Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.22704/ksee.2022.40.3.044

Assessment of the Applicability of Vapor Cloud Explosion Prediction Models  

Yoon, Yong-Kyun (세명대학교 소방방재학과)
Publication Information
Explosives and Blasting / v.40, no.3, 2022 , pp. 44-53 More about this Journal
Abstract
This study evaluates the applicability of the TNT Equivalency Method, Multi-Energy Method, and Baker-Strehlow-Tang (BST) Method, which are blast prediction models used to determine the overpressure of blast wave generated from vapor cloud explosion. It is assumed that the propane leaked from a propane storage container with a capacity of 2000 kg installed in an area where studio houses and shopping centers are concentrated causes a vapor cloud explosion. The equivalent mass of TNT calculated by applying the TNT Equivalency Method is found to be 4061 kg. Change of overpressure with the distance obtained by the TNT Equivalency Method, Multi-Energy Method, and BST Method is rapid and the magnitude of overpressure obtained by the TNT Equivalency Method and BST method is generally similar within 100 m from explosion center. As a result of comparing the overpressure observed in the actual vapor cloud explosion case with the overpressure obtained by applying the TNT Equivalent Method, Multi-Energy Method, and BST Method, the BST Method is found to be the best fit. As a result of comparing the overpressure with the distance obtained by each explosion prediction model with the damage criteria for structure, it is estimated that the structure located within 90 m from explosion center would suffer a damage more than partial destruction, and glass panes of the structure separated by 600 m would be fractured.
Keywords
Vapor cloud explosion; Overpressure; TNT Equivalency Method; Multi-Energy Method; Baker-Strehlow-Tang(BST) Method;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 UN SaferGuard, 2021, International Ammunition Technical Guideline(IATG); Formulae for ammunition management, UN, pp. 4-25.
2 Sari, A., 2011, Comparison of TNO Multienergy and Baker-Strehlow-Tang models, Process Safety Progress, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 23-26.   DOI
3 윤용균, 2015, 화재공학개론(역서), 화수목, pp. 96-99.
4 Pierorazio, A.J., J.K. Thomas, Q.A. Baker, and D.E. Ketchum, 2005, An update to the Baker-Strehlow-Tang vapor cloud explosion prediction methodology flame speed table, Process Safety Progress, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 59-65.   DOI
5 윤용균, 2019, 폭발이 구조물에 미치는 영향, 화약⋅발파(대한화약발파공학회지), Vol. 37, No. 4, pp. 10-16.
6 Baker, Q.A., C.M. Doolittle, G.A. Fitzgerald, and M.J. Tang, 1998, Recent developments in the Baker-Strehlow VCE analysis methodology, Process Safety Progress, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 297-301.   DOI
7 AICE, 2010, Guidelines for vapor cloud explosion, pressure vessel burst, BLEVE and flash fire hazards, Wiley, pp. 97-240.
8 Assael, M.J. and K.E. Kakosimos, 2010, Fires, explosions, and toxic gas dispersions; Effects calculation and risk analysis, CRC Press, pp. 149-206.
9 Karlos, V. and G. Solomos, 2013, Calculation of blast loads for application to structural components, EU, pp. 1-23.
10 Sochet, I., 2017, Blast effects, Springer, pp. 1-15, 121-140.
11 Tang, M.J. and Q.A. Baker, 1999, Process Safety Progress, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 235-240.
12 van den Berg, A.C., 1985, The Multi-Energy Method; A framework for vapor cloud explosion blast prediction, J. of Hazardous Materials, Vol. 12, pp. 1-10.   DOI