Combustible Dust Testing

Laboratory testing to quantify dust explosion & reactivity hazards

Flammable Gas & Vapor Testing

Laboratory testing to quantify explosion hazards for vapor and gas mixtures

Chemical Reactivity Testing

Laboratory testing to quantify reactive chemical hazards, including the possibility of material incompatibility, instability, and runaway chemical reactions

DIERS Methodology

Design emergency pressure relief systems to mitigate the consequences of unwanted chemical reactivity and account for two-phase flow using the right tools and methods

Deflagrations (Dust/Vapor/Gas)

Properly size pressure relief vents to protect your processes from dust, vapor, and gas explosions

Effluent Handling

Pressure relief sizing is just the first step and it is critical to safety handle the effluent discharge from an overpressure event

Thermal Stability

Safe storage or processing requires an understanding of the possible hazards associated with sensitivity to variations in temperature


Classification of hazardous materials subject to shipping and storage regulations

Safety Data Sheets

Develop critical safety data for inclusion in SDS documents


Model transport of airborne virus aerosols to guide safe operations and ventilation upgrades


Model transport of contamination for source term and leak path factor analysis

Fire Analysis

Model transport of heat and smoke for fire analysis

Flammable or Toxic Gas

transport of flammable or toxic gas during a process upset

OSS consulting, adiabatic & reaction calorimetry and consulting

Onsite safety studies can help identify explosibility and chemical reaction hazards so that appropriate testing, simulations, or calculations are identified to support safe scale up

Mechanical, Piping, and Electrical

Engineering and testing to support safe plant operations and develop solutions to problems in heat transfer, fluid flow, electric power systems

Battery Safety

Testing to support safe design of batteries and electrical power backup facilities particularly to satisfy UL9540a ed.4

Hydrogen Safety

Testing and consulting on the explosion risks associated with devices and processes which use or produce hydrogen

Spent Fuel

Safety analysis for packaging, transport, and storage of spent nuclear fuel

Decommissioning, Decontamination and Remediation (DD&R)

Safety analysis to underpin decommissioning process at facilities which have produced or used radioactive nuclear materials

Laboratory Testing & Software Capabilities

Bespoke testing and modeling services to validate analysis of DD&R processes

Nuclear Overview

Our Nuclear Services Group is recognized for comprehensive evaluations to help commercial nuclear power plants operate efficiently and stay compliant.

Severe Accident Analysis and Risk Assessment

Expert analysis of possible risk and consequences from nuclear plant accidents

Thermal Hydraulics

Testing and analysis to ensure that critical equipment will operate under adverse environmental conditions

Environmental Qualification (EQ) and Equipment Survivability (ES)

Testing and analysis to ensure that critical equipment will operate under adverse environmental conditions

Laboratory Testing & Software Capabilities

Testing and modeling services to support resolution of emergent safety issues at a power plant

Adiabatic safety calorimeters (ARSST and VSP2)

Low thermal inertial adiabatic calorimeters specially designed to provide directly scalable data that are critical to safe process design

Other Lab Equipment (DSC/ARC supplies, CPA, C80, Super Stirrer)

Products and equipment for the process safety or process development laboratory


Software for emergency relief system design to ensure safe processing of reactive chemicals, including consideration of two-phase flow and runaway chemical reactions


Facility modeling software mechanistically tracks transport of heat, gasses, vapors, and aerosols for safety analysis of multi-room facilities


Our highly experienced team keeps you up-to-date on the latest process safety developments.

Process Safety Newsletter

Stay informed with our quarterly Process Safety Newsletters sharing topical articles and practical advice.


With over 40 years of industry expertise, we have a wealth of process safety knowledge to share.

Recent Posts

7 Basics of Combustible Dust Sampling and Testing

Posted by The Fauske Team on 04.05.16

By Ronald L. Allen, MS, PE, CSP, Senior Consulting Engineer, Fauske & Associates, LLC

Understanding the characteristics of combustible dusts is essential to ultimately managing the risks associated with the material. But, many questions need to be answered before valid samples can be taken and tested. Mistakes can lead to wasted time and money – or worse – incorrect assessment of risk. This blog provides a brief overview of essential factors.

1. Who Should Perform the Testing?

While many labs may claim the ability to conduct hazardous dust tests, the truth is that not all labs have the qualifications or experience to do so. Engagement of a laboratory that is ISO 17025 certified to perform the specific tests that are needed will assure high quality results. These internationally recognized labs also have the resources to explain test results and offer guidance to their clients.How_to_Speak_Combustible_Dust_Final.jpg

2. What Tests to Perform?

Generally speaking, tests fall into three categories:

  • Combustibility Screening Test: Commonly known as a “Go/No Go” test, this initial screen determines whether the particulate is “explosible”. If the material proves to be “explosible”, additional characterization should be completed to understand ignition sensitivity and explosion severity.
  • Ignition Sensitivity Tests: These “before the ignition” tests are chosen based upon the environment and potential risks that may be present where the dust is generated, processed, conveyed, or stored. The most common tests answer the following questions:
    • How much energy is required to ignite the dust? This test for Minimum Ignition Energy (MIE) is critical to determine if a dust can be ignited by low-energy sources like static electricity or if a higher energy source (e.g., sparking motors) would be necessary for ignition. Results are reported in millijoules (mJ).
    • How much material must be suspended in the atmosphere before ignition can be supported? The test for Minimum Explosible Concentration (MEC) is often compared to the Lower Explosive Level (LEL) for flammable vapors and liquids. Results are measured in grams per cubic meter (g/m3).
    • At what temperature will airborne dust autoignite? The test for Minimum Ignition Temperature – Cloud (MIT) determines when airborne dust can ignite by contacting hot objects (e.g., oven cabinet surfaces, motors, overheated bearings) or heated environments. Results are reported in degrees of centigrade.
    • At what temperature will layered dust autoignite? The test for Layer Ignition Temperature (LIT) determines when layered dust can ignite when in contact with heated surfaces (e.g., oven cabinet surfaces, motors, overheated bearings). Results are reported in degrees of centigrade.
  • Explosion Severity Tests: These “after the ignition” tests determine how much energy is generated when a specific dust is ignited in a contained vessel. The test results are demanded when designing explosion protection equipment (e.g., explosion relief panels, chemical isolation systems) to mitigate the effects of an explosion involving a specific material. The most common tests answer the following questions:
    • What is the maximum pressure that will be generated by a dust cloud explosion? Maximum Pressure (Pmax) is reported in bars (standard atmospheres) and is not normalized.
    • What is the normalized speed of pressure rise created by the dust cloud explosion? The Deflagration Index (KSt) is reported in bar-meters/second (bar-m/sec).

3. Should Samples be Tested “As Received”?

ASTM International has published a series of standards (E1226, E1515, E2019, E1491, and E2021) that determine how dust samples should be tested for explosivity potentials and characteristics. Without exception, ASTM recommends that tested material have a particle size of <75 microns and a moisture content of <5%. In some cases, samples must be ground, sieved, and/or dried to meet these ASTM recommendations. Sizing and drying material often produces more conservative results than testing the material “as received”. Assuring consistent particle size and moisture content produces the consistent, reliable results needed for specifying explosion protection equipment (e.g., explosion vents, suppression systems). The conservative nature of the recommendations to test fine, dry material addresses many concerns about the potential for fines to accumulate in some location (e.g., duct elbow, dust collector, interior walls of bins) in the process or fine fugitive dust on elevated building surfaces like I-beams, pipes/ducts and light fixtures.

While the advantages of sizing and drying material are clear, there can also be value in testing particulate “as received” to understand how the material will behave in its specific native environment if particle segregation/classification did not take place. “As received” test data can be particularly beneficial when considering ignition sensitivity. For example, material that is sized and dried to meet ASTM recommendations may best represent the “worst case” dust characteristics that could be present inside of a dust collector where the most conservative protection techniques could be demanded. But, “as received” samples of the same material taken from an upstream location in the process where the particulate displays a larger particle size and/or increased moisture content could (for example) present a significantly higher minimum ignition energy (MIE) value than samples that have been sized and dried. The higher MIE value in the “as received” sample could justify reducing controls at the point of the process where the sample was taken. For example, static dissipative shoes could be required when working at the dust collector where lower MIE values could be expected, but the same precaution may not be warranted at the upstream location where an elevated MIE is documented. 

Many firms choose to test material in both fashions – ground and dried (if needed) and “as received”.

4. Where to Take Samples?

Generally speaking, it is recommended that samples be taken from the “dirty” side of dust collectors since that material tends to include relatively dry, small particles. The “best samples” are taken from dust collectors as directed below in order of preference:

  • Use non-sparking tools to scrape or otherwise remove the material directly from the dust collector filters or cartridges. This technique will increase the probability of collecting fine particles.
  • If it is not feasible to remove the material directly from the dust collector filters or cartridges, “pulse” the dust collector prior to collecting the sample from a clean storage collection drum/container.
  • If possible, avoid taking samples from the dust collection drum/container (e.g., 55 gallon drum) unless the drum/container has been emptied or cleaned before a “pulsed” sample is generated (see above). Otherwise, the sample will include a composite of material discharged from the dust collector that has the potential of including larger particles that may understate the risk posed by the material. Because of their mass, larger particles may “fall” into the collection drum/container without being collected onto the filters or cartridges. In this case, screening may be warranted to remove those coarse particles.

“Elevated surfaces” provide another preferred location to sample since smaller particle material tends to rise, disperse (aka, “float”), and collect on building steel, pipes, ductwork, and the tops of equipment. Often times, a vertical lift is required to safely access such areas for sampling purposes. Collecting samples from elevated surfaces is most appropriate in operations where dust collection systems do not exist.

Relatively dry, small particle material suitable for testing may also be found on the interior walls of bins and ductwork.

Generally speaking, the “age” of the sample is unimportant. The primary exception relates to metal dust. Since explosible characteristics of metal dust can be understated if the sample material is allowed to oxidize, it is advised that “fresh material” be sampled. These “fresh samples” should be tightly sealed to prevent entry of moisture that could lead to oxidation prior to testing.

5. How to Take Samples?

Use of non-sparking equipment (e.g., natural bristle brushes, plastic antistatic shovels, scoops, or dust pans) is recommended to collect samples. Samples should be collected in sealed plastic (e.g., Ziploc) bags or other sealed, non-conductive containers. Sample size requirements vary (100  – 1000 grams) dependent upon the test(s) that will be conducted. ISO 17025 – certified labs usually provide sampling instructions to clients and may even provide test kits. Samples should be clearly labeled to identify the location where they were taken.

6. How to Transport Samples?

Entities shipping combustible dust samples should consult DOT Hazardous Materials regulations prior to shipping samples. Warning labels or special shipping precautions are not needed for most common, small volume (e.g., <1000 grams) particulate samples, but exceptions can exist. Labs receiving the samples will have requirements about documentation that must accompany sample shipments.

7. Common Problems Associated with Combustible Dust Sampling

  • Not submitting adequate sample size or sample quantity to complete needed tests (lab should assist with direction or provide a kit)
  • Submitting incomplete test request forms
  • Samples not collected from proper locations (e.g., takes sample from floor or easily accessed locations where particle size tends to be large and may be moist)


Preparing and executing a strategy for combustible dust sampling and testing is a manageable task but can present challenges for the unindoctrinated. Partnering with an ISO 17025 laboratory can help address questions about jargon and recommended practices. More importantly, such expert advice from a certified lab can ultimately help reduce and manage risks.  

For more information, please contact Ron Allen at, 608-698-6105 or Dr. Ashok Dastidar at at 630-887-5249. 

Subscribe to FAI's Quarterly "Process Safety News" 

Topics: Combustible dust, iso 17025, deflagration, dust cloud, dust screening, ignition sensitivity, MEC, explosion severity, ignition temperature, dot hazardous, hazardous dust, combustibility, MIE, minimum ignition, minimum explosible, autoignite


Is My Dust Combustible?

A Flowchart To Help You Decide
Download Now