LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Tomlin, GB; Phylaktou, HN; Johnson, M; Andrews, GE; Algar, S (2016)
Publisher: Press of the University of Science & Technology of China
Languages: English
Types: Other
Subjects:
Accidental gas explosions are a recognised hazard in process industries but they are also common in residential buildings. Whilst process plants have specifically designed vent reliefs to limit the enclosure damage, in homes a similar effect is achieved due to the presence of doors and windows whose failure often protects the building. There are empirically based correlations for predicting overpressure and for vent sizing, however these are limited in application to simple enclosures. In practice, enclosures have interconnected spaces which would potentially increase the flame acceleration considerably. In this paper we present the results of full scale natural gas layer tests in a twin chamber, which consisted of two 22 m3 enclosures connected by an open doorway. Layered natural gas/air mixtures of 8, 10 and 12% by volume, were ignited at the rear of one of the chambers. Explosion relief was provided by vent openings of 2.48, 1.49 or 0.74 m2 on the far walls of both chambers. With tests with equal large vents on each of the chambers, the dominant influence was the external explosion. The maximum overpressure was produced by tests involving a 12% natural gas concentration. The use of a smaller vent in the adjoining enclosure had a significant effect on the maximum overpressure and the mechanism of the explosion development. However, altering the size from 1.49 m2 to 0.74 m2 had little overall effect. This was largely due to the greater generation of turbulence and the venting process which predominantly occurred via the doorway and through the ignition-chamber vent opening. The use of a smaller vent in the ignition enclosure also altered the manner in which the explosion developed. A venting driven ‘jetting’ expanding flame, propagated into the adjoining enclosure and towards the far vent opening, generating the dominant pressure peak in these type of tests.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 1. British Standards Institution, BS EN 114994:2007 Gas explosion venting protective systems. 2007: London.
    • 2. NFPA, NFPA 68 Standard on Explosion Protection by Deflagration Venting. 2013, Maryland: NFPA.
    • 3. Astbury, N.F., H.W.H. West, and H.R. Hodgkinson, Experimental Gas Explosions: Report of Further Tests at Potters Marston. 1972, The British Ceramic Research Association.
    • 4. Astbury, N.F., et al., Gas Explosions in Load-Bearing Brick Structures. 1970, The British Ceramic Research Association.
    • 5. Rasbash, D.J., et al., Gas Explosions in Multiple Compartments. 1970, Fire Research Station.
    • 6. Dragosavic, M. in BRE Symposium on Buildings and the Hazard of Explosion, Paper No. 3. 1972.
    • 7. Dragosavic, M., Structural Measures Against Natural-Gas Explosions in Highrise Blocks of Flats. Heron, 1973. 19(4).
    • 8. Pedersen, H.H., et al., Modelling large-scale vented gas explosions in a twin-compartment enclosure. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2013. 26(6): p. 1604-1615.
    • 9. Cooper, M.G., M. Fairweather, and J.P. Tite, On the mechanisms of pressure generation in vented explosions. Combustion and Flame, 1986. 65(1): p. 1-14.
    • 10. Bauwens, C.R., J. Chaffee, and S. Dorofeev, Effect of Ignition Location, Vent Size, and Obstacles on Vented Explosion Overpressures in Propane-Air Mixtures. Combustion Science and Technology, 2010. 182(11): p. 1915 - 1932.
    • 11. Bauwens, C.R., J.L. Chaffee, and S. Dorofeev. Experimental and Numerical Study of Methane-air Deflagrations in a Vented Enclosure. in Ninth International Symposium on Fire Safety Science. 2009.
    • 12. Harrison, A.J. and J.A. Eyre, External Explosions as a Result of Explosion Venting. Combustion Science and Technology, 1987. 52(1): p. 91 - 106.
    • 13. Bimson, S.J., et al. An experimental study of the physics of gaseous deflagration in a very large vented enclosure. in 14th International Colloquium on the Dynamics of Explosions and Reactive Systems. 1993. , Coimbra, Portugal.
    • 14. van Wingerden, C.J.M., An Experimental Study into the Venting of Gaseous Explosions: Part 1 - Experimental Results. 1984, TNO.
    • 15. van Wingerden, C.J.M., On the venting of large-scale methane air explosions, in Sixth international symposium of loss prevention and safety promotion in the process industries. 1989: Oslo.
    • 16. van Wingerden, C.J.M. and J.P. Zeeuwen. Venting of gas explosions in large rooms. in 4th International Symposium on Loss Prevention and Safety Promotion in the Process Industries (EFCE Event n 290). Volume 3: Chemical Process Hazards. 1983. Harrogate, England: IChemE.
    • 17. Fakandu, B.M., G.E. Andrews, and H.N. Phylaktou. Impact of non-central vents on vented explosion overpressures. in Tenth International Symposium on Hazards, Prevention, and Mitigation of Industrial Explosions (X ISHPMIE). 2014. Bergen, Norway.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article