Theoretical prediction of hydrogen cloud explosion overpressure considering self-accelerating flame propagation

LI Yanchao; BI Mingshu; GAO Wei

doi:10.11883/bzycj-2020-0140

Volume 41 Issue 7

Jul. 2021

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Abstract

References

Article Navigation > Explosion And Shock Waves > 2021 > 41(7): 072101

LI Yanchao, BI Mingshu, GAO Wei. Theoretical prediction of hydrogen cloud explosion overpressure considering self-accelerating flame propagation[J]. Explosion And Shock Waves, 2021, 41(7): 072101. doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2020-0140

Citation:

LI Yanchao, BI Mingshu, GAO Wei. Theoretical prediction of hydrogen cloud explosion overpressure considering self-accelerating flame propagation[J]. Explosion And Shock Waves, 2021, 41(7): 072101. doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2020-0140

Citation:

PDF( 4934 KB)

Theoretical prediction of hydrogen cloud explosion overpressure considering self-accelerating flame propagation

doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2020-0140

State Key Laboratory of Fine Chemicals, Department of Chemical Machinery and Safety Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, Liaoning, China

Received Date: 2020-05-07
Rev Recd Date: 2020-06-06

Available Online: 2021-06-23

Publish Date: 2021-07-05

Abstract

Abstract

On the basis of revealing the effects of equivalence ratio on flame morphology, radius and maximum explosion overpressure, this work was aimed at establishing a theoretical model to predict hydrogen cloud explosion overpressure by considering self-accelerating flame propagation. The results indicated that the decreasing order of flame propagation velocity is Φ=2.0, Φ=1.0 and Φ=0.8. For Le＜1.0 and Le＞1.0, the cellular structures could be formed on the flame surface, which would increase flame surface area and result in self-accelerating flame propagation. When the equivalence ratio was fixed, the positive maximum explosion overpressure and absolute value of negative maximum explosion overpressure continue to decrease as the distance between pressure senor and ignition source increases. As the equivalence ratio changes, there are some differences for positive maximum explosion overpressure and absolute value of negative maximum explosion overpressure at the fixed distance. The absolute value of negative maximum explosion overpressure was relatively higher than positive maximum explosion overpressure. Before rupture of thin film, the explosion overpressure evolution at various monitoring points could be reproduced using the theoretical model considering self-accelerating flame propagation.
- self-accelerating flame propagation,
- hydrogen cloud explosion overpressure,
- equivalence ratio,
- cellular structure

FullText(HTML)

References(15)

References

[1]	KIM W K, MOGI T, DOBASHI R. Flame acceleration in unconfined hydrogen/air deflagrations using infrared photography [J]. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2013, 26(6): 1501–1505. DOI: 10.1016/j.jlp.2013.09.009.
[2]	KIM W K, MOGI T, KUWANA K, et al. Prediction model for self-similar propagation and blast wave generation of premixed flames [J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2015, 40(34): 11087–11092. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2015.06.123.
[3]	WU F J, JOMAAS G, LAW C K. An experimental investigation on self-acceleration of cellular spherical flames [J]. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, 2013, 34(1): 937–945. DOI: 10.1016/j.proci.2012.05.068.
[4]	CAI X, WANG J, BIAN Z, et al. On transition to self-similar acceleration of spherically expanding flames with cellular instabilities [J]. Combustion and Flame, 2020, 215(5): 364–375. DOI: 10.1016/j.combustflame.2020.02.001.
[5]	DESHAIES B, LEYER J C. Flow field induced by unconfined spherical accelerating flames [J]. Combustion and Flame, 1981, 40: 141–153. DOI: 10.1016/0010-2180(81)90119-X.
[6]	PU L, SHAO X, LI Q, et al. A simple and effective approach for evaluating unconfined hydrogen/air cloud explosions [J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2018, 43(21): 10193–10204. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.04.041.
[7]	MOLKOV V V, MAKAROV D V, SCHNEIDER H. Hydrogen-air deflagration in open atmosphere: Large eddy simulation analysis of experimental data [J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2007, 32(13): 2198–2205. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2007.04.021.
[8]	TOLIAS I C, VENETSANOS A G, MARKATOS N, et al. CFD evaluation against a large scale unconfined hydrogen deflagration [J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2017, 42(11): 7731–7739. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.07.052.
[9]	THOMAS A, WILLIAMS G T. Flame noise: sound emission from spark-ignited bubbles of combustible gas [J]. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London: Series A: Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 1966, 294: 449–466. DOI: 10.1098/rspa.1966.0218.
[10]	LEYER J C, DESBORDES D, CLOUD J P S, et al. Unconfined deflagrative explosion without turbulence: experiment and model [J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 1993, 34(2): 123–150. DOI: 10.1016/0304-3894(93)85002-V.
[11]	LAPALME D, LEMAIRE R, SEERS P. Assessment of the method for calculating the Lewis number of H₂/CO/CH₄ mixtures and comparison with experimental results [J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2017, 42(12): 8314–8328. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.01.099.
[12]	SUN Z, LIU F, BAO X, et al. Research on cellular instabilities in outwardly propagating spherical hydrogen-air flames [J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2012, 37(9): 7889–7899. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2012.02.011.
[13]	LI Y, BI M, ZHANG S, et al. Dynamic couplings of hydrogen/air flame morphology and explosion pressure evolution in the spherical chamber [J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2018, 43(4): 2503–2513. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.12.044.
[14]	MUKAIYAMA K, SHIBAYAMA S, KUWANA K. Fractal structures of hydrodynamically unstable and diffusive-thermally unstable flames [J]. Combustion and Flame, 2013, 160(11): 2471–2475. DOI: 10.1016/j.combustflame.2013.05.017.
[15]	GOSTINTSEV Y A, ISTRATOV A G, SHULENIN Y V. Self-similar propagation of a free turbulent flame in mixed gas mixture [J]. Combustion, Explosion, and Shock Waves, 1988, 24(5): 563–569. DOI: 10.1007/BF00755496.

Relative Articles

[1]	XU Hongfei, WANG Fang, WU Yuwen, WENG Chunsheng. Investigation into the instability mechanism of hydrogen-oxygen rotating detonation wave propagation using a small-scale model[J]. Explosion And Shock Waves, 2025, 45(1): 012101. doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2024-0130
[2]	LI Jingye, JIANG Xinsheng, YU Binbin, WANG Chunhui, WANG Zituo. Visualization experimental research of oil gas vapor cloud deflagration in large-scale unconfined space[J]. Explosion And Shock Waves, 2022, 42(3): 035401. doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2021-0176
[3]	GE Gaoyang, MA Yuan, HOU Shizhuo, XIA Zhenjuan, MA Hu, DENG Li, ZHOU Changsheng. Experimental study on the effect of equivalent ratio on working characteristics of gasoline fuel two-phase rotating detonation engine[J]. Explosion And Shock Waves, 2021, 41(11): 112102. doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2020-0465
[4]	LI Yanchao, BI Mingshu, GAO Wei. Explosion pressure prediction considering the flame instabilities[J]. Explosion And Shock Waves, 2020, 40(1): 012101. doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2019-0004
[5]	WU Yuwen, CHU Chi, WENG Chunsheng, ZHENG Quan. Experimental research on the influence of orifice plate perturbation on detonation cellular structure characteristics[J]. Explosion And Shock Waves, 2019, 39(11): 112102. doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2018-0482
[6]	YU Minggao, WEI Beibei, ZHENG Kai. Effect of inert gas addition on syngas explosion[J]. Explosion And Shock Waves, 2019, 39(6): 065401. doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2018-0131
[7]	LI Yanchao, BI Mingshu, ZHANG Dawei, GAO Wei. Effects of diffusive-thermal instability and hydrodynamic instability on cellular flame during hydrogen/air explosion[J]. Explosion And Shock Waves, 2018, 38(5): 1064-1070. doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2017-0069
[8]	RAO Guoning, ZHOU Li, SONG Shuzhong, XIE Lifeng, LI Bin, PENG Jinhua. Explosion overpressure measurement and power evaluation of FAE[J]. Explosion And Shock Waves, 2018, 38(3): 579-585. doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2016-0245
[9]	XU Xiaohui, QIU Yanyu, WANG Mingyang, SHAO Luzhong. Development of the testing apparatus for modeling large equivalent underground cratering explosions[J]. Explosion And Shock Waves, 2018, 38(6): 1333-1343. doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2017-0144
[10]	Zhao Huanjuan, J.H.S.Lee, Zhang Yinghua, Qian Xinming, Yan Yiran. Effect of argon dilution on detonation instability of C₂H₂-O₂ mixture and its quantitative analysis[J]. Explosion And Shock Waves, 2017, 37(4): 577-584. doi: 10.11883/1001-1455(2017)04-0577-08
[11]	Pan Zhen-hua, Fan Bao-chun, Gui Ming-yue. Numerical investigation on evolution of detonation diffraction in moving gas inside a T-shaped channel[J]. Explosion And Shock Waves, 2014, 34(6): 709-715. doi: 10.11883/1001-1455(2014)06-0709-07
[12]	ZHANG Xu-dong, FAN Bao-chun, PAN Zhen-hua, GUI Ming-yue. Experimentalandnumericalinvestigation oncellularpatternsofrotatingdetonations[J]. Explosion And Shock Waves, 2011, 31(4): 337-342. doi: 10.11883/1001-1455(2011)04-0337-06
[13]	WANG Ai-feng, ZHAO Wei, JIANG Zong-lin. Cellularstructureofobliquedetonationand propagationoftransversewave[J]. Explosion And Shock Waves, 2010, 30(4): 349-354. doi: 10.11883/1001-1455(2010)04-0349-06
[14]	YAO Gan-bing, XIE Li-feng, LIU Jia-cong. Experimental study on detonation characteristics of liquid fuel-air mixtures[J]. Explosion And Shock Waves, 2006, 26(6): 543-549. doi: 10.11883/1001-1455(2006)06-0543-07
[15]	XIA Chang-jing, ZHOU Kai-yuan. Cellular structure evolution of gaseous detonation in a 90 rectangular bend[J]. Explosion And Shock Waves, 2005, 25(2): 151-156. doi: 10.11883/1001-1455(2005)02-0151-06
[16]	WANG Chang-jian, XU Sheng-li. Numerical study on cellular detonation in a straight tube based on detailed chemical reaction model[J]. Explosion And Shock Waves, 2005, 25(5): 405-416. doi: 10.11883/1001-1455(2005)05-0405-12

Supplements(0)

Cited By

Cited by

Periodical cited type(12)

1.	郑凯，任佳乐，宋晨，贾千航，邢志祥. 泡沫铜对密闭管道内合成气爆炸特性影响的实验研究. 爆炸与冲击. 2024(01): 28-38 . 本站查看
2.	卓萍，张网，张良，储玉喜，陈晔，张晋，王玥，李紫婷，陈红光. 新能源火灾防控技术研究进展. 消防科学与技术. 2024(05): 578-589 .
3.	关文玲，李莫凡，董呈杰，任常兴. 开敞空间氢气爆炸特性数值模拟研究. 消防科学与技术. 2024(07): 946-951 .
4.	张炜，王成，钱琛庚，徐坤，刘志林，孟繁霖. 基于遗传算法的气体爆炸化学反应简化模型及其应用. 北京理工大学学报. 2024(10): 997-1005 .
5.	陈佳燕，杨君涛，何其泽. 隧道氢能源汽车泄漏非均匀混合爆炸特性研究. 中国安全科学学报. 2024(08): 155-161 .
6.	代书绮，郭文杰，屠越，杨俊杰，韩佳豪. 浓度梯度对工业可燃气云爆炸特性影响. 辽宁化工. 2024(10): 1577-1580 .
7.	杜赛枫，张凯，陈昊，郭进，段在鹏. 破膜压力对氢-空气预混气体燃爆特性的影响. 爆炸与冲击. 2023(02): 159-169 . 本站查看
8.	殷德山，张英喆，于成龙，赵军，郑瑞臣. 氢氩混合气(5%∶95%)在空气中可爆性实验研究. 中国安全生产科学技术. 2023(04): 142-146 .
9.	刘芳，张峻豪，卢熹，郭策安. 基于DACO-BP的水下聚能装药峰值超压预测. 兵器装备工程学报. 2023(06): 17-24+102 .
10.	袁玉红，黄寅生，谭玉明，储召栋，张扬，李军福，夏煜，程扬帆. 弱约束条件下当量比对氢气爆燃特性的影响. 火工品. 2023(05): 63-68 .
11.	邝辰，刘迪，杨昊，于安峰，党文义. 氢气泄漏后燃爆风险研究现状综述. 安全、健康和环境. 2021(09): 1-5 .
12.	朱传杰，孙豫敏，林柏泉，江丙友. 管道内预混气体爆炸的波形演化特征及超压预测模型. 消防科学与技术. 2021(12): 1707-1711 .