首页> 外文OA文献 >Violent explosion after inadvertent mixing of nitric acid and isopropanol – Review 15 years later finds basic accident data corrupted, no evidence of broad learning
【2h】

Violent explosion after inadvertent mixing of nitric acid and isopropanol – Review 15 years later finds basic accident data corrupted, no evidence of broad learning

机译:非法混合硝酸和异丙醇后剧烈爆炸 - 15年后的回顾发现基本事故数据已损坏,无广泛学习证据

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

At a brewery in 1997, an operator confused filling nozzles for two commonly used acid cleaning agents and transferred nitric acid into a tank with P3, a proprietary phosphoric acid based cleaner that also contained 5–15% isopropanol. 10–15 min later the mixture exploded violently. The stainless steel tank disintegrated with such force that fragments lodged in walls of concrete. The explosion ravaged the cellar, destroyed equipment, blew out a masonry wall and released large amounts of nitrous oxide fumes. Likely, 62% nitric acid (CAS 7697-37-2) and isopropanol (2-propanol, CAS 67-63-0) reacted to produce isopropyl nitrate (nitric acid 1-methylethyl ester, CAS 1712-64-7), a rocket propellant. It is argued that the accident has broad learning potential because of the widespread usage of the two chemicals across industries, the innocent nature of the human error and the severity of the consequence.A review 15 years later of lessons learned finds that information dissemination has followed a tradition of informal meetings in small industry sector associations but impact is unclear. There is no useful mention of the accident in open sources. Although the Danish Working Environment Authority took the brewery to court for negligence, they did not report or investigate the accident, or attempt to disseminate information available to them. Today, the general literature is silent on the explosion hazards of mixing the two chemicals.The paper argues that without institutional support, learning opportunities are missed and broader cross-sector learning is limited or non-existent.
机译:在1997年的一家啤酒厂,操作员将两种常用的酸清洗剂的注油嘴弄混了,然后将硝酸与P3一起转移到了储罐中,P3是一种专有的磷酸基清洁剂,也含有5-15%的异丙醇。 10–15分钟后,混合物剧烈爆炸。不锈钢罐以这样的力崩解,使得碎屑滞留在混凝土壁中。爆炸摧毁了地窖,摧毁了设备,炸毁了砌体墙并释放了大量的一氧化二氮烟雾。可能有62%的硝酸(CAS 7697-37-2)和异丙醇(2-丙醇,CAS 67-63-0)反应生成硝酸异丙酯(硝酸1-甲基乙酯,CAS 1712-64-7),火箭推进剂。据认为,由于两种化学物质在整个行业中的广泛使用,人为错误的无辜性质和后果的严重性,该事故具有广泛的学习潜力.15年后的经验教训回顾表明,信息传播已经接followed而至。小型行业协会举行非正式会议的传统,但影响尚不清楚。在开源中没有有用的提及事故的信息。尽管丹麦工作环境局将啤酒厂因疏忽而告上法庭,但他们并未举报或调查事故,也未试图传播可利用的信息。如今,一般文献对混合两种化学物质的爆炸危险未作任何评论。该论文认为,如果没有机构的支持,就会错过学习机会,更广泛的跨行业学习是有限的或根本不存在的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号