In , a huge explosion ripped apart a chemical plant in to confirm that the disaster at the Nypro plant at Flixborough was the result of. Failure Knowledge Database / Selected Cases. 1. Disaster of Chemical Plant at Flixborough. June 1st. , Flixborough UK. TAKEGAWA. Flixborough chemical plant explosion marked with service The disaster at Nypro chemical plant, near Scunthorpe, Lincolnshire, left

Author: Arashisho Goltilkis
Country: Burma
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Sex
Published (Last): 15 June 2017
Pages: 383
PDF File Size: 13.10 Mb
ePub File Size: 11.6 Mb
ISBN: 445-1-51007-468-1
Downloads: 86150
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Shagrel

None of the 18 occupants of the plant control room survived, nor did any records of plant readings. Now pipe-lines are much larger and the amount of gas or liquid that can leak out is much greater.

Flixborough 1974 chemical plant explosion marked with service

Diszster person attending a caravan rally at Normanby Park said: A pipe was installed to bypass fflixborough leaking reactor so that the plant could continue production. There are now probably more than a dozen British petrochemical plants with a similar devastation-potential to the Nypro works at Flixborough. The report of the court of inquiry was critical of the installation of the bypass pipework on a number of counts: We believe that to this end considerable formality is essential in relation to such matters as permits to work and clearance certificates to enter vessels or plant diisaster.

For any given distance where the comparison can be made, Flixborough gives a higher estimated over-pressure than Buncefield, and other things being equal — overpressure estimation techniques might have changed so much in 30 years that the comparison is meaningless is therefore presumably to be judged the larger explosion. Skip to content Skip to navigation. At a working level the offset was accommodated by a dog-leg in the bypass assembly; a section sloping downwards inserted between and joined with by mitre welds two horizontal lengths of inch pipe abutting the existing inch stubs.

Hundreds of evacuees were accommodated at North Lindsey College 19774 other centres were also brought into use. Abnormal pressures and liquor displacement resulting from this it was argued flixboroygh have triggered failure of the inch bypass.


The plant as designed therefore could be destroyed by a single failure and had a much greater risk of killing workers than the designers had intended.

The Petrochemicals Division of Imperial Chemical Industries ICI operated many plants with large inventories of flammable chemicals at its Wilton site including one in which cyclohexane was oxidised to cyclohexanone and cyclohexanol. Views Read Edit View history. It was recognised that the number of casualties would have been even higher had the incident occurred on a weekday.

The explosion led to the biggest fire-fighting operation since the s and at the height of the incident diszster appliances were in attendance. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. The disaster was caused by ‘a well designed and constructed plant’ undergoing a modification that destroyed its technical integrity.

In view of the Court of Inquiry’s qualified conclusion, f,ixborough cause of the accident has been the subject of considerable controversy, especially as to the actual failure process e.

There was no on-site senior manager with mechanical engineering expertise virtually all the plant management had chemical engineering qualifications ; mechanical engineering issues with the modification were overlooked by the managers who approved it, nor was the severity of the potential consequences of its failure appreciated. This article needs additional citations for verification.

Critics of the inquiry report therefore found it hard to accept its characterisation of the plant as ‘well-designed’. No calculations were done to ascertain whether the bellows or pipe would withstand these strains; no reference was made to the relevant British Standard, or any other accepted standard; no reference was made to the designer’s guide issued by the manufacturers of the bellows; no drawing of the pipe was made, other than in chalk on the workshop floor; no pressure testing either of the pipe or the complete assembly was made before it was fitted.

Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries. Fri 18 Jul at 3: The management of major hazard installations must show that it possessed and used a selection of appropriate hazard recognition techniques, [S] had a proper system for audit of critical safety features, and used independent assessment where appropriate.


The leaks having been dealt with, early on 1 June attempts began to bring the plant back up to pressure and temperature.

The debate and argument continue to this day e.

Flixborough Disaster anniversary: New pictures come to light after 43 years – Scunthorpe Telegraph

Fortunately, I had a technical report about Flixborough in a personal file I kept in the event of such crises. Immediately after the accident, New Scientist commented presciently on the normal official response to such events, but hoped that the opportunity would be taken to introduce effective government regulation of hazardous process plants. And at a special service the Rev Peter Hearn spoke about a memorial — of mallards returning to peaceful waters — which would always be in Flixborough as a reminder.

The plant was re-built but cyclohexanone was now produced by hydrogenation of phenol Nypro proposed to produce the hydrogen from LPG; [7] in the absence of timely advice from the Health and Safety Executive HSE planning permission for storage of te LPG at Flixborough was initially granted subject to HSE approval, but HSE objected [8] ; as a result of a subsequent collapse in the price of nylon it closed down a few years later.

After the disaster, two of the twelve bolts were found to be loose; the inquiry concluded that they were probably loose before the disaster.

Lees’ Loss Prevention in the Process Industry 3rd edition. Learning from Accidents, 3rd edition. The proponent of the 8-inch gasket failure hypothesis responded by arguing that the inch hypothesis had its share of defects which the inquiry report had chosen to overlook, that the 8-inch hypothesis had more in its favour than the report suggested, and that there were important lessons that the inquiry had failed to identify:.