甲烷爆炸对建筑物内外压力场分布的影响

doi:10.11949/0438-1157.20200064

化工学报 ›› 2020, Vol. 71 ›› Issue (11): 5337-5351.DOI: 10.11949/0438-1157.20200064

甲烷爆炸对建筑物内外压力场分布的影响

李玉星^1,³(),尹渊博^1,³,王雅真²,刘翠伟^1,³()

^1.中国石油大学（华东）山东省油气储运安全省级重点实验室，山东青岛 266580
^2.中国石化青岛安全工程研究院，山东青岛 266580
^3.中国石油大学（华东）储运与建筑工程学院，山东青岛 266580

收稿日期:2020-01-16 修回日期:2020-06-16 出版日期:2020-11-05 发布日期:2020-11-05
通讯作者: 刘翠伟
作者简介:李玉星(1970—)，男，教授，lyx13370809333@163.com
基金资助:
国家重大研发计划项目(2016YFC0802104);国家自然科学基金项目(51704317);山东省重点研发计划项目(2019GSF111026);中石油科技创新基金项目(2018D-5007-0603);中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助(19CX07004A)

Effect of methane explosion on distribution of pressure field inside and outside buildings

Yuxing LI^1,³(),Yuanbo YIN^1,³,Yazhen WANG²,Cuiwei LIU^1,³()

^1.Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Oil and Gas Storage and Transportation Safety, China University of Petroleum, Qingdao 266580, Shandong, China
^2.Sinopec Research Institute of Safety Engineering, Qingdao 266580, Shandong, China
^3.College Pipeline and Civil Engineering, China University of Petroleum, Qingdao 266580, Shandong, China

Received:2020-01-16 Revised:2020-06-16 Online:2020-11-05 Published:2020-11-05
Contact: Cuiwei LIU

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

天然气泄漏导致的预混爆炸，会严重威胁周围人员的生命及财产安全，因此掌握气体预混爆炸在建筑物周围产生压力场的分布至关重要。基于Fluent软件，建立了适用于甲烷无约束爆炸超压的计算模型，并通过实验数据对其修正，结果表明：在化学计量浓度下参与燃烧爆炸的预混气体体积约为总体积的1/3，即当量体积。在此基础上建立了适用于甲烷约束爆炸的仿真模型，分析了建筑物高度和宽度对建筑周围压力场的影响，并进一步研究了气体爆炸对建筑物内部压力场分布的影响。结果表明，在建筑物不失效前提下，背对爆炸源一侧中上部为较安全区域，在紧急爆炸事故中，盲目的向下逃生，反而容易受到爆炸超压的强烈冲击。

关键词: 爆炸, 安全, 模型, 压力场, 数值模拟

Abstract:

Premixed methane gas explosions caused by leaked natural gas pose a serious threat to the lives, which may lead to casualties and buildings collapse. So it is important to know the distribution of pressure fields around buildings when there is an explosion. Then people can escape to a relative safe place. Based on the Fluent software, a calculation model suitable for the overpressure of the unconstrained explosion of methane was established, and it was corrected by experimental data. The results show that highest accuracy appears in the SAS turbulence model and the Laminar Finite-Rate model when there is no object to limit the explosion, and that the volume of methane air mixture involved in combustion explosion at the stoichiometric concentration is about 1/3 of the total volume. Then a model for methane unconfined explosion is established. The influence of building height and width on the pressure field is analyzed. Furthermore, the distribution of pressure field inside the building is studied. And the results show that the middle-upper part of buildings is safer than the bottom when the building does not fail. The width of a building affects its resistance to positive overpressure. But neither the height nor the width of the building will affect the change of negative overpressure. Thus in the emergency explosion accidents, it will more vulnerable to the strong impact of positive and negative overpressure that escaping to the bottom blindly.

Key words: explosions, safety, model, pressure field, numerical simulation

中图分类号:

TH 88

李玉星,尹渊博,王雅真,刘翠伟. 甲烷爆炸对建筑物内外压力场分布的影响[J]. 化工学报, 2020, 71(11): 5337-5351.

Yuxing LI,Yuanbo YIN,Yazhen WANG,Cuiwei LIU. Effect of methane explosion on distribution of pressure field inside and outside buildings[J]. CIESC Journal, 2020, 71(11): 5337-5351.

图/表 30

表1 冲击波超压对人体的伤害作用

Table 1 Damage effect of shock wave overpressure on human body

超压 $Δ p$ /MPa	伤害作用
0.02~0.03	轻微损伤
0.03~0.05	听觉器官损伤或骨折
0.05~0.10	内脏严重损伤或死亡
>0.10	大部分人员死亡

表1 冲击波超压对人体的伤害作用

Table 1 Damage effect of shock wave overpressure on human body

超压 $Δ p$ /MPa	伤害作用
0.02~0.03	轻微损伤
0.03~0.05	听觉器官损伤或骨折
0.05~0.10	内脏严重损伤或死亡
>0.10	大部分人员死亡

表2 冲击波超压对建筑物的破坏作用

Table 2 Damage effect of shock wave overpressure on buildings

超压 $Δ p$ /MPa	破坏作用
0.005~0.006	门窗玻璃部分破碎
0.006~0.015	受压面门窗不玻璃破碎
0.015~0.02	窗框损坏
0.02~0.03	墙裂缝
0.04~0.05	墙大裂缝，屋瓦掉下
0.06~0.07	木建筑房柱折断、松动
0.07~0.10	砖墙倒塌
0.10~0.20	防震钢筋混泥土破坏，小房屋倒塌
0.20~0.30	大型钢架结构破坏

表2 冲击波超压对建筑物的破坏作用

Table 2 Damage effect of shock wave overpressure on buildings

超压 $Δ p$ /MPa	破坏作用
0.005~0.006	门窗玻璃部分破碎
0.006~0.015	受压面门窗不玻璃破碎
0.015~0.02	窗框损坏
0.02~0.03	墙裂缝
0.04~0.05	墙大裂缝，屋瓦掉下
0.06~0.07	木建筑房柱折断、松动
0.07~0.10	砖墙倒塌
0.10~0.20	防震钢筋混泥土破坏，小房屋倒塌
0.20~0.30	大型钢架结构破坏

表3 网格信息

Table3 Grid information

编号	不同区域网格大小	网格数
1^#	点火区0.01 m×0.01 m，可燃物区0.04 m×0.04 m，空气区0.2 m×0.2 m	23150
2^#	点火区0.005 m×0.005 m，可燃物区0.02 m×0.02 m，空气区0.1 m×0.1 m	45044
3^#	点火区0.0025 m×0.0025 m，可燃物区0.01 m×0.01 m，空气区0.05 m×0.05 m	65103

图1 网格敏感性分析结果

Fig.1 Sensitivity analysis of grid

图2 无约束爆炸模型网格示意图

Fig.2 Schematic diagram of unconstrained explosion model grid

表4 不同湍流模型峰值超压与到达时间对比

Table 4 Comparison of peak overpressure and arrival time of different turbulence models

湍流模型	峰值超压ΔP/Pa	到达时间/s
SAS	578.87	0.19
k-ε standard	1020.3	0.07
k-ε RNG	不收敛
k-ε realizable	805.34	0.11
k- $ω$ standard	点火未成功
k- $ω$ SST	1684.7	0.16

表4 不同湍流模型峰值超压与到达时间对比

Table 4 Comparison of peak overpressure and arrival time of different turbulence models

湍流模型	峰值超压ΔP/Pa	到达时间/s
SAS	578.87	0.19
k-ε standard	1020.3	0.07
k-ε RNG	不收敛
k-ε realizable	805.34	0.11
k- $ω$ standard	点火未成功
k- $ω$ SST	1684.7	0.16

表5 点火能量对爆炸超压的影响

Table 5 Effect of ignition energy on explosion overpressure

球体点火区域半径/m	等价点火能/mJ	爆炸峰值超压ΔP/Pa
0.004	100	578.87
0.006	350	582.15
0.008	830	583.67
0.01	1600	580.45

表6 不同体积立方形预混气体爆炸工况条件

Table 6 Explosion conditions of different volume cubic premixed gases

工况编号	预混立方体边长a/m	甲烷体积浓度/%	监测体积范围/(m×m)	点火方式
1	1	9.5	20×15	中心点火
2	2	9.5	20×15	中心点火
3	3	9.5	20×15	中心点火

图3 实验装置图

Fig.3 Diagram of experimental equipment

图4 无约束甲烷/空气预混爆炸在不同混合物体积、不同检测距离的实验数据结果

Fig.4 Experimental results for unconstrained methane/air premixed explosions in different mixture volumes and different detection distances

图5 无约束爆炸模型示意图

Fig.5 Schematic diagram of unconstrained explosion

图6 边长2 m无约束预混立方气体爆炸Fluent数值模拟结果

Fig.6 Fluent numerical simulation results of 2 m unconstrained premixed cubic gas explosion

图7 2 m工况对应甲烷体积浓度分布图

Fig.7 Methane volume concentration distribution of case 2 m

表7 Fluent模型正负超压原始模拟计算值与实验值对比

Table 7 The positive and negative overpressure original Fluent simulation results and experimental data

预混气云边长/m	监测点位置/m	正超压/Pa			负超压/Pa
预混气云边长/m	监测点位置/m	模拟值	实验值	比值	模拟值	实验值	比值
1	2	252.93	108.62	2.33	-180.75	-64.66	2.80
	2.5	203.34	88.21	2.31	-128.64	-47.16	2.73
	3	165.57	69.13	2.40	-112.26	-45.65	2.46
2	2	555.72	173.28	3.21	-436.62	-137.07	3.19
	2.5	508.08	147.16	3.45	-362.61	-119.21	3.04
	3	411.36	140.43	2.93	-295.29	-103.04	2.87
3	2	894.93	276.72	3.23	-714.45	-212.06	3.37
	2.5	763.65	241.05	3.17	-567.99	-178.17	3.19
	3	680.22	223.91	3.04	-437.85	-144.78	3.02

图8 障碍物的布置(a)与网格划分(b)

Fig.8 Schematic diagram of obstacle arrangement (a) and meshing(b)

图9 监测点布置示意图

Fig.9 Schematic diagram of monitoring point

表8 障碍物研究工况条件设置表

Table 8 Obstacle research conditions setting table

分组研究	工况编号	障碍物高度h/m	障碍物宽度b/m	障碍物到爆心距离d/m	监测体积范围/m×m×m
A组：障碍物高度研究	A-1	2	2	2	20×20×15
	A-2	3	2	2	20×20×15
	A-3	4	2	2	20×20×15
	A-4	5	2	2	20×20×15
	A-5	6	2	2	20×20×15
B组：障碍物宽度研究	B-1	4	1	2	20×20×15
	B-2	4	2	2	20×20×15
	B-3	4	3	2	20×20×15
	B-4	4	4	2	20×20×15
	B-5	4	5	2	20×20×15

图10 A-3工况不同时刻通过爆心的XZ平面压力场分布图

Fig.10 Pressure distribution of XZ plane passing through the ignition point at different times for case A-3

图11 A组障碍物正对爆炸面超压分布曲线

Fig.11 Overpressure distribution on the facing surface of obstacles of case group A

图12 A组障碍物背对爆炸面超压分布曲线

Fig.12 Overpressure distribution on the back surface of obstacles of case group A

图13 B组工况爆炸最大正超压对应时刻压力场

Fig.13 Pressure fields at maximum positive overpressure corresponding time for case group B

图14 B组工况爆炸最大负超压对应时刻压力场

Fig.14 Pressure fields at maximum negative overpressure corresponding time for case group B

图15 B组障碍物正对爆炸面超压分布曲线

Fig.15 Overpressure distribution on the facing surface of obstacles of case group B

图16 B组障碍物背对爆炸源面超压分布曲线

Fig.16 Overpressure distribution on the back surface of obstacles of case group B

图17 障碍物内部监测点布置

Fig.17 The monitor points arrangement in obstacle

表9 工况A-3与工况C最大正负超压对比

Table 9 Maximum overpressure comparison between case A-3 and case C

工况编号	ΔP_max+/Pa	ΔP_max-/Pa
A-3	253.04	-196.93
C	251.51	-164.02

图18 工况A-3和工况C障碍物正对爆炸侧正负超压分布

Fig.18 Overpressure distribution on the facing surface of obstacles for case A-3 and case C

图19 工况A-3和工况C障碍物背对爆炸侧正负超压分布

Fig.19 Overpressure distribution on the back surface of obstacles for case A-3 and case C

图20 障碍物内部z=2 m半侧宽度上正负超压的变化

Fig.20 Overpressure change diagram inside the obstacle on z=2 m height

图21 障碍物内部中轴线上正负超压随高度的变化

Fig.21 Overpressure changes with height on the inner axis of the obstacle

参考文献 31

14	Kim W K. Prediction model for self-similar propagation and blast wave generation of premixed flames[J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2015, 40(34): 11087-11092.
15	Strehlow R A, Luckritz R T, Adamczyk A A, et al. The blast wave generated by spherical flames[J]. Combustion & Flame, 1979, 35(79): 297-310.
16	Li P L, Huang P, LIU Z Y, et al. Experimental study on vented explosion overpressure of methane/air mixtures in manhole[J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2019, 374(15): 349-355.
17	Huang K, Sun Z Y, Tian Y C, et al. Turbulent combustion evolution of stoichiometric H₂/CH₄/air mixtures within a spherical space[J].International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2019,45(27): 10613-10622.
18	Ciccarelli G, Johansen C T, Parravani M. The role of shock-flame interactions on flame acceleration in an obstacle laden channel[J]. Combustion & Flame, 2010, 157(11): 2125-2136.
19	Harrison A J, Eyre J A. The effect of obstacle arrays on the combustion of large premixed gas/air clouds[J]. Combustion Science and Technology, 1987, 52(1/2/3): 121-137.
20	Wang C, Huang F, Addai E K, et al. Effect of concentration and obstacles on flame velocity and overpressure of methane-air mixture[J]. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2016, 43: 302-310.
21	Hall R, Masri A R, Yaroshchyk P, et al. Effects of position and frequency of obstacles on turbulent premixed propagating flames[J]. Combustion and Flame, 2009, 156(2): 439-446.
22	Kundu S, Zanganeh J, Moghtaderi B. A review on understanding explosions from methane-air mixture[J]. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2016, 40: 507-523.
23	Ibrahim S S, Masri A R. The effects of obstructions on overpressure resulting from premixed flame deflagration[J]. 2001, 14(3): 213-221.
24	Xu H, Li Y, Zhu P, et al. Experimental study on the mitigation via an ultra-fine water mist of methane/coal dust mixture explosions in the presence of obstacles[J]. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2013, 26(4): 815-820.
25	Yu D M, Feng C G, Zeng Q X, et al. The damage of explosions and the division of their injury regions[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 1995(S2):13-17.
1	Vanderstraeten B, Tuerlinckx D, Berghmans J, et al. Experimental study of the pressure and temperature dependence of the upper flammability limit of methane/air mixtures[J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 1997, 56(3): 237-246.
2	Bunev V A, Bolshova T A, Babkin V S. The nature of the upper laminar flammability limit in methane-air mixtures at high pressures[J]. Doklady Physical Chemistry, 2013, 452(1): 197-199.
3	Checkel M D, Ting S K, Bushe W K. Flammability limits and burning velocities of ammonia/nitric oxide mixtures[J]. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 1995, 8(4): 215-220.
4	Chen J R, Tsai H Y, Chien J H, et al. Flow and flame visualization near the upper flammability limits of methane/air and propane/air mixtures at elevated pressures[J]. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2011, 24(5): 662-670.
5	Gieras M, Klemens R, Rarata G, et al. Determination of explosion parameters of methane-air mixtures in the chamber of 40 dm³ at normal and elevated temperature[J]. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2006, 19(2/3): 263-270.
6	Cui G, Wang S, Liu J G, et al. Explosion characteristics of a methane/air mixture at low initial temperatures[J]. Fuel, 2018, 234(15): 886-893.
7	Huang L B, Wang Y, Pei S F, et al. Effect of elevated pressure on the explosion and flammability limits of methane-air mixtures[J]. Energy, 2019, 186(1): 115840.
8	Zheng W, Kaplan C R, Houim R W, et al. Flame acceleration and transition to detonation: effects of a composition gradient in a mixture of methane and air[J]. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, 2018, 37(3): S1540748918305364.
9	Guo Y B, He L G, Wang D G, et al. Numerical investigation of surface conduit parallel gas pipeline explosive based on the TNT equivalent weight method[J]. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2016, 44: 360-368.
10	Fernando D A, Enrique G F, Juan F S P, et al. Characteristic overpressure–impulse–distance curves for vapour cloud explosions using the TNO multi-energy model[J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2006, 137(2): 734-741.
11	Dobashi R, Kawamura S, Kuwana K, et al. Consequence analysis of blast wave from accidental gas explosions[J]. Proc. of Combust. Inst., 2011, 33(2): 2295-2301.
12	Bao Q, Fang Q, Yang S, et al. Experimental investigation on the deflagration load under unconfined methane-air explosions[J]. Fuel, 2016, 185: 565-576.
13	Gostintsev Y A, Istratov A G, Shulenin Y V. Self-similar propagation of a free turbulent flame in mixed gas mixtures[J]. Combustion Explosion & Shock Waves, 1988, 24(5): 563-569.
26	李少鹏, 陈国华, 赵杰, 等. 开敞空间可燃气云爆炸冲击波超压及灾害动力响应研究评述[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2019, 15(11): 11-17.
	Li S P, Chen G H, Zhao J, et al. Research review on explosion shock wave overpressure and disaster dynamic response of open space combustible gas cloud[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2019, 15(11): 11-17.
27	张斌. 大涡模拟滤波网格分析及网格自适应控制研究与应用[D]. 上海: 上海交通大学, 2011.
	Zhang B. Grid analysis of large eddy simulation filter and research and application of grid adaptive control [D]. Shanghai: Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 2011.
28	Ales T, Miroslav M, Kozubková M. CFD simulation of vented explosion and turbulent flame propagation[J]. EPJ Web of Conferences, 2015, 92: 02101.
29	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.
30	Kim W K, Mogi T, Kuwana K, et al. Self-similar propagation of expanding spherical flames in large scale gas explosions[J]. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, 2015, 35(2): 2051-2058.
31	Malhotra A, Carson D, Mcfadden S. Blast pressure leakage into buildings and effects on humans[J]. Procedia Engineering, 2017, 210: 386-392.

[1]	叶展羽, 山訸, 徐震原. 用于太阳能蒸发的折纸式蒸发器性能仿真[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(S1): 132-140.
[2]	张义飞, 刘舫辰, 张双星, 杜文静. 超临界二氧化碳用印刷电路板式换热器性能分析[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(S1): 183-190.
[3]	王志国, 薛孟, 董芋双, 张田震, 秦晓凯, 韩强. 基于裂隙粗糙性表征方法的地热岩体热流耦合数值模拟与分析[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(S1): 223-234.
[4]	宋嘉豪, 王文. 斯特林发动机与高温热管耦合运行特性研究[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(S1): 287-294.
[5]	张思雨, 殷勇高, 贾鹏琦, 叶威. 双U型地埋管群跨季节蓄热特性研究[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(S1): 295-301.
[6]	连梦雅, 谈莹莹, 王林, 陈枫, 曹艺飞. 地下水预热新风一体化热泵空调系统制热性能研究[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(S1): 311-319.
[7]	金正浩, 封立杰, 李舒宏. 氨水溶液交叉型再吸收式热泵的能量及分析[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(S1): 53-63.
[8]	王浩, 王振雷. 基于自适应谱方法的裂解炉烧焦模型化简策略[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(9): 3855-3864.
[9]	李科, 文键, 忻碧平. 耦合蒸气冷却屏的真空多层绝热结构对液氢储罐自增压过程的影响机制研究[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(9): 3786-3796.
[10]	何松, 刘乔迈, 谢广烁, 王斯民, 肖娟. 高浓度水煤浆管道气膜减阻两相流模拟及代理辅助优化[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(9): 3766-3774.
[11]	邢雷, 苗春雨, 蒋明虎, 赵立新, 李新亚. 井下微型气液旋流分离器优化设计与性能分析[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(8): 3394-3406.
[12]	于旭东, 李琪, 陈念粗, 杜理, 任思颖, 曾英. 三元体系KCl + CaCl₂ + H₂O 298.2、323.2及348.2 K相平衡研究及计算[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(8): 3256-3265.
[13]	诸程瑛, 王振雷. 基于改进深度强化学习的乙烯裂解炉操作优化[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(8): 3429-3437.
[14]	闫琳琦, 王振雷. 基于STA-BiLSTM-LightGBM组合模型的多步预测软测量建模[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(8): 3407-3418.
[15]	李珍宝, 李超, 王虎, 王绍瑞, 黎泉. MPP抑制铝镁合金粉尘爆炸微观机理研究[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(8): 3608-3614.

甲烷爆炸对建筑物内外压力场分布的影响

Effect of methane explosion on distribution of pressure field inside and outside buildings

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

被引次数

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 30

参考文献 31

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价