4.5 Article

LPG stored at the wildland-urban interface: recent events and the effects of jet fires and BLEVE

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF WILDLAND FIRE
卷 32, 期 3, 页码 388-402

出版社

CSIRO PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1071/WF22084

关键词

accident; BLEVE; explosion; forest fire; fragmentation; gas; jet fire; LPG cylinders; pressure relief device; wildfire; wildland-urban interface fires

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluates the pressure relief device (PRD), cylinder type, and the effects of jet fires and BLEVEs. Through fire tests and hydrostatic tests on LPG cylinders made of steel and composite materials, the importance of PRD and proper cylinder selection and location in avoiding major accidents is revealed. The study also describes jet fires, fireball radiation, and the maximum distance reached by cylinder fragments. Recommendations to prevent accidents are provided.
Background. Jet fires and boiling liquid expanding vapour explosions (BLEVEs) are potential events when a vessel containing liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) is exposed to fire. Events involving domestic LPG tanks have occurred at wildland-urban interface areas in Portugal, the USA, Spain and Greece. Aims. Evaluation of the pressure relief device (PRD), the type of cylinder and the effects of jet fires and BLEVEs. Methods. LPG cylinders manufactured with steel and composite materials were exposed to fire. Hydrostatic tests were carried out to compare the burst pressure without fire influence. Fourteen accidents that occurred during wildfires are described. Key results. The presence of a PRD and the right choice of type of cylinder as well as cylinder location may avert major accidents. The jet fires and fireball radiation are also described, as well as the maximum distance reached by cylinder fragments. Conclusions. The tests showed that the burst pressure in the test of a cylinder without PRD under fire was significantly lower when compared with the hydrostatic tests. Implications. Lastly, recommendations to avoid accidents are made.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据