This work is motivated by the need to identify the fire and explosion risk on liquefied natural gas carriers (LNGCs) developed by Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering Co., Ltd., because the main engines are designed to use highly pressurized natural gas (about 300 bar), which has caused vague fears of fire and explosion risks. In this context, to identify the risk of fires and explosions quantitatively, a fire and explosion risk analysis (FERA) was carried out for the LNGCs. This paper, as a part of the FERA, presents the results of a preliminary investigation on the effect of introducing the highly pressured fuel gas system into LNGCs on the fire and explosion risk especially in the cargo compressor room. This study is conducted in a comparative way considering the risk contribution of each parameter that could impact on the fire and explosion risk. The effect of the highly pressured fuel gas is indirectly taken into account by the change of the initial leak rate in the system. To identify effects of the considered parameters quantitatively, dozens of simulations for the selected gas dispersion, explosion, and fire scenarios were carried out using FLACS and KFX. Based on the simulation results, it is concluded that, in case of the LNGCs, the effects of the initial large leak rate due to the high pressure in the fuel gas pipes on the fire and explosion risk are not significant compared with the effects of other parameters such as leak amount, leak location, and leak direction.

References

References
1.
DSME
,
2015
, “
Fire & Explosion Risk Analysis for Engine Room and Cargo Compressor Room in LNG Carrier Using ME-GI Fuel Supply System
,”
Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering
, Geoje, South Korea.
2.
DNV
,
2009
, “
Offshore QRA—Standardised Hydrocarbon Leak Frequencies
,” Det Norske Veritas, Oslo, Norway, Report No. 2008-1768.
3.
OGP Risk Assessment Data Directory
,
2010
, “
Ignition Probabilities
,” International Association of Oil & Gas Producers, London, UK, OGP Report No. 434-6.1.
4.
EI
,
2006
, “
Ignition Probability Review Model Development and Look-Up Correlations
,” IP Research Report, Energy Institute, London.
5.
ISO
,
2010
, “
Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries—Specific Requirements for Offshore Structures—Part 3: Topsides Structure
,” International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, No. ISO 19901-3:2010(E).
6.
ComputIT
,
2010
, “
Kameleon FireEX 2010 User Manual
,” Computational Industry Technologies AS, Trondheim, Norway.
7.
GexCon
,
2014
, “
FLACSv10.3 User’s Manual
,” GexCon AS, Bergen, Norway.
8.
Czujko
,
J.
,
2001
, “Design of Offshore Facilities to Resist Gas Explosion Hazard,” CorrOcean ASA, Oslo, Norway.
9.
LR
,
2015
, “Guidance Notes for the Calculation of Probabilistic Explosion Loads,” Lloyd’s Register, London.
10.
OGP Risk Assessment Data Directory
,
2010
, “
Consequence Modelling
,” International Association of Oil & Gas Producers, London, UK, OGP Report No. 434-7.
11.
Bjerketvedt
,
D.
,
Bakke
,
J. R.
, and
van Wingerden
,
K.
,
1993
,
Gas Explosion Handbook
,
Christian Michelsen Research (CMR)
,
Bergen, Norway
.
12.
UKOOA
,
2003
, “Fire and Explosion Guidance—Part 1: Avoidance and Mitigation of Explosions,” UK Offshore Operators Association, London.
13.
Spouge
,
J.
,
1999
, “
A Guide to Quantitative Risk Assessment for Offshore Installations
,” The Centre of Marine and Petroleum Technology (CMPT), London, UK.
14.
OGP Risk Assessment Data Directory
,
2010
, “
Vulnerability of Humans
,” International Association of Oil & Gas Producers, London, UK, No. OGP Report No. 434-14.1.
15.
SCI
,
2014
, “Design Guidance for Hydrocarbon Fires” FABIG Technical Note 13, Steel Construction Institute, Ascot, UK.
You do not currently have access to this content.