Comparison and Validation of Thermal Radiation Models for Hydrocarbon Jet Fire and Fireball

Abstract:

Primary consequences of fire hazards include personnel injuries, fatalities and/or facility and equipment damage due to high air temperatures, radiant heat fluxes or direct contact with flames. Many methods have been proposed to evaluate the thermal radiation incident on a target. This paper presents a survey of thermal models that can be used in quantitative consequence analysis and recommends a model that should be used to examine accident-related hazards. The capabilities of the existing conventional empirical models for estimating the incident thermal radiation from fireballs and jet fires were thoroughly evaluated by conducting several field trials. First, it was found that for estimating a fireball’s diameter, duration and surface emissive power in the downwind location, the TNO (The Netherlands Organization of Applied Scientific Research) model should be employed. Second, for estimating surface emissive power from fireballs in the crosswind location and incident thermal radiation power absorbed by the target located in the fireball’s diameter, the CCPS (Center for Chemical Process Safety of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers) solid flame model is proposed. Third, for estimating incident thermal radiation from fireballs one diameter away and elevations of fireballs, the Roberts point source model is recommended. Finally, for estimating incident thermal radiation from jet fires and flame length, the TNO model is suggested.

• Periodical: Applied Mechanics and Materials (Volumes 204-208)
• Pages: 3503-3512
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.204-208.3503
• Online since: October 2012
• Authors: Shi Gang Yang, Ya Dong Zhang, Hao Wu
• Keywords: Fireball, Flammable Gas, Jet Fire, Parametrics Discussion, Thermal Radiation Model

References

[1] G.M. Mercedes, Z. Luis, C. Joaquim. Fire Saf. J. 43 (2008) :583–588.

[2] M.J. Stephens, K. Leewis, D. Moore. A model for sizing high consequence areas associated with natural gas pipelines, in: Proceedings of the 4th International Pipeline Conference. Canada, 2002:IPC2002—27073.

DOI: 10.1115/ipc2002-27073

[3] B. M. Kevin, R. B. Howard, H.Anthony. Thermal Radiation from Large Pool Fires. National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2000, NISTIR 6546.

[4] F.P. Lees. Loss Prevention in the Process Industries-Hazard Identification, Assessment, and Control. vols. 2, (2nd ed), Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, 1996.

[5] R. F. Cracknell, J. N.Davenport, A. J.Carsley. IChemE Symposium Series, 139 (1994), 161–175.

[6] R. Pula, F. I. Khan,, B. Veitch, P.R. Amyotte. J. Loss Prev. in the Process Ind. 18 (2005): 443–454.

[7] CCPS, Guidelines for Consequence Analysis of Chemical Releases. Center for Chemical Process Safety, American Institute of Chemical Engineers, New York, 1999.

[8] T.Abbasi, S.A. Abbasi. J. Hazard. Mater. 141 (2007):489–519.

[9] A.F. Roberts. Fire Saf. J.4 (1982) 197–212.

[10] C.J.H. van den Bosch, R.A.P.M. Weterings. Methods for the Calculation of Physical Effects. Committee for the Prevention of Disasters, CPR 14E (TNO 'Yellow Book'), The Hague, The Netherlands, 2005.

[11] CCPS, Guidelines for vapor cloud explosions, pressure vessel burst, BLEVE and flash fire hazards (2nd ed). Center for Chemical Process Safety of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers, New York, 2010.

DOI: 10.1002/9780470640449

[12] A. Palacios , J. Casal. Fuel, 90 (2011):824–833.

[13] W.M. Henk Witlox , O. Adeyemi. Verification and validation of consequence and risk models for accidental releases of hazardous chemicals to the atmosphere. DNV Software, London, UK, 2009.

[14] B. J. Lowesmith, G. Hankinson, M. R. Acton, G. Chamberlain. Trans IChemE, Part B, Process Saf. Environ. Protect. 85 (B3) (2007): 207–220.

[15] T. Roberts, A. Goss , S. Hawksworth. Process Saf. Environ. Protect, 78 (2000):184–192.

[16] G. A.. Chamberlain. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. Vol. 65. July 1987, pp.299-309.