An intercomparison exercise on the capabilities of CFD models to reproduce a large-scale hydrogen deflagration in open atmosphere

International Journal of Hydrogen Energy

Volumn 35, Issue 9, 2010, Pages 4435-4444

  Garcia J ^a   Baraldi, D ^b   Gallego, E ^a   Beccantini, A ^c   Crespo, A ^a   Hansen, O R ^d   Hoiset S ^e   Kotchourko, A ^f   Makarov, D ^g   Migoya, E ^a   Molkov, V ^g   Voort, M M ^h   Yanez, J ^f  

^a UNIVERSIDAD POLITÉCNICA DE MADRID   (Spain)

^b JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE   (Italy)

^c DIF   (France)

^d GEXCON AS   (Norway)

^e STATOIL   (Norway)

^f KARLSRUHE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

^g UNIVERSITY OF ULSTER   (United Kingdom)

^h TNO   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

CFD; Deflagration; Hydrogen; Hydrogen safety

Indexed keywords

CFD MODELS; COMBUSTION MODELING; DEFLAGRATION; EXPERIMENTAL DATA; FLAME SPEED; HYDROGEN DEFLAGRATION; HYDROGEN SAFETY; HYDROGEN-AIR MIXTURE; INTERCOMPARISON EXERCISE; MAXIMUM PRESSURE; OPEN ATMOSPHERE; RATE OF PRESSURE; SIMULATION RESULT; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

EXPLOSIONS; EXPLOSIVES;

HYDROGEN;

EID: 77950342132     PISSN: 03603199     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.02.011     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. www.hysafe.org
2. 2 in a closed vessel. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 32 (2007) 2235-2245
3. Jordan T, García J, Hansen O, Huser A, Ledin S, Middha P, et al. Results of the HySafe CFD validation benchmark SBEPV5. In: 2nd International Conference on Hydrogen Safety. S. Sebastian, Spain, 11-13 September; 2007.
4. Venetsanos A., Papanikolaou E., Delichatsios M., Garcia J., Hansen O.R., Heitsch M., et al. An inter-comparison exercise on the capabilities of CFD models to predict the short and long term distribution and mixing of hydrogen in a garage. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 34 (2009) 5912-5923
5. Makarov D., Verbecke F., Molkov V., Roe O., Skotenne M., Kotchourko A., et al. An inter-comparison exercise on CFD model capabilities to predict a hydrogen explosion in a simulated vehicle refuelling environment. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 34 (2009) 2800-2814
6. Baraldi D., Kotchourko A., Lelyakin A., Yanez J., Middha P., Hansen O.R., et al. An inter-comparison exercise on CFD model capabilities to simulate hydrogen deflagrations in a tunnel. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 34 (2009) 7862-7872
7. Groethe M., Merilo E., Colton J., Chiba S., Sato Y., and Iwabuchi H. Large-scale deflagrations and detonations. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 32 (2007) 2125-2133
8. Petukhov V.A., Naboko I.M., and Fortov V.E. Explosion hazard of hydrogen-air mixtures in the large volumes. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 34 (2009) 5924-5931
9. Schneider H, Pförtner H. PNP-Sichcrheitssofortprogramm, Prozebgasfreisetzung-Explosion in der gasfabrik und auswirkungen von Druckwellen auf das Containment. Dezember 1983.
10. Becker T., and Ebert F. Vergleich zwischen experiment und theorie der explosion grober, freier gaswolken. Chemie Ingenieur Technik 57 1 (1985) 42-45
11. CAST3M. http://www-cast3m.cea.fr/cast3m/index.jsp
12. Kotchourko A., and Breitung W. Numerische Simulation der turbulenten Verbrennung von vorgemischten Gasen in komplexen 3D-Geometrien. FZK-Nachrichten, Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe (2000)
13. 2 explosion experiments in the FLAME facility. International Conference on Hydrogen Safety. Pisa 8-10 September; 2005.
14. Wilkening H., and Huld T. An adaptive 3-D solver for modelling explosions on large industrial environment scales. Combustion Science and Technology 149 (1999) 361-387
15. Troyer C., Baraldi D., Kranzlmueller D., Wilkening H., and Volkert J. Parallel grid adaptation and dynamic load balancing for a CFD Solver, EuroPVM/MPI 2005. In: Martino B., et al. (Ed). Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3666 (2005) 493-501
16. van den Berg A.C., Robertson N.J., and Maslin C.M. AutoReaGas, for gas explosion and blast analyses. 7-10 November. Course on explosion prediction and mitigation (2000), University of Leeds
17. FLUENT v6.1.18. http://fluent.com/software/fluent/
18. Sedov L.I. Similarity and dimensional methods in mechanics (1959), Academic Press
19. Kuhl, AL, Kamel MM, Oppenheim AK, Pressure waves generated by steady flames, Fourteenth Symposium on combustion, The Combustion Institute; 1973.
20. Magnussen B.F., and Hjertager B.H. On mathematical modeling of turbulent combustion with special emphasis on soot formation and combustion. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 16 (1976) 719-727
21. Hjertager B.H. Computer modelling of turbulent gas explosions in complex 2D and 3D geometries. Journal of Hazardous Materials 34 (1993) 173-197
22. Said R, Borghi R, A simulation with a cellular automation for turbulent combustion modeling. 22nd Symposium (Int.) on Combustion, University of Washington - Seattle, USA, 569-577, 1988.
23. Efimenko A.A., and Dorofeev S.B. CREBCOM code system for description of gaseous combustion. Technical report (1998), Russian Research Kurchatov Institute, Moscow
24. Skjold T. Review of the DESC project. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 20 (2007) 291-302
25. Molkov V., Makarov D., and Schneider H. LES modelling of an unconfined large-scale hydrogen-air deflagration. Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics 39 (2006) 4366-4376
26. Beccantini A, Malczynski A, Studer E, Comparison of TNT-equivalence approach, TNO multi-energy approach and a CFD approach in investigating hemispheric hydrogen-air vapor cloud explosions. Proceedings of the 5th International Seminar on Fire and Explosion Hazards. Edinburgh, UK; 23-27 April 2007.
27. Hirsch C., and Tartinville B. Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes modeling for industrial applications and some challenging issues. International Journal of Computational Fluid Dynamics 23 (2009) 295-303