If a flare cannot be ignited reliably and a stable flame maintained

at all times to burn the waste gas, we do not have a flare. What we
have is a vent pipe - where unburned heavy hydrocarbons or other
combustible gases can descend to grade level and become ignited
to produce a flashback, a fire, and possibly a catastrophic explosion.
Flare Pilot Design
Vicente A. Mendoza, P.E.
Vadim G. Smolensky, PhD.
John F. Straitz III, P.E.
NAO Inc.
Enforcement of more stringent environmental regulations for vapor collection
and control has increased the need for ultra-safe and extremely reliable control
of waste gases and offgases from energy exploration and production, petroleum
refining and chemical/petrochemical, pharmaceutical, pulp and paper, and other
process industries.
Due to downsizings, deferred maintenance and other corporate cost-cutting
measures, major corporations worldwide are insisting on more reliable products,
systems and services, including state-of-art designs for flare pilots and flare
systems that combine long, dependable service lives with minimal maintenance.
Flare technology and manufacturing practices of the 1940s, '50s and '60s are
maintenance-prone, obsolete and unsafe. To protect the global environment,
plant personnel and surrounding communities, flares and their essential compo-
nents must be designed, manufactured, tested, installed and serviced to ISO-
9001 quality standards.
The four most critical components of a flare are:
o flare burner tip
o flare seal
o flare pilot burner(s)
o flare ignition system
A wide range of considerations must be addressed to design a safe flare sys-
tem. Dependable ignition, flame stability and complete combustion are the keys
to safe flare operation. If a flare cannot be ignited reliably and a stable flame
-2-
at all. times to burn the waste gas, we do not have a flare. What we
have IS a vent pipe - where unburned heavy hydrocarbons or other combusti-
ble can descend to grade level and become ignited to produce a flash-
back, a fire, and possibly a catastrophic explosion.
we d.iscuss design calculations, testing, installation and service of inspir-
atlng flare pilot burners, which differ from regular furnace or boiler inspirating
pilot burners mainly by mixture-tube length and by severe "open environment"
application conditions versus the controlled environments of furnaces and boil-
ers, let's consider state-of-art designs for flare burner tips and seals.
Flare Burner Tips and Seals
In the 1940s and '50s, density-differential seals were developed for elevated
flares. Positioned below refractory-lined flare burners, these massive "seals"
(also called labyrinth or molecular seals) consume vast amounts of expensive
purge gas; but they are only partially effective. Because these seals do not
prevent air intrusion, the flare burner tips employed with this obsolete technolo-
gy must be refractory-lined to extend tip life and delay the inevitable and very
dangerous burn-back and burn-thru conditions.
Burning inside a refractory-lined flare tip causes quick failure of the refractory,
which is also subjected to temperature/expansion cycling. Refractory failure
then leaves the upper portion of the flare burner unprotected from searing
flames that further accelerate damage to the flare tip.
Pieces of refractory accumulate in the base of the massive seal, where they
can interfere with waste gas/offgas flow, building up pressures that are suffi-
cient to "burp refractory" from an elevated stack. Spalled refractory will also
plug the drain in the base of a mole seal, accelerating corrosion and the very
dangerous burn-thru conditions. Burn-thru in a flare tip and down inside a mole
seal allows explosive gas/air mixtures to penetrate a flare system - with cata-
strophic results.
Frequent refractory maintenance, frequent flare-.tip replacements, and
out corroded sections of a mole seal, then welding on patches create senous
safety problems. Explosive gases may surround a flare stack in a refinery, gas
plant, offshore platform or chemical/petrochemical processing facility.
Dangerous Trade-Ofts for Short-Term Profits
Maintenance expenses average nine p.ercent .in refineries and large chemical/
petrochemical plants. To improve profit margins, some plant managers are
-3-
deferring maintenance, downsizing their maintenance staffs, and outsourcing
maintenance, repair and retrofit responsibilities.
Refineries and chemical plants are inherently dangerous places to work. Hun-
dred of miles of piping transport volatile, toxic and carcinogenic liquids and
gases under intense heat and pressure. Pumps and valves fail. Pipes corrode.
And refractory-lined flare tips require frequent repair and replacement.
Problems with sophisticated electronics can, for example, put an entire plant at-
risk. Recently, a pair of computers in a Texas refinery stopped communicating
with each other for 15 seconds. That brief lapse in communications and control
caused more than 66,000 gallons of naphtha to spew from several damaged
pipe connections.
A giant vapor cloud of naphtha, a highly volatile petroleum distillate, floating
above a refinery is very dangerous. (Naphtha is so explosive it can be ignited
by sparks from the distributor of a passing car.) Skilled refinery employees
acted quickly, shutting down and bypassing damaged pipelines. The vapor
cloud dissipated. The dangerous situation was over within 15 minutes.
If the naphtha had been ignited, the explosion would have leveled the refinery
unit and ruptured nearby acid-gas lines containing hydrogen sulfide, H
2
S, which
can kill many people in extremely small doses.
Knowledgeable refinery managers, who may be forced by corporate decisions
to defer maintenance, realize they cannot cut any corners in the maintenance,
repair and replacement of flare pilots and burner tips. They are also acutely
aware of the four essential requirements for elevated flares:
1. Safe, reliable operation
2. Dependable ignition
3. No air penetration into flare tips,
seals and stacks/headers
4. No shortcuts in design and construction
to ISO-9001 quality standards
Refractory-Free Fluidic Flare Tips
State-of-art elevated flares utilize a lightweight Fluidic SeaI, a patented mUlti-
cone device with no moving parts, that is built into the refractory-free alloy tip of
a Fluidic Flare burner to provide a straight-thru, wall-less venturi flow path for
waste gases in only one direction. This ensures maximum exit velocities for
better control of flare flame patterns.
-4-
the principle of the Tesla diode and the boundary-layer effect, the
reverse flow seal uses the kinetic energy of air attempting to enter a
flare tiP to turn that intruding air back upon itself. (This technology has also
been used to develop effective Fluidic Windshields for flare pilots to maintain
controlled flame patterns despite winds up to 250 mph.)
Wind and wind direction are less significant than the kinetic energy of
the wind Itself. The greater the turbulence and downward pressure of the wind,
the greater the effectiveness of the patented kinetic seal. The effectiveness of
this unique, maintenance-free seal is not influenced by wide variations in waste
gas flow.
There is no need for any troublesome refractory lining inside a Fluidic Flare tip.
Other advantages include: No bottom-mounted molecular seal with significant
structural and windloads on elevated stacks; and no need for frequent mainte-
nance and replacement of refractory-lined flare burner tips. The working life of
a Fluidic Flare tip is typically five times longer than a troublesome refractory-
lined flare tip. (Many Fluidic Flares in continuous service onshore and offshore
since the 1970s have never been replaced.)
Safety is a very important advantage of the Fluidic Flare tip. In addition to
preventing air intrusion, the compact, lightweight kinetic seal, proven in more
than 2700 worldwide installations, eliminates all serious safety problems in-
volved in cutting out corroded sections of molecular seals, removing broken re-
fractory, then welding on metal patches, high above a plant where volatile
fumes may be present.
Since the late 1970s, the Fluidic Seal has been positioned at the very top of the
refractory-free flare tip. Patents cover the unique design configuration and the
positioning of this multi-cone seal. (U.S. patents 3,730,670 & 4,092,908. Also
protected by foreign patents. Other patents pending.)
Flame Stability in Crosswinds
A flare is only as good as its ability to maintain a stable flame, despite wind and
weather conditions. An effective flame retainer/flame holder on the top of a
flare burner is the key element in maintaining a stable flame. Without a flame
retainer, the flame will lift off; and it may be snuffed out by crosswinds. The
maximum exit velocity for many flares is approximately Mach 0.2, or 220 ftls
(67 m/s) for natural gas. With other types of flame holders such as a bluff
body, the exit velocity can increase to Mach 0.5.
Unfortunately, most flame retention designs are not very effective.
-5-
An effective flame retaining device will allow both a higher exit velocity and a
smaller flare tip. The flare flame will then be erect, stable and vertical, regard-
less of crosswinds. This results in lower thermal radiation at grade level and a
much cooler, longer-lasting flare tip because flame lick along the side of the
flare burner is reduced. An effective flame retainer is also critical for maintain-
ing high combustion efficiency at velocities up to Mach O.B.
State-of-art flame retainers employ VorTuSwirt
M
vanes to swirl approximately
300/0 of the flare gas in a vortex configuration. The other 70% goes straight up.
The swirling ball of flame enhances recirculation at the base of the main flare
flame, thus assuring a stable flame and preventing dangerous flame lift-ofts and
flame-outs, regardless of variations in waste gas flow or weather conditions -
from dead-still to hurricane- or typhoon-force winds.
Design Pilots for Maximum Effectiveness
All flares require dependable pilots, reliable ignition systems, and effective pilot
windshields, which must protect pilot flames to ensure proper ignition of waste
gas streams.
Pilot windshields (nozzles), although often overlooked, are extremely important.
Without them, the risk of an inoperable flare is real danger. Even if the flame is
not extinguished by high winds, it may be directed away from the flare and ren-
dered useless. The number of pilots used on a flare should be increased ac-
cording to the diameter of the flare to prevent this possibility.
Large flares require several pilots to assure ignition, regardless of wind direc-
tion. The size and number of pilots is determined by the size, deSign, and
function of a flare, and the heat level of the waste gas.
It is important to nc;>te that in our discussion of pilot windshields, we are refer-
ring to full windshields, which protect flare pilot flames in all directions. Partial
windshields, supplied by some manufacturers, protect pilot flames from the wind
in only one direction. (Many ineffective windshields trap rain, snow and con-
densate.)
Dependable pilots incorporate stainless steel windshields, effective flame reten-
tion nozzles and pilot-air inspirating venturis with gas filters to assure a reliable
source of primary air for stable, reliable pilot flames. Fluidic Windshields, previ-
ously mentioned, assure complete protection of pilot flames, regardless of wind
speed, wind direction, and hurricane- or typhoon-force rains, which can extin-
guish poorly designed flare pilots, while filling ignitor lines with water and thus
preventing re-ignition.
{
-6-
If a flare ,pilot. is with only a simple retention-type nozzle, it is likely
to extinguished In high crosswinds. An effective windshield, the length of
which should be 1 the total length of the pilot flame, will prevent this prob-
and manufactured to 180-9001 quality standards, a
pilot windshield will protect a pilot flame and keep it lit, despite the worst on
shore or offshore conditions.
Why Constant-Burning Pilots?
constant-burning flare pilots are needed to guarantee effective ignition of waste
gas streams. Typically, flare pilots have flames that are approximately 18"
(450mm) long. To maintain optimum flame stability and reliability, an inspirating
or venturi-type gas burner is used in a flare pilot. A small gas jet, installed in
the venturi tube at the base of the pilot, will introduce a gas/air mixture for a
stable, fast burning flame and deliver that flamefront to the pilot tip.
Pilot flames become unstable or tend to blowout if they are plugged by foreign
material or dirt in the pilot gas stream. To insure proper pilot operation, it is
necessary to keep pilot lines clean*.
Retractable pilots, conveniently accessible from grade level, will simplify period-
ic inspection, cleaning and any readjustments.
Because pilot flames are not visible to the eye in daylight, a thermocouple
should be used to monitor pilot operation. A well-designed and thoroughly
proven thermocouple is a reliable, convenient method of detecting a pilot flame.
However, a thermocouple mounted on a pilot without an effective windshield will
react erratically in high winds. Wind shear will tend to blow the pilot flame away
from the thermocouple, resulting in an inaccurate "readings," thus causing false
alarms and necessitating unnecessary EPA paperwork. To prevent these prob-
lems, while minimizing wind or rain intrusion, the thermocouple should be locat-
ed inside a Fluidic Windshield.
Other Pilot Design Parameters
For an inspirating flare pilot burner, the mixture tube length may be several
hundred feet. By contrast, mixture tube lengths for the "regular" inspirating
pilots of process burners are usualty in the order of 2 to 6 ft. The influence of
Our experience shows that when a new,flare or pilot is in service, lines mU,st be
out before commissioning. Use of a strainer on fuel gas lines to keep the lines clean IS deSirable,
as is a liquid trap or knockout pot to, liquid from the stream, A strainer s,hould not be
placed in a flamefront line because It Will prevent the propagation of a flame to the pilots,
-7-
the extra-long tube lengths on the inspiration process must be taken into ac-
count in designing effective flare pilot burners.
Regular inspirating pilot burners can be designed or analyzed on the basis of
the Euler momentum equation, as applied to inspirators. This equation can be
presented as:
Eq.1
Note: Nomenclature appears at end of this paper.
Taking into account the influence of a long mixture tube on the inspiration pro-
cess can be done two ways. The first consists of entering the friction coeffi-
cient K, into equation 1. The second consists of applying a correlation for con-
sideration of the influence of friction pressure upon excess air mixture.
To evaluate the suitability of the aforementioned calculation concepts, extensive
flare pilot tests have been conducted. One experimental setup represented an
inspirating flare pilot of nominal 1-1/4" diameter with a mixture tube that could
be varied in length from 9 to 1 00 ft. Natural gas/air flow rates, exit mixture
velocities and static pressure drop in the mixture tube were measured. The
excess air factor for the gas/air mixture was determined by gas/air flow rates
and by analysis of gas/air concentrations in the mixture tube.
Test results are presented in figures 1 and 2. Lengthening the pilot leads to an
increase in the mixture pressure drop (fig. 1) and an appreciable decrease in
the excess air factor (fig. 2).
On the basis of obtained experimental data and equation 1, the value of friction
factor f in the mixture tube was determined. It is obvious from fig. 3 ("Friction
Factor vs. Pilot Length"), the value of friction factor f varies, essentially depend-
ing upon the mixture tube length. This fact contradicts the physical sense of
friction factor, which for a constant Reynolds Number for a definite fluid, pipe
diameter and pipe roughness.
Thus, it is obvious: The introduction of the friction resistance coefficient K, into
equation 1 cannot be used for a design procedure for long inspirating pilots.
This phenomenon can be explained by the fact that equation 1 was developed
primarily for flow potential conditions. Such conditions do not take into account
a complicated vortex process in a mixing tube with the presence of significant
hydraulic resistance.
l
-8-
Th.e appropriate design procedure can be done in the following way. Without
the root of the matter, we can consider the interaction between the
p'rocess and flow conditions with significant hydraulic resistance as a
black a very long flare pilot can be considered as involving two parts:
a regular InspIrator and a long mixture tube.
In.spiration be calculated by equation 1, used for regular inspirating burners
wIth short mIxture tubes. Then, the excess air factor's empirical dependence
on mixture tube pressure drop, n = can be used to enter a correction for
the value n, obtai ned from equation 1.
The function n = can be presented as dimensionless. See fig. 4 ("Excess
Air Factor vs. Pressure Drop"). This allows the use of the design procedure for
mixture tubes of different lengths and diameters in English or metric measure-
ments.
Inspiration calculations carried out on the basis of this developed design proce-
dure demonstrate good accuracy. The average design error for flare pilots in
the range of lengths up to 100 ft was 5 percent. Fig. 5, with equations 2 thru 5,
depicts the appropriate design procedure steps.
Assuring Reliable Ignition
A constant burning pilot flame is essential since any gas vented from a flare
must be ignited. Pilot ignition systems have come a long way in recent years.
It wasn't so long ago that major companies were using flaming arrows, burning
rags on pulleys and other primitive ignition methods.
The most common ignition system is a flamefront generator with remote ignition
panel, developed in the 1940s by a major oil company. While there are certain
misconceptions about the operation and reliability of these panels, they usually
can be attributed to a limited working knowledge and/or an improper installation.
Air and fuel gas are metered through orifices in the remote ignition panel to
form a combustible mixture; then a spark is introduced to generate a flame
which is delivered through a 1" diameter pipe to the flare pilot, safely and quick-
ly. When there are multiple flare pilots, there are either valves to direct flame-
fronts to each pilot or a manifold to direct a single ball of flame to all pilots at
the same time.
The ball of flame travels thru the pipe with the combined velocity of the gas/air
mixture [approximately 88 ftls (27m/s)]. With natural gas, the burning speed of
the flame is 75 ftls (23 m/s). The flamefront arrives at the top of the flare stack
-9-
to ignite the pilots within a few seconds. This type of flare ignition system has
been used for many years.
One of the drawbacks of this system is that ignitor lines can accumulate mois-
ture and condensate and ultimately become fouled or plugged. Underground
lines should be avoided since these are inevitable havens for the buildup of
water and other "plugs." If an underground line must go under a road or other
obstruction, it must have a proper slope with a drain accessible for cleanout at
the low point.
Keep Ignition System Dry
Moisture is the single most significant problem to consider when locating and
installing a pilot ignition system. The air which is mixed with the gas steam
must be dry. If not, it will collect condensate. A condensate trap or small
knockout pot must be employed.
Wet compressed air will flood ignition lines and short-out spark plugs, prevent-
ing ignition of the pilots. Even the use of dry instrument air and/or dryers can-
not guarantee the complete prevention of moisture, because the combustion
process generates water vapor. A drain valve should be installed at the lowest
point of the line between the ignition panel and the pilot as a method of elimi-
nating condensate produced by flamefronts.
Before ignition of a flare pilot is attempted, the air valve on the ignition panel
should be opened to allow any existing moisture to escape. The spark plug can
then be checked by using the pushbutton and sightport. It is important that the
proper pipe size be used, as specified by the equipment supplier, along with
appropriate air and gas pressures to deliver the flamefront to the pilot with a
velocity of approximately 100 ftls (30.5 m/s).
Oversized or undersized lines will not produce good results; and they will lead
to problems. Oversized lines will cause slow travel of the flamefront, allowing it
to cool off and go out. Undersized lines may increase the speed and turbu-
lence of the flamefront and cause it to be unstable.
By opening the air valve to approximately 20 psig and the gas valve to about
10 psig, a mixture close to the optimum requirement for a proper flamefront will
be achieved.
It is imperative that installation instructions must be adhered to. A common
problem is the reversal of ignitor and pilot tubes from the pilot gas supply to the
pilot venturi. This can be avoided easily if proper care is taken during installa-
-10-
tion.
Electronic Ignition of Flare Pilots
For more than a decade, the trend has been toward electronic ignition. 8tate-
of-art, a high-energy excitor, originally developed for
of Jet aircraft engines. With this high-energy excitor, any
mOisture or dirt bUildup on a pilot tip will literally be blown off by the spark.
The use of a direct spark at the top of the flare has been tried many times. It
was abandoned in the late 1940s. Top-mounted ignitors will fail quickly be-
cause they are subjected to flame impingement.
Remote-spark pilots, designed and manufactured to 180-9001 standards, offer
fast paybacks for retrofit installations. Thousands are in service worldwide, in-
cluding hundreds of replacements for defective, unreliable, short-life pilots.
Complete Combustion of Waste Gases
Typical flare combustion efficiencies are 99+% for hydrocarbons such as natural
gas, ethane, propane and butane. Hydrocarbons such as ethylene and propyl-
ene will have similar efficiencies if smokeless operation is achieved through the
use of steam, air blower or mUlti-tip designs. The combustion efficiency will be
lower for gases having low-Btu heating value from high contents of nitrogen,
carbon dioxide, water vapor or other inert media.
For EPA compliance, if the heating value is below 300 Btu/scf
3
(11.2 MJ/m3),
some auxiliary fuel such as natural gas or propane must be utilized to increase
the heating value. In some applications, particularly if H
2
8 is present, the heat-
ing value must be further increased. When a gas contains considerable quanti-
ties of hydrogen carbon monoxide (as is the case for steel plant gases)
that are fast burning, the minimum heating value for complete combustion can
be as low as 80 to 90 Btu/scf
3
(3.4 MJ/m3); but those low-Btu gases must be
enriched to comply with EPA regulations.
If a flare requires steam or assist gas, one should consider using a low profile
enclosed flare. An enclosed "ground flare," sometimes called a thermal oxidizer
flare, will allow complete combustion of a gas at a lower calorific content without
the use of any assist media.
Burners are the key to reliability and performance of state-of-art low profile
enclosed flares, which require no steam to maintain smokeless destruction of
waste gases and waste liquids. With these flares, there are no visible flames,
-11-
no objectionable noise, no thermal radiation problems, and no possibility of
"burning rain" (liquid carryover from elevated flares with improperly designed
knockout drums) splattering plant personnel and equipment.
Conclusion
With dependable pilots, flares will dispose of unwanted waste gases safely and
reliably, while protecting the global environment and providing trouble-free oper-
ation. Proper operation, however, entails a joint responsibility between manu-
facturer and user. A good working knowledge of the principles of flare design
and function by the user will preclude many problems before they occur.
To deliver the most appropriate, safe flaring system, it is the responsibility of
the flare manufacturer to know all detailed operating parameters and to refuse
to quote flare systems which are inherently unsafe. To make full use of today's
proven technologies, there must be a complete understanding between respon-
sible buyers (including engineering contractors), ISO-certified manufacturers
and end-users.
References:
1. "Eliminate Air Polluting Smoke in Petroleum Processing," by Walter R. Smith, pp. 61-67, Oct.
1954, Chemical Engineering.
2. "Predicting Radiant Heating from Flares," by T.A. Brzutowski and E.C. Sommer, Jr., 38th API
Midyear Meeting, May 17, '73, Philadelphia, PA.
3. "Flaring in the Energy Industry," Brzutowski, Prog. Energy Combustion SCience, Vol 2, pp. 129-
41, '76, Pergamon Press, Great Britain.
4. "Flare Safety and Engineering," by John F. Straitz III , P.E., 11th Annual Loss Symposium,
AIChE, March 20-24, '77, Houston, TX.
5. "Make the Flare Protect the Environment, " Straitz, pp. 76-81 , Oct. 7, '77, Hydrocarbon
Processing.
6. "Solving Flare Noise Problems, " Straitz, May 8-10, '78, Inter-Noise78 Seminar, S. Francisco, CA.
7. "Proper Flare Operation Conserves Energy In Refinery," Straitz, pp. 37-42, Jan.1, '77, Oil &
Gas Journal.
8. "Flare Technology Safety," Straitz, pp.53-62, July '87, Chemical Engineering Progress.
9. "High-Performance Offshore Flares," Straitz, Fourth Annual Flare System Symposium, Oct. 14-
16, '86, Trodheim, Norway.
10. "How New Pilots Were Installed on an Operating Flare," Straitz, pp. 33-34, March '92, Oil, Gas
& Petrochem Equipment.
11 . "Improve Flare Design," Straitz, pp 86-90, Oct. '94, Hydrocarbon Processing.
12. "Where Safety Is Paramount," Straitz, pp 62-66, Feb. '96, PetroMin.
13. "Use el Quemador Optima Para Cada Aplication," Straitz, pp 76-79, May '96, Petroleo Internac-
ional.
14 . "Improve Flare Safety to Meet ISO-9001 Standards," Strai tz, pp 109-11 0 & 112, 114, June '96
Hydrocarbon Processing. '
II
-12-
Fig. 1 Mixture Pressure Drop vs Pilot Length

u
3
.6
c
Q.
0

0
(1)

:J
en
en
(1)

CL
.4
(1)

:J
:B



o 20 00
Pilot Length I Ft.
Pilpap.grf
-13-
Fig. 2 Excess Air Factor vs Pilot Length


-
0
-+-
u .7
0
u..
-

(/)
(/)
(l)
u
X
LU
.6
Pilot Length I Ft.
pilpopl.grf
'-
0
-+-
()
0
u..
c
0
-
()

u...
-14-
Fig. 3 Friction Factor vs Pilot Length

.
A


.01 ,
- . . . .
- - .
- - -
.01
o
o
pilpop 1.grt
20 40 80 100
Pilot Length I Ft.
,......
(,/)
(,/)
Q)
c
o
(,/)
c
Q)
E
-0
'-"
'--
o
+-
o
o
u-
(,/)
(,/)
Q)
o
x
UJ
-15-
Fig. 4 Excess Air Foetor (dimensionless) vs
Pressure Drop (dimensionless)
, 8 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~
~ ~
, 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~
',0. __
, 4 ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~
o 10 20
30
Pressure Drop (dimensionless)
I
pil pap 1 .grt
I'=>
-16-
Fig. 5 Pilot Design Procedure Steps
Step 1. Determine the mixture excess air factor no for given values
of gas jet. diameter dj , bumer nozzle diameter d
n
, type of gas, and
for gas/air temperatures as for a regular (short) inspirating burner.
This determination can be done using a regular inspiration
equation, for example eq. (1).
Step 2. Determine gas volume flow rate Qg, mixture volume flow
rate Qmix and mixture velocity in a mixture tube V for given values
of jet diameter dj, burner nozzle diameter d
n
and gas pressure P g
as for a regular (short) inspirating burner.
Step 3. Determine friction factor f by a value of Reynolds Number in
the mixture tube.
Step 4. Calculate the friction pressure drop value flp 1.0 for a regular
inspirating burner with a short mixture tube with a length 10:
I V2
AnI =fX-
o
X-XP .
.0 d
ll
2g mu
Eq.2
Step 5. Calculate the friction pressure drop value /1 Pf for the real
pilot mixture tube with the length I:
I V2
flpl=fxdx2xPma Eq.3
11 g
Step 6. Calculate the dimensionless value of friction pressure drop
An - !1p1
'-'j/ I -
!1p 1.0
Eq. 4
Step 7. Find on Fig.4 the dimensionless value of excess air factor by
value of I1PI
Step 8. Calculate the actual excess air factor value for flare pilot
with the length I :
Eq.5
An
A'
LJ
ro
rg
rmix
K
f
Kf
no
n
g
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
-17-
Nomenclature
cross sectional area of a burner nozzle, ft2
cross sectional area of a gas jet, ft2
actual volume of inspirating air per unit volume of
gas, ft3/ft3
air density, Ib/ft
3
gas density, Ib /ft
3
air-gas mixture density, Ib/ft
3
drag coefficient for air entrance and air-gas mixture
exit
friction factor
friction resistance coefficient
excess air factor for a regular inspirating burner
excess air factor for an inspirating pilot with a long
mixture tube
pressure drop for a regular inspirating burner, Ib/ft
2
pressure drop for an inspirating pilot with a long
mixture tube, Ib/ft
2
gas jet diameter, ft I
burner nozzle diameter, ft
gas volume flow rate, scfh
gas-air mixture volume flow rate, scfh
mixture velocity in a mixture tube, fps
gas pressure, psig
mixture tube length for a regular inspirating burner,
ft
mixture tube length for an inspirating pilot with a
long mixture tube, ft
acceleration of gravity, 32.17 ft/sec
2
!if = /:;Pf == dimensionless friction pressure drop
flp /.0
_ n
n=-
no
= dimensionless excess air factor