USBM Schedule 2G Comparison

Before going directly to the analysis, it would be good to summar¬ize explosion-proof container approval methods. Both Magison (52) and Short (84) state that in general practice, the systems are certified for: 1. a rugged enclosure able to withstand an internal explosion but not allow explosively hot gases to escape, and 2. maximum surface temperature, with equipment operating inside, that will not ignite the surrounding atmosphere. Also, testing insures that any material in contact with the container surface will not be ignited by a hot spot. Associated with the first practice, the enclosures are inspected for: 1. a safe flange gap width, 2. a pressure increase during ignition, and 3. an hydrostatic pressure withstand level. The hydrostatic pressure level is almost always determined by a meas¬ured ignition-pressure test and is usually applied to prove the mechan¬ical design to some safety factor. Consequently, explosion-proof enclosure testing includes temper¬ature, permissible flame gap, and pressure. Specifications and prev¬ious research also can be similarly separated even though some interre¬lation exists between the flame gap size and internal enclosure pressure during an explosion. The Schedule 2G Sections applicable to these subjects are: 1. 18.2 Definitions; 2. 18.6 Applications;