CFD modelling of hydrogen release, dispersion and combustion for automotive scenarios

Abstract The paper describes the analysis of the potential effects of releases from compressed gaseous hydrogen systems on commercial vehicles in urban and tunnel environments using computational fluid dynamics (CFD). Comparative releases from compressed natural gas systems are also included in the analysis. This study is restricted to typical non-articulated single deck city buses. Hydrogen releases are considered from storage systems with nominal working pressures of 20, 35 and 70 MPa, and a comparative natural gas release (20 MPa). The cases investigated are based on the assumptions that either fire causes a release via a thermally activated pressure relief device(s) (PRD) and that the released gas vents without immediately igniting, or that a PRD fails. Various release strategies were taken into account. For each configuration some worst-case scenarios are considered. By far the most critical case investigated in the urban environment, is a rapid release of the entire hydrogen or natural gas storage system such as the simultaneous opening of all PRDs. If ignition occurs, the effects could be expected to be similar to the 1983 Stockholm hydrogen accident [Venetsanos, A. G., Huld, T., Adams, P., & Bartzis, J. G. (2003). Source, dispersion and combustion modelling of an accidental release of hydrogen in an urban environment. Journal of Hazardous Materials, A105, 1–25]. In the cases where the hydrogen release is restricted, for example, by venting through a single PRD, the effects are relatively minor and localised close to the area of the flammable cloud. With increasing hydrogen storage pressure, the maximum energy available in a flammable cloud after a release increases, as do the predicted overpressures resulting from combustion. Even in the relatively confined environment considered, the effects on the combustion regime are closer to what would be expected in a more open environment, i.e. a slow deflagration should be expected. Among the cases studied the most severe one was a rapid release of the entire hydrogen (40 kg) or natural gas (168 kg) storage system within the confines of a tunnel. In this case there was minimal difference between a release from a 20 MPa natural gas system or a 20 MPa hydrogen system, however, a similar release from a 35 MPa hydrogen system was significantly more severe and particularly in terms of predicted overpressures. The present study has also highlighted that the ignition point significantly affects the combustion regime in confined environments. The results have indicated that critical cases in tunnels may tend towards a fast deflagration, or where there are turbulence generating features, e.g. multiple obstacles, there is the possibility that the combustion regime could progress to a detonation. When comparing the urban and tunnel environments, a similar release of hydrogen is significantly more severe in a tunnel, and the energy available in the flammable cloud is greater and remains for a longer period in tunnels. When comparing hydrogen and natural gas releases, for the cases and environments investigated and within the limits of the assumptions, it appears that hydrogen requires different mitigation measures in order that the potential effects are similar to those of natural gas in case of an accident. With respect to a PRD opening strategy, hydrogen storage systems should be designed to avoid simultaneous opening of all PRD, and that for the consequences of the released energy to be mitigated, either the number of PRDs opening should be limited or their vents to atmosphere should be restricted (the latter point would require validation by a comprehensive risk assessment).

[1]  Hervé Guillard,et al.  Godunov type method on non-structured meshes for three-dimensional moving boundary problems , 1994 .

[2]  P. Roe.  Approximate Riemann Solvers, Parameter Vectors, and Difference Schemes , 1997 .

[3]  R. Peyret.  Handbook of Computational Fluid Mechanics , 2000 .

[4]  Dieter Kranzlmüller,et al.  Parallel Grid Adaptation and Dynamic Load Balancing for a CFD Solver , 2005, PVM/MPI.

[5]  Baraldi Daniele,et al.  An Innovative Method of Adaptive Meshing for Hydrogen Explosion Simulations with the CFD Code REACFLOW , 2006 .

[6]  A. G. Venetsanos,et al.  Prediction of ammonia releases using ADREA‐AF code , 1993 .

[7]  A G Venetsanos,et al.  Source, dispersion and combustion modelling of an accidental release of hydrogen in an urban environment. , 2003, Journal of hazardous materials.

[8]  Thomas Huld,et al.  An adaptive 3-D CFD solver for modeling explosions on large industrial environmental scales , 1999 .

[9]  K. Moodie,et al.  Structure and velocity measurements in underexpanded jets , 1986 .

[10]  Bjørn H. Hjertager,et al.  Solution adaptive CFD simulation of premixed flame propagation over various solid obstructions , 2002 .

[11]  Dmitriy Makarov,et al.  An intercomparison exercise on the capabilities of CFD models to predict distribution and mixing of H2 in a closed vessel , 2007 .

[12]  M. G. Dodson,et al.  The Structure and Concentration Decay of High Pressure Jets of Natural Gas , 1984 .

[13]  Tron Solberg,et al.  Prevention of Hazardous Fires and Explosions , 1999 .

[14]  M. Rivara,et al.  A 3-D refinement algorithm suitable for adaptive and multi-grid techniques , 1992 .

[15]  Tron Solberg,et al.  Investigations to improve and assess the accuracy of computational fluid dynamic based explosion models , 1996 .

[16]  A. Beccantini,et al.  An Intercomparison Exercise on the Capabilities of CFD Models to Predict Deflagration of a Large-Scale H2-Air Mixture in Open Atmosphere , 2005 .

[17]  Bjørn H. Hjertager,et al.  SIMULATION OF TRANSIENT COMPRESSIBLE TURBULENT REACTIVE FLOWS , 1982 .

[18]  P. Royl,et al.  Multi-dimensional simulation of hydrogen distribution and turbulent combustion in severe accidents , 2001 .

[19]  Bjørn H. Hjertager,et al.  Simulation of gas explosions , 1989 .

[20]  Thomas Huld,et al.  Numerical simulation of explosion phenomena in industrial environments , 1996 .

[21]  J. G. Bartzis,et al.  Modelling the effects of obstacles on the dispersion of denser-than-air gases , 1994 .

[22]  A. D. Birch,et al.  Velocity Decay of High Pressure Jets , 1987 .

[23]  A G Venetsanos,et al.  Analysis of data from spilling experiments performed with liquid hydrogen. , 2000, Journal of hazardous materials.

[24]  R. Kumar,et al.  Burning velocities of hydrogen-air mixtures , 1993 .

[25]  Bjørn H. Hjertager,et al.  Computer modelling of turbulent gas explosions in complex 2D and 3D geometries , 1993 .

[26]  Matthew N. Swain,et al.  A comparison of H2, CH4 and C3H8 fuel leakage in residential settings , 1992 .

[27]  J. G. Bartzis,et al.  A dense vapour dispersion code package for applications in the chemical and process industry , 1996 .

[28]  J. G. Bartzis,et al.  Comparative modelling of a passive release from an L-shaped building using one, two and three-dimensional dispersion models , 2000 .

[29]  Francesco Grasso,et al.  Euler and Navier-Stokes equations for compressible flows , 1996 .

[30]  J. G. Bartzis,et al.  CFD modeling of large-scale LH2 spills in open environment , 2007 .

[31]  Y. R. Mayhew,et al.  Engineering Thermodynamics: Work and Heat Transfer , 1967 .

[32]  J. G. Bartzis,et al.  Modelling of Flow and Pollution Dispersion in a Two Dimensional Urban Street Canyon , 2002 .

[33]  William G. Houf,et al.  Characterization of high-pressure, underexpanded hydrogen-jet flames , 2007 .

[34]  Bjørn H. Hjertager,et al.  Pressure development due to turbulent flame propagation in large-scale methaneair explosions , 1982 .

[35]  M. Heitsch,et al.  Integral Large Scale Experiments on Hydrogen Combustion for Severe Accident Code Validation - HYCOM , 2005 .

[36]  Fritz Ebert,et al.  Vergleich zwischen Experiment und Theorie der Explosion großer, freier Gaswolken , 1985 .