abstract contents page - terra millennium corporation -...

1700 Fireproofing

AbstractThis section describes various types, relative merits, and properties of fireproofing materials. It gives guidelines for determining structures that require fireproofing and recommended materials and suppliers. It also discusses the various types of fire-proofed and fire resistant systems for critical control systems. API RP 2218 is the industry standard for fireproofing.

Contents Page

1710 Introduction 1700-2

1711 Definition of Terms

1712 Company and Industry Documents

1720 Support Structures 1700-3

1721 Where Fireproofing of Support Structures Is Warranted

1722 Level of Protection Required

1723 Layout and Design Considerations

1724 Materials

1725 Specific Applications

1730 Critical Valves, Instrumentation, and Shutdown Systems 1700-17

1731 Emergency Shutdown or Isolation Valves

1732 Tank Block Valves

1733 Air Supply

1734 Switchgear Housing and Junction Boxes

1735 Instrument and Electrical Cables

1736 Home Runs for Cable Trays and Conduit Banks

1740 Fireproofing Test Methods 1700-24

1750 Materials Suppliers and Applicators 1700-28

1751 Support Structures

1752 Critical Valves, Instrumentation, and Shutdown Systems

1760 References 1700-30

Revision History 1700-31

March 2010 (E) 2000–2010 Chevron U.S.A. Inc. All rights reserved. 1700-1

1700 Fireproofing Fire Protection Manual

1710 IntroductionSelecting a fireproofing material involves answering three questions:

• What level of protection is required, if any?• What materials will provide this level of protection?• Of those materials, which is the appropriate choice?

Section 1720 specifically addresses the application of these questions to support structures and Section 1730 to critical valves, instrumentation, and shutdown systems. COM-SU-5191 specifies coatings that must be used under fire proofing to prevent corrosion (see also Section 1724, “Materials”).

Section 1710 defines terms used throughout Section 1700 and lists relevant Company and industry documents.

1711 Definition of Terms

Flammable Materials. For the purpose of this section, flammable materials include flammable gases, vapors, and liquids having a flash point below 100F or being handled at temperatures above their flash point.

Fireproofing. Protection that provides resistance to fire and heat transfer long enough to allow critical structures to remain standing or critical control systems to operate, while the fire is brought under control.

Fireproofing can also be applied to allow sufficient time for personnel to access escape routes, etc.

Fire-Exposed Envelope.

• For structural steel, vessel/column skirts, etc., the area within a radius of 20-40 feet horizontally and 20-40 feet vertically of fire-potential equipment. Distances can be expanded or reduced based on drainage, pressure and liquid holdup.

• For instrumentation, electrical power cables and/or air piping/tubing, the area within a 50' horizontal radius or 50' vertically.

Fire Potential Equipment.

• Fired equipment, including heaters and furnaces that handle flammable mate-rials that will ignite when released.

• Rotating or reciprocating mechanical equipment, such as pumps or compres-sors, that handles flammable materials, including their drainage paths.

• Drums, exchangers, columns, and similar operating vessels that handle flam-mable materials and have a volume of more than 1000 gallons (24 barrels), including their drainage paths.

• Plot-limit piping manifolds that contain flammable materials and ten or more valves.

1700-2 2000–2010 Chevron U.S.A. Inc. All rights reserved. March 2010 (E)

Fire Protection Manual 1700 Fireproofing

• Tanks, spheres, and spheroids that contain flammable materials including their drainage and relief path and impounding basins.

Emergency Shutdown or Depressuring System. A system that will shut down a plant or other facility under emergency conditions, either automatically or by remote push button; actuate remote block valves to stop the flow of flammable liquids or gases; stop heat input to process furnaces, reboilers, or heaters; stop the rotation of associated machinery (especially pumps); or depressure the equipment through a vent, if appropriate.

Emergency Isolation System. A system of remote-operated valves to isolate a piece of equipment or unit involved in a fire or other emergency, thus limiting the supply of fuel. This may be an individual pump, compressor, vessel, LPG sphere, etc., or it may encompass an entire area inside the plot limits of a plant or battery.

Critical Instrument or Electrical Cables. Cables or tubing associated with emer-gency shutdown, depressuring, or isolation systems. Typically, these systems must maintain their operational integrity to facilitate safe unit shutdown for at least 20 minutes into a fire. This time may be longer if the controls need to operate longer to safely shutdown, isolate and/or depressure the equipment.

Home Runs. Large groups of multiconductor signal cables from the control house to the main junction boxes in the plant. Home runs are expensive to install and time consuming to repair. Their loss may cause damage to plant(s) outside the fire area as a result of loss of control.

Plot Limit Valves. The boundary valves for a plant area containing a complete operation or group of operations that may be shut down as a unit. These valves are used for isolation on turnarounds or fire emergencies. They should have at least a 50-foot separation from other hydrocarbon-handling facilities.

1712 Company and Industry DocumentsSee Section 1760 for a complete listing of Company and industry guidelines for fireproofing. The Standard Drawings can be found in the Standard Drawings section. Use API RP 2218, “Fireproofing Practices in Petroleum and Petrochemical Processing Plants” as a guide to determine the extent of fireproofing required. This section is a supplement to that publication.

1720 Support StructuresSection 1720 presents guidelines for fireproofing support structures to protect them from failure due to fire exposure for specific time periods.

1721 Where Fireproofing of Support Structures Is WarrantedFireproofing of the principal members is warranted if the structure is in the fire-exposed envelope and failure of these members could cause any of the following:

• Threat of injury to personnel



• Loss or serious damage to valuable or critical supported equipment• Release of large volumes of flammable material• Release of toxic material• Threat to adjacent property and structures of high value• Serious loss of productive capacity

Conversely, fireproofing is not warranted in these situations:

• The value of the structure and supported equipment is low when compared to the cost of fireproofing.

• Member failure would not cause failure of the structure or equipment. Thus, wind and earthquake bracing and other secondary members, such as supports for stairs, platforms, and walkways, are not normally fireproofed.

• The structure is far enough removed from the source of a fire to preclude serious damage (e.g., outside the fire hazard envelope).

• The fire would cause failure or serious damage to supported equipment whether or not the structure was fireproofed.

• The structure supports piping that is not carrying flammable liquids. Piping carrying only gases does not normally justify fireproofing of the supports because the risk of a hydrocarbon pool fire is low.

1722 Level of Protection RequiredMajor factors that determine the level of fireproofing needed are the intensity and duration of potential fire, structural design load and the importance of the structure or equipment. Typically, onshore fireproofing should protect onshore structures supporting high-risk or valuable equipment from reaching 1000F (538C) for a period of three hours, as defined by UL 1709 (see Section 1740). Offshore fire-proofing should protect structures from reaching 750F (400C) for a specified period when exposed to a hydrocarbon fire as defined by the Norwegian Petroleum Directorate high intensity fire curve.

The difference between onshore and offshore temperature limitations is based on structural design load capacities. Onshore structures are designed for a maximum load of 60% of capacity, resulting in a higher temperature allowance. Because of weight considerations, offshore maximum load design may be extended to near 100% of capacity, resulting in a lower steel temperature allowance.

For dense concrete, this is equivalent to four hours as defined by ASTM E-119, the test used prior to 1984. (Refer to Section 1740 for a discussion of the differences between ASTM E-119 and UL 1709 fire tests.) Fireproofing in excess of these requirements may be necessary for special high valued equipment such as reactors or equipment handling large quantities of flammable material in congested areas. Non-critical structures are not protected.

Three-hour fireproofing as shown on Standard Drawing GA-N33336 (in Standard Drawings Section) is for main support members of structures and equipment within



the fire-exposed envelope (see Section 1711 for definition of terms). A three-hour level of protection is appropriate for a typical onshore hydrocarbon processing unit fire duration.

Refer to Section 1740 for guidance on jet fire protection.

Consult the ETC Fire & Process Safety Team if you feel the above criteria do not fit your needs.

When fireproofing of structural supports is warranted, the following types of protec-tion are recommended:

Less than three-hour protection. Thinner coatings may be used where three-hour protection is not warranted. See Figures 1700-1 and 1700-2 for guidance.

Three-hour protection may not be justified in areas where the flammable inventory is such that a three-hour fire is not feasible or the process is designed to isolate and vent in a shorter period of time. This would generally be the case for offshore struc-tures where 1 or 2 hour protection is often provided.

A three-hour rating for formed and poured concrete fireproofing is usually worth the small incremental cost of the additional concrete. If gunite concrete is used, it is economical to use the thickness corresponding to the particular fire rating needed because cost is more nearly proportional to thickness. Actual thicknesses of proprie-tary systems need to be specified by the vendor based on the operating conditions and equipment being protected.

Comparative Fire RatingThe required weight and thickness of fireproofing material for a given duration of fire exposure varies depending on the type of material chosen. Estimated weights and thicknesses for different types of material and different ratings are given in Figures 1700-1 and 1700-2.


1700 FireproofingFire Protection M

anual

1700-6

2000–2010 Chevron U

.S.A. Inc. A

ll rights reserved.M

arch 2010 (E)

Fig. 1700-1 Properties of Cementitious Base Fireproofing Materials

OW STRENGTH

yrocrete 241 Fendolite M II1

prietary inorganic ment formulation

Spray-applied Vermiculite Portland

cement mix

55 44

817 548

0.87 1.32

55 40-41

sign No. XR-701 Design No. XR-704

11/16" 1"

15/16" 1-3/16"

1-1/8" 1-7/16"

- 1-5/8"

1-3/8" 1-13/16"

1-9/16" 2-5/16"+

Note4 Epoxy3

Note4 Note4

Notes7 9 10 Notes7 9

ailable.

HIGH STRENGTHINTERMEDIATE

STRENGTH L

Product Name Concrete (poured-in-

place or gunited)Haydite

Vermiculite MixPyrocrete 240

(High Yield)P

Specifications

Standard mix of Portland cement and

rock aggregate

Haydite and Vermiculite (light weight aggregate) plus Portland cement

Proprietary inorganic cement formulation

Proce

Density (lbs./cu ft) 140-150 75-95 47

Compressive Strength (PSI) 2500-3000 1500-2000 836

Thermal Conductivity (BTU in F-hr-sq ft @ 75F mean temperature)

13 3 1.19

Hardness (Shore D) 70-90 70-90 55

UL 1709 Fire Time Rating (thickness in inches at:

Design No. XR-716 De

1 hour - - -

1.5 hours - - 11/16"

2 hours - - 1-1/8"

2.5 hours - - -

3 hours 2.5" Note2 2" Note2 1-3/8"

4 hours - - 1-9/16"

Recommended Primer Epoxy3 Epoxy3 Note4

Recommended Topcoat None5 None5 Note4

Recommended Use Note6 Note7 Notes7 8 9

(1) Chevron has not used this system extensively. Before using it, contact the ETC Fire & Process Safety Team.(2) While there is no test data to support this number, it is equivalent to a 4 hr ASTM E-119 rating, for which test data is av(3) Coating System Data Sheet 4.4 in the Coatings Manual.(4) Follow manufacturer’s recommendations.(5) For severe weathering and corrosive conditions, consider an epoxy topcoat.(6) Structures such as piers, legs, pipe supports, etc., where weight is not a concern.(7) Vessels, skirts and other applications requiring lighter weight aggregate. Generally not used on structural steel.(8) Better for modular designs where flexing occurs during transport.(9) Applications requiring lighter weight and low volume.(10)Chevron has good experience with this product.

Fire Protection Manual

1700 Fireproofing

March 2010 (E)

2000–2010 C

hevron U.S.A

. Inc. All rights reserved.

1700-7

F

INSULATING

emp Trays)

Eternit Promat H

alcium ation

High density calcium silicate insulation

54

14202 1.14

N/A

1986 HIFT Test Results

-

-

Note4

Note4

Note4

Note4

Note4

Note4

None

Note2

ys Note1

d Engineering Specialist.

r dry locations.

ig. 1700-2 Properties of Non-Cementitious Base Fireproofing Materials

INTUMESCENT SUBLIMING

Product Name Chartek VII Pittchar XP1 Thermolag 3000

(100% Solids)Super Fire T

(Electric Cable

Specifications

100% solids two-component epoxy

intumescent

100% solids epoxy intumescent

100% solidstwo-component epoxy subliming intumescent

High density csilicate insul

Density (lbs./cu ft) 62.4 73 80 28

Compressive Strength (PSI) 2700 2264 2190 900

Thermal Conductivity (BTU in/deg F-hr-sq ft @ 75F mean temperature)

1.48 1.69 0.076 0.54-0.80

Hardness (Shore D) 70 60 50 N/A

UL 1709 Fire Time Rating (thickness in inches at):

Design No. XR-617 Design No. XR-612 Design No. XR-618 and XR-6203

-

1/4 hour - - - 1"

1/2 hour - - - 1.5"

1 hour - 0.28" 0.12" -

1.5 hours 0.40" 0.40" 0.21" -

2 hours 0.60" 0.52" 0.31" -

2.5 hours 0.80" 0.63" 0.41" -

3 hours - 0.75" 0.50" -

4 hours - - 0.69" -

Recommended Primer Note2 Note2 Note2 None

Recommended Topcoat Note2 Note2 Note2 Note5

Recommended Use Note6 Note6 Note7 Cable Tra

(1) Chevron has not used this system extensively. Before using it, contact the ETC Fire & Process Safety Team or ETC Materials an(2) Follow manufacturer’s recommendations.(3) Larger steel than W10X49.(4) See manufacturer’s brochure for calculation instructions (page 18-19).(5) Outdoor installations need weatherjacketing. Silicone waterproofing is recommended by Johns Manville and may be adequate fo(6) Oil platforms and other applications requiring light weight and low volume.(7) Thermolag 3000 has both on and offshore applications. See Manufacturer’s brochures for each market.


1723 Layout and Design ConsiderationsThe API Publication 2218, “Guideline for Fireproofing Practices in Petroleum and Petrochemical Processing Plants,” gives a sequence of steps to follow when consid-ering what to fireproof. This section of the manual offers supplemental information.

Consider the following during design:

• General layout of the plant (see Section 1300).

• Drainage (both of the plant area and within structures) should carry hydro-carbon spills away from supports, structural members, and equipment. This reduces the amount of potential fire damage due to an accidental spill. Where drainage does not meet these criteria, additional fireproofing may be justified (see Section 1400).

• Fire risks in plants properly spaced from one another (see Section 1300) is inherently safer than close spacing that relies on additional protection from fire-proofing.

• Sources of ignition—furnaces, shops, etc.—should be located as far as prac-tical from areas where flammable vapor might be released to the air. Where risks are not adequately separated, additional fireproofing may be justified.

• Failure of structural members could result in releasing large quantities (>1000 gallons) of fuel into a fire, involve high value equipment in the fire, or extend shutdown repair duration.

• Weight of fireproofing can impact structural design and costs; these need to be designed in tandem.

1724 Materials

Types of Fireproofing MaterialsThe Company usually uses concrete material because it is often the most cost-effec-tive. Many commercial products are also available. They have specialized uses and are usually more expensive than concrete. Fireproofing materials come in three categories:

• Cementitious-based materials such as concrete, Carboline’s Pyrocrete 241, and Hydraulic Press Brick Co.’s Haydite-Vermiculite field mix.

• Ablative materials or non-cementitious coatings such as Thermal Science Inc.’s (TSI) Thermolag 3000 (subliming) and AkzoNobel’s Chartek VII (intu-mescent)

• Insulation-based material such as Johns Manville Super Firetemp

Figures 1700-1 and 1700-2 give the UL 1709 and/or ASTM E-119 rating for these materials. Use these figures to compare the relative performance of the tested mate-rials. New applications should use materials that have been rated by UL 1709. (See Section 1740.)



Both cementitious-based and insulation-based materials insulate the structure from heat generated during a fire. These materials are not destroyed by the high tempera-tures of a fire. Both intumescent and subliming coatings absorb heat through mass reduction. Subliming coatings absorb heat by transforming to a gas and intumescent coatings work by quickly swelling to four times their original thickness to insulate the structure.

If you use concrete, follow Specification CIV-SU-850, Plain and Reinforced Concrete. Concrete should be specified as ASTM C-150, Type II. If you use other materials, follow the manufacturer’s recommended installation procedures.

UL 1709 “rapid rise” fire testing (described in Section 1740) indicates that gunited concrete may not provide the same protection as cast-in-place concrete. Even though Company experience with gunited concrete in actual fire conditions is limited, it does not indicate that gunited concrete is inferior to cast-in-place concrete. Until experience indicates otherwise, gunited concrete can be considered a cost-effective fireproofing method for low-risk, lower-value areas where aesthetics is not a high priority. Consult with the Fire & Process Safety Team about using it in critical high risk areas.

Properties of Fireproofing MaterialsFigures 1700-1 and 1700-2 compare fireproofing materials. Some of the terms used in the figures are discussed below.

Applied Weight. Design of structures must include the weight of fireproofing, which can significantly add to the total dead weight load. Concrete has a density of 150 lb/cu ft. Less dense materials minimize dead weight. However, lighter weight materials may not save money because they are generally more expensive than concrete.

Compressive Strength. Will the area you are fireproofing be subject to mechanical abuse? Compressive strength is a good indicator of impact resistance. Some light-weight fireproofing systems such as Pyrocrete 241 have low compressive strength and are more easily dented or damaged. These materials should not be used in high-traffic, high-maintenance areas.

Thermal Conductivity. Normally, thermal conductivity is not a major factor in choosing a fireproofing material unless the material is to insulate the structure also. Figures 1700-1 and 1700-2 show 75F mean temperature K factors for some common materials. If used as both insulation and fireproofing, these materials should not be exposed to continuous temperatures over 200F.

Flexibility for Modular Construction. Concrete is not very flexible and, as such, may not be applicable for modular construction. As structures are lifted into place, they flex and can cause cementitious fireproofing to crack or pull away from the steel. Epoxy based intumescent fire proofing may be more applicable for modular construction. If cementitious fire proofing is used for modular construction, a thor-ough inspection of the erected structure and fireproofing should be conducted to ensure the fireproofing has maintained its integrity.



Mineral/Chemical Composition of Fireproofing MaterialsThe composition of a fireproofing material determines its compressive strength and the need to use primers and/or topcoating with the material.

Concrete and Haydite-Vermiculite Mix. Concrete fireproofing is a standard mixture of Portland cement and rock aggregate conforming to ASTM C-150. The Haydite-Vermiculite (H-V) mixture also uses Portland cement but with lightweight aggregates. Except in severe freeze-thaw service, concrete and the H-V mix do not normally need a topcoat. Haydite is an expanded shale/clay and Vermiculite is expanded Mica.

Lightweight Cementitious Materials. Commercial lightweight cementitious fire-proofing materials must be topcoated. They are mostly lightweight aggregate with just enough cement to hold them together. The lightweight aggregates will absorb water and tend to degrade much faster than normal concrete. Topcoating slows degrading.

Pyrocrete 240 & 241 have lower range compressive strengths, and now being chlo-ride-free, do not cause corrosion problems. Refer to the manufacturer’s recommen-dations for primers and topcoats.

Noncementitious Materials. Intumescent coatings like Chartek VII work by quickly swelling up to four times their original thickness during a fire. The swelled material forms a strongly oxidation-resistant char layer. In this manner, it resists the fire. It also protects the underlying steel by being a good insulator. Chartek VII comes in the form of a strong epoxy. Epoxies are not very permeable, so leaching of chloride should not be a problem. Thermolag 3000 is a subliming coating which just chars away during a fire.

Shelf Life of Fireproofing Materials. Some of these specialty fireproofing mate-rials have a limited shelf life, similar to some brands of coatings. Therefore, it is unwise to purchase excessive amounts that cannot be used in a short time. The shelf life of Pyrocrete 241, for example, is two years. In general, suppliers will not take their material back and there will be disposal costs for the expired material.

Weathering. Long-term environmental exposure does not have much effect on fire-proofing materials. Dense cementitious materials are usually unaffected. Light-weight cementitious materials and noncementitious materials can be protected by topcoating. However, the weathering resistance of noncementitious coatings needs a more careful evaluation. Figures 1700-1 and 1700-2 indicate where topcoating is recommended.

In a 1975 test program by the Smithers Company, (an independent testing labora-tory), a noncementitious, intumescent coating, Albi Clad 890, was found to retain only 30% of its fireproofing capabilities after an accelerated weathering test. This loss in fireproofing was greater than that indicated by physical appearance. Another intumescent coating, Firex RX 2384, showed only a nine-minute time of protection in a high rise fire after accelerated weathering. Consequently, these products are not recommended.



The Smithers program did not test Chartek VII and Thermolag 3000. However, product literature states that these two products can pass accelerated weathering tests without significant loss of fireproofing capabilities.

The weatherability standard generally accepted by the industry is the NORSOK M-501, “Surface Preparation and Protective Coating” (Rev. 4, Dec. 1999). Offshore fireproofing installations should comply with this standard.

This standard gives the requirements for the selection of coating materials, surface preparation, application procedures and inspection for protective coatings to be applied during the construction and installation of offshore installations and associ-ated facilities.

This standard covers both paints, thermally sprayed metallic coatings and applica-tion of passive fire protective coatings.

The aim of this standard is to obtain a coating system, which ensures:

• Optimal protection of the installation with a minimum need for maintenance. • That the coating system is maintenance friendly. • That the coating system is application friendly. • That health, safety and environmental impacts are evaluated and documented.

This standard is not applicable to pipelines and pipeline risers.

Reuse After a Fire. Cementitious fireproofing materials are not necessarily ruined after exposure to a fire. Remaining properties depend on how much water of hydra-tion was lost. The amount lost is a function of the intensity and duration of fire exposure. Concrete is a good insulator and it is not unusual to find much of the remaining concrete in good condition after a fire. All loose and damaged material must be removed. The fireproofing can then be rebuilt to original thickness using standard concrete repair practices found in the Civil and Structural Manual, Section 260. It has been found that for fireproofed structures involved in fires, the fire proofing has remained intact and the structures generally do not require replacing.

Proprietary materials (e.g., Pyrocrete 241) may require reapplication of material to bring the total thickness back to the required fire rating.

Intumescent and subliming fireproofing systems must be replaced after a fire. Insu-lation-based systems would normally also need to be replaced after a fire.

Problems with FireproofingThe Company has no reported failures of a fireproofing material during a fire. However, fireproofing has caused the following problems:

• Severe corrosion of the structural steel and reinforcement mesh underneath fire-proofing. The primary cause is water that gets between the fireproofing and the steel. As noted above, some proprietary fireproofing may cause corrosion prob-lems if the steel is not coated. Refer to the Corrosion Prevention Manual, Section 630, for more information on corrosion under fireproofing.

• Excessive cracking of cementitious fireproofing.



Corrosion Prevention. The Corrosion Prevention Manual Section 732 describes the significant risk of corrosion of steel under fireproofing. Abrasive blasting and priming the structural steel prior to fireproofing and proper cure of cementitious fireproofing are important in eliminating corrosion. Flashing or caulking prevent entry of water between the fireproofing and the steel. Acceptable sealants should be specified. Two such products are Dow Corning No. 732 Silicone elastomeric sealer and H. B. Fuller, Foster Products Division No. 95-44 butyl caulking.

Critical structures or vessels that are fireproofed require a periodic inspection of the metal under the fireproofing. This includes LPG spheres and legs.

COM-SU-5191 and the NACE Recommended Practice RP 0198, “The Control of Corrosion Under Thermal Insulation and Fireproofing Materials - A Systems Approach”, provide specific coating recommendations. Manufacturers of proprie-tary fireproofing materials will usually recommend coatings for steel under their product. In some cases, proprietary fireproofing may need topcoating as well, espe-cially for offshore locations.

Chlorinated rubber coatings may also be considered where application restrictions, such as low-temperature climates, limit the use of epoxy.

Touchup is required if the primer is damaged during shipment or application of the reinforcing anchor studs. The touchup coating must be compatible with the original primer. Also consider economics— spraying a new primer coat may be less costly than extensive touchup.

Improper chloride content in cementitious fire proofing can also increase corrosion rates. Good quality control techniques should be applied to fire proofing installation contracts.

Cracking and Proper Cure. Proper cure of cementitious fireproofing materials greatly reduces the amount of cracking. In some geographic locations, it is neces-sary to take extra measures like spray-applying a curing compound to seal the surface to prevent moisture loss. Another measure is to wrap the freshly poured concrete work with burlap or polyethylene sheet; however, this method can cause staining. The concrete can also be cured by continuous application of a fine fresh water mist to keep the surface moist.

Cracking can occur even when concrete is properly cured. The main causes are thermal cycling, shrinkage, and corrosion of reinforcing steel. If the cracking is bad enough, it can accelerate corrosion of the underlying steel by allowing in water. While cracking is undesirable, it is not cause for rejection unless severe.

There are no well-established criteria for judging severity of cracking. However, the following checks can help you decide if a job needs more thorough review or repair.

• Spalling of concrete, removing more than 20% of depth.• Many long, full-thickness cracks wider than 1/8 inch.• Substantial thinning of the steel substrate.• Evidence of rust leaking from cracks or delamination of fireproofing away from

the steel.



Any of the above indicators may justify removing small sections of fireproofing to allow a more thorough inspection and to determine the extent of the corrosion.

Selecting the Appropriate SystemConcrete has usually been the most cost-effective fireproofing material for on-shore processing facilities. It is readily available and the materials are least expensive. It does not require specialized installation techniques like some commercial fire-proofing materials.

Some proprietary fireproofing systems, such as Pyrocrete 241, Chartek VII and Thermolag 3000 have become more competitive with concrete from an installed cost standpoint, and have performed better than concrete in fire tests.

Consider the long-term costs of fireproofing systems. If a topcoat is required in the original design, plan to recoat it about every 10 years. Discounted cash flow calcula-tions may show this maintenance cost to be low; however, also consider the chance that the required planned maintenance will not be carried out. Concrete fireproofing avoids this problem.

The weight savings of lightweight fireproofing does not always translate into cost savings. Some offshore platforms are exceptions. Users should be wary of this claim and be sure that the benefits are real.

1725 Specific ApplicationsRefer to API RP 2218 for guidance on where to apply fireproofing. This section provides supplemental information.

Firewalls, Bulkheads and Decks/FloorsThe approved design for fireproofed bulkheads is to have the fireproofing on the side of the bulkhead exposed to the fire hazardous equipment. This design is also applicable for the protection of accommodations blocks, egress routes, escape paths, etc.

Two test protocols exist that apply to bulkheads and walls. These are:

1. The ABS Guide for Building and Classing Facilities on Offshore Installations (Chapter 2, Section 1):

1.1 Standard Fire Test

A test in which specimens of the relevant bulkheads or decks are exposed in a test furnace to temperatures corresponding to the standard time-temperature curve and as defined by Annex 1 of Part 3 of the IMO Fire Test Procedures (FTP) Code.

“H” Class Divisions

“H” class divisions are those divisions formed by bulkheads and decks that are constructed of steel or other equivalent material, suitably stiffened, and are designed to withstand and prevent the passage of smoke and flame for the 120-minute duration of a hydrocarbon fire test. “H” class divisions are to be insulated so that the average temperature of the unexposed face will not



increase by more than 139C any time during the two-hour hydrocarbon fire test, nor will the temperature, at any point on the face, including any joint, rise more than 180C above the initial temperature, within the time listed below:

– Class “H-120” 120 minutes– Class “H-60” 60 minutes– Class “H-0” 0 minutes

This division is to remain intact with the main structure of the vessel, and is to maintain its structural integrity after two (2) hours. Structural integrity means that it will not fall under its own weight, nor will it crumble or break upon normal contact after exposure to the fire.

2. The second protocol is the ISO 834-1 test. The Akzo Nobel catalog has an outstanding write-up on it. Akzo Nobel contact information is in Section 1751.

There have been projects on offshore platforms where the fireproofing was installed on the inside of the bulkhead—i.e., on the side away from the fire hazard. Typical hydrocarbon pool fires can generate a temperature of 2000F within five minutes. Steel will begin to fail at about 750F (refer to Section 1722 for a discussion of failure temperatures). A design in which the fireproofing is installed on a bulkhead on the side not exposed to the fire will not protect the bulkhead. The result is that the bulkhead steel would fail in a very short period of time further allowing the fire, heat and toxic fumes to enter the protected area.

This fireproofing design has reportedly passed a DNV test protocol for an H-120 wall. The problem with that protocol is that it does not stipulate anything about structural integrity of the bulkhead. The only pass/fail criteria stipulated is the temperature of the “unexposed” surface. Unfortunately, this protocol requires a rela-tively small bulkhead segment (2m 3m) which does not accurately simulate the structural loading and connections for an actual bulkhead. The concern is that the steel would heat up very quickly and the bulkhead would deform and ultimately fail by collapsing on itself or by pulling away from the support members.

If any project is considering the design which has the fireproofing on the inside unexposed surface please contact the Fire & Process Safety Team before proceeding.

Vertical Vessel SkirtsFireproofing for skirts of columns and other vertical vessels is detailed in Standard Drawing GD-N99994 (see the Standard Drawings Section). Skirts limited to one access openings of less than 24 inches in diameter, with pipe openings of no more than 1-inch maximum annulus clearance around the pipe or pipe insulation (per the Standard Drawing) need not be fireproofed on the inside. Spilled fuel within the skirt cannot get sufficient oxygen through only one opening. Additional openings would permit cross-ventilation that could greatly increase the intensity of a possible fire and would justify fireproofing the inside of the skirt. Fireproofing should be included at the bottom of the skirt in the bolt area between the bottom reinforcing plate and the base plate ring per Standard Drawing GD-N99994. Fireproofing for



the support legs of vertical vessels should be similar to that shown in Drawing GA-N33336.

Hydroprocessing Reactor SkirtsReactors with a “hot box” design at the shell-to-skirt joint should be fireproofed to the bottom of the hot box. Insulation covering the hot box should be protected with a 10-gage stainless steel flame shield. The flame shield should extend from the top of the fireproofing to the head-to-shell joint and be mechanically secured. Consult a fireproofing or reactor design specialist for details of the flame shield.

The flame shield design was tested in 1989 with a UL 1709 test modified with a high pressure hydrogen jet. The flame shield protected the underlying insulation from the erosive effects of the hydrogen jet. Concrete fireproofing and Pyrocrete 241 were also tested, and neither was affected by the hydrogen jet. See Materials Division Report, “Fireproofing Tests with Hydrogen Jet Impingement,” M.D. Gibb, January, 1990 File No. 56.35, available from Chevron Energy Technology Company, Process & Equipment Technology Group.

Piers or Legs for Horizontal VesselsSupport piers or legs for horizontal vessels near ground level, when not constructed of reinforced concrete, should be fireproofed. (Exception: Metal saddles less than 12 inches high at the lowest point need not be fireproofed.)

Offshore StructuresCementitious fireproofing materials have performed poorly offshore because the reinforcing steel in the concrete corrodes. Consequently, these materials are not recommended for offshore structures. Specialty, lightweight fireproofing materials are often used offshore instead of concrete, to save space and weight. In addition, there are no reinforcing bars in the materials to corrode. Chartek was used on Plat-form Ninian, Pyrocrete 241 was used on Platform Hidalgo, and Thermolag was used on Platforms Gail and Esther. (Refer to Section 1740 for a discussion of ratings that apply to offshore fireproofing of decks and bulkheads and to Section 3100 for specific offshore information.)

Fireproofing for Structures Subject to Physical DamageFor structures subject to physical damage, we recommend Portland cement concrete with normal aggregates and a compressive strength of at least 2500 psi (28-day test) or one of the proprietary fireproofing materials with comparable compressive strength. Fireproofing for vessel skirts is normally made with lightweight aggre-gates per Standard Drawing GD-N99994. Follow CIV-SU-850 for the proper instal-lation and curing procedures for concrete.

Intumescent coatings do not resist mechanical damage nearly as well as gunited concrete does. For this reason, intumescent coatings should be considered only for pipeway stanchions and secondary risk applications. They should not be considered equivalent to gunited concrete for critical applications such as column skirts or major vessel supports without detailed review.



When fireproofing is applied to modular construction components in a fabrication facility, it should be inspected prior to installation of the fireproofed component for damage caused during transport and repaired accordingly.

Filling Hollow Supports with ConcreteFilling pipe stanchions and other hollow supports with concrete increases resistance to failure from fire exposure up to an hour or longer. Tests have shown that tank legs constructed of structural steel tubing and filled with concrete withstood two hours of fire exposure without collapse or failure. Under some conditions, this type of construction provides adequate fireproofing for pipe stanchions because the piping being supported generally fail in less time.

Prefabricated Fireproofed BeamsOften it is economical to fireproof structural members off-site. Material such as Pyrocrete 241 can be used to “butter up” the ends of prefabricated concrete fire-proofed beams after they are installed.

Sealing Firewall/Fire Rated Barrier PenetrationsFirestops are an integral part of every passive fire protection system. Passive fire barriers can prevent fire from spreading to nearby areas. Openings in fire rated barriers permit access to the area and admit process piping and utilities. Provisions must be made to preserve the integrity of the barriers when openings are required. Fire rated doors and windows must be installed to protect the normal access open-ings, while fire rated penetration seals/sealing materials are required to seal open-ings for utilities and process piping.

A firestop must satisfy a number of requirements:

• Meet the same fire rating as the barrier in which it will be used.

• Accommodate the penetrating items, including any requirements for motion, thermal expansion or other functions.

• Function as a smoke barrier.

• East to re-penetrate to accommodate modifications.

• Economic.

Nelson Firestop Sealant (CLK) is a line of sealants used to seal against the spread of flame, smoke, gasses and water in fire rated walls and floors that have been pene-trated with process piping and utilities.

3M FireDam 150 Caulk is a heat and cold smoke penetration sealant for fire rated walls and floors.

Contact information for these products is in Section 1750.

Refer to Section 853 of the Tank Manual for a discussion on sealing piping penetra-tions through dike/berm/bund walls.



Fire Resistant Paint“FIREFREE 88” (Ff88) is a fire resistant paint that has the potential for reducing risk of fire losses in some specific applications. These include (but are not limited to):

• Staging planks used in/around hot work areas• Temporary welding installations• Wooden buildings near process areas• Wooden stairs and walkways in off-plot locations exposed to grass/other fires• Increasing the fire rating of interior/exterior walls• Protection for combustible materials.

Ff88 is a passive, performance based product that radically changes the standard time and temperature curves by not allowing the protected material to become part of the fire. It is basically an intumescent coating that when exposed to the heat of fire, quickly swells to at least 100 times its original thickness to insulate the coated object. This product is not intended for use on structural steel, but can be used on a variety of substrates including metal/steel plate, wood, fiberglass foam composite panels, gypsum board, oriented strand board, and other wood products and composite architectural products. Ff88 is a non-toxic; water based latex fire resis-tant coating with proprietary fibers.

Typically, Ff88 is applied in various thicknesses to various materials to obtain an ASTM E-119 time rating such as the following examples. For:

• 1 layer ½" sheetrock, a 1 hr rating = 25 mils• 1 layer 5/8" sheetrock, a 1 hr rating = 15 mils• 1 layer 5/8" sheetrock, a 2 hr rating = 60 mils• 2 layers 5/8" sheetrock, a 2 hr rating = 25 mils• ½" lathe & plaster, a 1 hr rating = 20 mils• 2 ¾" concrete, a 2 hr rating = 70 mils• 1 ½" wood, a 1 hr rating = 30 mils

Note Refer to Section 1750 for a discussion of various fireproofing test methods.

1730 Critical Valves, Instrumentation, and Shutdown SystemsRefer to Figure 1700-3 for an overview of this section.

Critical valves are defined as valves equipped with remote operated actuators that must retain their operational integrity for a minimum of 20 minutes during a fire to facilitate safe unit shutdown.



Fig. 1700-3 Determining Fireproofing Needs for Critical Valves, Instrumentation and Shutdown Systems

Is the valve being consideredfor fireproofing, a critical* valve?

Is the critical valve in a firehazard area?

Yes

Is criticalinstrumentation/

power wiring/air tubing in firehazard area?

Yes

Is the critical valve actuatorfail-safe?

Is criticalinstrumentation/ power

wiring/air tubing part of afail-safe system?

Is the instrumentation/power wiring/air tubing being

considered for fireproofing, part ofa critical* system?

No fireproofing necessary

No

Yes

Yes

No

Is instrumentation/power wiring/air tubing in fire

hazard area?

Do the economics justifyfireproofing?

Start

Yes

Yes

Make instrumentation/ power wiring/air tubing firesafe by one or more options:

Route instrumentation/power wiring/air tubing outside of fire hazardous area

Fireproof and support steel conduit with thermal insulation and SS jacketing per Section 1735

Utilize fire resistant cable per Section 1735

Fireproof cable tray per Section 1736 Separate critical cable from non-

critical and make critical cable firesafe per Section 1735 and bullets above)

NoNo

No

Yes

No

No

No

Yes

For definition of "critical valves" see Section 1730

For definition of "critical instrumentation/power wiring/air tubing systems," see Section 1735

(Refer also to other definitions in Section 1711)

*NOTES:

Make valve and actuator firesafe by one or more options:

Steel valve design Fireproofing actuator

and power source Fireproofing valve



1731 Emergency Shutdown or Isolation ValvesFail-Safe design is preferred for critical and emergency valves. It uses spring opposed valved actuators and normally pressured or electrically energized control circuits. Failure of the control circuit will cause the valve to move to its fail-safe position. See the Instrumentation and Control Manual, Section 1300 for more infor-mation on failure modes.

Fireproofing Systems for ValvesIf a fail-safe design is not feasible and the valve must be located in a fire hazardous area, the valve must be fireproofed to withstand a UL 1709 fire for 20 minutes. This is done by using a fire-safe valve design (see Section 2000) with a fireproofed valve actuator, fire-safe air supplies (refer to Section 1733, “Air Supply”), fire-safe instru-ment and electrical cables (refer to Section 1735, “Instrument and Electrical Cables”), and locating a remote actuation station at grade in a safe location at least 50 feet from the protected equipment.

Valve actuators can be fireproofed with the following systems:

• Intumescent Coating (preferred); K-Mass Fireproofing System. K-Mass is a Chartek-based intumescent coating system shop-applied to a thickness of about 1/2-inch. During a fire, the coating swells and forms an insulating char under a glazed surface. Because of the molding-type process used to apply the coating, K-Mass systems can be designed to provide normal maintenance and operating access to the actuator. The major disadvantage is that the system can be applied only in the Thermal Designs Shop in Houston, TX.

• Insulated Box Enclosure. This system (Figure 1700-4) is a box-like assembly to fully enclose the motor/air operator of a critical valve including motor, gearbox, and drive nut or the entire housing of the protected component. The fireproofing enclosure is made from a refractory ceramic fiber (RCF) block inside a stainless steel weather jacket. It is designed to keep the internal temper-ature of electrical components at or below 200F for 20 minutes during a fire. This fireproofing system is easily applied to the smaller-sized and more rectan-gular-shaped valve operators.

The enclosure should be designed and installed so that leakage (e.g., from a valve stem packing) does not enter the enclosure. If there is evidence of oil accumulation, the enclosure should be promptly removed and cleaned and the leakage problem corrected.

Normal local operation of an MOV/AOV (e.g., push buttons, lights, declutch, or handwheel) may be retained by minor modification to the valve operator. Components that require servicing are made accessible by removing the insula-tion cover and insulation as required. This is a significant disadvantage because frequently these covers or panels are not reinstalled properly, reducing fire protection capabilities.



• Insulated Bag. This system (Figure 1700-5) uses insulation pads laced together with stainless steel wire to form a bag that fully encloses the motor/air operator of a critical valve, including motor, gearbox, and drive nut or the entire housing of the protected component. The insulation bag is constructed of semi-flexible pads of ceramic fiber or fiberglass insulation. The assembly has a weather protected Dacron cover. It is designed to keep the internal temperature of elec-trical components at or below 200F for 20 minutes if exposed to a 2000F fire, as described by UL 1709.

This fireproofing system is easily applied to the larger-sized and more complex-shaped valve operators.

The enclosure should be designed and installed so that leakage (e.g., from a valve stem packing) does not enter the enclosure. If there is evidence of oil accumulation, the enclosure should be promptly removed and cleaned and the leakage problem corrected.

Normal local operation of any MOV/AOV (e.g., push buttons, lights, declutch or handwheel,) may be retained by minor modification to the valve operator. Components that require servicing are made accessible by unlacing and opening or removing the bag, which takes only a few minutes. As with the insulated box enclosure, this is a major disadvantage of this system.

1732 Tank Block ValvesTank valves 12 inches or smaller are easily hand-operated and are not normally power-operated; therefore, fireproofing is not required.

Fig. 1700-4 Insulated Box Enclosure for Valve Actuators

Fig. 1700-5 Insulated Bag for Valve Actuators



For larger size tank valves where air or motor operators have been installed, fire-proofing may be justified for the operator, conduit, and controls within the fire hazardous areas. The switchgear should be located outside the tank impounding areas or drainage paths and the conduit should be buried as close as possible to the valve. For MOVs with a separate control box, it is normally less costly to locate the box outside the tank impounding basin. This is because a water-tight enclosure (NEMA 3 or 4) can be used instead of an XP enclosure (NEMA 7) and fireproofing is not necessary. This also improves access in case of fire.

Fireproofing of motor operators on tank block valves is justified where all of the following conditions are met:

• Tank fill/suction valves are larger than 12 inches.

• Flash point of tank contents is under 100F.

• Valve or piping failure during a fire would cause burning liquid to spread fire to other tanks, equipment, important facilities, or the property of others.

Other considerations that may justify fireproofing include:

• The tank field is operated from a remote control center.

• The facility is considered a major or critical facility.

• The number of personnel available during the first 20 minutes of a fire emer-gency is limited, so remote operating capability must be maintained.

• The risk of a tank overfill is increased due to high use or filling rate.

• A spill resulting from a fire could cause serious environmental damage.

1733 Air SupplyAir supply tubing for control and motive power for air-operated emergency isola-tion valves (AOVs) should be steel or stainless steel. It should be supported every 6 feet in horizontal runs or every 8 feet in vertical runs; or it should be in rigid steel conduit, supported every 10 feet. Type 304 or 316 stainless steel tubing, without fireproofing can safely be used for instrument air through a fire hazardous area as long as it is well supported.

For air used for motive power of AOVs, consider locating air filters, lubricators, and solenoids outside the fire hazardous area. If this is not practical, then these items must be fireproofed along with the valve activator.

1734 Switchgear Housing and Junction BoxesSwitchgear housing and junction boxes for power and control of emergency shut-down, and isolation valves (MOVs), and motor starters should be located outside a fire hazardous area. If this equipment must be placed closer, the entire enclosure, as well as the rear of any exposed mounting support plate, should be fireproofed. Johns Manville—Super FireTemp X Board fireproofing can be used in this application.



Switchgear and junction boxes can also be protected to a lesser degree by installing a radiant heat shield between the enclosure and the potential fire source.

1735 Instrument and Electrical Cables“Critical control instrument cables, power cables and instrument air piping/tubing” is defined as being part of a critical valve/shutdown system that must maintain its operational integrity for a minimum of 20 minutes in a fire to facilitate a safe unit shutdown.

Critical control tubing, instrument cables, and power wiring should be located outside fire hazardous areas wherever possible. This includes routing underground and routing in the upper level of elevated pipeways, separate from main cable trays, to prevent a single incident from disabling both systems.

Critical instrument tubing or electrical cables located above ground within 50 hori-zontal feet of fire hazardous equipment should be fire resistant or fireproofed to withstand exposure up to 2000F for at least 20 minutes. Cables should be installed in galvanized steel conduit or cable tray (refer to Section 1711, “Definition of Terms”).

Do not locate fire resistant wiring in or under aluminum conduit or cable trays. The tray or conduit can fail during a fire, causing the wiring to fail, or melted aluminum can fall on the wiring, damaging the sheathing.

Where main cable runs are buried, individual cable risers to motors, switches, etc., should withstand exposure up to 2000F for at least 20 minutes or be externally fire-proofed if the motors and switches are part of a critical emergency shutdown and isolation system and the system is not fail-safe.

You can use the following systems, presented in order of preference, to protect crit-ical wiring or tubing systems located in fire hazardous areas. These systems are designed to maintain circuit integrity for at least 20 minutes in a 2000F fire, as described by UL 1709.

Fire-Resistant Wiring Needing Steel ConduitThis system uses wiring or cable with electrical insulation which will withstand exposure up to 2000F for at least 20 minutes. The cable must be installed inside a steel conduit for support (e.g., Cable USA, Inc.’s Integraflame Circuit Integrity Cable).

Fire-Resistant Wiring with Rigid SheathingThis system can be of two types: 1) wiring enclosed by mineral insulation inside an Incoloy 825 shield (e.g., Pyrotenax MI Cable); or 2) nickel conductors enclosed by silicon dioxide insulation in a stainless steel sheath (e.g., Meggitt Safety Systems’ SI 2400 Fire Cable). Neither system requires conduit.



Nonfire-resistant Tubing or Wiring with Thermal InsulationThis system protects critical instrument leads or electrical wiring that is not heat resistant (e.g., plastic tubing and wiring with PVC insulation). It consists of the tubing or wiring inside a rigid steel conduit covered by thermal insulation and stain-less steel weather jacketing.

ConduitConduit should be rigid steel with steel fittings and covers. Supports should be spaced 6 feet or less in horizontal runs and 8 feet or less in vertical runs to support the weight of the fireproofing material and to avoid sagging during a fire. In fire hazard areas, conduit supports should be insulated because they may conduct heat inside the fireproofing during a fire.

Thermal insulation that can withstand exposure up to 2000F for at least 20 minutes should cover the conduit. Due to the short exposure, most thermal insulation for pipe will be adequate if it is at least 1-1/2 inches thick. Extended protection may be gained by using ceramic fiber or two-layer calcium silicate insulation. Mineral wool would also work, but for a shorter length of time. To seal against weather and protect against mechanical damage, a galvanized or stainless steel weather jacket secured with stainless steel bands should cover the insulation. Aluminum weather jacketing would melt, exposing the insulation to damaging effects of the fire or hose streams.

1736 Home Runs for Cable Trays and Conduit Banks

LocationHome runs of cable trays and conduit banks should be routed outside fire hazardous areas wherever possible. This includes routing underground and routing on the upper level(s) of elevated pipeways at least 50 feet above the ground and outside the drainage path of hydrocarbon spills.

Home runs located within 50 feet of equipment or drainage that could expose them to a spill fire (e.g., areas within the drainage pattern of pumps operating over 600F, or over the auto-ignition temperature, or pumps with a history of fires) should be fireproofed if loss from the home run and corresponding facility down time is unac-ceptable.

It is often preferable to separate the critical instrumentation and alarm wiring from the home runs. Non-critical home run cables do not require fireproofing. Critical cables should be protected as described in Section 1735.

DesignGenerally, cable trays are recommended over conduit banks because of their ease of installation and fireproofing.

Conduit or tray supports should be spaced 6 feet or less in horizontal runs and 8 feet or less in vertical runs to bear the weight of the fireproofing material and to avoid sagging during a fire. Supports should be insulated to protect the conduit or tray



within a fire hazard area because they will conduct heat inside the fireproofing. Conduit should be rigid steel with all steel fittings and covers.

Due to the cost of re-entry into a fireproofed conduit raceway or tray, future addi-tions should be taken into account during initial construction. Fireproofed cable tray networks should contain about 20% spare cables or tubing for future additions and replacements because the tray is totally enclosed by the fireproofing system.

Where home run conduit and cable trays enter control buildings, wall penetrations should be sealed to prevent entry of vapors, smoke, and fire.

Methods of FireproofingThe following methods of fireproofing prevent internal temperature from exceeding 200F for 20 minutes in a 2000F fire per UL 1709.

• Wrap the conduit bank or tray with flexible blanket insulation designed for use at 2000F and cover with stainless or galvanized steel weather jacket and stain-less steel bands.

3M’s Interam system uses ceramic fiber blanket with an aluminum covering. This material is thinner than conventional insulation (0.6 inches vs. 1.5 inches) and can be used economically on odd shaped sections where fitup of thicker, more rigid systems is difficult.

• Box-in cable trays with prefabricated panels (usually calcium silicate) and weather jacketing. This type of system is economical for simple rectangular shapes. Promat-H and Johns Manville Super Firetemp can be used for this.

1740 Fireproofing Test MethodsVarious tests measure the level of protection offered by a fireproofing material or system. If the material fails the test after 2 hours, it gets a 2-hour rating on that test; if it fails after 4 hours, it gets a 4-hour rating.

UL 1709 Standard for Rapid Rise Fire Tests of Protection Materials for Structural SteelUnderwriters Laboratories, in cooperation with the industry, has developed tests to more closely simulate fire conditions expected in a process plant. These tests are now used by many companies, including Chevron. Fireproofing manufacturers use the tests instead of ASTM E-119, because the UL 1709 tests more closely approxi-mate hydrocarbon fires. These “high rise” fire tests include a faster temperature rise and higher energy input than ASTM E-119 as shown in Figure 1700-6. The ASTM E-119 test is primarily for buildings or combustible structures. Hydrocarbon fires reach higher temperatures more quickly than building fires. The first standard-ized oil industry test for high rise fires, UL 1709, came out in late 1984.



ASTM E-119 ratings are often longer than the UL 1709 counterpart. For example, depending on the material, the ASTM E-119 4-hour test is equivalent to only 2-3 hours in the UL 1709 test (concrete). Consequently, the UL 1709 test usually shows that thicker protection is needed than that predicted by ASTM E-119. It also shows that the behavior of some materials may be significantly poorer in hydro-carbon fires than in conventional fires. This is why UL 1709 is now used for both structural supports and for critical control systems.

ASTM E-1529 closely follows UL 1709 and is also considered a “rapid rise” fire test, however, ASTM E-1529 utilizes a lower heat flux factor, and therefore is not the equivalent of UL1709.

UL 1709 Fire Test ConditionsIn this test, a uniform thickness of a fireproofing material is applied in accordance with accepted field practice on a steel I-beam at least 8' in length. The I-beam is supported vertically during the application and during the test. The beam is then put in a furnace. Temperature of the I-beam is measured by not less than three thermo-couples located at each of four levels (minimum of 12 thermocouples). The upper and lower levels are 2' from the beam ends and the remaining two intermediate levels are equally spaced between the upper and lower levels. Thermocouples are placed to measure significant temperatures of the component elements of the beam. Thermocouple design is also specified in the test standard.

The transmission of heat through the protection material during the period of fire exposure for which Classification is desired shall not raise the average temperature at any of the four levels of the steel column above 1000F (538C) and no thermo-couple shall indicate a temperature greater than 1200F (649C).

The UL Fire Resistance Directory gives the specific rating for different thicknesses and configurations of beams. Some theoretical relationships have been developed between I-beam size, fireproofing thickness, and fire. UL is paid by the manufac-

Fig. 1700-6 Comparison of Standard and High Rise Time-Temperature Curves



turer to test their fireproofing materials. Therefore, non-proprietary materials like concrete have no UL rating. However, favorable Company experience shows that concrete and Haydite-Vermiculite Mix provide the degree of protection recom-mended.

Offshore RatingsFor bulkheads and deck sections of offshore installations, fireproofing can be applied to any of the following ratings, depending upon application: A-60, A-120, H-60, and H-120. Manufacturers must certify product ratings with test results (see Figure 1700-7). Refer to Section 3123 for more information on fire/blast walls.

Jet Fire ProtectionHydrocarbon jet fires are produced by an ignited discharge of hydrocarbon prod-ucts under pressure. Such fires can act like a cutting torch, concentrating a massive heat input into a fairly small area.

The design of passive fire protection for jet fire needs to take into account not only the increased heat flux, but also the erosive nature of the jet itself. This is especially important with lighter weight reactive coatings such as intumescent or subliming compounds that change state upon heating. The performance of the coating in terms of its ability to block the input of heat to the substrate and the degree to which the reacted material (or char) remains in place will dictate the performance of the protective system.

Fig. 1700-7 Examples of Product Rating Tests1

RatingNormal

ConfigurationTest Environmental

Temperature Criteria to be Met Test Type

A-60(60 min)2

Bulkhead, deck section 9 sq. m usually 4.8 mm or greater steel thick-ness

Follow ASTM E-119 temp. curve (or equivalent)

Protected steel temp not to exceed a rise of 250°F (139°C) for 30 minutes

Cellulosic fire simula-tion—designed for commercial building. Gas fired furnace.

H-60(60 min)3

Bulkhead, deck section 9 sq. m usually 4.8 mm or greater steel thick-ness

Follow UL 1709 temp. curve (or equivalent)

Protected steel temp not to exceed a rise of 250°F (139°C) for 60 minutes.No passage of smoke or flames and maintain structural integrity for 120 minutes.

Norwegian Petro-leum Directorate high intensity of high rise fire curve. Gas fired furnace.

(1) A-120 and H-120 are 120-minute tests.(2) This is an ASTM E-119 test for use in protecting living quarters for 60 minutes under typical

combustible materials fire conditions.(3) This is a UL 1709 test for use in protecting process areas for 60 minutes under high rise fire conditions

typical of hydrocarbon fires.



Jet Fire Tests. Jet fire testing was developed in order to examine both the thermal and mechanical loads (i.e., the erosive effect of a fire) imparted to passive fire protection material by jet fires resulting from high-pressure releases of natural gases.

There are many different test methods available and sample configurations that may be used but they can be of differing characteristics. The test which is most appli-cable internationally is OTI 95-634, a joint development between Norway, UK and USA. This testing tells the manufacturer where to place each thermocouple and how far the jet fire nozzle is from the tested article. This procedure has proven to be quite conservative.

Adopt the following approach when developing jet fire protection requirements.

Jet Fire Class Divisions. Refer to the Fire Protection Manual, Section 3123 for a discussion and guidance on protecting walls, bulkheads, decks, and occupied spaces from various fire types, including typical combustibles and hydrocarbon fires.

Jet Fire Load Bearing Divisions and Structural Members. The fire resistance rating is determined by defining the following:

• The structural element being considered.

• The required duration of the load bearing ability.

• The jet fire load (or heat flux in kW/m2).

• The restricted critical core temperature (i.e., the failure threshold temperature of the material which is generally accepted as 750F (400C)).

Every load bearing member will be suitably fire protected to meet the requirements of the fire resistance rating as defined.

The ability of a load bearing or structural member to maintain its load bearing capa-bility is determined by its critical core temperature. It is accepted practice, unless it is demonstrated by calculation or suitable fire testing to be otherwise, to limit the critical temperature of the steel cores to 750F (400C).

Therefore, as widely accepted in the UK and Norway, the jet fire exposed load bearing divisions and structural members should be described as follows:

• Duration of load bearing ability in minutes

• Fire load – jet fire. It may be appropriate to define the characteristics of the jet fire as follows:

– Fuel type– Likely maximum heat flux– Maximum orifice size of any release– Mass flow rate– Velocity of jet

• Restricted steel core temperature - 750F (400C).



1750 Materials Suppliers and ApplicatorsThe recommended sources listed below are current as of November 2004.

1751 Support Structures

Fireproofing Materials

1752 Critical Valves, Instrumentation, and Shutdown SystemsFor sources of acceptable wire other than those listed below, we strongly recom-mended that you consult with ETC, Machinery & Electrical Systems Team.

ChartekAKZO NOBELAttn: Sherman Spears or Steve MartinInternational Paint, Inc.6001 Antoine Dr.Houston, TX 77091Phone: (508) 478-4179 or (713) 684-5854

Fendolite M IIMandoval Industrial Fireproofing Products7025 W. Tidwell, Suite 111Houston, TX 77092Phone: (800) 847-5768

Haydite-Vermiculite MixHydraulic Press Brick CompanyAttn: Keith McCabe8900 Hemlock Rd.P.O. Box 31330Cleveland, OH 44130Phone: (216) 524-2950, ext. 24Email: [email protected]

PittcharPPG Industries151 Colfax St.Springsdale, PA 15144Phone: (724) 274-3473

PyrocreteCarboline1401 South Hanley Rd.St. Louis, MO 63144Phone: (925) 838-7571

Super FiretempJohns Manville1559 9th AvenueSan Francisco, CA 94122Phone: (415) 665-0767

ThermolagThermal Sciences Inc. 2200 Cassens Dr.St. Louis, MO 63026Phone: (314) 349-1233



Valve Actuator Fireproofing

High Temperature Wire

Cable Tray Fireproofing

Fire Resistant Paint

K-Mass Fireproofing System and Box EnclosuresThermal Designs, Inc.5352 Prudence StreetHouston, TX 77045Phone: (713) 433-8110

Insulated BagOPTIMA Fire ProtectionAttn: Clifton Philpot7631 Ethel Ave.No. Hollywood, CA 91605Cell: (626) 665-3229

Integraflame Circuit Integrity CablesCable USA, Inc.2584 South Horseshoe Dr.Naples, FL 34104-6131Phone: (239) 643-6400Fax: (239) 643-4230Web: www.cableusainc.com

MI (Mineral Insulated) CablePyrotenaxBICC General750 E. Green St. Suite 301Pasadena, CA 91101Phone: (626) 796-1040

SI 2400 Fire CableMeggitt Safety Systems1955 Surveyor Ave.Simi Valley, CA 93063Phone: (805) 584-4100

3M Interam3M Ceramic Materials DepartmentBuilding 225-4N, 3M CenterSt. Paul, MN 55144Phone: (800) 328-1687

Promat HEternitVillage Center DriveReading, PA 19607Phone: (800) 255-3975

Super FiretempJohns Manville1559 9th AvenueSan Francisco, CA 94122Phone: (415) 665-0767

Firefree 88International Fire Resistant Systems3095 Kerner Blvd., Unit “I”San Rafael, CA 94901Phone: (888) 580-0088



Fire Stop Materials

1760 References

American Petroleum Institute (API)• API 2218, “Guideline for Fireproofing Practices in Petroleum and

Petrochemical Processing Plants”

American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM)• ASTM E-119, “Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials”• PIPSTS03001, “Plain and Reinforced Concrete”

Chevron ReferencesETC Materials Division, “Fireproofing Tests with Hydrogen Jet Impingement,” M.D. Gibb, January 1990, File No. 56.35

Guidelines:

• Civil and Structural Manual• Coatings Manual• Corrosion Prevention and Metallurgy Manual• Instrumentation and Control Manual

Specifications and Engineering Forms:

• CIV-SU-850, “Plain and Reinforced Concrete”• COM-SU-5191

Standard Drawings:

• GA-N33336, “Standard Details—Concrete Fireproofing for Structural Members”

• GD-N99994, “Standard Fireproofing Specification for Vessel Skirts”

National Association of Corrosion Engineers• NACE RP 0198, “The Control of Corrosion Under Thermal Insulation and

Fireproofing Materials—A Systems Approach”

Underwriters’ Laboratories (UL)• UL 1709, “Standard for Rapid Rise Fire Tests of Protection Materials for Struc-

tural Steel”• Fire Resistance Directory

Nelson Firestop ProductsPhone: (800) 331-7325Web: www.nelsonfirestop.com

3MFire Dam 150 CaulkPhone: (800) 933-0732 - N. Calif.Phone: (800) 940-1084 - Houston



Revision History

Date Description Author SponsorDecember 2004 General revision TBBB TBBB

March 2010 (E) Errata: Replaced references to Quick Reference Guide with COM-SU-5191. TBBB TBBB
