Abstract

A breathable air source is required for a confined space such as an underground refuge alternative (RA) when it is occupied. To minimize the risk of suffocation, federal regulations require that mechanisms be provided and procedures be included so that, within the refuge alternative, the oxygen concentration is maintained at levels between 18.5% and 23% for 96 h. The regulation also requires that, during use of the RA, the concentration of carbon dioxide should not exceed 1%, and the concentration of carbon monoxide should not exceed 25 ppm. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) evaluated the cryogenic air supply's ability to provide breathable air for a refuge alternative. A propane smoker was used to simulate human breathing by burning propane gas which will consume O2 and generate CO2 and H2O. The rate of propane burned at the smoker was controlled to represent the O2 consumption rate for the breathing of a certain number of people. Two 96-h tests were conducted in a sealed shipping container, which was used as a surrogate for a refuge alternative. While burning propane gas to simulate human oxygen consumption, cryogenic air was provided to the shipping container to determine if the cryogenic air supply would keep the O2 level above 18.5% and CO2 level below 1% inside the shipping container as required by the federal regulations pertaining to refuge alternatives. Both of the 96-h tests simulated the breathing of 21 persons. The first test used the oxygen consumption rate (1.32 cu ft of pure oxygen per hour per person) specified in federal regulations, while the second test used the oxygen consumption rate specified by (Bernard et al. 2018, “Estimation of Metabolic Heat Input for Refuge Alternative Thermal Testing and Simulation,” Min. Eng., 70(8), pp. 50–54) (0.67 cu ft of pure oxygen per hour per person). The test data shows that during both 96-h tests, the oxygen level was maintained within a 21–23% range, and the CO2 level was maintained below 1% (0.2–0.45%). The information in this paper could be useful when applying a cryogenic air supply as a breathable air source for an underground refuge alternative or other confined space.

References

1.
Brown
,
R.
,
2000
, “
Confined‐Space Safety Questions
,”
Opflow
,
26
(
6
), pp.
52
52
.10.1002/j.1551-8701.2000.tb02249.x
2.
Garrison
,
R. P.
, and
Erig
,
M.
,
1991
, “
Ventilation to Eliminate Oxygen Deficiency in a Confined Space—Part III: Heavier-Than-Air Characteristics
,”
Appl. Occup. Environ. Hyg.
,
6
(
2
), pp.
131
140
.10.1080/1047322X.1991.10387847
3.
Harper
,
P.
,
Wilday
,
J.
, and
Bilio
,
M.
,
2011
, “
Assessment of the Major Hazard Potential of Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
,”
UK The Health and Safety Executive
, Report.
4.
Jorgensen
,
E. B.
, Jr
,
1992
, “
Confined Space Entry
,”
Prof. Saf.
,
37
(
2
), p.
22
.https://www.proquest.com/docview/200378039?pqorigsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true
5.
Margolis
,
K. A.
,
Westerman
,
C. Y. K.
, and
Kowalski-Trakofler
,
K. M.
,
2011
, “
Underground Mine Refuge Chamber Expectations Training: Program Development and Evaluation
,”
Saf. Sci.
,
49
(
3
), pp.
522
530
.10.1016/j.ssci.2010.12.008
6.
Pettit
,
T.
, and
Linn
,
H.
,
1987
, “
A Guide to Safety in Confined Spaces
,” DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No.
87-113
.https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/87-113/default.html
7.
Suruda
,
A.
,
Pettit
,
T.
,
Noonan
,
G.
, and
Ronk
,
R.
,
1994
, “
Deadly Rescue: The Confined Space Hazard
,”
J. Hazard. Mater.
,
36
(
1
), pp.
45
53
.10.1016/0304-3894(93)E0051-3
8.
Zhang
,
Z.
,
Yuan
,
Y.
, and
Wang
,
K.
,
2017
, “
Effects of Number and Layout of Air Purification Devices in Mine Refuge Chamber
,”
Process Saf. Environ. Prot.
,
105
, pp.
338
347
.10.1016/j.psep.2016.11.023
9.
MSHA
,
2008
,
Regulatory Economic Analysis for Refuge Alternatives for Underground Coal Mines
,
Mine Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances
.
10.
MSHA
,
2008
,
30 CFR Parts 7 and 75; Refuge Alternatives for Underground Coal Mines; Final Rule
,
Mine Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances
, Arlington, VA.
11.
Bauer
,
E. R.
,
Matty
,
T. J.
, and
Thimons
,
E. D.
,
2014
,
Investigation of Purging and Airlock Contamination of Mobile Refuge Alternatives (Report of Investigations 9694)
,
Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
,
Pittsburgh, PA
.
12.
Yan
,
L.
,
Fernando
,
R.
,
Yantek
,
D.
,
Carr
,
J.
,
Reyes
,
M.
,
DeGennaro
,
C.
,
Yonkey
,
J.
, and
Srednicki
,
J.
,
2021
, “
Storage Time and Venting Characteristics for Cryogenic Air Supplies on Cryocooler Shutdown
,”
The 21st International Cryocooler Conference
, Jan.,
Boulder, CO
, pp.
85
95
.https://cryocooler.org/resources/Documents/C21/085.pdf
13.
Yantek
,
D. S.
,
Y
,
L.
,
DeGennaro
,
C.
,
Homer
,
J.
,
Lambie
,
B.
,
Srednicki
,
J.
, and
Yonkey
,
J.
,
2022
, “
Test Method for Evaluating Breathable Air Supplies for Underground Coal Mine Refuge Alternatives or Other Confined Spaces
,”
Int. J. Min. Sci. Technol.
,
29
(
3
), pp.
343
355
.10.1016/j.ijmst.2019.01.004
14.
Bernard
,
T.
,
Yantek
,
D.
, and
Thimons
,
E.
,
2018
, “
Estimation of Metabolic Heat Input for Refuge Alternative Thermal Testing and Simulation
,”
Min. Eng.
,
70
(
8
), pp.
50
54
.10.19150/me.8429
15.
Yan
,
L.
,
Yantek
,
D. S.
,
DeGennaro
,
C. R.
, and
Fernando
,
R. D.
, “
Mathematical Modeling for Carbon Dioxide Level Within Confined Spaces
,”
ASME
Paper No. RISK-22-1004. 10.1115/RISK-22-1004
You do not currently have access to this content.