Hubbry Logo
Inerting systemInerting systemMain
Open search
Inerting system
Community hub
Inerting system
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Inerting system
Inerting system
Inerting system
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

An inerting system decreases the probability of combustion of flammable materials stored in a confined space. The most common such system is a fuel tank containing a combustible liquid, such as gasoline, diesel fuel, aviation fuel, jet fuel, or rocket propellant. After being fully filled, and during use, there is a space above the fuel, called the ullage, that contains evaporated fuel mixed with air, which contains the oxygen necessary for combustion. Under the right conditions this mixture can ignite. An inerting system replaces the air with a gas that cannot support combustion, such as nitrogen.[1][2]

Principle of operation

[edit]

Three elements are required to initiate and sustain combustion in the ullage: an ignition source (heat), fuel, and oxygen. Combustion may be prevented by reducing any one of these three elements. In many cases there is no ignition source, e.g. storage tanks. If the presence of an ignition source can not be prevented, as is the case with most tanks that feed fuel to internal combustion engines, then the tank may be made non-ignitable by progressively adding an inert gas to the ullage as the fuel is consumed. At present carbon dioxide or nitrogen are used almost exclusively, although some systems use nitrogen-enriched air, or steam. Using these inert gases reduces the oxygen concentration of the ullage to below the combustion threshold.

Oil tankers

[edit]

Oil tankers fill the empty space above the oil cargo with inert gas to prevent fire or explosion of hydrocarbon vapors. Oil vapors cannot burn in air with less than 11% oxygen content. The inert gas may be supplied by cooling and scrubbing the flue gas produced by the ship's boilers. Where diesel engines are used, the exhaust gas may contain too much oxygen so fuel-burning inert gas generators may be installed. One-way valves are installed in process piping to the tanker spaces to prevent volatile hydrocarbon vapors or mist from entering other equipment.[3] Inert gas systems have been required on oil tankers since the SOLAS regulations of 1974. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) publishes technical standard IMO-860 describing the requirements for inert gas systems. Other types of cargo such as bulk chemicals may also be carried in inerted tanks, but the inerting gas must be compatible with the chemicals used.

Aircraft

[edit]

Fuel tanks for combat aircraft have long been inerted, as well as being self-sealing, but those for military cargo aircraft and civilian transport category aircraft usually were not. Early applications using nitrogen were on the Handley Page Halifax III and VIII, Short Stirling, and Avro Lincoln B.II, which incorporated inerting systems from around 1944.[4][5][6]

Cleve Kimmel first proposed an inerting system to passenger airlines in the early 1960s.[7] His proposed system for passenger aircraft would have used nitrogen. However, the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) did not mandate installation of an inerting system at that time. Early versions of Kimmel's system weighed 2,000 pounds. The FAA focused on keeping ignition sources out of the fuel tanks.

The FAA did not formally propose lightweight inerting systems for commercial jets until the 1996 explosion of TWA Flight 800, a Boeing 747, caused by the ignition of fuel-air vapours in the center wing fuel tank. This tank is normally used only on very long flights, and little fuel was present in the tank at the time of the explosion. A small amount of fuel in a tank is more dangerous than a large amount, since it takes less heat to raise the temperature of the remaining fuel. This causes the ullage fuel-to-air ratio to increase and exceed the lower flammability limit. A small amount of fuel in the tank leaves pumps on the floor of the tank exposed to the air-fuel mixture, and an electric pump is a potential ignition source. The explosion of a Thai Airways International Boeing 737 in 2001 and a Philippine Airlines 737 in 1990 also occurred in tanks that had a small amount of residual fuel. These three explosions occurred on warm days, in the center wing tank (CWT) that is within the contours of the fuselage. These fuel tanks are located in the vicinity of external equipment that inadvertently heats the fuel tanks. The National Transportation Safety Board's (NTSB) final report on the crash of the TWA 747 concluded "The fuel air vapor in the ullage of the TWA flight 800 CWT was flammable at the time of the accident". NTSB identified "Elimination of Explosive Mixture in Fuel tanks in Transport Category Aircraft" as Number 1 item on its Most Wanted List in 1997.[citation needed]

After the TWA Flight 800 crash, a 2001 report by an FAA committee stated that U.S. airlines would have to spend US$35 billion to retrofit their existing aircraft fleets with inerting systems that might prevent such explosions. However, another FAA group developed a nitrogen-enriched air (NEA) based inerting system prototype that operated on compressed air supplied by the aircraft's propulsive engines. Also, the FAA determined that the fuel tank could be rendered inert by reducing the ullage oxygen concentration to 12% rather than the previously accepted threshold of 9 to 10%. Boeing commenced testing a derivative system of their own, performing successful test flights in 2003 with several Boeing 747 aircraft.

The new, simplified inerting system based on membrane gas separation technology was originally suggested to the FAA through public comment. It uses a hollow fiber membrane material to separate supplied air into nitrogen-enriched air (NEA) and oxygen enriched air (OEA). This technology is extensively used for generating oxygen-enriched air for medical purposes. It uses a membrane that preferentially allows the nitrogen molecule (molecular weight 28) to pass through it but not the oxygen molecule (molecular weight 32).

Unlike the inerting systems on military aircraft, this inerting system runs continuously to reduce fuel vapor flammability whenever the aircraft's engines are running. The goal is to reduce oxygen content within the fuel tank to 12%, lower than normal atmospheric oxygen content of 21%, but higher than that of inerted military aircraft fuel tanks, which have a target of 9% oxygen. Inerting in military aircraft is typically accomplished by ventilating fuel-vapor laden ullage gas out of the tank and into the atmosphere.

FAA rules

[edit]

After what it said was seven years of investigation, the FAA proposed a rule in November 2005, in response to an NTSB recommendation, which would require airlines to "reduce the flammability levels of fuel tank vapors on the ground and in the air". This was a shift from the previous 40 years of policy in which the FAA focused only on reducing possible sources of ignition of fuel tank vapors.

The FAA issued the final rule on 21 July 2008. The rule amends regulations applicable to the design of new airplanes (14CFR§25.981), and introduces new regulations for continued safety (14CFR§26.31–39), Operating Requirements for Domestic Operations (14CFR§121.1117) and Operating Requirements for Foreign Air Carriers (14CFR§129.117). The regulations apply to airplanes certificated after 1 January 1958 of passenger capacity of 30 or more or payload capacity of greater than 7500 pounds. The regulations are performance based and do not require the implementation of a particular method.

The proposed rule would affect all future fixed-wing aircraft designs (passenger capacity greater than 30), and require a retrofit of more than 3,200 Airbus and Boeing aircraft with center wing fuel tanks, over nine years. The FAA had initially planned to also order installation on cargo aircraft, but this was removed from the order by the Bush administration. Additionally, regional jets and smaller commuter planes would not be subject to the rule, because the FAA does not consider them at high risk for a fuel-tank explosion. The FAA estimated the cost of the program at US$808 million over the next 49 years, including US$313 million to retrofit the existing fleet. It compared this cost to an estimated US$1.2 billion "cost to society" from a large airliner exploding in mid-air. The proposed rule came at a time when nearly half of the U.S. airlines' capacity was on carriers that were in bankruptcy.[8]

The order affects aircraft whose air conditioning units have a possibility of heating up what can be considered a normally empty center wing fuel tank. Some Airbus A320 and Boeing 747 aircraft are slated for "early action". Regarding new aircraft designs, the Airbus A380 does not have a center wing fuel tank and is therefore exempt, and the Boeing 787 has a fuel tank safety system that already complies with the proposed rule. The FAA has stated that there have been four fuel tank explosions in the previous 16 years—two on the ground, and two in the air—and that based on this statistic and on the FAA's estimate that one such explosion would happen every 60 million hours of flight time, about 9 such explosions will probably occur in the next 50 years. The inerting systems will probably prevent 8 of those 9 probable explosions, the FAA said. Before the inerting system rule was proposed, Boeing stated that it would install its own inerting system on airliners it manufactures beginning in 2005. Airbus had argued that its planes' electrical wiring made the inerting system an unnecessary expense.

As of 2009, the FAA had a pending rule to increase the standards of on board inerting systems again. New technologies are being developed by others to provide fuel tank inerting:

  1. The On-Board Inert Gas Generation System (OBIGGS) system, tested in 2004 by the FAA and NASA, with an opinion written by the FAA in 2005.[9] This system is currently in use by many military aircraft types, including the C-17. This system provides the level of safety that the proposed increase in standards by the proposed FAA rules has been written around. Critics of this system cite the high maintenance cost reported by the military.
  2. Three independent research and development firms have proposed new technologies in response to Research & Development grants by the FAA and SBA. The focus of these grants is to develop a system that is superior to OBIGGS that can replace classic inerting methods. None of these approaches has been validated in the general scientific community, nor have these efforts produced commercially available products. All the firms have issued press releases or given non-peer reviewed talks.[10]

Other methods

[edit]

Another method in current use to inert fuel tanks is an ullage system. The FAA has decided that the added weight of an ullage system makes it impractical for implementation in the aviation field.[11] Some U.S. military aircraft still use nitrogen based foam inerting systems, and some companies will ship containers of fuel with an ullage system across rail transportation routes.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Inerting system

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
An inerting system is an engineering safety measure designed to prevent explosions and fires by introducing an inert gas into an enclosed space, such as a storage tank or process vessel, to displace oxygen and reduce its concentration below the level required to support combustion of flammable substances. This process, known as inerting or inert gas blanketing, creates a non-reactive atmosphere that eliminates or minimizes the risk of ignition in environments handling volatile hydrocarbons, chemicals, or fuels. By maintaining oxygen levels below the limiting oxygen concentration (LOC)—for instance, 9% for benzene when using nitrogen—inerting systems ensure that even if an ignition source is present, no explosive reaction can occur. Common inert gases employed in these systems include (the most widely used due to its availability and inert properties), , , and sometimes flue gases from combustion processes. Methods of inerting vary by application and include purging (displacing air through dilution or displacement), blanketing (covering liquid surfaces to prevent air ingress), and sparging (bubbling gas through liquids to mix and inert). Systems often incorporate monitoring equipment, such as oxygen analyzers, alarms, and backup supplies, to maintain reliability and a slight positive that avoids re-entry of ambient air. These setups can rely on on-site generation (e.g., via modules) or stored bulk gases, with nitrogen purity typically exceeding 99% for effective oxygen reduction. Inerting systems find critical applications across industries, including the chemical sector for reactors, storage tanks, and pipelines to protect against undesired reactions and ; maritime operations on oil tankers, where exhaust gases blanket cargo tanks to exclude oxygen from vapor spaces; and , where onboard generation systems (OBIGGS) produce nitrogen-enriched air to inert tanks. In , these systems evolved significantly following incidents like the 1996 explosion, with the U.S. (FAA) developing hollow-fiber membrane-based OBIGGS in the 1990s to keep oxygen below 12%, a mandate now required on new commercial . Overall, inerting enhances , preserves product quality, and complies with standards such as BS 5908:1990 and FAA regulations, though it requires careful management to mitigate risks like asphyxiation in confined spaces.

Fundamentals

Definition and Purpose

An inerting system is a safety engineering mechanism designed to introduce inert gases, such as nitrogen or carbon dioxide, into enclosed spaces containing flammable materials to displace oxygen and reduce its concentration below the limiting oxygen concentration (LOC) required for combustion. This process creates a non-combustible atmosphere, thereby preventing the ignition of flammable vapors, liquids, or dusts in potentially hazardous environments like storage tanks or processing vessels. The primary purpose of inerting systems is to mitigate the risks of fires and explosions by eliminating or minimizing the oxidizer component of the , enhancing overall safety during the transport, storage, and handling of volatile substances. By maintaining oxygen levels below combustible thresholds, these systems significantly reduce the probability of catastrophic incidents, providing a critical layer of in high-risk operations. Inerting systems find broad application across maritime, , and industrial sectors, where they safeguard fuel tanks, cargo holds, and chemical processing equipment from explosive hazards. A key distinction exists between inerting, which involves the continuous or ongoing reduction of oxygen to sustain a atmosphere, and purging, which is a one-time displacement of gases to initially clear a space without necessarily maintaining low oxygen levels over time.

Principle of Operation

Inerting systems operate by introducing an inert gas into a confined space containing flammable materials, thereby diluting the oxygen concentration to a level below the limiting oxygen concentration (LOC), which is the minimum oxygen level required to support combustion in a fuel-inert gas mixture. This process prevents ignition by ensuring that even if fuel vapors and an ignition source are present, the oxidizer (oxygen) component is insufficient for a sustained flame. The LOC varies by fuel type but typically ranges from 10% to 15% by volume in air at standard conditions. This mechanism disrupts the flammability triangle, a model representing the three essential elements for —, (ignition source), and oxidizer—by effectively removing the oxidizer leg through oxygen reduction. For vapors, such as those from , the LOC is approximately 11-12% at , rising slightly with altitude due to changes. The dilution process can be described by the basic mixing equation for oxygen concentration at constant : O2,final=O2,initial×V+0×VinertV+Vinert\text{O}_{2,\text{final}} = \frac{\text{O}_{2,\text{initial}} \times V + 0 \times V_{\text{inert}}}{V + V_{\text{inert}}} where O2,initial\text{O}_{2,\text{initial}} is the initial oxygen concentration, VV is the initial volume, and VinertV_{\text{inert}} is the volume of inert gas added. To ensure safety, systems incorporate continuous monitoring using oxygen sensors (e.g., electrochemical or paramagnetic analyzers) that detect levels in real-time, triggering automated inert gas injection via valves or pumps to maintain concentrations with a safety margin, typically 2% below the LOC. Efficiency is influenced by environmental factors: higher temperatures lower the LOC (by 0.5-1% per 100°C for vapors), and gas solubility (e.g., higher for CO₂ in liquids) can alter effective oxygen levels. Broadly, oxygen levels below 15% are targeted to provide a conservative margin above most fuel-specific LOCs, preventing flammability across varied conditions.

Types of Inerting Systems

Inerting systems employ various es to displace oxygen and prevent in enclosed spaces, with the choice of gas depending on the application, availability, and safety considerations. is the most commonly used inert gas, particularly in , due to its high availability from processes and its inert, non-reactive properties that minimize risks to equipment and fuel integrity. (CO2) is frequently selected for industrial applications because of its lower cost and ease of storage, though it requires careful handling to avoid potential issues like increased in hydrocarbons. , primarily composed of CO2 and from exhaust, is utilized in maritime settings, such as oil tankers, for its on-board generation without additional equipment. Other gases, like , are reserved for specialized high-purity needs where minimal reactivity is essential, though they are less common due to higher costs. Inerting systems can be categorized by their method of gas delivery and generation. Direct injection systems rely on pre-stored from high-pressure cylinders, allowing rapid deployment in compact spaces but limited by the finite supply and need for refilling. On-site generation systems produce continuously using technologies like separation, which filters to yield nitrogen-enriched air (NEA) with 90-95% content, suitable for sustained operations in . Exhaust-based systems, such as inert gas generators (IGGs), capture and process to create low-oxygen mixtures, commonly applied in large-scale maritime environments for cost-effective, high-volume inerting. Key components of inerting systems include gas generators or sources for producing or storing the inert medium, distribution piping to deliver the gas to target areas, oxygen analyzers to monitor and maintain safe oxygen levels (typically below 8-12%), and control valves to regulate flow and pressure. These elements ensure precise operation, with analyzers providing real-time feedback to prevent over- or under-inerting. The advantages and disadvantages of different gases influence system design. Nitrogen offers non-corrosive properties and low solubility in fuels, reducing equipment degradation and maintaining inerting efficiency over time, making it ideal for aviation fuel tanks. In contrast, CO2 provides effective inerting at lower concentrations but poses risks of acidity when combined with moisture, potentially leading to corrosion in metallic components, and its higher solubility in jet fuels can diminish long-term performance. Flue gas systems are economical but may introduce particulates or sulfur compounds, necessitating additional scrubbing. Selection of an inerting system type hinges on operational constraints, including space limitations—favoring compact on-site generators over bulky cylinder storage—gas purity requirements for sensitive processes, and environmental factors such as the availability of exhaust sources or the need to minimize emissions. For instance, membrane-based nitrogen systems excel in weight-sensitive aviation due to their efficiency, while flue gas suits emission-heavy industrial sites.

Historical Development

Early Implementations

The origins of inerting systems trace back to , when pioneered their use to mitigate vulnerabilities. Early efforts focused on displacing oxygen in to prevent ignition from incendiary bullets or other threats. For instance, attempts to employ (CO2), (N2), and engine exhaust gases for inerting the space above fuel were explored by military engineers, though technical challenges limited widespread adoption during the war. These systems aimed to create a non-combustible atmosphere by reducing oxygen levels below the threshold needed for , marking the initial application of gas displacement principles for prevention in high-risk environments. Post-war, inerting technologies saw experimental adoption in industrial settings during the and , particularly for preventing dust explosions in storage facilities. In grain silos, fumigation emerged as an early method not only for but also to suppress ignition risks from combustible dust accumulations, building on demonstrations from the that evolved into practical trials by . Similarly, chemical storage tanks began incorporating inert gases to safeguard flammable liquids, to lower oxygen concentrations and avert vapor ignition. These trials emphasized conceptual reliability over scale, prioritizing oxygen dilution to stay below 11-12% in enclosed spaces prone to mixtures. In the maritime sector, the marked the start of experimental inerting on oil tankers, driven by recurring vapor ignition incidents during handling. Oil majors conducted documented trials with exhaust-derived to fill empty tank spaces, reducing probabilities by maintaining low oxygen levels—typically under 8%—in hydrocarbon-laden atmospheres. These pioneering systems, often boiler-flue based, addressed the hazards of volatile oil vapors in large-volume tanks, laying groundwork for broader measures. A pivotal catalyst in the was the surge in tanker incidents, including s and spills that underscored the dire risks from non-inerted holds. Events like the rising frequency of tanker blasts amid growing vessel sizes highlighted the urgent need for standardized inerting, prompting initial international discussions within frameworks that would evolve into SOLAS protocols.

Key Regulatory Milestones

The adoption of the 1974 International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) marked a pivotal regulatory advancement for inerting systems in maritime applications, initially mandating their installation on oil tankers of deadweight tons (DWT) and above, with subsequent amendments extending the requirement to those of DWT and above, to mitigate risks from flammable vapor ignition in cargo tanks. This requirement, developed in response to a series of devastating tanker s in the early —such as those involving vapor accumulation and ignition—aimed to maintain non-flammable atmospheres in tanks by introducing , with the provisions entering into force on 1 July 1981 for newbuilds delivered after that date. The SOLAS amendments under Chapter II-2, Regulation 4.5.5, specified that inert gas systems must render and maintain cargo tank atmospheres inert at all times except during cargo operations, significantly reducing global maritime fire incidents. In the 1980s, the (IMO) further refined these standards through Assembly Resolution A.566(14), adopted on November 20, 1985, which provided draft amendments to SOLAS Regulation II-2/55.5, allowing alternative arrangements to full inert gas systems under specific conditions for certain tankers while emphasizing equivalent safety levels. Complementing this, Resolution A.567(14), also adopted in 1985, established detailed regulations for inert gas systems on chemical tankers, requiring systems to be designed, constructed, and tested to prevent flammable mixtures, with capabilities for automatic flow regulation and oxygen monitoring below 8%. These resolutions built on the SOLAS framework by extending inerting requirements to chemical carriers and providing technical guidelines that influenced national implementations, such as those in the U.S. Coast Guard's navigation and vessel inspection circulars. The aviation sector saw accelerated regulatory progress following the July 17, 1996, explosion of TWA Flight 800, where a center wing fuel tank detonation—caused by ignition of flammable fuel/air vapors—resulted in the loss of all 230 people on board, prompting the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to initiate extensive research into fuel tank inerting technologies. This tragedy, investigated by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), highlighted vulnerabilities in ullage spaces and spurred global efforts, including FAA-led development of nitrogen-enriched air (NEA) systems to reduce oxygen concentrations and flammability exposure. Culminating in the FAA's July 21, 2008, Final Rule on Reduction of Fuel Tank Flammability (14 CFR Parts 25 and 26), the regulation required flammability reduction means—such as NEA systems—on new transport-category airplanes with high-flammability tanks, mandating fleet-average exposure below 3% and oxygen limits of 12% at altitudes up to 10,000 feet, with service instructions effective by September 20, 2010. In the , international alignment advanced through the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and the (ICAO), with EASA's Safety Information Bulletin 2010-10 (revised 2011) mandating flammability reduction systems (FRS), including NEA inerting, for new production aircraft to harmonize with the FAA rule and prevent explosions. This bulletin required FRS installation on airplanes with center tanks exposed to high flammability, aligning cut-in dates with FAA timelines and emphasizing simulations for compliance assessment. ICAO incorporated these standards into Annex 8 (Airworthiness of Aircraft) updates during the decade, promoting global adoption of inerting as a core safety measure for , thereby ensuring consistent regulatory oversight across jurisdictions.

Maritime Applications

Oil Tankers

In oil tankers, inerting systems primarily utilize inert gas generators (IGGs) that produce from , which is scrubbed to remove particulates, compounds, and before distribution to tanks. This process achieves an oxygen content of less than 8% in the tanks, rendering the hydrocarbon-air mixture non-flammable by staying below the critical oxygen threshold for . Key components include deck seals, which act as primary non-return barriers using water to prevent of vapors into the machinery spaces, and mechanical non-return valves that provide secondary protection against gas reversal. These systems are mandatory under SOLAS for all new crude oil tankers of 8,000 deadweight tons (DWT) and above constructed on or after 1 January 2016, and for existing crude oil tankers of 20,000 DWT and above. Operationally, the inerting system maintains continuous blanketing of cargo tanks with during loaded voyages to displace oxygen and prevent ignition sources from causing explosions, while during loading and unloading, it purges tanks to control oxygen levels in hydrocarbon vapors. Per (IMO) standards, the delivered must have an oxygen content not exceeding 5% by volume in the supply main for systems installed on or after 1 2016 (previously up to 8%), with the tank atmosphere limited to 8% oxygen during operations and 11% as the maximum for safe hydrocarbon vapor environments. Monitoring involves oxygen analyzers and pressure regulators to ensure compliance, with alarms activating if levels rise above set points. This closed-loop process minimizes risks during ballasting, cargo transfer, and transit. The implementation of these systems has significantly reduced incidents on tankers since their widespread adoption following the SOLAS amendments, transforming tanker by eliminating the oxygen triangle of fire. However, challenges persist, such as accelerated in cargo s due to and condensates in the , which can form acidic conditions on tank internals; mitigation involves coatings, regular inspections, and sometimes switching to cleaner sources like generators on modern vessels. By the , approximately 50% of the global fleet had been retrofitted with IGG systems to meet phased-in requirements for existing ships over 20,000 DWT.

Other Vessels

In liquefied natural gas (LNG) carriers, inerting systems primarily utilize to displace oxygen in boil-off gas spaces and interbarrier areas, preventing the formation of methane-air mixtures. These systems maintain oxygen concentrations below 5% by volume, a threshold that ensures the atmosphere remains non-flammable even in the presence of vapors from boil-off gas. is generated onboard via or membrane separation units, providing a clean, dry suitable for cryogenic environments without introducing contaminants that could affect insulation materials or cargo integrity. For chemical and product tankers, which transport diverse flammable liquids such as refined products, alcohols, and acids, inerting systems often employ hybrid approaches combining and (CO2) to accommodate varying cargo reactivities. is favored for sensitive cargoes to avoid potential reactions with CO2, while CO2 may be used intermittently for its cost-effectiveness in less reactive scenarios; these systems deliver inert gas with oxygen levels below 8% during loading, unloading, and storage to suppress vapor ignition. Purging operations are conducted intermittently, particularly during tank cleaning between cargoes, where inert gas displaces residual vapors and reduces oxygen to safe levels before ventilation or , minimizing risks and ensuring compliance with cargo-specific stability requirements. Implementation on these vessels features smaller-scale inert gas generators compared to those on large crude oil tankers, reflecting reduced tank volumes and cargo capacities, typically producing 500–2,000 cubic meters per hour of to match operational demands. These generators are integrated with cargo handling pipelines and systems to enable targeted inerting without cross-contamination, using automated controls to monitor oxygen levels and adjust flow rates during transitions between cargoes or cleaning cycles. The 2017 International Code of Safety for Ships Using Gases or Other Low-Flashpoint Fuels (IGF Code), adopted by the , mandates inerting systems for ships using alternative fuels like LNG, requiring risk assessments and equipment capable of maintaining non-explosive atmospheres in fuel and spaces.

Aviation Applications

Commercial Aircraft

In commercial , inerting systems primarily employ nitrogen-enriched air (NEA) technology through onboard inert gas generation systems (OBIGGS) to mitigate fuel tank explosion risks in passenger and cargo jets. These systems draw compressed from the engines and route it through air separation modules (ASMs) utilizing hollow-fiber , which selectively permeates oxygen while retaining to produce NEA with greater than 95% content. The resulting NEA is then distributed to the ullage spaces of s, particularly the center wing tank, to displace oxygen and prevent flammable vapor mixtures. This design ensures compliance with flammability reduction requirements while integrating seamlessly with existing pneumatic systems. Operationally, OBIGGS activates primarily during flight when engine is available, maintaining an oxygen concentration below 12% by volume in the center at up to 10,000 feet altitude, with a linear increase to 14.5% at 40,000 feet. The system focuses on high-flammability tanks to reduce the fleet average flammability exposure to no more than 3%. For ground operations, supplementary measures or continuous low-flow modes may be employed in some implementations to sustain inerting between flights, though primary functionality relies on in-flight generation. Following the FAA's 2008 rule on flammability reduction, these systems required retrofits on approximately 2,700 existing U.S.-registered transport category airplanes as estimated in 2008, with full compliance achieved by 2018 and ongoing incorporation in new production models. Similar requirements have been adopted by the (EASA), ensuring comparable safety standards for aircraft in European operations. The economic rationale for widespread adoption stems from enhanced safety outweighing implementation costs, as detailed in the FAA's regulatory evaluation. Total present-value compliance costs, including retrofits and production integrations, were estimated at $1.012 billion over a 49-year period at a 7% discount rate, encompassing kit acquisition, installation labor, and downtime. Quantified benefits, primarily from averting 1-2 catastrophic explosions with societal costs exceeding $1.2 billion each, yielded a present-value of $657 million, with additional unquantified gains in public confidence and operational continuity justifying the mandate. Notable implementations include the and XWB, both certified in the 2010s with integrated OBIGGS as standard features to meet stringent flammability standards from inception. On the 787, the system uses multiple ASMs to inert all fuel tanks, while the A350 employs an inert gas generation system (IGGS) for similar coverage, demonstrating the technology's maturity in modern wide-body designs.

Military and Unmanned Applications

In , On-Board Inert Gas Generation Systems (OBIGGS) play a vital role in protection for fighter jets, reducing oxygen concentrations to around 9% to mitigate explosion risks from combat damage or environmental hazards. These systems, which separate air into nitrogen-enriched streams using hollow fiber membranes or , are ruggedized for high-G maneuvers and integrated into platforms like the F-35 Lightning II, where they enable safe operations in lightning-prone conditions after hardware and software enhancements. In the F-35, Parker Aerospace's OBIGGS supplies continuous flow to inert spaces, supporting stealthy, high-performance missions while adhering to Department of Defense survivability requirements. For unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and drones, compact membrane-based inerting systems facilitate extended endurance by efficiently generating to maintain oxygen below ignition thresholds in limited-volume tanks. These lightweight modules, often leveraging hollow fiber technology, are tailored for tactical applications, including swarming operations that demand reliable across coordinated fleets. The UAV segment drives market expansion, fueled by rising defense needs for autonomous platforms. Military inerting adaptations emphasize seamless integration with stealth composites and radar-absorbent materials, as seen in fifth-generation fighters, to preserve low-observability without compromising protection. Systems undergo validation testing across extreme altitudes and full flight profiles, from to 50,000 feet, ensuring inerting efficacy under hypobaric conditions. Early military implementations, such as CO2 and exhaust gas inerting in post-WWII bombers like the B-50 and B-36, laid the groundwork but were phased out due to reliability issues, evolving into today's standardized OBIGGS under DoD protocols.

Industrial Applications

Storage Facilities

Inerting systems for stationary storage facilities focus on preventing and degradation in large-scale of fuels and commodities, such as in bulk tanks and in silos. For depots, nitrogen padding systems are commonly employed to create a protective in the headspace of storage tanks, displacing oxygen and minimizing risks of oxidation, , and explosive atmospheres. These systems utilize fixed on-site generators, which produce high-purity (typically 95-99.9% purity) through or membrane separation processes, ensuring a continuous supply without reliance on external deliveries. By maintaining oxygen concentrations below 12%—a level below the limiting oxygen concentration (LOC) for most hydrocarbons—these systems effectively render the tank environment non-flammable during filling, emptying, and idle periods. Design considerations for padding in large-volume tanks emphasize efficient gas distribution and safety integration. networks deliver evenly across the tank's vapor space, often with flow control valves to match breathing rates during or contraction of the stored liquid. relief devices, such as breather valves, are essential to accommodate inflow while preventing overpressurization or collapse, with set points typically ranging from 0.03 to 0.07 bar above . These designs comply with (API) Standard 2000 (7th edition, 2014), which outlines venting requirements for atmospheric and low-pressure storage tanks, including those under inert blanketing, to handle normal and scenarios without compromising structural integrity. Additionally, API RP 2217A provides guidelines for safe operations in inerted confined spaces, addressing hazards like asphyxiation during maintenance. In silos and warehouses handling combustible dusts, such as storage, CO2 or flooding systems are used to mitigate risks from airborne particulates. These gases are released into the enclosed to dilute oxygen below the LOC (typically 12-16% for grain dusts), creating a non-combustible atmosphere that suppresses ignition sources like static sparks or . Automated sensors, including oxygen analyzers and detectors, continuously monitor air quality and trigger controlled gas releases from storage cylinders or bulk tanks when predefined thresholds—such as oxygen exceeding the LOC plus a safety margin—are detected, ensuring rapid response without manual intervention. These systems incorporate distribution manifolds for uniform coverage in large volumes, up to several thousand cubic meters, and include interlocks to ventilate the space post-inerting for safe re-entry. Compliance with NFPA 69 ensures proper design for explosion prevention. The adoption of inerting systems in U.S. storage facilities has grown since the , driven by enhanced regulatory focus on fire and prevention, including OSHA standards on combustible and guidelines. Nitrogen padding is a standard practice in many terminals to align with environmental and occupational safety mandates. Such systems are also used in agricultural storage to reduce risks. Overall, these technologies prioritize passive containment safety, distinguishing them from dynamic process environments.

Chemical Processing

In chemical processing plants, inerting systems are essential for managing reactive chemicals and solvents in dynamic environments such as reactors and dryers. Nitrogen blanketing is commonly employed to maintain oxygen concentrations below 5% in the headspace of reactors, preventing unwanted oxidation reactions that could degrade products or initiate polymerizations. This technique displaces air with dry , ensuring a stable inert atmosphere during ongoing reactions, as seen in the production of where oxygen levels must remain low to avoid formation and runaway reactions. Prior to maintenance activities, inert purging is performed by introducing nitrogen into reactors and dryers to displace flammable vapors or residual reactants, reducing the risk of ignition during shutdowns. This process involves sweeping the vessel with nitrogen until oxygen levels are below the limiting oxygen concentration (LOC), typically verified through inline analyzers to confirm safe conditions for personnel entry. In petrochemical applications, such purging aligns with NFPA 69 guidelines, which specify design and performance criteria for inerting systems to prevent deflagrations in enclosures handling combustible materials. Solvent recovery units in chemical utilize systems to separate and recapture volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from streams, with inerting integrated to mitigate autoignition risks from concentrated flammables. These membranes selectively permeate organics while retaining inert carrier gases like , allowing recovery rates exceeding 95% for solvents such as in pharmaceutical synthesis, all under oxygen-depleted conditions to avoid spark-induced fires. Inerting systems are integrated with distributed control systems (DCS) for automated monitoring and adjustment of gas flow, oxygen levels, and pressure in real-time, enhancing operational safety in large-scale plants. DCS platforms enable interlocks that halt processes if oxygen thresholds are exceeded, ensuring compliance with process demands. Hazards like accumulation during nitrogen injection—due to its low conductivity—are addressed through grounding of equipment and conductive piping, as non-bonded systems can generate sparks capable of igniting residual vapors despite inert conditions. Compliance with NFPA 69 is recommended for overall system design.

Regulations and Standards

International Maritime Regulations

The International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), specifically Chapter II-2, mandates the installation of inert gas systems (IGS) on all oil tankers of 8,000 deadweight tons (DWT) and above to prevent explosions in tanks by maintaining low oxygen levels. These requirements, effective since the 1974 SOLAS amendments entered into force in 1980, specify that delivered to the tanks must have an oxygen content of no more than 5% by volume at the supply point, while the atmosphere in the tanks themselves must be maintained at no more than 8% oxygen by volume during operations..pdf) For tankers constructed on or after , 2016, further amendments under SOLAS II-2/4.5.5 lowered the oxygen limit for supplied to tanks from 8% to 5% by volume to enhance . For carriers, the International for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying in Bulk (IGC ), integrated into SOLAS Chapter II-2, requires inerting systems using or other inert gases to safely handle flammable cargoes like (LNG). These provisions ensure that cargo tanks and associated piping are purged and maintained with oxygen levels below flammable limits during loading, unloading, and carriage. The International of Safety for Ships Using Gases or Other Low-Flashpoint Fuels (IGF ), effective from , , extends similar mandates to ships using LNG as fuel, requiring -based inerting for fuel tanks to mitigate explosion risks prior to introducing fuel. Updates to the IGF in incorporated goal-based standards for alternative inerting methods while emphasizing systems for LNG applications. Enforcement of these regulations occurs primarily through port state control (PSC) inspections, where authorities verify compliance with SOLAS, IGC, and IGF requirements, including the operational integrity of inerting systems and oxygen monitoring equipment. These SOLAS-based standards apply to contracting states representing over 99% of global merchant shipping gross tonnage, thereby covering nearly all international tanker trade.

Aviation Regulations

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) mandates fuel tank inerting systems through 14 CFR Part 25, specifically requiring On-Board Inert Gas Generating Systems (OBIGGS) on transport-category, turbine-powered airplanes with more than 30 passenger seats or a maximum payload greater than 7,500 pounds that received an original airworthiness certificate on or after January 1, 1992. These systems must limit the bulk average oxygen concentration in fuel tanks to 12 percent or less at sea level up to 10,000 feet altitude, increasing linearly to 14.5 percent at 40,000 feet, to reduce flammability exposure to no more than 3 percent of the fleet average evaluation time for normally emptied tanks. The rule excludes airplanes that received an original airworthiness certificate before January 1, 1992, focusing instead on modern fleets to address ignition risks without imposing undue burdens on legacy operations. The (ICAO) harmonizes these standards in 6, which governs the operation of for international commercial air transport and requires fuel tank ullage oxygen concentrations below 12 percent to mitigate explosion hazards during flights. This aligns with global airworthiness principles in 8, ensuring consistent safety for cross-border operations by adopting flammability reduction means equivalent to those in national regulations. The [European Union Aviation Safety Agency](/page/European Union Aviation Safety Agency) (EASA) implements equivalent requirements under Certification Specifications (CS-25), mandating OBIGGS for large aeroplanes to achieve fuel tank inerting with oxygen levels below 12 percent, applicable to new type designs and significant modifications. For European fleets, CS-25.975(e) emphasizes compliance through flammability exposure limits of 3 percent or less, with updates in the 2020s incorporating special conditions for composite materials in fuel tank structures, as seen in certifications for the and Boeing 787, to address unique fire propagation risks in non-metallic designs. Following the 1996 incident, which involved a center wing , these regulations collectively apply to the vast majority of the global passenger fleet, estimated to cover over 90 percent of large through phased retrofits and new production standards completed by 2017.

Challenges and Innovations

Technical and Operational Challenges

Inerting systems face several technical challenges related to gas quality and system integrity. In applications, nitrogen-enriched air (NEA) purity can vary significantly with operational factors such as airflow rates and altitude, resulting in oxygen concentrations ranging from 5% at in low-flow modes to up to 11% in high-flow scenarios. Membrane fouling in NEA generators, often due to temperature fluctuations and extended warmup periods, degrades air separation module performance, reducing NEA flow and overall inerting efficiency. Impure inert gases, particularly in systems using bleed air, can introduce contaminants that accelerate in fuel tank components and associated piping. These systems impose weight penalties that impact and payload capacity. In industrial settings like oil tankers, inert gas systems (IGS) encounter similar purity issues, where flue gas from inert gas generators contains variable levels of oxygen and hydrocarbons, potentially compromising tank atmosphere control. from impure inerts is a prominent concern, as and other acidic byproducts in combustion-derived gases promote pitting and general degradation in cargo tanks and deck lines. These technical limitations necessitate robust and monitoring to maintain system reliability across diverse operating environments. Operational hurdles further complicate inerting system deployment. Aviation systems demand high energy inputs, typically consuming 1-2% of bleed air, which varies by flight phase and reduces overall efficiency. Maintenance costs for these systems are substantial due to the need for regular inspections of membranes, sensors, and distribution lines. Crew training is essential to handle mode adjustments for varying conditions, such as temperature and flow, ensuring proper operation without compromising safety. In marine applications, inert gas generators require significant consumption—often several kilograms per hour depending on capacity—to produce sufficient volumes, adding to operational expenses and environmental footprint. Safety trade-offs present critical risks in inerting operations. Over-inerting can displace excessive oxygen, leading to asphyxiation hazards in confined spaces like fuel tanks or cargo holds, particularly during or access. Gaseous inerting agents exacerbate this suffocation risk, while integration with requires careful balancing to avoid inert gas interference with extinguishing agents or delayed response times. Retrofitting older vessels with inerting systems poses substantial economic barriers due to structural modifications, installation, and compliance testing.

Recent Technological Advancements

Recent advancements in inerting systems have leveraged technologies to enhance predictive capabilities, particularly in applications. A 2025 study introduced a model using multi-phase (SPH) to simulate oxygen distribution in fuel tanks, enabling accurate prediction of inerting dynamics and reducing oxygen levels below 9% up to 26% faster with optimized dual-inlet configurations compared to single-inlet designs. This approach achieves real-time safety monitoring by integrating sensor data for 3D visualization and control, with simulation runtimes reduced by 80% relative to traditional methods like ANSYS Fluent, allowing for proactive prevention. Improvements in On-Board Inert Gas Generation Systems (OBIGGS) have focused on advanced membrane technologies to boost efficiency across sectors. Enhanced hollow fiber polymer membranes, as developed by industry leaders, offer superior energy efficiency by optimizing production while minimizing system weight and space requirements, thereby lowering overall operational demands. The global inerting system market, dominated by OBIGGS, is projected to expand from USD 367.6 million in 2024 to USD 501.6 million by 2034, reflecting a 3.0% (CAGR) from 2025 to 2034 driven by these innovations and regulatory mandates for safety. In unmanned applications, miniaturized inerting systems are emerging to address fire risks in fuel-laden drones, supporting broader market expansion in inert gas generation. The on-board inert gas generating system sector is projected to grow at a 12.9% CAGR during 2025-2031. Sustainability efforts in maritime inerting have advanced with low-emission nitrogen generators designed for oil tankers, aligning with the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) 2050 net-zero greenhouse gas goals by reducing CO2 outputs during inert gas production. Hybrid AI controls are increasingly incorporated to optimize generator operations, predicting maintenance needs and minimizing energy use in real-time, as seen in evolving AI-enabled systems for predictive safety in fuel containment. These developments promote environmentally friendly inerting while maintaining explosion prevention efficacy.

References

  1. https://www.hse.gov.uk/comah/sragtech/techmeasinerting.htm
  2. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/inert-gas-system
  3. https://static.prd.echannel.linde.com/wcsstore/DE_REC_Industrial_Gas_Store/Assets/anwendungen/White-paper-Inerting-chemical-industry-Englisch.PDF
  4. https://www.fire.tc.faa.gov/2004Conference/files/fuel/B.Cavage_Simplified_fuel_tank_inerting_system.pdf
  5. https://encyclopedia.che.engin.umich.edu/fire-explosion-prevention/
  6. https://www.fire.tc.faa.gov/pdf/TG3.pdf
  7. https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1926/1926.1202
  8. https://www.fire.tc.faa.gov/pdf/04-8.pdf
  9. https://education.aiche.org/topclass/media/1ca7b2a8-1310-4f80-a89e-7352d4d3d114/story_content/external_files/Inerting%20for%20Explosion%20Prevention.pdf
  10. https://www.chesolver.com/plant-purging-guide
  11. https://static.prd.echannel.linde.com/wcsstore/PT_RES_Industrial_Gas_Store/Attachment/Inerting-in-the-chemical-industry-A5-booklet_tcm310-393623.pdf
  12. https://www.marineinsight.com/marine-safety/protection-against-explosion-the-i-g-system/
  13. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20010092198/downloads/20010092198.pdf
  14. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S100093611830164X
  15. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/AD0711059.pdf
  16. https://www.getty.edu/conservation/publications_resources/pdf_publications/pdf/inertgases.pdf
  17. https://www.rivieramm.com/opinion/opinion/the-evolution-of-mobile-inert-gas-systems-in-the-tanker-trade-33355
  18. https://www.marinepublic.com/blogs/oil-and-gas/127735-inert-gas-systems-on-tankers-safety-and-operational-guide
  19. https://www.imo.org/en/about/conventions/pages/international-convention-for-the-safety-of-life-at-sea-%28solas%29%2C-1974.aspx
  20. https://www.ocimf.org/document-libary/96-inert-gas-systems-the-use-of-inert-gas-for-the-carriage-of-flammable-oil-cargoes/file
  21. https://wwwcdn.imo.org/localresources/en/KnowledgeCentre/IndexofIMOResolutions/AssemblyDocuments/A.566%2814%29.pdf
  22. https://wwwcdn.imo.org/localresources/en/KnowledgeCentre/IndexofIMOResolutions/AssemblyDocuments/A.567%2814%29.pdf
  23. https://www.faa.gov/lessons_learned/transport_airplane/accidents/N93119
  24. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2008/07/21/E8-16084/reduction-of-fuel-tank-flammability-in-transport-category-airplanes
  25. https://ad.easa.europa.eu/blob/SIB_201010_R1_Fuel_Tank_Safety_Flammability_Reduction_System_FRS.pdf/SIB_2010-10R1_1
  26. https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Safety/Pages/OilTankers.aspx
  27. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0010938X81900263
  28. https://library.cqpress.com/cqalmanac//document.php?id=cqal78-1236934
  29. https://erules.veristar.com/dy/data/bv/pdf/529-NR_2025-01.pdf
  30. https://www.sigtto.org/media/1394/gas-concentrations-in-the-insulated-spaces.pdf
  31. https://www.boconline.co.uk/en/images/Inerting-in-the-chemical-industry_tcm410-166975.pdf
  32. https://www.rivieramm.com/news-content-hub/news-content-hub/inert-gas-systems-for-smaller-ships-are-being-scrutinised-45309
  33. https://www.wartsila.com/marine/products/gas-solutions/inert-gas/wartsila-moss-inert-gas-generators-for-tankers
  34. https://www.imo.org/en/mediacentre/pressbriefings/pages/01-igf.aspx
  35. https://www.eaton.com/us/en-us/catalog/fuel-measurement-management/on-board-inert-gas-generating-system.html
  36. https://www.parker.com/us/en/industries/aerospace/Aerospace-NextGen-Tech/Aerospace-Key-Technologies/Inerting-systems.html
  37. https://www.fire.tc.faa.gov/pdf/CR-2001-210903.pdf
  38. https://www.fire.tc.faa.gov/2007conference/files/Fuel_Tank_Safety/ThursPM/CannolettaFiberOpticO2/CannolettaFiberOpticO2Pres.pdf
  39. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA183781.pdf
  40. https://www.parker.com/us/en/divisions/fluid-systems-division/industries/military-aircraft.html
  41. https://breakingdefense.com/2024/04/exclusive-pentagon-clears-f-35-to-fly-in-lightning-after-years-long-hold/
  42. https://www.strategicmarketresearch.com/market-report/aerospace-fuel-tank-inerting-system
  43. https://www.eaton.com/us/en-us/products/fuel-systems-emissions-components/fuel-distribution-systems/fuel-tank-inerting-systems.html
  44. https://www.industryarc.com/Report/18947/fuel-tank-inerting-systems-market
  45. https://www.oxigraf.com/projects/o2n2-oxygen-analyzer-for-on-board-inert-gas-generation-system-obiggs-validation
  46. https://deq.mt.gov/files/Land/UST/Documents/PDFfiles/TankClosureWithoutTears.pdf
  47. https://www.icheme.org/media/9850/xix-paper-63.pdf
  48. https://law.resource.org/pub/us/cfr/ibr/002/api.2000.1998.pdf
  49. https://www.api.org/oil-and-natural-gas/health-and-safety/refinery-and-plant-safety/occupational-safety/rp-2217a
  50. https://www.airproducts.com/-/media/airproducts/files/en/312/312-19-001-us-fire-suppression-solutions-and-best-practices.pdf
  51. https://robecco.net/en/co2-n2-inerting-systems-robecco-inert/
  52. https://dustsafetyscience.com/smoldering-fires-carbon-dioxide/
  53. https://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/all-codes-and-standards/list-of-codes-and-standards/detail?code=69
  54. https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2021-01/TEIA_ENG_OilTerminals.pdf
  55. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281577211_Nitrogen_A_security_blanket_for_the_chemical_industry
  56. https://www.airproducts.co.uk/-/media/Files/en/312/312-11-013-us-nitrogen-a-security-blanket-for-the-chemical-industry.pdf
  57. https://docinfofiles.nfpa.org/files/AboutTheCodes/69/69_FDR_F2023.pdf
  58. https://www.mtrinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/MT01-Fane-Memb-for-VaporGas_Sep-2006-Book-Ch.pdf
  59. https://www.yokogawa.com/us/library/resources/references/mitsubishi-chemical-builds-safer-and-more-reliable-emergency-shutdown-system-using-dcs-integration/
  60. https://www.chevronwithtechron.com/content/dam/external/chevron/en_us/marketing-support/all-other/Static_Electricity_Hazards_and_Prevention_from_CBT.pdf
  61. http://north-standard.com/insights-and-resources/resources/archive/articles/amendments-to-solas-inert-gas-system-requirements-on-board-new-build-tankers-from-1-january-2016
  62. https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/Pages/IGCCode.aspx
  63. https://www.imo.org/en/ourwork/safety/pages/igf-code.aspx
  64. https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/document-library/easy-access-rules/online-publications/easy-access-rules-large-aeroplanes-cs-25
  65. https://www.fire.tc.faa.gov/pdf/04-41.pdf
  66. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0951832025008695
  67. https://www.tankeroperator.com/news/can-inert-gas-systems-be-included-in-decarbonisation-drives/12661.aspx
  68. https://survitecgroup.com/pdf/displaypdf/s_inertgasgenerator_datasheet.pdf
  69. https://dataintelo.com/report/inert-gas-systems-for-tankers-market
  70. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/27525783.2025.2509708
  71. https://advancedseparations.airliquide.com/aero-applications
  72. https://www.stratviewresearch.com/546/aerospace-fuel-tank-inerting-system-market.html
  73. https://www.openpr.com/news/4171533/on-board-inert-gas-generating-system-research-at-a-cagr-of-12-9
  74. https://oxymat.com/blog/nitrogen-gas-generators-in-marine/
  75. https://www.imo.org/en/mediacentre/pressbriefings/pages/imo-approves-netzero-regulations.aspx
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.