Environmental Manager

Design & Operate Flares Safely

Use these equations to design a system that will safely destroy toxic vapors
Ajay Kumar, P.E.
The Sapphire Group, Inc.
Flares are used at most chemical process facilities to destroy flammable, toxic or corrosive vapors. These
systems are designed primarily to destroy uncontrolled or unburned vapors produced during process upsets
and emergency releases (Figure 1).
A variety of flare styles and operating modes are available. For instance, flares may be designed for
elevated, ground-level, or enclosed operation. Steam-assisted, air-assisted or pressure-head flares are
available. Flare operations can also be classified as smokeless, fixed or endothermic. The most widely used
configuration is an elevated, steam-assisted or air-assisted flare.
The key design factors for ensuring flare safety and performance include:
" Flare size or capacity
" Flame stability
" Reliable pilot and ignition system
" Flashback protection
" Thermal radiation
" Noise level
" Smokeless operation
Flare size or capacity. It is important, for safety purposes, that the flare be sized properly. If, during flare
design, the flowrate is overestimated, the flare will be oversized. In an oversized flare, burning inside the
flare tip may occur, and, due to low vertical momentum, the flame may easily be extinguished by the wind.
On the other hand, if flowrate is underestimated, the flame will not be stable. Excessive flowrate may cause
the flame to lift off the flare tip or blow out, allowing unburned compounds to escape in the untreated
exhaust.
The maximum gas-handling capacity of a flare can be estimated using the following approach, suggested
by The American Petroleum Institute (API) [1]. If flares are equipped with some key accessories, such as
flame arresters, a flame windshield, and a reliable pilot and ignition system, the allowable exit velocity of
gases can be as high as 0.5 times the sonic velocity. The sonic velocity or Mach number [M] is estimated as
follows:
M = 1.702 x 10-5 x [W/(P2D2)] x [ZT/KMw]0.5 (1)
where:

W = Flare-gas flowrate, lb/h

P2 = Pressure at flare tip, 14.7 psia
D = Flaretip inside diameter, ft
Z = Compressibility factor, dimensionless
T = Flare-gas temperature, R (R = T in F + 460)
K= Ratio of specific heats of flare gas (i.e., ratio of specific heat at constant pressure to specific heat at
constant volume), dimensionless
Mw = Flare gas molecular weight,

lb/lb-mol

If we assume M = 0.5 and other parameters used in the above equation are known, then the flare-gas
flowrate, W, can be approximated for a given flare. Alternatively, if the flare-gas flowrate to be handled is
known, we can use Equation 1 to approximate the diameter, D, of the flare.
Example. If a wastegas stream with a flowrate of 325,000 lb/h is to be handled using a flare, estimate the
size of the flare for a safe operation. Assume Z = 1.0, T = 650R, K = 1.1, Mw = 54 lb/lb-mol. Also assume
that the flare will be equipped with a flame arrester, a wind shield, and a reliable pilot and flame ignition
system.
Solution. From Equation 1, if M = 0.5, then:
D2 = (1.702 x 10-5)(325,000/14.7 x 0.5)[(1 x 650)/(1.1 x 54)]0.5 = 2.49
D = 1.58 ft = 19 in.
Flame stability. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [2,3,4] a flare handling gases with
heat content greater than 1,000 Btu/std. ft3 can have a stable flame as long as the exit velocity of the flare
gas is below 400 ft/s. The following equation can be used to calculate the exit velocity of flare gas [2]:
Vex = [5.766 x 10-3Qf(Tf + 460)]/Di2 (2)
where:
Vex = Exit velocity of flare gas, ft/s
Qf = Flare gas flowrate, std. ft3/min
Tf = Flare-gas temperature, F
Di = Flare tip inside diameter, in.
Example. Determine if a flare handling 30,000 std. ft3/min of gas will have a stable flame. The flare-gas
temperature is 150F and the flare-tip diameter is 18 in.
Solution. From Equation 2:

Vex = [(5.766 x 10-3)(30,000)(150 + 460)]/(18)2

Vex = 326 ft/s
Since this exit velocity is less than 400 ft/s, the flame in this example is expected to be stable for the
conditions described above.
Reliable pilot and ignition system. A safe flare must have a dependable pilot and a reliable ignition system.
The pilots must be able to ignite waste gas, even at speeds of 600 miles per hour [5]. And, to prevent flameouts, and unacceptable or deadly atmospheric releases, flare pilots must be designed to withstand hurricaneor typhoon-force winds (even greater than 250 miles per hour).
Windshields are used to protect the pilot from wind and ensure proper ignition of waste gases.
Thermocouples can be used to monitor pilot operation (for instance, pilot flames may not be visible in
daylight) and ensure that the pilots are lit continuously.
A pilot ignition system is an integral part of any flare system. Remote ignition panels are considered to be
the most-dependable pilot ignition system. In this system, air and fuel gas are mixed in controlled
quantities. A spark is introduced into the mixture to generate a flame front, which is delivered through a 1in. pipe to the pilot. Without a reliable pilot and ignition system, a flameout could occur, resulting in
unacceptably high ground-level concentrations of flammables and toxics.
Flashback protection. When flashback occurs, fluegases burn inside the flare stack, gas-collection header or
plant piping. To prevent this, and minimize the risk of explosion, flares must be equipped with flashback
protection. One such approach involves using liquid seals in the flare system that keep the flame front from
propagating back into the plant piping.
Similarly, liquid seals are often included at the base of an elevated stack to help maintain a positive
pressure in the downstream flare header, to ensure that any leaks in the flare header will be discharged into
the atmosphere (rather than back into the plant), and to prevent air leakage into the header. Air leakage into
a flare header can be extremely dangerous, as it may result in a potentially hazardous gas-air mixture, with
the possibility of an explosion in the stack or header. If a liquid seal is not used at the base of the stack, the
flare stack should be purged continuously with an oxygen-free gas, such as nitrogen.
Mechanical seals located at or below the flare tip, can also be used to prevent flashback in flare systems.
These seals significantly reduce the amount of continuous purge gas required to prevent air infiltration into
the flare stack. Most molecular seals are purged at a rate of 0.5 ft/s to keep the flame out of the flare tip [1].
Velocity seals (with single or multiple baffles) reduce the purge gas velocity through the flare tip to 0.02
0.04 ft/s [1].
Thermal radiation. In flare design, the effect on personnel and equipment of heat radiating from the
combustion of large quantities of flammables must be evaluated. For safe operation, the flare height should
be designed with consideration given to potential radiation levels around the flare. The potential radiation
levels should not exceed allowable radiations levels on the ground.
Thermal radiation impacts can be estimated using the API approach [1]. For calculation purposes, the flare
geometric configurations needed to solve Equations 3 4 are shown in Figure 2. Note that in that figure: H =
flare stack height, Lf = flame length. The various geometric dimensions needed to solve Equations 3 4 can
be approximated as follows:
Flame length. To estimate flame length, the following equation was derived using the flame-length and
heat-release data provided by API [1]:

Lf = 0.01288HBtu0.44 (3)
where:
Lf = Flame length, ft
HBtu = Heat release, British thermal units per hour
Flame distortion due to wind. Flame will often be tilted due to wind, as shown in Figure 2. If wind speed, U
and flare exit velocity, Vex, are known, then DX/L and DY/L can be determined from the Table on p. 136.
Once DX/L and DY/L are estimated, Yc and Xc can be determined as follows:
Xc = DX/2 (3a)Yc = DY/2 (3b)
Effective flame height from the ground will be:
H = H + Yc (3c)
Radiation level. Radiation level in the vicinity of the flare can be estimated, using the equation below [1]:
Kr = (tFQh)/(4pD2) (4)
where:
Kr = Radiation level, Btu/h-ft2
t = Fraction of heat intensity transmitted, P1.0
F = Fraction of heat radiated,P 0.15-0.30 for most cases
D = Minimum distance from the centerpoint of the flame to the object being considered
Qh = Heat release rate, Btu/h-ft2
Note that Equation 4, in conjunction with Equations 3a, b and c, can be used to calculate either the heat
radiation level at a given distance from the flame, or the distance, D, for a given heat radiation level.
Example. If the heat-release rate for a flame is 4.5 109 Btu/h, and allowable radiation level is 1,500 Btu/hft2, estimate the distance around the flare stack within which the radiation level would exceed 1,500 Btu/hft2. The flare is 150 ft high. Assume a windspeed of 15 ft/s and a flare-gas exit velocity of 300 ft/s.
Solution. From Equation 4 (assuming F = 0.3):
D = {[(1.0)(0.3)(4.5 x 109)]/[4(3.14) (1,500)]}0.5
D = 268 ft
From Figure 2:
D2 = R2 + H2

From Equations 3a, b and c:

H = H + Yc = H + (DY)/2
To estimated DX and DY, flame length must be estimated first. Use Equation 3:
L = 0.01228(4.5 x 109)0.44 = 228 ft
For U = 15 ft/s and Vex = 300 ft/s:
U/Vex = 0.05 from the Table, right
DY/Lf = 0.60, and DX/Lf = 0.60
For Lf = 228 ft:
DX = DY = 0.6(228) = 136.8 ft
From Equation 3a:
XC = YC or DX/2 = DY/2 = 136.8/2 = 68.4 ft (rounded up to 69 ft)
Then from Equation 3b:
H = 150 + 69 = 219 ft
From D2 = R2 + H2 relationship shown in Figure 2, R = 154 ft
From Figure 2:
R = R + XC = 154 + 69 = 223 ft
It means that within 223 ft of the flare stack, the radiation level will be above the 1,500-Btu/h-ft 2 level.
Noise level. The noise level for a stack can be approximated using the method described in API [1].
According to this approach, the noise level at 100 ft from the stack tip can be approximated by the
following equation:
L100 = L +10Log10[1/2MC2] (5)
where:
L100 = Noise intensity at 100 ft from the stack tip, decibels
L = Noise intensity parameter, which depends on pressure ratio across the safety valve releasing into the
stack header (see below for its relationship with pressure ratio)
M = Mass flow through the safety valve of the flare stack, slugs/s (1 slug/s = 32 lb/s)
C = Speed of sound in the waste gas, ft/s

Based on the L parameter and pressure-ratio data provided in graphical format in the API document, the
following relationship was established, to estimate L based on a given pressure ratio, P r, across the safety
valve:
For Pr<2.9:L = 13.3 + 88.1Log10Pr

(6a)

For Pr>2.9:L = 51.9 + 5.06Log10Pr (6b)

The speed of sound in the gas can be estimated using the following relationship:
C = 223[(KT)/(Mw)]0.5 (7)
where:
C = Speed of sound in the gas, ft/s
K = Ratio of specific heats of the gas (i.e., ratio of specific heat at constant pressure to specific heat at
constant volume), dimensionless
T = Gas temperature, R
Mw = Molecular weight, lb/lb-mol
Equation 5 in association with Equations 6a, 6b and 7 can be used to estimate noise impact at 100 ft from
the stack tip. The following equation can be used to estimate noise level for distances that differ from the
100-ft reference boundary.
LP = L100 20Log10(r/100) (8)
where:
LP = Noise level at distance r, decibels
r = Distance from the sound source (stack tip), ft
Example. For a flare stack, if the maximum gas flowrate is 200,000 lb/h, the pressure ratio is 3.0, and the
gas temperature is 150F, what is the noise level 400 ft from the stack? Assume a gas molecular weight of
54 lb/lb-mole, and the ratio of specific heats of the gas to be 1.1.
Solution. From Equation 6b:
L = 51.9 + 5.06Log103 = 54.3
For T = 150F = 610R, using Equation 7:
C = 223[(1.1 x 610)/54]0.5 = 786 ft/s
Gas flowrate = 200,000 lb/h = 55.6 lb/s= 1.74 slugs/s
Then, from Equation 5,

L100 = 54.3 + 10Log10[1/2 x 1.74 x (786)2]

= 54.3 + 10(5.73) = 54.3 + 57.3= 111.6 decibels
From Equation 8, the noise level at a distance 400 ft is:
LP = 111.6 20Log10(400/100)= 99.6 decibels
Smokeless operation. The most common method to achieve smokeless combustion is to inject steam into
the flame. The specific requirements for steam-assisted-flow operation depend on the molecular weight,
heating value, carbon-hydrogen ratio of the gas, and flare tip design. Typical values range from 0.15 to 0.50
lb steam per lb of flare gas. EPA recommends the following formula for estimating steam requirement [2].
Qs = 1.03x10-3xQfMw (9)
where:
Qs = Steam requirement, lb/min
Qf = Flare gas flowrate, std. ft3/min
Mw = Molecular weight of gas stream, lb/lb-mol
Example. Estimate the steam requirement for a gas flowrate of 300,000 std. ft3/min and molecular weight of
54 lb/lb-mole.
Solution. From Equation 9, the amount of steam needed to produce smokeless operation is:
Qs = 1.03x10-3 x 300,000 x 54= 16,686 lb/min
Note that the steam pressure for smokeless operation should exceed 10 psig. If steam is introduced at
pressures below 10 psig, the desired turbulence or air entrainment will not achieve smokeless operation due
to insufficient momentum. On the other hand, too much steam will cool the flame and possibly snuff it out.
This situation may result in flame pulsation and flame instability.

Flameout conditions
To ensure safe flare operation during periods when the flame may have gone out, ground-level
concentrations for flammables should not be within the explosive limits of the gas. The ground-level
concentration should be estimated assuming the flare is functioning as a stack or vent only (i.e., the flame
has gone out). To estimate ground-level concentrations for flare as a vent, the EPA Screen3 computer model
can be used [6] (www.epa. gov/ttn/scram). This model accounts for flare exit velocity, exit temperature,
atmospheric stabilities and wind speeds when estimating worst-case, ground-level concentrations.
Alternatively, for a quick estimate, the maximum ground-level concentration can be estimated using the
following equation [7]:
C = 0.23Q/UH2 (10)
where:
C = Maximum ground-level concentration, g/m3

Q = Flammable gas flowrate through the stack, g/s

U = Wind speed, m/s
H = Effective flare stack height (including plume rise), m
Note that the gas plume rise (i.e., the increase in plume height from the ground) largely depends on
momentum and thermal buoyancy of the flare gas and atmospheric stability. A detailed discussion on plume
rise can be found in [6 and 8]. For a rough estimate, one can use the following plume rise equation for
momentum plume rise (i.e., rise due to velocity).
DH = 3d Vex/U (11)
where:

DH = Plume rise, m

d = Flare-stack tip diameter, m

Vex = Flare gas exit velocity, m/s
U = Wind speed, m/s
Note that DH must be added to the actual flare height to estimate the effective flare stack height required
for Equation 10.
Example. Estimate the ground-level concentration for a flammable gas if the release rate to the atmosphere
is 200,000 lb/h, exit velocity is 275 ft/s, and flare tip diameter is 1.5 ft. The flare stack height is 200 ft.
Assume that the wind speed is 10 ft/s. Lower and upper flammable limits for the gas are 20,000 and
100,000 ppm, respectively. The molecular weight of the gas is 54.
Solution:
Q = 200,000 lb/h = 25,200 g/sVex = 275 ft/s = 83.8 m/s
From Equation 11:
DH = 3dVex/U
d = 1.5 ft . 0.46 m
Vex = 275 ft/s . 83.8 m/s
U = 10 ft/s . 3.1 m/s
Then, DH = [3(0.46)(83.8)]/(3.1) = 37.3 m
The effective flare stack height, H = flare stack height + plume rise (DH)
Flare stack height = 200 ft . 61 m
So, H = 61 + 37.3 = 98.3 m

From Equation 10,C = [0.23(25,200)]/[(3.1) (98.3)2]= 0.19 g/m3 = 193 mg/m3

If molecular weight is 54, then 190 mg/m3 = 87 ppm [(to convert to ppm [9]: ppm = (mg/m3)
(24.45/molecular weight)].
Thus, in the event of an accidental release, the flammable maximum ground-level concentration is expected
to stay below the lower flammability limit. In cases where the estimated ground-level concentration is
estimated to be above the flammable level, some remedial action (e.g., raising flare height, reducing wastegas flowrate to the flare) must be taken to prevent this dangerous situation.
The equations discussed above can be used to perform a process-safety and performance-analysis on flares.
In addition, it is strongly suggested that a process hazard analysis be performed on the flare system to
identify any specific unsafe scenarios relative to operation, design and maintenance of the given flare
system. Accordingly, specific recommendations must be made and implemented to minimize the risk
associated with the flare system. These recommendations include providing instrument interlocks,
installing new instruments, increasing the inspection frequency of key components of the flare system.
Piping and instrumentation diagrams and operating procedures relative to the flare system must also be
updated on a regular basis, and made available to operating personnel.
Edited by Suzanne Shelley

References
1. "Guide For Pressure-Relieving and Depressuring Systems," API Recommended Practice 521, Fourth
Edition, March 1997.
2. "USEPA: Control Technologies For Hazardous Air Pollutants," EPA/625/6-91/014.
3. Code of Federal Regulations, 40CFR 60.18: General control device requirements.
4. Code of Federal Regulations, 40CFR 264.1033: Closed-vent systems and control devices.
5. Straitz III, J.F., Improve flare design, Hydrocarbon Processing, October 1994.
6. SCREEN3 Model User's Guide, EPA-454/B-95-004 (www.epa.gov/ttn/scram).
7. Kumar, A., Get a fix on plant pollutants, Chem. Eng., November 1994, p 141.
8. Briggs, G.A., Plume rise predictions, in "Lectures on Air Pollution and Environmental Analysis,"
American Meteorological Society, Boston, Mass., 1975.
9. Threshold limit values for chemical substances and physical agents and biological exposure indices,
American Conference of Government Industrial Hygienists, 1996, p.10.

Author
Ajay Kumar, P.E., is a senior risk and process safety management consultant with The Sapphire Group (111
South Calvert St., Suite 1560, Baltimore, MD 21202; Phone: 410-385-5291; Fax: 410-385-1395). Kumar
has 15 years of experience in process safety and air quality engineering. A registered P.E. in Pennsylvania
and North Carolina, he holds a B.S.Ch.E. from the University of Roorkee (Roorkee, India), an M.S. in

atmospheric Sciences from North Carolina State University, and a Master's of Business Admin. (M.B.A.)
degree from Loyola College (Baltimore, Md.).