Invite People

Share 4Engineers with your friends and help them get started!

Emails
Enter multiple email addresses by separating it with a comma.
Back
MikeHarlan

Balancing safety and speed in flammable liquid packaging

We just finished retrofitting our drum and tote lines for Class I liquids with closed fill lances, vapor balance to carbon, verified grounding, continuous LEL, and automated torque and leak checks. Emissions are down and our operators feel safer. The tradeoff is a slower takt time. We added 9 to 12 seconds per container and get nuisance trips around 6 to 8 percent LEL on humid days.
We have chipped away at it with a few changes. Bottom entry lances and a two stage fill profile reduced splashing. A small pre purge on the bung cavity helps, and conditioning the LEL sample with a heated line cut false highs. We moved cap torquing to a separate station and tightened weigh cell filtering to shorten settle time without losing accuracy.
For those packaging flammables, how are you balancing layers of protection with throughput under NFPA 30 and OSHA expectations? What LEL setpoints and delay timers work for you, and have you kept leak testing in line or pushed it offline?

Login to comment

Login
MikeHarlan
Jun 10 at 1:00 PM
We run pre-alarm at 10% LEL and hard trip at 20% held for 2 s; switching to IR LEL heads plus a heated, coalesced sample line nearly eliminated humid-day spikes. Drums get a 4-5 s inline vacuum-dome gross leak with torque verify, then 1-per-pallet 60 s offline pressure decay, while totes are offline only to keep the filler moving. Biggest takt gain came from upsizing the vapor balance line to the carbon and adding a slotted hood pulling ~150 fpm at the bung to cut top-off blips.
Report content
Reason Description