Live support chatExplosion at the DuPont Buffalo Facility (Ohio T&M)
Credit: 1 PDH
Subject Matter Expert: Edward P. Brunet, Jr., P.E.
In Explosion at the DuPont Buffalo Facility, you'll learn ...
- What caused a deadly explosion at the Dupont Buffalo plant
- How faulty design assumptions contributed to the incident
- Shortcomings in the plant’s procedures and work permit process
- Steps that should have been taken immediately prior to and during hot work, which could have prevented the explosion
Overview
To meet the Ohio Board's intent that online courses be "paced" by the provider, a timer will be used to record your study time. You will be unable to access the quiz until the required study time of 50 minutes has been met.
Credit: 1 PDH
Length: 17 pages
On November 9, 2010, hot work being performed on a tank at the DuPont Yerkes plant in Towanda, NY (near Buffalo, NY) set off an explosion that killed one worker and injured another.
The work being performed that day involved repairing the weld on an agitator support mounted at the top of the tank. The repair involved a simple fillet weld, which did not penetrate the tank shell. And the tank had been used for decades to store what engineers thought was “only a slurry basically made up of water”. Nonetheless, the welding repair work ignited an explosion inside the tank.
In this course, you’ll learn what caused the explosion in Slurry Tank #1 at the Dupont Buffalo plant. We’ll review the polyvinyl fluoride (PVF) production process at the plant and how faulty design assumptions contributed to the accident. You’ll see how mistakes, shortcomings and human error in the plant’s maintenance practices, operational decisions, start-up procedure, management of change (MOC) process and work permit process led to the explosion.
Specific Knowledge or Skill Obtained
This course teaches the following specific knowledge and skills:
- What is polyvinyl fluoride (PVF), how it is made and what it is used for
- The dangers associated with components used in the PVF production process
- The risks inherent with welding, brazing and other hot work activities
- Why it is important to check for explosive atmospheres prior to hot work – even with seemingly benign containers, tanks and vessels
- Faulty assumptions made in the process hazard analysis (PHA) during the project’s design phase
- Errors, shortcomings, and bad decisions made in the days and weeks leading up to the accident
Certificate of Completion
You will be able to immediately print a certificate of completion after passing a multiple-choice quiz consisting of 10 questions. PDH credits are not awarded until the course is completed and quiz is passed.
| This course is applicable to professional engineers in: | ||
| Alabama (P.E.) | Alaska (P.E.) | Arkansas (P.E.) |
| Delaware (P.E.) | District of Columbia (P.E.) | Florida (P.E. Area of Practice) |
| Georgia (P.E.) | Idaho (P.E.) | Illinois (P.E.) |
| Illinois (S.E.) | Indiana (P.E.) | Iowa (P.E.) |
| Kansas (P.E.) | Kentucky (P.E.) | Louisiana (P.E.) |
| Maine (P.E.) | Maryland (P.E.) | Michigan (P.E.) |
| Minnesota (P.E.) | Mississippi (P.E.) | Missouri (P.E.) |
| Montana (P.E.) | Nebraska (P.E.) | Nevada (P.E.) |
| New Hampshire (P.E.) | New Jersey (P.E.) | New Mexico (P.E.) |
| New York (P.E.) | North Carolina (P.E.) | North Dakota (P.E.) |
| Ohio (P.E. Timed & Monitored) | Oklahoma (P.E.) | Oregon (P.E.) |
| Pennsylvania (P.E.) | South Carolina (P.E.) | South Dakota (P.E.) |
| Tennessee (P.E.) | Texas (P.E.) | Utah (P.E.) |
| Vermont (P.E.) | Virginia (P.E.) | West Virginia (P.E.) |
| Wisconsin (P.E.) | Wyoming (P.E.) | |
To meet the Ohio Board's intent that online courses be "paced" by the provider, a timer will be used to record your study time. You will be unable to access the quiz until the required study time of 50 minutes has been met.
Credit: 1 PDH
Length: 17 pages
