Explosion and Fire (at Falk Corporation, Mil, Wis) 3 dead, 37 injured, many missing

TMJ4 ^ | Wednesday December 8, 2006

[Trust but Verify]

The police are interviewing, not detaining people. There is a difference.

[Trust but Verify]

I don't always agree with Fighting Bob Donovan, but he is a hell of an alderman when it comes to taking care of his constituents. They are lucky to have him and not one of the other slugs on the Milwaukee City Council.

[E Rocc]

The police are interviewing, not detaining people. There is a difference.

Post 117 suggested detention was taking place.

-Eric

[TraditionalistMommy]

Fervent prayers.

[madison10]

Froedtert

I'm not asking...

Praying for the workers, their families and the firefighters.

[Lando Lincoln]

Sincere prayers for all concerned - and my home town.

[gas0linealley]

"In an explosion there has to be a fuel that explosively combusts."

Not so. Boiler explosions are just one example.

[Lando Lincoln]

Froedtert is the best trauma center in Wisconsin. I took a tour of that Falk facility two years ago. Falk was cutting an emergency replacement pinion gear for me. They walked me though every step of the process. They joked that since I was "Cheesehead" and a Packer fan, they'd expedite my job. First-class company, first-class treatment during my visit and terrific people. Again, prayers for all.

[Blueflag]

I was speaking technically, as a firefighter (past life). The rupture of a presssure vessel, like a "boiler explosion" indeed has all the effects of an 'explosion', it's just TECHNICALLY explosive decompression, not an 'explosion.' But I admit that's being pedantic. Just so ya know, dictionary.com agrees with you, not me ;-) ex·plo·sion /ɪkˈsploʊʒən/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ik-sploh-zhuhn] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun 1. an act or instance of exploding; a violent expansion or bursting with noise, as of gunpowder or a boiler (opposed to implosion).

[Indy Pendance]

pronounced fray' dirt

[firehunter]

I am curious as to why you believe it is "chemically" impossible for a propane tank to explode? There are many documented cases of propane, and other compressed flammable gases, that have been heated in a fire to a point where the vapor pressure inside the vessel becomes excessive and causes a rapid, mechanical, and violent "explosion" of ONLY the tank itself. THEN the subsequent release of of large volumes of flammable gas ignites causing the fireball.
Could you give me some more information on your theory please?

[GoLightly]

I think that would be a possibility, specially since the company is connected to Rexnord.

http://www.rexnord.com/portal/

I see they have an Aerospace Division.

[Blueflag]

Simple -- if your name firehunter implies what I think it does, you already know I was not offering a theory.

(1) Class B fuels inside a closed container cannot ignite absent an oxidizer, source of ignition, and a mixture (in vapor form) within the explosive range -- which for propane IIRC is about 2 - 10%. Propane INSIDE a pressure vessel CANNOT explode. That is chemical, stoichiometric fact.

(2) The pressure vessels are made of steel. It is chemically impossible ( unless on the surface of the sun, in a blast furnace or at ground zero ) to cause steel to explode.

THEREFORE I do not believe it is chemically impossible for a propane tank to explode, I *know* it is not chemically possible.

My point here is to attack sloppy reporting. Propane in the atmosphere ignited and exploded. A big industrial tank did not 'explode.' The big storage tanks are NOT an issue.

Any pressure vessel may fail structurally from excessive internal pressure, and yes, a backyard BBQ propane tank next to a roaring structure fire is a risk of 'explosion' or BLEVE, as is a rail car accident. But that is not what I meant.


(Your own note points out that) ... a mechanical failure of the tank must occur (perhaps from vapor pressure - Charles Law comes into effect) first. Then and only then can the propane disperse in the atmosphere to an explosive mixture, find a source of combustion (or be at ignition temperature). As a firefighter you are aware that liquid fuels cannot "explode" or otherwise combust unless oxygen (or other oxidizer) is present AND only as a vapor does the fuel actually burn. Surely in your training you have seen instances of a flame front on top of cold diesel fuel burn itself out because the cold diesel did not produce enough vapor to burn. Heat the diesel enough, and the flame burns quite nicely ABOVE the pool of diesel because its the VAPOR burning, not the liquid. All this is just meant to illustrate the FACT that gaseous propane burns/explodes, the big industrial propane tanks don't.

BUT. The real point here is that in this "explosion" in Milwaukee I really doubt we'll find an explosively ruptured 170,000 lb double-wall propane tank -- ruptured from a chemical/rapid-oxidation explosion. The liquid propane inside the tank simply cannot chemically combust. Period. Yes it can get really hot, the venting systems can fail, and a BLEVE result. I don't see that reported here. I think we'll find that a large propane leak occured, formed an explosive mixture, found a source of ignition, and boom. There would have to have been a 'huge' long-burning, highly visible, VERY HOT fire in close proximity to an industrial storage tank in order for the tank to "explode" from vapor pressure.

You already know liquid flammable fuels inside a closed container in the absence of an oxidizxer simply cannot explode. The vessel can rupture from pressure and resulting structural failure, but then the escaping fuel vaporizes/burns/'explodes'.

[ridesthemiles]

Falk makes large gears. ""

When I lived there in the 60's, friends of mine worked there. They also made large gears and propellers for very large ships.

Don't know if they still do that. Sorry for this mess. That is a solid employer in that area.

[Quick Shot]

Was there any update as to a cause?