Dense gas dispersion model development and testing for the Jack Rabbit II phase 1 chlorine release experiments

A systematic review of consequence modeling studies of the process accidents in Iran from 2006 to 2022

“… In its most recent versions, it includes improvements for modeling along short-duration wind propagation and time-varying propagation. 5 -Presentation of modeling advances by the two groups involved: the UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and the US National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) -Predictions from DRIFT, PHAST, CFD, and the NCAR model are compared to measurements [ 71 ] The HSE and NCAR models -Model predictions of discharge by HSE show that metastable models tended to over-predict measured release rate from the chlorine tank, while flash models tend to under-predict release rates. -The two integral models tested by HSE (DRIFT and PHAST) provide the best fit to the upwind concentration data when they take into account the rainout of liquid from the impinging two-phase jet.…”

“…Due to the emergence of newer software in the field of outcome modeling such as FDS, it is recommended to make necessary comparisons in this field in future studies, because some studies that have used FDS software have also accused PHAST and ALOHA of overestimation. The CFD model tested by HSE has the advantage of resolving the complex of the high-momentum jet and cloud conduction between Conex containers in the near field [ 71 ]. However, it requires long computer run times and there are uncertainties when simulating far-field dispersion beyond about 1 km, due to errors in the boundary layer profiles that occur beyond this distance.…”

Study on Dispersion of Carbon Dioxide over the Shrubbery Region

“…Over the past few decades, various atmospheric dispersion models have been performed, such as Accident Damage Analysis Module (ADAM) (Fabbri et al, 2017;Fabbri and Wood 2019;Fabbri et al, 2020), ALOHA (NOAA/EPA 1992) [based on DEGADIS (Havens and Spicer 1990)], DRIFT (Gant et al, 2018;Gant et al, 2021), the ESCAPE model (Expert System for Consequence Analysis and Preparing for Emergencies) (Kukkonen et al, 2017), and the HPAC/SCIPUFF (Hazard Protection Assessment Capability/Second-Order Closure Puff) (Simpson et al, 2020). With improved computational resource availability, the computational fluid dynamics (CFD) models have gradually become the most popular model.…”

Development of Flammable Dispersion Quantitative Property–Consequence Relationship Models Using Extreme Gradient Boosting

“…Integral models such as HEGADIS, NCAR, and DRIFT, which utilize both empirical and CFD methods, have been widely used as a result of their higher prediction precision and lower computational costs. 11 However, these models are limited to free-field dispersion with no obstructions and are generally not applicable to situations involving complex geometries. 12 The consequence modeling package PHAST (process hazard assessment software tool) is a popular consequence analysis and risk assessment tool that integrates dispersion models to examine the progress of potential incidents from initial release to far-field dispersion, including the modeling of rainout and subsequent vaporization.…”

“…CFD models, such as ANSYS Fluent, CFX, and FLACS, are capable of capturing the influence of surface roughness but are time-consuming and possess significant computational costs. − This makes them particularly cumbersome in emergencies in which instant estimation is necessary. Integral models such as HEGADIS, NCAR, and DRIFT, which utilize both empirical and CFD methods, have been widely used as a result of their higher prediction precision and lower computational costs . However, these models are limited to free-field dispersion with no obstructions and are generally not applicable to situations involving complex geometries …”