Dust explosions in vented silos: Simulations and comparisons with current standards
[EN] Dust explosions represent a serious hazard to personnel and equipment in industries and silo facilities that handle combustible materials. Venting devices are the most common protective systems employed in silos, although their use may pose problems in large and low-strength silos. The main aim...
| Autores: | , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión aceptada para publicación |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2011 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universidad de León |
| Repositorio: | BULERIA. Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad de León |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:buleria.unileon.es:10612/22616 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/powder-technology https://hdl.handle.net/10612/22616 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Ingeniería agrícola Dust explosion Silo Venting CFD DESC |
| Sumario: | [EN] Dust explosions represent a serious hazard to personnel and equipment in industries and silo facilities that handle combustible materials. Venting devices are the most common protective systems employed in silos, although their use may pose problems in large and low-strength silos. The main aim of the present work was to simulate dust explosions in silos using a commercial CFD program, the DESC code, to determine the pressures developed in vented explosions with vent areas of different sizes. Dust cloud characteristics were taken fromstudies carried out by the FSA(ResearchCentre for Applied System Safety andIndustrial Medicine, Germany) in a 12 m3silo with a mechanical feeding system. The pressures and associated vent areas in these simulations were compared to those contemplated in two venting standards. The simulated explosion pressures showed the expected trends for the associated vent areas and agreed reasonably well with the values contemplated in NFPA 68(2007) [5]. However,whenthe reduced explosion overpressure waslow, the vent area contemplated in EN 14491 (2006) [4] was much larger than in the present simulations. |
|---|