Filtern
Dokumenttyp
Sprache
- Englisch (6)
Referierte Publikation
- ja (6)
Schlagworte
- Dangerous goods packagings (6) (entfernen)
Organisationseinheit der BAM
- 3.1 Sicherheit von Gefahrgutverpackungen und Batterien (6) (entfernen)
Abstract: The leaks of dangerous goods from actually intact bags detected in the years 2018 to 2020 tend to be at an almost constant high level. These releases of powdery or granular dangerous goods represent violations of the sift-proofness required in the dangerous goods regulations. This article first analyzes the causes. The components of the bags that are affected by leaks are micro-perforations, joins and closures, in particular internal sleeve valves.
A distinction must be made between bags closed in conformity with or contrary to the manufacturer's instructions.
The particle release is determined by a number of influencing factors of the filling substance, the packaging and other boundary conditions. Therefore, a comprehensive test concept is developed in this work, which takes all these factors into account. The application of this test concept facilitates the planning of the test setup and the experiments. On this basis, the complex mechanisms involved in the release of solid substances can be systematically investigated in the test laboratory. To prevent releases of powdery or granular substances from intact bags, it is necessary that the user has access to the closing instructions and the relevant properties of the test substance used for the design type approval. Further experimental investigations are needed to assess whether filling substances change their properties during transport and whether this enables them to escape.
The leaks of dangerous goods from actually intact bags detected in the years 2018 to 2020 tend to be at an almost constant high level. These releases of powdery or granular dangerous goods represent violations of the sift-proofness required in the dangerous goods regulations. This article first analyzes the causes.
The components of the bags that are affected by leaks are micro-perforations, joins and closures, in particular internal sleeve valves. A distinction must be made between bags closed in conformity with or contrary to the manufacturer's instructions. The particle release is determined by a number of influencing factors of the filling substance, the packaging and other boundary conditions.
Therefore, a comprehensive test concept is developed in this work, which takes all these factors into account. The application of this test concept facilitates the planning of the test setup and the experiments. On this basis, the complex mechanisms involved in the release of solid substances can be systematically investigated in the test laboratory.
To prevent releases of powdery or granular substances from intact bags, it is necessary that the user has access to the closing instructions and the relevant properties of the test substance used for the design type approval. Further experimental investigations are needed to assess whether filling substances change their properties during transport and whether this enables them to escape.
Sift-proofness is a requirement for different types of dangerous goods packagings for solid substances according to the international Dangerous Goods Regulations. In these regulations, a sift-proof packaging is defined as a packaging that is completely impermeable to dry contents. This means indirectly that absolutely no mass transport of solid substances is allowed. Moreover, this requirement applies both to the original filling substance and to fine solid material generated during transport. Further specifications, test conditions or tolerable limit values are not given. This is in contrast to physical principles and the usual practice in other fields of technology in which sift-proofness is relevant. This paper shows the necessary steps for how the requirements for sift-proofness of dangerous goods packagings can be defined more precisely. Physical basics of the term ‘sift-proofness’ are explained. A qualitative as well as a quantitative approach is possible. In any case, it is essential to carry out appropriate vibration tests to assess the siftproofness. There is a need for systematical investigations of the sift-proofness of dangerous goods packagings.
The Dangerous Goods Regulations currently do not include limit leakage rates orsensitivity requirements for industrial leak testing procedures that are equivalent tothe bubble test, which is the prescribed test method for design type testing ofdangerous goods packagings. During series production of such packagings, variousmethods are used, which often do not meet the requirements of the bubble test withregard to important criteria.Sensitivity, flow direction, pressure level and automatability are particularly importantfactors when selecting a suitable industrial leak testing method.The following methods are in principle both suitable and equally effective as thebubble test: pressure rise test (vacuum chamber), ultrasonic bubble leak detectionand gas detection methods (pressure technique by accumulation and vacuumchamber technique).To ensure a uniform test level during design type testing and production line leaktesting and therefore a comparable safety level as required by the Dangerous GoodsRegulations, it is necessary to include a more precise specification in these regula-tions. This requires, on the one hand, information about the sensitivity of the bubbletest and, on the other hand, the inclusion of a list of suitable, equally effective indus-trial test methods with their specific boundary conditions.
In practice, checks on dangerous goods transports often detect leaks of powdered dangerous goods from valved bags. In this work, the influence factors of a sudden release of powdery substances from the valves of valved bags were investigated.
Drop tests were performed on paper bags of UN design type 5M2 with internal sleeve valve using 2 different powdery substances (Esplas H130 and zinc oxide “Rotsiegel”).
The internal sleeve valves of all test samples were not sift‐proof with respect to both filling substances. For almost all test samples, the Esplas H130 powder already leaked out of pasted joints during manual filling. This is a contradiction to the requirement in UN 6.1.4.18.1, according to which closures and joints of paper bags 5M2 should be sift‐proof.
In the drop tests, longer valve lengths had a greater sealing effect for both filling substances (for filling degrees of at least 95% and for test samples which had already been mechanically loaded). As an extreme example, at the drop height of 1.20 m and a filling degree of 100%, the released amount of zinc oxide powder from a 10‐cm‐long valve was about 16 times higher than from a valve length of 12.5 cm.
The valve length is therefore a safety‐relevant parameter and should be specified by the manufacturer.
To ensure that only filling goods with similar physical properties in comparison with the test substance are used for valved bags, the user must be informed of the particle size of the test substance.
This work focuses on the question if the bubble test prescribed in the Dangerous Goods Regulations has sufficient sensitivity to detect leakage rates, which could result in the formation of explosive atmospheres during transport. The sensitivity of the bubble test is not directly comparable with other leak testing methods because of its different flow conditions. Therefore, a normalized minimum detectable leakage rate under Helium test conditions is calculated for the bubble test. This sensitivity of the bubble test under reference conditions is compared with limit leakage rates for a worst‐case transport scenario. The sensitivity of the bubble test is not sufficient to prove the limit leakage rates for 6‐L packagings. The formation of explosive vapour‐air‐mixtures cannot be excluded. Therefore, more sensitive leak testing methods should be considered for smaller packaging design types.