervision Bureau is again exercising its authority beyond its scope; the qualifications and scope of operations for design institutes should be under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Construction. Document No. 116 issued by the Work Safety Supervision Bureau is truly inappropriate.
The Work Safety Supervision Bureau is again exercising its authority beyond its scope; the qualifications and scope of operations for design institutes should be under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Construction. Document No. 116 issued by the Work Safety Supervision Bureau is truly inappropriate. yjx2006 posted on 2009-8-22 17:33 [/quote] There are differences in understanding; since it relates to safe production, it falls under the responsibility of the safety supervision agency.
This is really hard to describe in detail; companies conduct process safety risk analyses during the design or project phase, depending on their own circumstances
Local implementations have now begun, mainly involving DCS, ESD, feed cut-off valves, alarms, etc. Automation controls and safety interlock devices are added based on the level of risk present in the enterprise.
Here, we first conduct an assessment of the enterprise’s automated control systems and safety interlock devices; for those that do not meet the requirements, a remediation plan is formulated, with completion required by the end of 2010 as a condition for obtaining a renewed certificate.