blogs for industry
...blogs for the dead

next_postNot with a straight face | Back to blogs for industry | Do we need a journalism program?next_post
Dewar don'ts posted 02/12/2006 02:11 pm by Jim Hu Last update:02/12/2006 02:13 pm

Page_11.jpg Page_12.jpg Is this the cross?
Page_15.jpg
The first report (9 MB! pdf*) on the Chemistry Dept. explosion from last month has been released. News coverage here and here. From the report:
Upon examining the tank on January 24, 2006, Mr. Gustafson immediately pointed out that the cross where the internal tank regulator and the rupture disk should have been attached had been sealed with two brass plugs. Mr. Gustafson also pointed out that you could see on the external tank where the vaporizer piping that loops around the internal tank had been pressured by the swelling of the internal tank, forming visible rings on the external tank. All of these, according to Mr. Gustafson, were a direct indication that the pressure relief and rupture disk had probably failed at sometime in the past and the openings sealed. Without these two safeguards in place, it was only a matter of time until an explosion occurred.
This is kind of like sealing off the vent on a pressure cooker. It gets worse, when you consider the places where OHS disagreed with the external report.
OHS does not agree with his conclusion over the pipe plugs being the same size and type, and therefore possibly installed at the same time. Although we may never know the timing of the plug installations, OHS would note that one plug appeared to have corrosion, indicating that it may have been in place for a longer period of time...
So, this means that there could have been more than one person at more than one time who didn't think about what it meant that the tank was venting. Since I don't think Al Qaeda snuck in and sealed these ports, it suggests that the modifications were done by people who you'd think were smart enough to understand the consequences of evaporating a large volume of liquid N2 in a closed container...If they were thinking about it, which they clearly weren't. Of course, it doesn't even require understanding that PV=nRT...it requires thinking "I wonder why the manufacturer put this thing here where the gas is escaping?"
Hat tip for the title of this post to Lily Manson.
*It's only a 31 page report...but instead of making the pdf directly, it's scanned. I get these kinds of documents from the university all the time, and it drives me nuts. They're bloated and they're not searchable.
Edit : Trackbacks(0) Categories: academia news science

Trackbacks

The Trackback URL for this entry is: http://dimer.tamu.edu/simplog/tb.php/3236

  • No trackbacks.

Pingbacks

  • No pingbacks.

February 2010
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28
Jan



Powered by Simplog