障碍物阻塞率梯度对甲烷爆炸特性影响研究

doi:10.11949/0438-1157.20210525

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

通过自主设计并搭建小型实验平台，研究障碍物阻塞率梯度依次为0、0.05、0.1、0.15时，甲烷火焰传播过程的火焰结构变化、火焰前锋动力学以及压力演变。结果表明：阻塞率梯度为0和0.05的工况，经过障碍物后的火焰前锋会由模糊逐渐变得清晰，随后火焰前锋会向燃烧区凹陷；而阻塞率梯度为0.1和0.15工况的火焰在经过障碍物后，前端始终模糊，随后湍流燃烧加剧，迅速在整个管道爆燃，并无火焰前锋凹陷现象。阻塞率梯度对火焰瞬时速度影响较大，而对平均速度并无太大影响。随着阻塞率梯度从0增大到0.15，最大火焰速度会明显提升，而平均火焰速度却近似一致。此外，高阻塞率梯度的障碍物组有利于压力积聚，随着阻塞率梯度的增大，峰值超压也呈现规律性的增大，达到峰值超压所需的时间也相应延长。

关键词: 爆炸, 甲烷, 障碍物, 阻塞率梯度, 湍流

Abstract:

Through the self-designed and built small experimental platform, the flame structure change, flame front dynamics and pressure evolution of methane flame propagation process were studied when the blockage rate gradient was 0, 0.05, 0.1 and 0.15 respectively. The results show that when the blockage rate gradient is 0 and 0.05, the flame front will gradually become clear after passing through the obstacles, and then the flame front will sag to the combustion zone. When the blockage rate gradient is 0.1 and 0.15, the front end of the flame is always blurred after passing through the obstacles, and then the turbulent combustion intensifies, and deflagration occurs rapidly in the whole pipeline, and there is no flame front depression phenomenon. The blockage rate gradient has a great influence on the instantaneous flame velocity, but not on the average flame velocity. With the increase of blockage rate gradient from 0 to 0.15, the maximum flame velocity increases obviously, but the average flame velocity is almost the same. In addition, the obstacle group with high blockage rate gradient is conducive to pressure accumulation. With the increase of blockage rate gradient, the peak overpressure increases regularly, and the time to reach the peak overpressure increases accordingly.

Key words: explosion, methane, obstacles, blockage rate gradient, turbulence

中图分类号:

TD 712

余明高,马梓茂,韩世新,王雪燕,陈传东. 障碍物阻塞率梯度对甲烷爆炸特性影响研究[J]. 化工学报, 2021, 72(10): 5430-5439.

Minggao YU,Zimao MA,Shixin HAN,Xueyan WANG,Chuandong CHEN. Study on influence of obstacle blockage rate gradient on methane explosion characteristics[J]. CIESC Journal, 2021, 72(10): 5430-5439.

图/表 9

图1 实验装置示意图1—甲烷;2—压缩空气;3—流量控制器;4—压力传感器;5—进气阀;6—点火电极;7—OB1;8—OB2;9—OB3;10—出气阀;11—泄爆口;12—不锈钢板;13—石英玻璃管道;14—高速摄像机

Fig.1 Illustration of experimental setup

表1 阻塞率梯度配置

Table 1 Blockage rate gradient configuration

障碍物组	OB1阻塞率	OB2阻塞率	OB3阻塞率
C₀	0.25	0.25	0.25
C_0.05	0.2	0.25	0.3
C_0.1	0.15	0.25	0.35
C_0.15	0.1	0.25	0.4

图2 不同阻塞率梯度下的火焰结构演变

Fig.2 Evolution of flame structure under different blockage rate gradients

图3 火焰前锋位置随时间的变化（φ=10%）

Fig.3 Flame front position changed with time(φ = 10%)

图4 火焰前锋速度历程（φ=10%）

Fig.4 Velocity history of flame front(φ = 10%)

图5 火焰前锋速度历程（φ=8%~11%）

Fig.5 Velocity history of flame front(φ=8%—11%)

图6 压力演变（φ=10%）

Fig.6 Pressure evolution(φ = 10%)

图7 压力演变（φ=8%、9%、11%）

Fig.7 Pressure evolution(φ = 8%, 9%, 11%)

图8 峰值超压随阻塞率梯度的变化

Fig.8 Peak overpressure varying with blockage rate gradient

参考文献 37

1	臧小为, 沈瑞琪, Е. В. 尤尔托夫,等. 2008—2018年俄罗斯煤炭工业事故统计分析及启示[J]. 煤矿安全, 2020, 51(3): 247-251, 256.
	Zang X W, Shen R Q, Yurtov E B, et al. Statistical analysis and lessons of accidents in coal industry of Russia during 2008 and 2018[J]. Safety in Coal Mines, 2020, 51(3): 247-251, 256.
2	许佳林. 煤矿安全管理问题及措施分析[J]. 能源与节能, 2020, (12): 157-158.
	Xu J L. Analysis of coal mine safety management problems and measures[J]. Energy and Energy Conservation, 2020(12): 157-158.
3	Atay E, Bayraktaroglu S. The Turkish Soma Coal mining disaster: antecedents, consequences, and ethics Habibe Ilhan [J]. Journal of Business Ethics Education, 2019, 16(13): 231-246.
4	Meng X, Liu Q, Luo X, et al. Risk assessment of the unsafe behaviours of humans in fatal gas explosion accidents in China's underground coal mines[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2019, 210(10): 970-976.
5	Alharbi A, Masri A R, Ibrahim S S. Turbulent premixed flames of CNG, LPG, and H₂ propagating past repeated obstacles[J]. Experimental Thermal & Fluid Science, 2014, 56: 2-8.
6	何学秋, 杨艺, 王恩元, 等. 障碍物对瓦斯爆炸火焰结构及火焰传播影响的研究[J]. 煤炭学报, 2004, 29(2): 186-189.
	He X Q, Yang Y, Wang E Y, et al. Effects of obstacle on premixed flame microstructure and flame propagation in methane/air explosion[J]. Journal of China Coal Society, 2004, 29(2): 186-189.
7	Boeck L R, Lapointe S, Melguizo-Gavilanes J, et al. Flame propagation across an obstacle: OH-PLIF and 2-D simulations with detailed chemistry[J]. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, 2016, 36(2): 2799-2802.
8	余明高, 袁晨樵, 郑凯. 管道内障碍物对加氢甲烷爆炸特性的影响[J]. 化工学报, 2016, 67(12): 5311-5319.
	Yu M G, Yuan C Q, Zheng K. Effects of hydrogen addition on explosion characteristics of gas under condition of obstacles[J]. CIESC Journal, 2016, 67(12): 5311-5319.
9	Li Q, Sun X, Wang X, et al. Experimental study of flame propagation across flexible obstacles in a square cross-section channel[J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2019, 44(7): 3944-3952.
10	Wei H, Gao D, Zhou L, et al. Experimental observations of turbulent flame propagation effected by flame acceleration in the end gas of closed combustion chamber[J]. Fuel, 2016, 180(15): 157-163.
11	Chapman W R, Wheeler R V. CCLⅩⅩⅩⅢ—The propagation of flame in mixtures of methane and air. Part Ⅳ. The effect of restrictions in the path of the flame[J]. Journal of the Chemical Society, 1926, 129(7): 1087-1095.
12	Fairweather M, Hargrave G K, Ibrahim S S, et al. Studies of premixed flame propagation in explosion tubes[J]. Combustion and Flame, 1999, 116(4): 504-518.
13	林柏泉, 张仁贵, 吕恒宏. 瓦斯爆炸过程中火焰传播规律及其加速机理的研究[J]. 煤炭学报, 1999(1): 58-61.
	Lin B Q, Zhang R G, Lyu H H. Study on the law of flame propagation and its acceleration mechanism during gas explosion[J]. Journal of China Coal Society, 1999(1): 58-61.
14	Johansen C, Ciccarelli G. Modeling the initial flame acceleration in an obstructed channel using large eddy simulation[J]. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2013, 26(4): 571-585.
15	Masri A R, Ibrahim S S, Nehzat N, et al. Experimental study of premixed flame propagation over various solid obstructions[J]. Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, 2000, 21(1/2/3): 109-116.
16	Ibrahim S S, Masri A R. The effects of obstructions on overpressure resulting from premixed flame deflagration[J]. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2001, 14(3): 213-221.
17	Johansen C T, Ciccarelli G. Visualization of the unburned gas flow field ahead of an accelerating flame in an obstructed square channel[J]. Combustion & Flame, 2009, 156(2): 405-416.
18	陈道阳, 张礼敬, 陶刚, 等. 障碍物对火焰传播过程影响数值模拟[J]. 工业安全与环保, 2012, 38(6): 35-37.
	Chen D Y, Zhang L J, Tao G, et al. Study of obstacles to flame propagation in process of the combustible gas explosion[J]. Industrial Safety and Environmental Protection, 2012, 38(6): 35-37.
19	Wen X, Yu M, Liu Z, et al. Effects of cross-wise obstacle position on methane–air deflagration characteristics[J]. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2013, 26(6): 1335-1340.
20	丁以斌, 肖福全, 宣晓燕, 等. 立体结构障碍物的不同放置方式对甲烷预混火焰传播的影响[J]. 煤炭学报, 2012, 37(1): 137-140.
	Ding Y B, Xiao F Q, Xuan X Y, et al. Deposited manner of solid structure obstacles influence on flame propagation in premixed-methane tube[J]. Journal of China Coal Society, 2012, 37(1): 137-140.
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	杜扬, 李国庆, 王世茂, 等. 障碍物数量对油气泄压爆炸特性的影响[J]. 化工学报, 2017, 68(7): 2946-2955.
	Du Y, Li G Q, Wang S M, et al. Effects of obstacle number on characteristics of vented gasoline-air mixture explosions[J]. CIESC Journal, 2017, 68(7): 2946-2955.
23	李国庆, 杜扬, 白洁, 等. 平板障碍物通道形状对油气爆炸传播特性影响[J]. 化工学报, 2020, 71(4): 1912-1921.
	Li G Q, Du Y, Bai J, et al. Effects of flat obstacle channel shapes on characteristics of asoline-air explosion[J]. CIESC Journal, 2020, 71(4): 1912-1921.
24	Liu F, Hua Y, Zhang X, et al. Experimental study on induced accelerated combustion of premixed hydrogen-air in a confined environment[J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2019, 44(59): 31593-31609.
25	Lee J H S, Knystautas R, Chan C K. Turbulent flame propagation in obstacle-filled tubes[J]. Symposium on Combustion, 1985, 20(1): 1663-1672.
26	Ciccarelli G, Fowler C J, Bardon M. Effect of obstacle size and spacing on the initial stage of flame acceleration in a rough tube[J]. Shock Waves, 2005, 14(3): 161-166.
27	Yu M, Yang X, Zheng K, et al. Experimental study of premixed syngas/air flame deflagration in a closed duct[J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2018, 43(29): 13676-13686.
28	刘玉华, 丁以斌. 立体结构障碍物不同阻塞比对火焰传播的影响[J]. 湖南有色金属, 2008, 24(1): 1-4, 64.
	Liu Y H, Ding Y B. Effect of different blockage ratios of solid structure obstacles on flames transmission[J]. Hunan Nonferrous Metals, 2008, 24(1): 1-4, 64.
29	Yang X, Yu M, Zheng K, et al. An experimental study on premixed syngas/air flame propagating across an obstacle in closed duct[J]. Fuel, 2020, 267: 117200.
30	Bychkov V, Valiev D, Eriksson L E. Physical mechanism of ultrafast flame acceleration[J]. Physical Review Letters, 2008, 101(16): 164501.
31	Bychkov V, Sadek J, Akkerman V. Analysis of flame acceleration in open or vented obstructed pipes[J]. Physical Review E, 2017, 95(1): 013111.
32	Ugarte O J, Bychkov V, Sadek J, et al. Critical role of blockage ratio for flame acceleration in channels with tightly spaced obstacles[J]. Physics of Fluids, 2016, 28(9): 823-54.
33	Eriksson P L E. Flame acceleration in the early stages of burning in tubes[J]. Combustion and Flame, 2007, 150(4): 263-276.
34	Fan B, Ying Z, Chen Z, et al. Observations of flame behavior during flame-obstacle interaction[J]. Process Safety Progress, 2008, 27(1): 66-71.
35	Xiao H, Houim R W, Oran E S. Effects of pressure waves on the stability of flames propagating in tubes[J]. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, 2017, 36(1): 1577-1583.
36	Xiao H, Houim R W, Oran E S. Formation and evolution of distorted tulip flames[J]. Combustion & Flame, 2015, 162(11): 4084-4101.
37	Yang X, Yu M, Zheng K, et al. A comparative investigation of premixed flame propagation behavior of syngas-air mixtures in closed and half-open ducts[J]. Energy, 2019, 178(1): 436-446.

[1]	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.
[2]	岳林静, 廖艺涵, 薛源, 李雪洁, 李玉星, 刘翠伟. 凹坑缺陷对厚孔板喉部空化流动特性影响研究[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(8): 3292-3308.
[3]	杨克, 贾岳, 纪虹, 邢志祥, 蒋军成. 垃圾焚烧飞灰对瓦斯爆炸压力及火焰传播的抑制作用及机理研究[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(8): 3597-3607.
[4]	牛超, 沈胜强, 杨艳, 潘泊年, 李熠桥. 甲烷BOG喷射器流动过程计算与性能分析[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(7): 2858-2868.
[5]	刘晓洋, 喻健良, 侯玉洁, 闫兴清, 张振华, 吕先舒. 螺旋微通道对掺氢甲烷爆轰传播的影响[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(7): 3139-3148.
[6]	周小文, 杜杰, 张战国, 许光文. 基于甲烷脉冲法的Fe₂O₃-Al₂O₃载氧体还原特性研究[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(6): 2611-2623.
[7]	丁俊华, 俞树荣, 王世鹏, 洪先志, 包鑫, 丁雪兴. 多重效应下超高速干气密封流场模拟及密封性能试验[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(5): 2088-2099.
[8]	张伟政, 赵吉军, 马学忠, 张琦璇, 庞益祥, 张俊涛. 湍流效应对高速机械密封端面型槽冷却性能影响分析[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(3): 1228-1238.
[9]	朱兵国, 何吉祥, 徐进良, 彭斌. 冷却条件下渐扩/渐缩管内超临界压力二氧化碳的传热特性[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(3): 1062-1072.
[10]	胡晗, 杨亮, 李春晓, 刘道平. 天然烟浸滤液水合物法储甲烷动力学研究[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(3): 1313-1321.
[11]	武子超, 汪志雷, 李荣业, 李可昕, 华敏, 潘旭海, 王三明, 蒋军成. 点火方式对欠膨胀氢气射流爆炸超压影响规律研究[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(3): 1409-1418.
[12]	彭晓婉, 郭笑楠, 邓春, 刘蓓, 孙长宇, 陈光进. ZIF-8浆液法分离CH₄/N₂的双吸收-吸附塔工艺流程建模与模拟[J]. 化工学报, 2023, 74(2): 784-795.
[13]	杨克, 王辰升, 纪虹, 郑凯, 邢志祥, 毕海普, 蒋军成. 聚多巴胺包覆混合粉体抑制甲烷爆炸的实验研究[J]. 化工学报, 2022, 73(9): 4245-4254.
[14]	廖珊珊, 张少刚, 陶骏骏, 刘家豪, 汪金辉. 竖直射流火撞击障碍管道数值模拟分析[J]. 化工学报, 2022, 73(9): 4226-4234.
[15]	王燕, 何佳, 杨晶晶, 林晨迪, 纪文涛. 草酸盐和碳酸氢盐抑制聚乙烯粉尘爆炸特性[J]. 化工学报, 2022, 73(9): 4207-4216.