Effects of obstacle position and number on the overpressure of hydrogen combustion in a semi-confined compartment

References

• Şahin S, Sarwar MS. Hydrogen hazard and mitigation analysis in PWR containment. Ann Nucl Energy. 2013;58:132–140.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hardie SML., McKinley IG. Fukushima remediation: status and overview of future plans. J Environ Radioactiv. 2014;133:75–85.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang P, Jiang J.C. Numerical simulation for the effect of the obstacle on the inducted venting of gas explosion. J Safety & Environ. 2011;11:151–156.
   Google Scholar
• Lv X, Zheng L, Zhang Y, et al. Combined effects of obstacle position and equivalence ratio on overpressure of premixed hydrogen–air explosion. Int J Hydrogen Energ. 2016;41:17740–17749.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li G, Du Y, Liang J, et al. Characteristics of gasoline-air mixture explosions with different obstacle configurations. J Energy Instit. In press; Available from:https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joei.2017.01.001.
   Google Scholar
• Na'Inna AM, Phylaktou HN, Andrews GE. Effects of obstacle separation distance on gas explosions: the influence of obstacle blockage ratio. Procedia Eng. 2014;84:306–319.
   Google Scholar
• Pang L, Zhang Q, Wang T, et al. Influence of laneway support spacing on methane/air explosion shock wave. Safety Sci. 2012;50:83–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ciccarelli G, Fowler CJ, Bardon M. Effect of obstacle size and spacing on the initial stage of flame acceleration in a rough tube. Shock Waves. 2005;3:161–166.
   Google Scholar
• Hall R, Masri AR, Yaroshchy P, et al. Effects of position and frequency of obstacles on turbulent premixed propagating flames. Combust Flame. 2009;156:439–446.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang F, Tao G, Zhang L, et al. Numerical simulation on sinfluence of obstacle on the pressure filed of combustible gas explosion. J Safety Sci Technol. 2013;2:59–63.
   Google Scholar
• Wen X, Yu M, Ji W, et al. Methane–air explosion characteristics with different obstacle configurations. Int J Mining Sci Technol. 2015;25:213–218.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Na'Inna AM, Phylaktou HN, Andrews GE. Explosion flame acceleration over obstacles: effects of separation distance for a range of scales. Process Saf Environ. 2017;107:309–316.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bauwens CR, Chaffee J, Dorofeev SB. Effect of ignition location, vent size and obstacles on vented explosion overpressures in propane–air mixtures. Combust Sci Technol. 2010;182:1915–1932.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chao J, Bauwens CR, Dorofeev SB. An analysis of peak overpressures in vented gaseous explosions. P Combust Inst. 2011;33:2367–2374.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OECD Nuclear Energy Agency. ISP-49 on Hydrogen Combustion. Report NEA/CSNI/R (2011) 9, January 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Manninen M, Silde A, Lindholm I, et al. Simulation of hydrogen deflagration and detonation in a BWR reactor building. Nucl Eng Des. 2002;211:27–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baraldi D, Heitsch M, Wilkening H. CFD simulations of hydrogen combustion in a simplified EPR containment with CFX and REACFLOW. Nucl Eng Des. 2007;237:1668–1678.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holler T, Kljenak I, Komen EMJ. Simulation of hydrogen combustion experiment in large-scale experimental facility with ANSYS fluent CFD code. Proc. 24th International Conference Nuclear Energy for New Europe; 2015; Ljubljana (Slovenia).
   Google Scholar
• Guessab A, Aris A, Bounif A. Simulation of turbulent piloted methane non-premixed flame based on combination of finite-rate/eddy-dissipation model. Mechanika. 2013;6:657–664.
   Google Scholar
• Sathiah P, Haren SV, Komen E, et al. The role of CFD combustion modeling in hydrogen safety management—II: validation based on homogeneous hydrogen–air experiments. Nucl Eng Des. 2007;252:289–302.
   Google Scholar
• Xiao J, Travis JR, Kuznetsov M, et al. Numerical investigations of heat losses to confinement structures from hydrogen-air turbulent flames in ENACCEF facility. Int J Hydrogen Energ. 2015;38:13106–13120.
   Google Scholar