Inhibition of polyethylene dust explosion by oxalate and bicarbonate

doi:10.11949/0438-1157.20220790

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to study the suppression characteristics and mechanism of oxalate and bicarbonate on the explosion flame of polyethylene dust, two kinds of bicarbonate powders ( NaHCO₃, KHCO₃ ) and two kinds of oxalate powders ( Na₂C₂O₄, K₂C₂O₄ ) were selected. The inhibition performance of oxalate and bicarbonate on flame propagation of polyethylene dust explosion was analyzed from two aspects of flame structure and flame propagation velocity. Combined with the physical and chemical properties of four kinds of explosion suppression powders, the mechanism of inhibiting polyethylene dust explosion was analyzed. The results show that all four kinds of explosion suppression powder can inhibit the flame propagation of polyethylene dust explosion, and the inhibition effect increases with the increase of the concentration of explosion suppression powder. Under the same explosion inhibitor concentration, KHCO₃ had the best explosion suppression performance, followed by NaHCO₃, and then K₂C₂O₄ and Na₂C₂O₄. That is, the explosion suppression performance of potassium salt powder was better than that of sodium salt with the same acid radical ion, and the explosion suppression performance of bicarbonate powder was better than that of oxalate with the same metal ion. The four kinds of explosion suppression powders all have physical and chemical explosion suppression properties. In terms of physics, bicarbonate powder mainly has the functions of thermal desorption, dilution of oxygen and thermal shielding, while oxalate only has the functions of dilution of oxygen and thermal shielding. In terms of chemical, four kinds of explosion suppression powders can be pyrolyzed to produce active free radicals Na· and K·, and react with the high active radicals H· and OH· produced by polyethylene dust explosion to form Na·⇔NaOH and K·⇔KOH cyclic reaction, and then play an explosion suppression role by interrupting the chain reaction.

Key words: explosion, oxalate, bicarbonate, dust, safety, explosion suppression characteristic

摘要：

为研究草酸盐和碳酸氢盐抑制聚乙烯粉尘爆炸特性，选取NaHCO₃、KHCO₃、Na₂C₂O₄和K₂C₂O₄四种粉体，从火焰结构和火焰传播速度两方面分析其对聚乙烯粉尘爆炸的抑制性能，并结合抑爆粉体的理化性质分析抑爆机理。结果表明，四种抑爆粉体均可抑制聚乙烯粉尘爆炸火焰传播，且抑制效果随抑爆粉体浓度增加而增强。相同条件下，抑爆性能KHCO₃>NaHCO₃>K₂C₂O₄>Na₂C₂O₄，即钾盐粉体抑爆性能优于具有相同酸根离子的钠盐，碳酸氢盐粉体抑爆性能优于具有相同金属离子的草酸盐。另外，结合抑爆粉体热解特性测试及爆炸产物分析，探究了四种抑爆粉体的抑爆机理及离子构成带来的抑爆性能差异性原因。

关键词: 爆炸, 草酸盐, 碳酸氢盐, 粉体, 安全, 抑爆特性

CLC Number:

X 937

Yan WANG, Jia HE, Jingjing YANG, Chendi LIN, Wentao JI. Inhibition of polyethylene dust explosion by oxalate and bicarbonate[J]. CIESC Journal, 2022, 73(9): 4207-4216.

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.

Figures/Tables 12

Fig.1 Particle size distribution of explosion suppression powders

Fig.2 Particle size distribution of polyethylene powder

Fig.3 Schematic diagram of pipeline explosion test system

Fig.4 Flame shapes of polyethylene dust at different concentrations

Fig.5 Average propagation velocity of polyethylene dust explosion flame at different concentrations

Fig.6 Flame structure of 0.20 g/L polyethylene dust explosion under the action of four explosion suppression powders with different concentrations

Table 1 Time of 0.20 g/L polyethylene dust explosion flame front reaching the top of the pipe under the action of four explosion suppression powders with different concentrations

抑爆粉体	火焰锋面到达管道顶端时间/ms
抑爆粉体	20%	40%	60%	80%
NaHCO₃	40.0	50.5	54.5	82.0
KHCO₃	45.0	51.0	85.0	151.0
Na₂C₂O₄	34.5	36.0	44.0	59.0
K₂C₂O₄	36.0	37.0	48.0	78.0

Fig.7 Variation of flame front position of 0.20 g/L polyethylene dust explosion with time under the action of four explosion suppression powders

Fig.8 Variation of average propagation velocity of 0.20 g/L polyethylene dust explosion flame under the action of four explosion suppression powders

Fig.9 Thermal decomposition characteristics of four explosion suppression powders

Fig.10 Analysis of explosion products of polyethylene dust under the action of four explosion suppression powders

Fig.11 Schematic diagram of explosion suppression mechanism of four powders

References 34

1	Abbasi M R, Shamiri A, Hussain M A. Dynamic modeling and molecular weight distribution of ethylene copolymerization in an industrial gas-phase fluidized-bed reactor[J]. Advanced Powder Technology, 2016, 27(4): 1526-1538.
2	Han O S, Lee J S. Pyrolysis characteristic and ignition energy of high-density polyethylene powder[J]. Journal of the Korean Institute of Gas, 2014, 18(3): 31-37.
3	Yan X Q, Yu J L. Dust explosion incidents in China[J]. Process Safety Progress, 2012, 31(2): 187-189.
4	Addo A, Dastidar A G, Taveau J R, et al. Niacin, lycopodium and polyethylene powder explosibility in 20 L and 1 m³ test Chambers[J]. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2019, 62: 103937.
5	戚易斌. 韩国丽水产业园区化工厂发生爆炸致6死11伤[J]. 化工安全与环境, 2013(11): 15.
	Qi Y B. Explosion at chemical plant in Lishui Industrial Park, South Korea, resulting in 6 deaths and 11 injuries[J]. Chemical Safety and Environment, 2013(11): 15.
6	Yang K, Cao J J, Zhao Y, et al. Inerting effect of N₂ on explosion of LDPE dust/ethylene hybrid mixtures[J]. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2021, 70: 104431.
7	Li M H, Xu J C, Wang C J, et al. Thermal and kinetics mechanism of explosion mitigation of methane-air mixture by N₂/CO₂ in a closed compartment[J]. Fuel, 2019, 255: 115747.
8	王燕, 林森, 李忠, 等. 惰性气体对KHCO₃冷气溶胶甲烷抑爆性能的影响研究[J]. 煤炭科学技术, 2021, 49(2): 145-152.
	Wang Y, Lin S, Li Z, et al. Research on synergistic effect of inert gas on methane explosion suppression performance of KHCO₃ cold aerosol[J]. Coal Science and Technology, 2021, 49(2): 145-152.
9	Liu R Z, Jia B S, Wang W. Numerical simulation of gas explosion suppression by ultrasonic water mist based on the cloud, fog, and edge computing[J]. Environmental Technology & Innovation, 2021, 21: 101369.
10	Song Y F, Zhang Q. Quantitative research on gas explosion inhibition by water mist[J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2019, 363: 16-25.
11	Cao X Y, Wang Z R, Lu Y W, et al. Numerical simulation of methane explosion suppression by ultrafine water mist in a confined space[J]. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2021, 109: 103777.
12	纪虹, 杨克, 黄维秋, 等. 超细水雾协同甲烷氧化菌降解与抑制甲烷爆炸的实验研究[J]. 化工学报, 2017, 68(11): 4461-4468.
	Ji H, Yang K, Huang W Q, et al. Methane degradation and explosion inhibition by using ultrafine water mist containing methane oxidative bacteria-inorganic salt[J]. CIESC Journal, 2017, 68(11): 4461-4468.
13	Jiang H P, Bi M S, Peng Q K, et al. Suppression of pulverized biomass dust explosion by NaHCO₃ and NH₄H₂PO₄ [J]. Renewable Energy, 2020, 147: 2046-2055.
14	Liu J Q, Meng X B, Yan K, et al. Study on the effect and mechanism of Ca(H₂PO₄)₂ and CaCO₃ powders on inhibiting the explosion of titanium powder[J]. Powder Technology, 2022, 395: 158-167.
15	纪文涛, 李璐, 李忠, 等. 聚磷酸铵抑制PMMA粉尘爆炸特性研究[J]. 化工学报, 2022, 73(1): 461-469.
	Ji W T, Li L, Li Z, et al. Study on suppression of PMMA dust explosion by ammonium polyphosphate[J]. CIESC Journal, 2022,73(1): 461-469.
16	Wang Z, Meng X B, Yan K, et al. Study on the inhibition of Al-Mg alloy dust explosion by modified Mg(OH)₂ [J]. Powder Technology, 2021, 384: 284-296.
17	Zhang P P, Zhou Y H, Cao X Y, et al. Mitigation of methane/air explosion in a closed vessel by ultrafine water fog[J]. Safety Science, 2014, 62: 1-7.
18	Jiang B Y, Liu Z G, Tang M Y, et al. Active suppression of premixed methane/air explosion propagation by non-premixed suppressant with nitrogen and ABC powder in a semi-confined duct[J]. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2016, 29: 141-149.
19	Jiang H P, Bi M S, Li B, et al. Flame inhibition of aluminum dust explosion by NaHCO₃ and NH₄H₂PO₄ [J]. Combustion and Flame, 2019, 200: 97-114.
20	Chen X F, Zhang H M, Chen X, et al. Effect of dust explosion suppression by sodium bicarbonate with different granulometric distribution[J]. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2017, 49: 905-911.
21	Zheng L G, Wang Y L, Yu S J, et al. The premixed methane/air explosion inhibited by sodium bicarbonate with different particle size distributions[J]. Powder Technology, 2019, 354: 630-640.
22	杨克, 纪虹, 邢志祥, 等. 含草酸钾的超细水雾抑制甲烷爆炸的特性[J]. 化工学报, 2018, 69(12): 5359-5369.
	Yang K, Ji H, Xing Z X, et al. Characteristics on methane explosion suppression by ultrafine water mist containing potassium oxalate[J]. CIESC Journal, 2018, 69(12): 5359-5369.
23	王燕, 林晨迪, 郑立刚, 等. 草酸盐粉体抑制甲烷爆炸的试验研究[J]. 安全与环境学报, 2020, 20(4): 1327-1333.
	Wang Y, Lin C D, Zheng L G, et al. Experimental investigation into the inhibitive effect of the methane explosion via the oxalate powders[J]. Journal of Safety and Environment, 2020, 20(4): 1327-1333.
24	刘皓, 商靠定. K₂C₂O₂溶液抑制甲烷-空气扩散火焰试验研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2016, 26(8): 46-51.
	Liu H, Shang K D. Experimental research on suppression of methane-air diffusion flame by water mist with potassium oxalate[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2016, 26(8): 46-51.
25	杨冬雷, 倪小敏, 况凯骞, 等. 复合干粉灭火剂抑制食用油火的试验研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2011, 21(3): 65-70.
	Yang D L, Ni X M, Kuang K Q, et al. Experimental study on the performance of composite dry powders in suppressing cooking oil fires[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2011, 21(3): 65-70.
26	Amyotte P R, Pegg M J, Khan F I, et al. Moderation of dust explosions[J]. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2007, 20(4/5/6): 675-687.
27	Traoré M, Dufaud O, Perrin L, et al. Dust explosions: how should the influence of humidity be taken into account?[J]. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2009, 87(1): 14-20.
28	Wang Y, Lin C D, Qi Y Q, et al. Suppression of polyethylene dust explosion by sodium bicarbonate[J]. Powder Technology, 2020, 367: 206-212.
29	Lin S, Liu Z T, Qian J F, et al. Inertant effects and mechanism of Al(OH)₃ powder on polyethylene dust explosions based on flame propagation behavior and thermal analysis[J]. Fire Safety Journal, 2021, 124: 103392.
30	喻健良, 侯玉洁, 闫兴清, 等. 密闭空间内聚乙烯粉尘爆炸火焰传播特性的实验研究[J]. 化工学报, 2019, 70(3): 1227-1235.
	Yu J L, Hou Y J, Yan X Q, et al. Experimental study on flame propagation characteristic of polyethylene dust explosion under confined chamber[J]. CIESC Journal, 2019, 70(3): 1227-1235.
31	喻健良, 纪文涛, 孙会利, 等. 乙烯/聚乙烯两相体系爆炸特性[J]. 化工学报, 2017, 68(12): 4841-4847.
	Yu J L, Ji W T, Sun H L, et al. Explosibility of hybrid mixtures of ethylene and polyethylene dust[J]. CIESC Journal, 2017, 68(12): 4841-4847.
32	王菲, 李晓泉, 梁乐乐, 等. 氯化钠对蔗糖粉尘最小点火能的影响研究[J]. 广西大学学报(自然科学版), 2021, 46(2): 491-497.
	Wang F, Li X Q, Liang L L, et al. Study on the effects ofnacl on minimum ignition energy of sucrose dust[J]. Journal of Guangxi University (Natural Science Edition), 2021, 46(2): 491-497.
33	谭迎新, 王志杰, 高云, 等. 固体惰性介质对煤粉爆炸压力的影响研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2007, 17(12): 76-79, 196.
	Tan Y X, Wang Z J, Gao Y, et al. Study on the effect of solid inert mediums on the pressure of coal dust explosion[J]. China Safety Science Journal (CSSJ),2007, 17(12): 76-79, 196.
34	Cao X Y, Bi M S, Ren J J, et al. Experimental research on explosion suppression affected by ultrafine water mist containing different additives[J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2019, 368: 613-620.

[1]	Weiqi JIN, Yuerong WU, Xia WANG, Li LI, Su QIU, Pan YUAN, Minghe WANG. Progress in infrared imaging detection technology and domestic equipment for industrial gas leakage in chemical industry parks [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(S1): 32-44.
[2]	Jiajia ZHAO, Shixiang TIAN, Peng LI, Honggao XIE. Microscopic mechanism of SiO₂-H₂O nanofluids to enhance the wettability of coal dust [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(9): 3931-3945.
[3]	Ke YANG, Yue JIA, Hong JI, Zhixiang XING, Juncheng JIANG. Study on the inhibition effect and mechanism of waste incineration fly ash on gas explosion pressure and flame propagation [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(8): 3597-3607.
[4]	Zhenbao LI, Chao LI, Hu WANG, Shaorui WANG, Quan LI. The microscopic mechanism on MPP inhibiting explosion of Al-Mg alloy powder [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(8): 3608-3614.
[5]	Xiaoyang LIU, Jianliang YU, Yujie HOU, Xingqing YAN, Zhenhua ZHANG, Xianshu LYU. Effect of spiral microchannel on detonation propagation of hydrogen-doped methane [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(7): 3139-3148.
[6]	Zhongliang XIAO, Bilu YIN, Liubin SONG, Yinjie KUANG, Tingting ZHAO, Cheng LIU, Rongyao YUAN. Research progress of waste lithium-ion battery recycling process and its safety risk analysis [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(4): 1446-1456.
[7]	Cheng YUN, Qianlin WANG, Feng CHEN, Xin ZHANG, Zhan DOU, Tingjun YAN. Deep-mining risk evolution path of chemical processes based on community structure [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(4): 1639-1650.
[8]	Zizong WANG, Hansheng SUO, Xueliang ZHAO. Research and construction of digital twin intelligent ethylene plant [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(3): 1175-1186.
[9]	Zichao WU, Zhilei WANG, Rongye LI, Kexin LI, Min HUA, Xuhai PAN, Sanming WANG, Juncheng JIANG. Study on the effect of ignition mode on overpressure of underexpanded hydrogen jet explosion [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(3): 1409-1418.
[10]	Jianglong DU, Wenqi YANG, Kai HUANG, Cheng LIAN, Honglai LIU. Heat dissipation performance of the module combined CPCM with air cooling for lithium-ion batteries [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(2): 674-689.
[11]	Ke YANG, Chensheng WANG, Hong JI, Kai ZHENG, Zhixiang XING, Haipu BI, Juncheng JIANG. Experimental study on inhibition of methane explosion by polydopamine coated mixed powder [J]. CIESC Journal, 2022, 73(9): 4245-4254.
[12]	Shanshan LIAO, Shaogang ZHANG, Junjun TAO, Jiahao LIU, Jinhui WANG. Numerical simulation analysis of vertical jet fire impinging on the pipeline [J]. CIESC Journal, 2022, 73(9): 4226-4234.
[13]	Zhanjun FENG, Weichang XU, Xiaonan AN, Guangwen XU. The scientific and technological contribution and humanistic spirit of the century-old “Golden Sea” [J]. CIESC Journal, 2022, 73(8): 3776-3785.
[14]	Jingwei ZHANG, Yiwei ZHOU, Zhuo CHEN, Jianhong XU. Advances in frontiers of organic synthesis in microreactor [J]. CIESC Journal, 2022, 73(8): 3472-3482.
[15]	Xiaoqiang FAN, Zhengliang HUANG, Jingyuan SUN, Jingdai WANG, Xiaofei WANG, Xiaobo HU, Guodong HAN, Yongrong YANG, Wenqing WU. Development of cloudy gas-liquid fluidized bed ethylene polymerization process and high performance products [J]. CIESC Journal, 2022, 73(6): 2742-2747.