Abstract To be able to perform proper consequence modelling as a part of a risk assessment, it is essential to be able to model the physical processes well. Simplified tools for dispersion and explosion predictions are generally not very useful. CFD tools have the potential to model the relevant physics and predict well, but without proper user guidelines based on extensive validation work, very mixed prediction capability can be expected. In this article, recent dispersion validation effort for the CFD tool FLACS–HYDROGEN is presented. A range of different experiments is simulated, including low-momentum releases in a garage, subsonic jets in a garage with stratification effects and subsequent slow diffusion, low momentum and subsonic horizontal jets influenced by buoyancy, and free jets from high-pressure vessels. LH2 releases are also considered. Some of the simulations are performed as blind predictions.
[1]
Mathieu Ichard,et al.
Validation of CFD modelling of LH2 spread and evaporation against large-scale spill experiments
,
2011
.
[2]
E. Studer,et al.
Hydrogen related risks within a private garage: Concentration measurements in a realistic full scale experimental facility
,
2009
.
[3]
Matthew N. Swain,et al.
An experimental investigation into the ignition of leaking hydrogen
,
2007
.
[4]
Olav R. Hansen,et al.
CFD-Modeling of LNG Dispersion Experiments
,
2007
.
[5]
M. Heitsch,et al.
An inter-comparison exercise on the capabilities of CFD models to predict the short and long term distribution and mixing of hydrogen in a garage
,
2009
.
[6]
Olav R. Hansen,et al.
FLACS CFD air quality model performance evaluation with Kit Fox, MUST, Prairie Grass, and EMU observations
,
2004
.