Anda di halaman 1dari 28

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

Definition of explosion loading


Kees van Wingerden
GexCon AS
Bergen, Norway

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

Contents
Explosion loads
Far field blast prediction
Near field: why use CFD?
Near field: FLACS
Near field: Examples
Summary

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

Explosion loads
Within the explosion (0-2 cloud
radii) and in near field (2-5 cloud
radii)
Pressure load
Explosion wind
Heat transfer
(Convective/radiation/conductive)
Smoke

Pressure affects in general

Far field
(> 5 cloud radii)

buildings / big objects where a


pressure difference can be
Pressure load
maintained during a while
Explosion wind
Wind (drag) = 1/2u2 affects
Separation of near and far field is
especially slender objects where
not exact
pressure differences across the
object are quickly diminished.
www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

Contents
Explosion loads
Far field blast prediction
Near field: why use CFD?
Near field: FLACS
Near field: Examples
Summary

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

Far field blast prediction methods


Application: prediction of far field blast caused by vapour
cloud explosions in petrochemical and chemical facilities
Estimate of overpressure and duration in the far-field as a
function of distance to the cloud centre
Necessary input parameters: combustion energy of fuel
participating in blast generation; some methods require
information on initial strength

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

Examples of far field blast prediction methods


TNT method: Load predicted as an equivalent load from
TNT-explosions
TNT equivalency factor must be defined (can be very
difficult)
Assumption that all released fuel participates in blast
generation
Multi-Energy and Baker-Strehlow-Tang methods: Graphs for
estimating pressure at distance to cloud centre
Function of source strength / maximum flame speed
Only combustion energy of fuel-air cloud in congested
areas is taken into account
Limited to spherical symmetric assumption

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

Multi-Energy method
Series of blast curves (generated by computer
code) giving blast overpressure, duration and
shape as a function of combustion energy
scaled distance
Necessary input parameters: initial blast
strength and participating combustion energy
Initial blast strength is estimated on the basis of
level of congestion, maximum length of flame
propagation and fuel reactivity
ME-method excludes detonation
www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

Multi-Energy method

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

Initial blast strength (estimate)

VBR = Volume Blockage Ratio


Lf is maximum flame propagation length
D = determining obstacle diameter
Sl = laminar burning velocity fuel
Sc = scaling parameter taken equal to D
a = 0.84; b = 2.75
www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

10

Initial blast strength (verification)

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

11

Generation of more than one pressure wave (in case of


multiple separated congested areas inside gas cloud)
Separation distance between
obstructed areas containing gas

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

12

Guidance with respect to separation


distance
For explosions in an obstructed part where the
explosion overpressure exceeds 1 bar the separation
distance to a second nearby obstructed part shall
exceed half the horizontal dimension of the
obstructed part where the initial explosion occurs
For weak explosions (0 bar) this separation distance
can be decreased to quarter of the horizontal
dimension of the obstructed part
In between these two data, a linear interpolation is
proposed
Connecting pipe-racks in between two obstructed
parts may increase necessary separation distance
www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

13

Example: Flixborough

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

14

Example: Multi-Energy method


Satisfactory in far-field - correct input of
source strength is required

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

15

Baker-Strehlow-Tang
Set of numerically derived blast curves
Curves represent different flame speeds
expressed using Mach number

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

16

Baker-Strehlow-Tang blast curves

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

17

Baker-Strehlow-Tang flame speed table

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

18

VCEs in large obstructed areas


VCEs in obstructed areas
are non-symmetric
P = 0.10 barg
symmetry is assumed in
both the Baker-StrehlowTang method, ME-method
and TNT-equivalency
methods

P = 10 barg

One shall therefore be


careful when using simple
methods, especially for
prediction of pressures in
the vicinity of the gas
cloud/obstructed areas

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

19

Example: Directional blast loading. Effect of


ignition source location (propylene cloud in 50
m x 25 m x 5 m facility; ignition location north)
E
N

S
W
www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

20

Example: Directional blast loading. Effect


of ignition source location
Distance
from
plant
centre
(m)

FLACS
(direction)

TNT eq.
method

MEmethod
(initial
strength
6)

SW

NW

NE

SE

23.4

1.1

0.14

0.14

1.2

0.9

0.5

37.5

0.92

0.1

0.11

0.58

0.37

0.45

58.7

0.24

0.06

0.07

0.32

0.17

0.4

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

10

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

21

Contents
Explosion loads
Far field blast prediction
Near field: why use CFD?
Near field: FLACS
Near field: Examples
Summary

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

22

Why use CFD?


Predicting outcome of accidental
leaks & explosions require correct
representation of the surroundings
(geometry) and its effect on:
Ventilation and dispersion
Jet release (impinging)
Ignition position
Explosion (positive feedback
mechanism)
Keywords: geometry, 3D, spatial
variance
www.gexcon.com

Alternatives to
CFD generally
ignore geometry!

GexCon AS

11

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

23

Why use CFD?


When representing the full chain of events in a probabilistic
risk analysis a poor representation of the effect of the
surroundings/geometry on each element of the chain will
have an enormous impact on the overall outcome of such
an analysis

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

24

Why use CFD?


Allows for studying the effect of mitigating measures
related to layout improvements (e.g. safety gaps) and
the effect of waterspray

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

12

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

25

Effect of facility geometry on flow


around facility and ventilation inside

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

26

Release in open and obstructed areas

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

13

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

27

Explosions: effect of obstacle orientation

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

28

Explosions: effect of obstacle orientation

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

14

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

29

Contents
Explosion loads
Far field blast prediction
Near field: why use CFD?
Near field: FLACS
Near field: Examples
Summary

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

30

Can explosion loads in this environment be


calculated with simple models?

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

15

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

31

CFD (Computational Fluid Dynamics)


Model and simulate real life processes using fundamental
conservation equations (mass, momentum & energy
balances) and digital computers
Define a simulation domain (part of the real world)
The domain is divided into boxes/volumes
Define initial conditions and boundary conditions
Solve conservation equations (Navier-Stokes + +)
Predict what will happen in the real world

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

32

CFD is the tool to combine knowledge


Many phenomena at smaller scales than
realistic grid resolution (0.01m-1.00m)
flame reaction zone
obstructions
turbulence

spray

water mitigation

flow

Flow solver: models based on


established equations
experimental input
expert knowledge
simplifications where appropriate

1mm droplets break-up into


m mist to mitigate flames

Both experiments, experts and simplified tools benefit from interaction with CFD
www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

16

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

33

CFD models for prediction of explosion


consequences
Calculates explosion loads for complex geometries
Based on solution of partial gas dynamic differential equations
Physical submodels describe flow and combustion processes
Specialized CFD tools: FLACS, EXSIM, Auto-Reagas
General purpose CFD tools
Other non-commercial
tools (COM3D, REACFLOW)

Validation is of paramount importance


www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

34

CFD Equations (FLACS)


Flow solver:
Full 3D Cartesian N-S flow solver
SIMPLE method, compressible
extension
Transport equations for fuel/fuel mix.
Distributed porosity concept (PDR)
Source terms for chemical reactions
Euler-model for droplet transport

v
P,

Turbulence:
k- model
wall functions
sub-grid contributions
Equations seem to be similar for all CFD-tools
www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

17

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

35

Sub-Grid Modelling (FLACS)


Several scales must be solved on realistic grid sizes (0.1-2m)
Turbulence model is one of several SUB-GRID that need to be developed
Initial combustion model
Flame model
Flame folding around objects
Water deluge model
Models for panels
Subgrid pipes increase pressure factor of 6

Development and validation of


sub-grid models :
easy to make a model
difficult to get accuracy
Validation, validation, validation

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

36

Combustion Modeling (FLACS)


Various options
Specified burning velocity
Models for burning velocity
Flame library for gases
Models for flame wrinkling & turbulent quenching
Sub-grid objects enhance the flame area (flame folding)

Rigorous models
Reaction kinetics
Thermodynamics/ chemical equilibrium
Multi-environment models
PDF based models
www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

18

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

37

Geometry modeling alternatives


To get correct prediction of dispersion and explosion
loads a correct geometry model is crucial !
Options:
Manual modelling based on drawings and photos
Import from other CAD software
Laser scanning

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

38

FLACS takes into account congestion effects

FLACS-simulations:
Max. pressure 1 barg
Max. pressure 6 barg
100 air changes per hour
50 air changes per hour

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

19

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

39

Geometry handling (FLACS)


CFD and geometry details needed
for many scenarios
Explosion: 15 15 small pipes =>
100 pressure
Dispersion: details can be crucial

Geometry handling
porosity concept
sub-grid modeling
Same geometry dispersion,
explosion & fire
Efficient concept
FLACS interfaces can handle
100.000+ objects
www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

40

Pressure loads on far field targets


12m

24m

48m

FLACS takes into account


Directional effects (ignition point)
Confinement/congestion (source strength)
Geometry interaction (reflection/interference)
Multiple sources
www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

20

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

41

Contents
Explosion loads
Far field blast prediction
Near field: why use CFD?
Near field: FLACS
Near field: Examples
Summary

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

42

Explosion analysis of liquefaction plant


Small/medium sized liquefaction plant under construction
Concern: loads to ship terminal and surrounding residential
areas
Dimensioning blast load need to be determined

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

21

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

43

Liquefaction plant:

Dimensioning
load identified

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

44

Far field loads

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

22

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

45

VCE prediction using FLACS

CFD includes effects neglected by


simple methods:
- reflections, focussing, end ignition
and geometry effects

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

46

Contents
Explosion loads
Far field blast prediction
Near field: why use CFD?
Near field: FLACS
Near field: Examples
Summary

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

23

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

47

Verification & Validation


Analysts paradox
Everyone believes an experiment except the
experimentalist. No one believes an analysis except
the analyst
Verification & validation need to be given adequate
attention
New approaches of V & V are needed to quantify
uncertainty and to accept use of computations as virtual
reality by regulatory authorities

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

48

Validation important
FLACS validated against numerous tests
Various ventilation studies (offshore platforms)
Dispersion experiments (wind tunnel & field tests)
Explosion experiments (wide range of scenarios)

GexCon performing wind measurements offshore

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

24

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

49

Validation: dispersion
Example: Maplin Sands tests
Conducted by Shell Research in 1980
34 spills of liquefied gases onto water

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

50

Explosion validation: large-scale


GexCon has simulated around 100 large-scale experiments:

23 BFETS Phase 2 (confinement, congestion, gas conc., ignition point, deluge)


40+ HSE Phase 3A (ignition point, congestion, low conf., deluge & repeatability)
30 Phase 3B (dispersion+explosion & partial fills & reference tests)
Indirect 98-JIP (ventilation/dispersion), comparisons done by consortium member

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

25

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

51

Explosions in realistic clouds (BFETS: Phase 3B)


Advantica, GexCon and Shell Global Solutions cooperated on
multisponsor project with wide support from 10 major oil companies
Statoil/Hydro/TFE/Shell/Talisman/BP/ExxonMobil/Enterprise/Marathon/HSE

More than 100 GexCon tests


20 dispersion & explosion tests full scale

www.gexcon.com

Partial fills
Structural response + gas reactivity

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

52

Comparison with experimental data


1000 transient concentration profiles available
Accumulated values presented here: FLAMMABLE VOLUME
Observed
Simulated
rt.FUEL file

dispersion sim ulation : Flam m ble volum e


2500

Volume (m^3)

2000

1500

1000

500

www.gexcon.com

20

19

18

18 : 1m grid

17

16

16 : 1m grid

15

14

14 : 1m grid

13

12

11

10

9 : 1m grid

8 : 1m grid

GexCon AS

26

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

53

FLACS: advantages & challenges


Realistic accident scenarios (probabilistic approach)
All equipment details are taken into account
Can be used for explosion analysis and design
(structural response)
Accurate answers
Requires detailed geometry model (but no problem
when CAD available)
Approximations for turbulence and combustion

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

54

FLACS can be used to


limit consequences
Local explosion effects can be accounted for
(structural response)
Layout optimization can be performed
Mitigation measures can be investigated
FLACS has often been used to explain
past accidents

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

27

Total Raffinage Chemie Explosion Loading and Response Seminar: 26 September 2012, Brussels

55

Thank you very much for your


attention!!

kees@gexcon.com

www.gexcon.com

GexCon AS

28