Liquid Hydrogen Release Risk and Behavior Modeling: State-of-the-Art Knowledge Gaps and Research Needs for Refueling Infrastructure Safety.

Ekoto, Isaac; Hecht, Ethan; Marchi, Christopher W. San; Groth, Katrina M.; LaFleur, Angela Christine; Natesan, Nitin; Ciotti, Michael; P, Harris, Aaron

doi:10.2172/1160297

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 100 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) tools, it is possible to obtain comprehensive information regarding the flow field. Previous numerical investigations can be classified into three types: (1) modelling studies, (2) influence‐factor investigations, and (3) dispersion behaviour research . For modelling studies, it was confirmed that the slip effects of the nonvapour phase should be considered, as the non‐homogeneous equilibrium model (NHEM) exhibited good agreement with the experimental data .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Plume dispersion behaviour and hazard identification for large quantities of liquid hydrogen leakage

Shao

Zhang

et al. 2019

Asia-Pacific J Chem Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hydrogen is a promising energy carrier. The primary issue of hydrogen utilisation is safety in various scenarios for the coming hydrogen economy. This study focuses on liquid hydrogen leakage, which is typically induced by structural failure in refuelling stations and transit vehicles. In the present study, the authors reveal the plume dispersion behaviour and the underlying mechanism from a macro perspective and identify the associated hazards in the whole dispersion history. These problems have drawn little attention in previous studies. A numerical investigation was conducted, and the flow-field data were deeply investigated, which were insufficient in the previous experiment. The local turbulence and mixing induced by the temperature difference was revealed to be the major cause of hydrogen dispersion. The lift force induced by the density difference enhanced the dispersion. The dispersion behaviour was classified into three phases: the dense-gas phase, rise phase, and passive phase. The rise phase is the major one for cryogenic hydrogen dispersion. The frostbite hazard can be ignored, owing to insufficient exposure duration. For wind velocities of 2.2, 5.0, and 10.0 m/s, the durations of the hazardous cloud are 56, 51, and 47 s, respectively. The maximum heights of the hazardous cloud are 23.6, 12.1, and 6.2 m, respectively. There is a high fire/explosion probability in the dense-gas phase and a low probability in the latter two phases.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Plume dispersion behaviour and hazard identification for large quantities of liquid hydrogen leakage

Shao

Zhang

et al. 2019

Asia-Pacific J Chem Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A one-dimensional model for a liquid hydrogen jet, that includes energy conservation along with the mass and momentum conservation previously described, has been developed [22]. A lack of validation data for this model has prompted the development of an experiment at Sandia National Laboratories (Sandia) [23].…”

Section: Gas Release Dispersion and Accumulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

HyRAM: A methodology and toolkit for quantitative risk assessment of hydrogen systems

Groth

Hecht

2017

International Journal of Hydrogen Energy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

HyRAM is a methodology and accompanying software toolkit being developed to provide a platform for integration of state-of-the-art, validated science and engineering models and data relevant to hydrogen safety. The HyRAM software toolkit establishes a standard methodology for conducting quantitative risk assessment (QRA) and consequence analysis relevant to assessing the safety of hydrogen fueling and storage infrastructure. The HyRAM toolkit integrates fast-running deterministic and probabilistic models for quantifying risk of accident scenarios, for predicting physical effects, and for characterizing the impact of hydrogen hazards (thermal effects from jet fires, thermal and pressure effects from deflagrations and detonations in enclosures). HyRAM 1.0 incorporates generic probabilities for equipment failures for nine types of hydrogen system components, generic probabilities for hydrogen ignition, and probabilistic models for the impact of heat flux and pressure on humans and structures. These are combined with fast-running, computationally and experimentally validated models of hydrogen release and flame behavior. HyRAM can be extended in scope via usercontributed models and data. The QRA approach in HyRAM can be used for multiple types of analyses, including codes and standards development, code compliance, safety basis development, and facility safety planning. This manuscript discusses the current status and vision for HyRAM.

show abstract

“…To date, no LH 2 RPT has been observed. Pritchard and Rattigan [6] reported in 2010 that no record of a RPT resulting from a LH 2 spill has been found, and subsequent reports addressing hydrogen safety do not mention RPT [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14]. The absence of LH 2 RPT can be explained either by (i) the low number of experiments and the stochastic nature of the phenomena or (ii) the fact that the underlying physical mechanisms responsible for LNG RPTs are not present for LH 2 spills on water.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Liquid Hydrogen Spills on Water—Risk and Consequences of Rapid Phase Transition

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Liquid hydrogen (LH2) spills share many of the characteristics of liquefied natural gas (LNG) spills. LNG spills on water sometimes result in localized vapor explosions known as rapid phase transitions (RPTs), and are a concern in the LNG industry. LH2 RPT is not well understood, and its relevance to hydrogen safety is to be determined. Based on established theory from LNG research, we present a theoretical assessment of an accidental spill of a cryogen on water, including models for pool spreading, RPT triggering, and consequence quantification. The triggering model is built upon film-boiling theory, and predicts that the mechanism for RPT is a collapse of the gas film separating the two liquids (cryogen and water). The consequence model is based on thermodynamical analysis of the physical processes following a film-boiling collapse, and is able to predict peak pressure and energy yield. The models are applied both to LNG and LH2, and the results reveal that (i) an LNG pool will be larger than an LH2 pool given similar sized constant rate spills, (ii) triggering of an LH2 RPT event as a consequence of a spill on water is very unlikely or even impossible, and (iii) the consequences of a hypothetical LH2 RPT are small compared to LNG RPT. Hence, we conclude that LH2 RPT seems to be an issue of only minor concern.

show abstract

Liquid Hydrogen Release Risk and Behavior Modeling: State-of-the-Art Knowledge Gaps and Research Needs for Refueling Infrastructure Safety.

Cited by 9 publications

References 100 publications

Plume dispersion behaviour and hazard identification for large quantities of liquid hydrogen leakage

Plume dispersion behaviour and hazard identification for large quantities of liquid hydrogen leakage

HyRAM: A methodology and toolkit for quantitative risk assessment of hydrogen systems

Liquid Hydrogen Spills on Water—Risk and Consequences of Rapid Phase Transition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About