APPLICATION OF IEC 60079-10-1 EDITION 2.
0 FOR HAZARDOUS AREA
CLASSIFICATION
Copyright Material IEEE
Paper No. 3&,&
Allan Bozek, P.Eng. MBA
Senior Member, IEEE
EngWorks Inc.
1620 49th Avenue S.W.
Calgary, AB T2T 2T7
Canada
abozek@engworks.ca
Abstract – This document provides guidance on the
application IEC 60079-10-1 Edition 2.0: Explosive
Atmospheres – Part 10-1: Classification of areas – Explosive
gas atmospheres. The IEC 60079-10-1 Ed. 2.0 document
incorporates significant revisions from previous editions in
both technical content and design approach to classifying
hazardous locations where flammable gas or vapours may
be present. The design concepts incorporated into the
document are introduced with application guidance provided
in the context of real world examples.
Index Terms — IEC 60079-10-1, Hazardous Area
Classification, Explosive gas atmospheres.
I. INTRODUCTION
IEC 60079-10-1 [1] is the core document used within the
IEC system of standards for classifying locations where
flammable gas or vapour hazards may be present. The
document supports the proper selection and installation of
equipment using the “zone” method of hazardous area
classification. Edition 2.0 of IEC 60079-10-1 incorporates
significant changes to address the shortcomings of previous
editions and provides several new evaluation methods for
determining the degree and the extent of a hazardous
location.
This paper describes the most significant changes
incorporated into IEC 60079-10-1 Ed. 2.0 and provides
guidance on how the document may be used to classify a
location. Several examples are presented with a discussion
on how the results compare with API and NFPA
recommended practices.
II. EVOLUTION OF IEC 60079-10-1
A. History
The IEC is a world organization that publishes international
standards for electrical, electronic and related technologies.
IEC standards publications form the basis of
recommendations for international use and to promote
international uniformity. The standards are developed on a
consensus bases with all member countries interested in
978-1-5090-5877-8/17/$31.00 © 2017 IEEE - 451 -
their development given the opportunity to participate. IEC
National Committees apply IEC publications to the maximum
extent possible within the context their national and regional
standards publications.
The development of IEC 60079-10-1 is the result of the
efforts of the TC 31J committee responsible for the
preparation and maintenance of IEC standards relating to the
classification of hazardous areas and their installation
requirements.
Edition 1.0 of IEC 60079-10-1 [2] evolved from IEC 79-1 [3]
first published in 1972. The original publication consisted of
13 pages of guidance addressing the classification of
locations where flammable gas/vapour atmosphere may
exist. In 2008, the flammable gas/vapour and combustible
dust standards were amalgamated under the 60079 series of
standards. The subsequent revision of the IEC 60079-10
standard was renumbered to IEC 60079-10-1 Ed.1.0 to
address the classification of locations where flammable
gas/vapour hazards may exist. The former IEC 61241-10
standard was renumbered to IEC 60079-10-2 to address
combustible dust hazards.
The IEC 60079-10-1 document is considered an objective
based standard meaning that the requirements and
objectives that are important to safety, health and the
technical integrity of a design are addressed. Every
requirement is related to at least one of the standards stated
objectives. The standard will state why an objective is
important and it may provide guidance on how to achieve an
objective but how a solution is implemented is left up to the
user. For this reason, the IEC standards for hazardous area
classification do not incorporate application diagrams to
define a hazardous location. This is in contrast to such
publications as API RP 505 [4], NFPA 497 [5] and EI15 [6]
where “classification by example” diagrams are often used to
designate the degree and extent of a hazardous area
classification.
There was general industry consensus that the edition 1.0
of IEC-60079-10-1 required a revision to address several
shortcomings. While the body of the document addressed
the objectives required of a hazardous area classification, the
guidance provided in the supporting annexes did not always
result in an acceptable solution. This prompted the
development of a new approach supported by scientific
research and experimental data. The calculation methods
were incorporated into Edition 2.0 of IEC 60079-10-1
CFP17PCI-PRT
providing an improved method of assessment that better hazardous area influenced primarily by the release velocity
reflects real world applications. as illustrated in Fig. 1. The suggested shape of the
hazardous area under such conditions would be as illustrated
III. TECHNICAL REVISIONS INCORPORATED in Fig. 2. A low pressure gas release in contrast will be
INTO IEC 60079-10-1 ED. 2.0 influenced more by material vapour density and atmospheric
conditions. The shape of the hazardous area would likely be
The significant technical changes incorporated into IEC as illustrated in Fig. 3. In contrast, a liquid hydrocarbon
60079-10-1 Ed. 2.0 with respect previous editions include: release would likely form a pool near the vicinity of the
release. The extent of the hazardous area and its shape will
A. Recognition of Alternative Area Classification Standards be influenced by vapour pressure of the flammable fluid as it
and Recommended Practices evaporates under ambient conditions. The shape of the
hazardous area would be as illustrated in Fig 4.
IEC 60079-10-1 Ed. 2.0 recognizes the use of other The standard also provides recommended hazardous area
standards and recommended practices where they provide shapes for liquefied flammable gas release scenarios and
guidance or examples appropriate to the application and discusses how aerosol and hybrid mixtures incorporating
comply with general principles of the IEC standard [1]. flammable gas and combustible dusts may be handled.
Historically, the IEC standard has relied on “source of
release” evaluation methodologies where release scenarios
were modelled using calculations to assess a situation and
determine an appropriate classification. The standard now
recognizes the use of “simplified methods” where the zone
classification and extent are determined using typical
diagrams sourced from a variety of publications including API
RP 505, NFPA 497 and EI15. IEC 60079-10-1 cautions
Users that where a standard is selected as a preferred base
for a site or application, examples from another standard
should not be selected to achieve a less rigorous
classification without due justification. An extensive list of
industry codes and national standards for hazardous area
classification are included for reference in Annex K of the Fig. 1 High Velocity Jet Release
document. Where such industry codes or national standards
are used, they shall be quoted as the basis for classification
and not IEC 60079-10-1.
The IEC standard describes a “combination of methods”
approach where “simplified methods” are used to classify
facilities in the early stages of a design and then later
optimized using “source of release” methods when detailed
process information becomes available as the project
evolves. The “source of release” methodology is described in
detail in a series of schematic flowcharts incorporated into
Annex F of the document.
The standard also recognizes the value of prior experience
when classifying facilities. Clause 5.5.4 from NFPA 497 was
paraphrased within the standard allowing for the evaluation of
same or similar installations to be used as a basis for Fig. 2 High Pressure Gas/Vapour Jet Release Hazardous
classifying new facilities. It also implies that existing facilities Area Shape
may be reclassified based on operating experience. This
allows for experience and documented evidence to be
incorporated into a hazardous area classification design with
proper justification.

B. Forms of Release

IEC 60079-10-1 Ed. 2.0 incorporates a detailed discussion

of material properties as they apply to a potential source of
release and how it influences a hazardous area classification
design. The characteristics of a gaseous release, a gas
liquefied by pressure or by temperature or a liquid pool
release are discussed in the context of release behavior and
their influence on the shape of hazardous area. For
example, a high pressure gaseous release may be self- Fig. 3 Low Pressure Gas/Vapour Release Hazardous Area
diluting under certain conditions with the shape of the Shape

- 452 -

Fig. 4 Flammable Liquid Pool Release Hazardous Area
Shape
C. Source of Release Calculation Methods
Annex B of IEC 60079-10-1 Ed. 2.0 provides calculation
methods for evaluating a source of release based on its form
of release.
1) Release rates of gas or vapours: The standard
provides a method for determining the release rate of low
pressure subsonic releases and high pressure sonic
releases. The calculation methods for gas releases are very
similar to the methods described in 60079-10-1 Ed. 1.0 with
the addition of a coefficient of discharge factor added to the
equations which serves to model the viscosity properties of a
liquid or gas with respect to a release opening. The standard
provides some guidance on selecting an appropriate
coefficient of discharge factor if no other information is
available to the User.
The standard also incorporates a new table in Annex B that
recommends suitable hole cross sectional diameters for
secondary grades of release. Previous editions of the
standard omitted this information and it was left up to the user
to determine an appropriate hole size for a given situation.
The hole size had a large influence on the calculation
resulting in a wide variation of potential solutions. The new
table provides consistency in modelling similar situations
which should help to achieve more uniform design solutions.
2) Release rate of liquids: The formula from 60079-10-
1 Ed. 1.0 with the addition of coefficient of discharge factor
(Cd) has been incorporated into the standard. The intent is to
use the liquids release calculation to determine an
appropriate pool size for determining the release rate of an
evaporative pools.
3) Release rates of evaporative pools: A new
calculation model for evaluating the evaporation rate of a pool
release is provided. This is a very common scenario in
many facilities handling flammable liquids where a release
scenario usually results in a pool formation adjacent the leak
source. The standard also provides a table to assist in
determining the volumetric evaporation rate of a pool release.
D. Determining the Zone Classification of a Location
Annex D of the standard provides a structured method for
selecting the appropriate zone classification for both indoor
and open air locations based on the “grade of release”,
“availability” of ventilation and the “effectiveness” of
- 453 -
ventilation within an area. Using these parameters, Table
D.1 (Fig. 5) of the standard then suggests an appropriate
zone classification for the location. It should be cautioned that
the zone classification suggested by the table should be
evaluated against the formal definitions for a zone
classification. For example, the standard defines a zone 2
location as one where a flammable gas atmosphere is “not
likely to occur” and if it does, “exists for a short time only”. If
the “short time only” criteria cannot be achieved, which may
the case in remote unattended or unmonitored facilities; the
assignment of the zone classification may warrant further
evaluation.
Fig. 5 IEC 60079-10-1 Ed 2.0 Table D.1 – Zones for Grade
of Release and Effectiveness of Ventilation
E. Introducing the Concept of Dilution for Ventilation
Assessment
Previous editions of IEC 60079-10 evaluated enclosed
locations based on the hypothetical volume Vz. Vz was
defined as a volume in which a gas/vapour concentration was
equal to a certain Lower Flammable Limit (LFL) safety
threshold depending on the intended zone classification. A
Zone 2 classification incorporated a 50% LFL (2X safety
factor) safety threshold. A Zone 0 or 1 location incorporated
a 25% LFL (4X safety factor) threshold. The Vz calculation
was used to differentiate between “high”, “medium” and “low”
ventilation in enclosed spaces which subsequently influenced
the zone classification for the area.
The use of Vz as a basis for determining a zone
classification was controversial as there was no scientific
basis for the formulae. The calculation of Vz often resulted in
very large volumes up to 3 orders of magnitude greater than
what was observed through Computational Fluid Dynamic
(CFD) modelling and real world experimental testing [7][8][9].
There was general consensus among users that a new
scientifically validated approach was needed to better reflect
reality.
IEC 60079-10-1 Ed. 2.0 replaces Vz with the concept of
dilution. Dilution is a measure of the ability of ventilation or
atmospheric conditions to dilute a release to a safe level. It is
influenced by the release rate of the flammable material and
ventilation velocity. Ventilation velocity is a measure of
turbulence which is necessary to dilute a gas or vapour
release. Air movement is required to promote a turbulent
boundary layer between the release source and surrounding
atmosphere. This allows air to mix with the release reducing stopped. A low dilution environment typically leads to a Zone
the LFL of the gas/air mixture and transporting it away. 1 or even Zone 0 classification based on Table D.1 (Fig. 5).
Ventilation turbulence may be caused by momentum of the
gas/vapour leak itself, by buoyancy of the release in air or by
wind flow interacting with the release.
For indoor situations, ventilation velocity is calculated by
determining the volumetric flow of the ventilation system
accounting for any release sources and dividing the value by
the cross sectional area perpendicular to the flow. This
results in an average flow velocity (Uw) that can be used for
assessing the ability of a ventilation system to control a
release.
To perform an assessment, the “ventilation velocity” is
determined by the design of the ventilation system or by
outdoor atmospheric conditions and plotted against the
“release characteristic” which describes the flammable
source of release in the context of the size and rate of
release. The standard provides a method for determining the
ventilation velocity of open areas using Fig. 6. The release
characteristic of a source of release may be calculated using
the following formula: Fig. 7 IEC 60079-10-1 Ed 2.0 Figure C.1 – Chart for
Assessing the Degree of Dilution
Wg (m3/sec) (1)
(ʌg x k x LFL) For enclosed areas, both the ventilation velocity and the
where background concentration of flammables entrained in the air
must be assessed. Dilution in an enclosed area may result
Wg mass release rate of flammable from the exchange of fresh air from outside the enclosure or
substance (kg/s) by the enclosure itself having sufficient volume to allow the
ʌg Density of gas or vapour (kg/m3) release to disperse. This makes it possible for large
k Safety factor attributed to LFL enclosed areas to have minimal interior/exterior air exchange
LFL Lower flammable limit (vol/vol) rates while still maintaining sufficient ventilation effectiveness
to disperse a release.
To assess the background concentration of an enclosed
location, the flow rate from the flammable release source
must be compared to the fresh air introduction rate
accounting for mixing inefficiencies. The standard
incorporates a calculation formula to estimate the
background concentration as follows:
f x Qg (vol/vol) (2)
Xb = Qg + Q1
where

Xb Background concentration (vol/vol)

Fig. 6 IEC 60079-10-1 Ed 2.0 Table C.1 – Indicative
Qg Volumetric flow of flammable gas from
Outdoor Ventilation Velocities
the source of release (m3/sec)
Q1 Volumetric flow rate of air entering the
The degree of dilution may then be determined using Fig.
room through aperatures (m3/sec)
7. “High dilution” refers to situations where the
f Degree to which the air inside the
concentration near the source of release can be quickly
enclosure is well mixed
reduced and there will be no persistence after the release is
f = 1 where the background
stopped. Under the appropriate conditions, this will permit a
concentration is uniform thoughout the
“NE” negligible extent that may be used as a basis to
enclosure
designate an area “non-hazardous”. “Medium dilution”
f ग़ 1 where inefficient mixing inside the
applies to situations where the concentration of the release is
enclosure results in gradients of
controlled resulting in a stable boundary when the release is
background concentration
in progress and the explosive gas atmosphere does not
persist after the release has stopped. For most secondary
The criteria for assessment is Xb << Xcrit where Xcrit is the
grade source release applications, a medium dilution
maximum acceptable gas concentration determined by the
environment will lead to a Zone 2 classification. “Low
user. Xcrit would normally be the LFL alarm setpoint for gas
dilution” applies to situations where there is a significant
detectors in the area.
concentration while the release is in progress and the
flammable atmosphere will persists after the release is

- 454 -
 For artificially ventilated enclosures, the ventilation
velocity used for evaluation is the average flow velocity
caused by the ventilation system accounting for any
inefficiencies or flow obstructions. For naturally ventilated
enclosures, the ventilation velocity will be a function of the
thermal stack effect, wind effects on the enclosure and the
combination effects of both. The concept of dilution and
background concentration is further developed in the context
of several application scenarios in Annex C of the standard.
F. Estimating the Extent of a Hazardous Zone
Annex D of IEC 60079-10-1 Ed. 2.0 incorporates a
structured method for determining the extent of a hazardous
zone in outdoor locations. This is a welcome addition to the
standard as previous editions did not provide a means of
assessing appropriate extents. The hazardous distances
suggested are based on release characteristic formulae (1)
discussed earlier. Fig. 8 provides a graphical means of
determining an appropriate extent based on the type of
release expected. Release behavior is characterized as a
heavy gas release, typical of a liquid pool release, a diffusive
release resulting from a low velocity gas/vapour release or a
jet release characteristic resulting from a high velocity gas
release. As always, the distances calculated must be
evaluated using engineering judgement and an appropriate
safety factor applied to account for facility layout and site
conditions. The method described is for open air situations
and does not apply to indoor low dilution applications.
Fig. 8 IEC 60079-10-1 Ed 2.0 Figure D.1 – Chart for
Estimating Hazardous Area Distances
G. Documentation
IEC 60079-10-1 Ed. 2 recommends all area classification
designs be fully documented. This is important in capturing
the rationale used to classify a facility and to maintaining the
integrity of the design over the life of the facility. Information
to be incorporated into a documented design includes:
• sources of information used (code, national standard
or calculation)
• gas a vapour dispersion calculations
• study of ventilation characteristics with consideration
given to position of openings in buildings for ventilation
- 455 -
• properties of flammable materials
• identification and location of sources of release
Area classification design documentation should also
include plans, elevations or three dimensional models that
indicate the type and extent of zones as well as the
appropriate group classification, ignition temperature and/or
temperature class. The standard also discusses the option to
indicate equipment protection levels (EPLs) on drawings to
assist with the selection of equipment in hazardous locations.
The standard provides examples of data sheets that may be
used for documenting flammable material substances,
sources of release and hatching symbols for designating
hazardous locations on drawings.
H. Examples
Annex E of the standard provides several examples
illustrating the use of concepts described. They are not
intended to be used as a basis for design but to illustrate the
means of assessment as described in the annex sections of
the standard. Examples include:
• pump application in open air
• pump application within an enclosed location
• process vessel in open air
• control valve in a congested location
• process piping in an enclosed location
• compressor facility handing natural gas
The compressor facility example is fully documented to
illustrate the level of documentation expected for a given
application. It should be noted that the examples are
intended to show application of the evaluation methods and
are not intended to be used as representative examples for
classification purposes.
IV. APPLICATION OF IEC 60079-10-1 ED. 2.0
IEC 60079-10-1 Ed. 2.0 is intended to be used by
competent personnel who are well versed in the properties of
flammable materials (chemistry knowledge), able to identify
potential release sources (process and mechanical
knowledge), assess ventilation requirements (mechanical
knowledge) as well as understand the implications of a
classification design as it applies to the selection of electrical
equipment (electrical knowledge). The standard encourages
the use of a multidisciplinary team who possess competency
in each of these areas to participate in the design process.
The methodologies described in the Annex sections of IEC
60079-10-1 Ed. 2.0 require detailed process information to
perform an assessment. Often, this information is not
available in the early stages of a project when preliminary
area classification design information is needed for long lead
item purchases. This is where the use of other recognized
documents such as API RP 505, NFPA 497 and EI15 may
have value. The documents provide conservative
classification by example diagrams that may be used to
determine the degree and extent of a classification based on
preliminary process information. Engineering judgement
must always be used when employing such diagrams to
ensure they represent the true nature of the hazard. The
properties of the flammable materials handled must be
considered to ensure the diagram used is appropriate for the
application.
 As additional process information becomes available, the
hazardous area classification may be optimized using the
calculation methods described in the Annex sections of IEC
60079-10-1 Ed. 2.0. This provides the opportunity for the
hazardous area classification design to be optimized to reflect
the true nature of the hazard.
A. Natural Gas Release
A hazardous area classification is required for a pressure
vessel located in an outdoor location in an upstream gas
processing facility. The vessel handles natural gas at a
pressure of 4500 kPA. Fig. 48 of API RP 505 recommends a
Zone 2 classification extent of 3 meters as illustrated in Fig.
8.
Fig. 8 API RP 505 Figure 48
To assess this situation using the methods incorporated
into the annex sections of IEC 60079-10-1 Ed. 2.0 requires
several steps as follows:
1) Calculation of the release rate: The first step is to model
a typical release scenario. This would be done by applying
the appropriate formulae provided in Annex B of the
standard. For this particular example, a choked gas velocity
(sonic gas) release scenario using the following formulae
would be applicable.
(3)
Table B.1 from the standard recommends a hole cross
sectional area of 0.25mm2 be applied. Additional process
information required to complete the calculation include:
• Operating pressure: P = 4500 kPA
• Process temperature: T = 25°C = 303.15K
• Mole weight of Natural gas: 19 kg/kmole
• Specific heat at constant pressure: Cȡ = 2.22 (kJ/kg K)
• Polytropic Index of expansion : ѫ = 1.32
• Compressibility Factor : Z = 1.0
• Coefficient of Discharge; Cd = 0.75
• Atmospheric Pressure; pa = 101kPA
• Universal Gas Constant; R = 8314
• Gas density, ȡg = 0.764 kg/m3
- 456 -
Using the process information provided, the calculated
release rate would be 1.6 X 10-3 kg/s.
2) Zone Classification: To determine the appropriate
zone classification, the ventilation velocity and the release
characteristic must be determined. The ventilation velocity
can be determined from Table C.1 of IEC 60079-10-1 (Fig.
6). For a lighter than air release in an unobstructed area, a
ventilation velocity of 0.5 m/s at grade would be appropriate.
The release characteristic would then be determined
using formula (1). This requires the LFL of natural gas be
determined as well as an appropriate safety factor applied
based on the LFL. Given that the LFL of natural gas
(methane) is relatively high at 5%, a k = 1.0 safety factor
would be appropriate. In other situations where the LFL is
less than 5%, a k safety factor of between 0.5 and 1.0 would
be appropriate. Based on the information provided, the
characteristic of release would be 0.042. Applying the results
of the release characteristic calculation to the expected
ventilation velocity as illustrated in Fig. 9, the application
results in a medium dilution situation.
0.5m/s
0.042
Fig. 9 Degree of Dilution
The zone classification for the application may then be
determined from table D.1 from IEC 60079-10-1 based on a
secondary grade of release, good availability of ventilation
(typical of most outdoor locations) and medium degree of
dilution. Fig. 10 indicates a Zone 2 classification would be
appropriate. Typically, most secondary release applications
in open areas result in a Zone 2 classification unless there
are significant impediments to the flow of natural ventilation in
the area.
Once the appropriate zone classification has been defined,
the extent of the Zone 2 classification may then be
determined. Given that the release is sonic, a jet release
would be most likely warrant a 1 meter Zone 2 classification
as illustrated in Fig. 11.
The results of the IEC source of release calculation would
indicate that a 1 meter Zone 2 classification surrounding the
vessel flange connections would be appropriate for the
application. This compares to a 3 meter classification extent
recommended by API RP 505.
The difference can be attributed to the nature of the
release. The behaviour of a natural gas jet release is such
that the momentum of the gas release will mix turbulently
with the surrounding air as illustrated in Fig. 1. This would
limit the extent of the hazardous radii to a fairly short
distance. From an applications perspective, electrical and
instrumentation equipment mounted on the vessel would
need to be certified for a Zone 2 hazardous location.
Electrical and instrumentation equipment on process
equipment adjacent the vessel may not require a hazardous
location certification if they do not handle flammable materials
Fig. 12 Mechanically Ventilated Building handing Natural
and are outside of the 1 meter zone classification.
Gas

API addresses such situations based on the presence of

“adequately ventilation” which is defined as “Ventilation
(natural or artificial) that is sufficient to prevent the
accumulation of significant quantities of vapour-air or gas-air
mixtures in concentrations above 25% of the LFL”. API also
recognizes that locations ventilated at 6 air changes per hour
may be designated “adequately ventilated”. The ventilation
fan provides approximately 4 ACPH of ventilation which is
below the 6ACPH default API adequate ventilation criteria.
To determine if the building is adequately ventilated in
accordance with API recommendations, a fugitive emission
calculation as described in Appendix B of API RP 505 would
be required.
The IEC standard evaluates the zone classification based
on Fig. 5 by evaluating the grade of release, the availability of
Fig. 10 Zone Classification ventilation and the effectiveness of the ventilation system.
Given that the application incorporates a secondary grade of
release, the zone classification will be determined by the
availability and the effectiveness of the ventilation system.
The availability of the ventilation system is categorized
using the following criteria from the standard:
Good: ventilation that is present continuously. Artificially
ventilated locations with power systems redundancy would
meet these criteria.
Fair: ventilation that is expected to be present during
normal operation with discontinuities occurring infrequently
and for short periods.
Poor: ventilation that does not meet the standard of fair or
good, but discontinuities are not expected to occur for long
periods.
The application was assessed to meet the criteria of “fair”
ventilation.
1.0m The effectiveness of the ventilation system requires
evaluation of the “degree of dilution” and determination of the
0.042 expected background concentration for the application. The
assessment of the degree of dilution is based on Fig. 7. The
Fig. 11 Extent of Zone Classification – Gas Release ventilation flow velocity may be calculated based on the
volumetric flow of the gas/air mixture divided by the cross
sectional area perpendicular to the flow using the following
B. Natural Gas Release in an Enclosed Location formula:

The same natural gas release scenario is evaluated for a Qa (m/sec) (4)
Uw = (L L x H
6m long x 4m wide x 3.5m high enclosed location as
illustrated in Fig. 12. The location is mechanically ventilated where
at 0.09 m3/sec (200 CFM). What would be an appropriate
zone classification for the enclosed area? Uw Ventilation velocity (m/sec)
Qa Air flow rate (m3/sec)
L Length of the enclosed area (m)
H Height of the enclosed area (m)

- 457 -
 The calculated ventilation velocity was determined to be
0.004 m/sec. Applying the characteristic of release and the
ventilation velocity information to Figure C.1 from the IEC
standard results in a medium degree of dilution as illustrated
in Fig. 13.
0.004m/s
0.042
Fig. 13 Enclosed Location Degree of Dilution
Applying the information derived from the calculations to Fig.
14 suggests a Zone 2 classification for the building. This
however requires that the background concentration be
checked using formulae (3). To do so, a suitable value of f is
required which is a safety factor applied to account the
degree of inefficiency of air mixing due to equipment
congestion and variable air flow patterns. Since the building
layout is relatively open, an f factor of 2 was selected. The
background concentration Xb was then determined to be
4.5% LFL which is much less than the Xcrit value defined as
the 20% LFL gas detection alarm setpoint. Based on this
result, a Zone 2 classification would be appropriate for the
application as illustrated in Fig. 14.
Fig. 14 Zone Classification for Enclosed Building
C. Pentane Fluid Release
A pump in a refinery process handles pentane at 3000 kPA
at an operating temperature of 20°C. A typical leak scenario
- 458 -
for the application would consist of a small amount of leakage
from the pump seal under normal operating conditions. The
pump is surrounded by a 2m x 3m fluid containment dyke
designed to contain any leakage. The standard API diagram
used to classify refinery sources of release is illustrated in
Fig. 15. Given that pentane has a vapour density of 2.5 as
compared to air, the application requires a transient vapor
zone. A Zone 2 classification extending 15m in addition to a
15m transient vapour zone would apply.
Fig. 15 API RP 505 Figure 20
Assessing this situation using the IEC source of release
calculation method requires examining the nature of a
hypothetical release under normal conditions. A pentane
release from a pump seal would likely result in some
flammable material flashing to atmosphere with the bulk of
the release collecting in a pool formation within the
containment dyke. The pentane fluid within the dyke would
then flash to atmosphere at a rate determined by the ambient
air temperature and the vapour pressure of the pentane fluid.
The release rate from an evaporative pool may be
determined by calculation or by Figure B.2 of IEC 60079-10-1
as illustrated in Fig. 16. The values obtained from the figure
are based on the assumption that the liquid temperature of
the fluid is equal to the ambient temperature with a wind
speed of 0.5 m/sec. Pentane has a vapour pressure of 57
kPA at 20°C and a mole weight of 72 kg/kmole. Referencing
the chart, the volumetric evaporation rate would be
approximately 0.5 x 10-3 m3/sec for a pool surface area of 1.0
m2. Given that the dimensions of the containment dyke in the
application is 6.0 m2 the value obtained from the chart must
be multiplied by the actual surface area yielding an estimated
volumetric evaporation rate of 3.0 x 10-3 m3/sec.
Calculating the release characteristic using formula (1)
yields a value of 0.4 based on a k safety factor of 0.5
(Pentane has a LFL of 1.5%) and a wind speed of 0.25 m/sec
sourced from table C.1 (Fig. 17) for a heavier than air release
in an obstructed area at ground level. Using Figure D.1 from
the standard (Fig. 18) for a heavy gas release yields a
hazardous location extent of approximately 6 meters. This is
in contrast the to the 30m extent recommended by API.
The extent determined by the IEC calculations is a starting
point and should be viewed with engineering judgement.
Other factors such as below grade locations within the
classified area and other natural obstacles may also
influence the extent of the classification.

Fig. 16 Volumetric Evaporation Rate Estimate
Fig. 17 Outdoor Ventilation Velocity for a Pentane Pool
Release at Ground Level
~6.0m
0.4
Fig. 18 Extent of Zone Classification – Pentane Release
- 459 -
V. CONCLUSIONS
The IEC 60079-10-1 Edition 2.0 standard is a significant
update to previous editions. It addresses many of the
shortcomings of previous editions and the rationale and
design approaches are based on scientific analysis
supported by testing and verification. The new document
acknowledges the use of alternative publications including
API RP 505, NFPA 497, EI 15 to classify locations and
recognizes the value in observing the behavior of existing
facilities when classifying new or re-classifying existing
facilities.
The classification methods described in the annexes of IEC
60079-10-1 Ed. 2.0 standard require a high level of
competency to perform a hazardous area classification. The
calculations require detailed process information to perform
an analysis which may not available in the early stages of a
project. While employing the methods described will help to
achieve an optimized design, the results should always be
applied with good engineering judgement taking into account
the nature of the flammable release, the working environment
and the potential consequences of an ignition event.
VI. REFERENCES
[1] IEC 60079-10-1/Ed:2, 2015, Explosive atmospheres –
Part 10-1: Classification of areas – Explosive gas
atmospheres, International Electrotechnical
Commission, Geneva, Switzerland.
[2] IEC 60079-10-1/Ed:1, 2009, Explosive atmospheres –
Part 10-1: Classification of areas – Explosive gas
atmospheres, International Electrotechnical
Commission, Geneva, Switzerland.
[3] IEC 79-10, 1972, Electrical Apparatus for Explosive
Gas Atmospheres – Part 10 Classification of Hazardous
Areas, International Electrotechnical Commission,
Geneva, Switzerland.
[4] ANSI/API RP 505, 1997, Recommended Practice for
Classification of Locations for Electrical Installations at
Petroleum Facilities Classified as Class I, Zone 0, Zone
1, and Zone 2, American Petroleum Institute,
Washington, DC.
[5] EI 15, 2015 Model code of safe practice Part 15: Area
classification code for installations handling flammable
fluids, Energy Institute, London, UK.
[6] ANSI/NFPA 497, Recommended Practice for the
Classification of Flammable Liquids, Gases, or Vapors
and of Hazardous (Classified) Locations for Electrical
Installations in Chemical Process Areas, National Fire
Protection Association, Quincy, MA.
[7] D.M. Webber, M.J. Ivings and R.C. Santon, “Ventilation
theory and dispersion modelling applied to hazardous
area classification”, Journal of Loss Prevention in the
Process Industries”, September 2011, 612-621.
[8] HSL Research Report RR630, “Area classification for
secondary releases from low pressure natural gas
systems”, Health and Safety Executive (HSE) UK 2008.
[9] P Persic, “Hypothetical Volume of Potentially Explosive
Atmosphere in the Context of IEC Standard 60079-10-
1, Ex-Bulletin, Croatia 2012. Vol 40, 1-2.
[10] Rangel Jr., Estellito, Luiz, Aurélio M. and Madureira Jr.,
Hilton – “Area classification is not a copy-and-paste
process: performing reliable hazardous area
classification studies”. IEEE IAS Industry Applications
Magazine, Jan/Feb 2016, p. 38 – 49.

VII. VITAE
Allan Bozek, P.Eng., MBA, graduated from the University
of Waterloo in 1986 with BSc in Systems Design Engineering
and a MBA from the University of Calgary in 1999. He is a
Principal with EngWorks Inc. providing hazardous location
consulting services to industry. He is a registered
professional engineer in the provinces of Alberta, Ontario,
Saskatchewan and British Columbia, Canada and has been
a member of the IEEE since 1989. Allan’s areas of expertise
include hazardous area classification design, application of
hazardous location codes and standards to facilities and the
design and certification of equipment in hazardous locations.

10

- 460 -