室外立体停车场氢泄漏扩散特性及危险性分析

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2025.07.1040

中国安全科学学报 ›› 2025, Vol. 35 ›› Issue (7): 176-183.doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2025.07.1040

室外立体停车场氢泄漏扩散特性及危险性分析

田苗¹(), 王伟²^,^**(), 晏明海¹, 路欣欣³, 田世祥¹, 张孝春⁴

¹ 贵州大学矿业学院, 贵州贵阳 550025
² 应急管理部上海消防研究所, 上海 200032
³ 四川省消防救援总队, 四川成都 610037
⁴ 广东工业大学环境科学与工程学院, 广东广州 510006

收稿日期:2025-03-08 修回日期:2025-05-12 出版日期:2025-07-28
通信作者:
** 王伟(1987—),男,山东滨州人,博士,副研究员,主要从事新能源火灾防控、高压氢泄漏扩散特性、受限空间燃爆机制等方面的研究。E-mail:wangw8799@163com。
作者简介:

田苗 (2000—),男,贵州江口人,硕士研究生,研究方向为高压氢泄漏扩散特性及电池储能。E-mail:tian13668569677@163.com。
田世祥副教授
张孝春教授
基金资助:
广东省重点领域研发计划项目(2024B1111080002); 上海市自然科学基金面上项目资助(24ZR1473000); 贵州省科技计划项目(黔科合支撑[2022]一般 250); 上海市社会发展科技攻关项目(22dz1201000)

Analysis on hydrogen leakage diffusion characteristics and risks in outdoor multi-story park

TIAN Miao¹(), WANG Wei²^,^**(), YAN Minghai¹, LU Xinxin³, TIAN Shixiang¹, ZHANG Xiaochun⁴

¹ School of Mining, Guizhou University, Guiyang Guizhou 550025, China
² Emergency Management Department Shanghai Fire Research Institute, Shanghai 200032, China
³ Sichuan Fire and Rescue Corps, Chengdu Sichuan 610037, China
⁴ School of Environmental Science and Engineering, Guangdong University of Technology, Guangzhou Guangdong 510006, China

Received:2025-03-08 Revised:2025-05-12 Published:2025-07-28

摘要/Abstract

摘要： “双碳目标”助力氢燃料电池汽车(HFCV)产业发展,HFCV安全停放于室外立体停车场是规模化推广的关键,为此,搭建缩尺度实体试验平台,研究停车场封闭条件(封闭、半开放、开放)、泄漏位置、质量流量及孔径对氢气扩散特性的影响。结果表明:停车场开放程度增加,泄漏源处氦气相关指标上升,如中央位置大孔径泄漏且流量为0.18 kg/s时,一至三层氦气最大体积分数依次为21.3%、27%、45.3%,对应氢气体积分数已远超爆炸下限,存在极高燃爆风险;泄漏质量流量增加,氦气体积分数和压力上升、安全风险增大,氦气的泄漏质量流量与体积分数、压力存在明显的正相关关系;同等开放程度下,角落易聚集且墙边扩散情况优于空旷地带,并且扩散过程受空间边界引导,呈现出非均匀的扩散态势;孔径越大,氦气泄漏速率越高。

关键词: 室外立体停车场, 氢燃料电池汽车(HFCV), 氢气泄漏扩散, 扩散特性, 封闭条件, 危险性

Abstract:

The goals of carbon peaking and carbon neutrality support the development of HFCV industry. Safe parking of HFCV in outdoor three-dimensional parking lot is the key to large-scale promotion. Therefore, a scaled-down physical experimental platform was built to investigate the effects of outdoor multi-story parking lot closure conditions (closed, semi-open, open), leakage location, mass flow rate nd aperture on hydrogen diffusion characteristics. The experimental results show that as the opening degree of the outdoor multi-story parking lot increases, and the related indexes of helium at the leakage source rise. For example, when the leakage occurs at the center with a large aperture at the flow rate is 0.18 kg/s, the maximum volume fractions of helium on the first, second, and third floors are 21.3%, 27% and 45.3%, respectively. The corresponding hydrogen volume fractions far exceed the lower explosive limit, posing an extremely high risk of combustion and explosion. With the increase of leakage mass flow, both the volume fraction and pressure of helium increase, and the safety risk increases. There is an obvious positive correlation between leakage mass flow rate of helium and volume fraction and pressure. Under the same degree of openness, helium tends to accumulate in corners, and its diffusion along walls is more efficient than that in open areas. The diffusion process is guided by the spatial boundary, showing a non-uniform diffusion trend. In addition, the larger the pore size, the higher the helium leakage rate.

Key words: outdoor multi-story park, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles(HFCV), hydrogen leakage and diffusion, diffusion characteristics, closed conditions, hazard

中图分类号:

X932爆炸安全与防火、防爆

田苗, 王伟, 晏明海, 路欣欣, 田世祥, 张孝春. 室外立体停车场氢泄漏扩散特性及危险性分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(7): 176-183.

TIAN Miao, WANG Wei, YAN Minghai, LU Xinxin, TIAN Shixiang, ZHANG Xiaochun. Analysis on hydrogen leakage diffusion characteristics and risks in outdoor multi-story park[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(7): 176-183.

图/表 13

表1

图1

图2

图3

图4

表2

图5

图6

图7

图8

图9

图10

图11

参考文献 25

[1]	OLIVEIRA A M, BESWICK R R, YAN Yushan. A green hydrogen economy for a renewable energy society[J]. Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering, 2021, 33: DOI:10.1016/j.coche.2021.100701.
[2]	EHLERS J C, FEIDENHANS'L A A, THERKILDSEN K T, et al. Affordable green hydrogen from alkaline water electrolysis:key research needs from an industrial perspective[J]. Acs Energy Letters, 2023, 8(3):1502-1509.
[3]	QIAN Jinyuan, WU Jiayi, GAO Zhixin, et al. Hydrogen decompression analysis by multi-stage Tesla valves for hydrogen fuel cell[J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2019, 44(26):13 666-13 674.
[4]	COOPER J, DUBEY L, BAKKALOGLU S, et al. Hydrogen emissions from the hydrogen value chain-emissions profile an impact to global warming[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2022, 830: DOI:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.154624.
[5]	WANG Xueyan, ZHANG Changshuai, GAO Wei. Risk assessment of hydrogen leakage in diesel hydrogenation process[J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2022, 47(10):6955-6964.
[6]	于溪芮, 何旭, 孔得朋. 基于Apriori算法的氢安全事故统计分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(4):128-134.
	YU Xirui, HE Xu, KONG Depeng. Apriori algorithm-based statistical analysis of hydrogen accidents[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(4):128-134.
[7]	赵明斌. 地下停车场内燃料电池汽车泄漏及爆炸事故的安全分析[D]. 济南: 山东大学, 2021.
	ZHAO Mingbin. Safety analysis of hydrogen fuel cell vehicle leakage and explosion accident in an underground parking garage[D]. Ji'nan: Shandong University, 2021.
[8]	BIE H Y, HAO Z R. Simulation analysis on the risk of hydrogen releases and combustion in subsea tunnels[J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2017, 42(11):7617-7624.
[9]	LI Yongjun, WANG Zhirong, SHANG Zheng, et al. Effect of leakage source condition on the unignited hydrogen released issuing through a horizontal realistic pipeline geometry[J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2024, 55:1090-1101.
[10]	HAJJI Y, BOUTERAA M, BOURNOT P, et al. Assessment of an accidental hydrogen leak from a vehicle tank in a confined space[J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2022, 47(66):28 710-28 720.
[11]	LI Yongjun, WANG Zhirong, SHI Xuemeng, et al. Numerical investigation of the dispersion features of hydrogen gas under various leakage source conditions in a mobile hydrogen refueling station[J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2023, 48(25):9498-9511.
[12]	BARLEY C D, GAWLIK K. Buoyancy-driven ventilation of hydrogen from buildings:laboratory test and model validation[J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2009, 34(13):5592-5603.
[13]	PITTS W M, YANG J C, BLAIS M, et al. Dispersion and burning behavior of hydrogen released in a full-scale residential garage in the presence and absence of conventional automobiles[J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2012, 37(22): 17 457-17 469.
[14]	CARITEAU B, TKATSCHENKO I. Experimental study of the concentration build-up regimes in an enclosure without ventilation[J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2012, 37(22):17 400-17 408.
[15]	RUFFIN E, MOUILLEAU Y, CHAINEAUX J. Large scale characterization of the concentration field of supercritical jets of hydrogen and methane[J]. Springer Netherlands, 1996, 9(4):279-284.
[16]	LI Xuefang, CHEN Mingjia, WANG Yujie, et al. Measurements of concentration decays in underexpanded jets through rectangular slot nozzles[J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2018, 43(20):9884-9893.
[17]	MAKAROV D, SHENTSOV V, KUZNETSOV M, et al. Pressure peaking phenomenon:model validation against unignited release and jet fire experiments[J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2018, 43(19):9454-9469.
[18]	HUSSEIN H, BRENNAN S, MOLKOV V. Dispersion of hydrogen release in a naturally ventilated covered car park[J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2020, 45(43):23 882-23 897.
[19]	HOUF W G, EVANS G H, EKOTO I W, et al. Hydrogen fuel-cell forklift vehicle releases in enclosed spaces[J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2013, 38(19):8179-8189.
[20]	杨保德, 崔小东, 李席, 等. 化工企业实验室氢气泄漏模拟分析[J]. 山东化工, 2021, 50(13):149-151.
	YANG Baode, CUI Xiaodong, LI Xi, et al. Simulation of hydrogen leakage in a laboratory of chemical enterprises[J]. Shandong Chemical Industry, 2021, 50(13):149-151.
[21]	CHOI J, HUR N, KANG S, et al. A CFD simulation of hydrogen dispersion for the hydrogen leakage from a fuel cell vehicle in an underground parking garage[J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2013, 38(19):8084-8091.
[22]	张静, 黄玉玺, 张巍, 等. 车库燃料汽车氢气泄漏模拟与分析[J]. 太原理工大学学报, 2022, 53(6):1068-1075.
	ZHANG Jing, HUANG Yuxi, ZHANG Wei, et al. Simulation and analysis of hydrogen leakage in garage fuel vehicles[J]. Journal of Taiyuan University of Technology, 2022, 53(6):1068-1075.
[23]	WANG Qihua, ZHAI Chunjie, GONG Junhui, et al. Analytical and numerical predictions of hydrogen gas flow induced by wall and corner leakages in confined space[J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2020, 45(11):6848-6862.
[24]	刘自亮, 熊思江, 花争立, 等. 埋地输氢管道泄漏爆炸事故后果模拟分析[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2019, 15(12):94-100.
	LIU Ziliang, XIONG Sijiang, HUA Zhengli, et al. Simulation analysis on leakage and explosion accident consequence of buried hydrogen pipeline[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2019, 15(12):94-100.
[25]	袁裕鹏, 崔伟逸, 沈辉, 等. 燃料电池船舶舱内氢气泄漏扩散的数值模拟[J]. 交通运输工程学报, 2022, 22(4):196-209.
	YUAN Yupeng, CUI Weiyi, SHEN Hui, et al. Numerical simulation of leakage and diffusion of hydrogen in cabin of fuel cell ship[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2022, 22(4):196-209.

场景	实际尺寸/m×m×m	模型尺寸/m×m×m
停车场	65×31×5	2.17×1.03×0.17
立柱	0.9×0.9×5	0.03×0.03×0.17
停车位	2.4×4.5	0.08×0.15

试验编号	楼层	位置	质量流量/ (kg·s^-1)	孔径/ mm
1	一	M₁	0.18	12.86
2	一	M₁	0.27	12.86
3	一	E₁	0.18	12.86
4	一	E₁	0.27	12.86
5	一	C₁	0.18	12.86
6	一	C₁	0.27	12.86
7	二	M₂	0.18	6.70
8	二	M₂	0.18	12.86
9	二	E₂	0.18	6.70
10	二	E₂	0.18	12.86
11	三	M₃	0.18	6.70
12	三	M₃	0.18	12.86
13	三	E₃	0.18	6.70
14	三	E₃	0.18	12.86

室外立体停车场氢泄漏扩散特性及危险性分析

Analysis on hydrogen leakage diffusion characteristics and risks in outdoor multi-story park

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 13

参考文献 25

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	丁仰卫, 杨海龙, 鲁义, 刘蔚廷, 谷旺鑫, 夏楚淇. 磷石膏基自产气膨胀浆体自膨胀扩散特性研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(7): 82-90.
[2]	魏明尧, 皇甫昊棋, 高康, 陆春钦, 蔚立元, 付士根. 煤油气共生矿井油型气涌出危险性定量评价[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(4): 67-75.
[3]	覃瀚萱, 桂蕾, 张文芳, 韩幽铭. 基于墙体裂缝特征的滑坡区房屋风险分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(3): 133-141.
[4]	王少嘉, 王志, 赵庆杰, 史波波. 高温和低温短期冲击下的锂离子电池热失控特性分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(12): 159-167.
[5]	张玉涛, 郭强, 张园勃, 李亚清, 孙亚利. 基于相关系数法的煤自燃危险性关联分析及预测[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(1): 125-132.
[6]	邓兵兵, 谢昱姝, 邓方, 葛悦, 吕良海, 张晓峰. 埋地燃气管道在土壤中小孔泄漏扩散特性研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(10): 160-166.
[7]	马天行, 林允, 周晓斌, 魏培荣, 李仁宗, 苏家玉. 煤层底板突水危险性预测的熵权-正态云模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(S1): 171-177.
[8]	李存义, 朱志成, 郭占恒, 韩毅平, 龚伟. 海上风电场地质灾害危险性评估与应用[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(S1): 181-186.
[9]	张青松, 刘添添, 白伟. 加热方式对锂离子电池热失控行为影响^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(9): 44-51.
[10]	金智新, 刘倩, 邓存宝, 王延生. 生产安全事件随机-模糊耦合的危险性度量[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(1): 1-7.
[11]	温廷新, 李洋子. 基于预处理的AFOA-ELM冲击地压危险预测模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(8): 29-34.
[12]	裴兴旺, 李慧民, 李文龙, 孟海, 李轩. 基于熵权物元可拓的桥梁检测作业危险性评价[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(8): 42-48.
[13]	周宇, 苏磊, 谢传欣. 氧化石墨烯制备工艺危险性研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(3): 127-132.
[14]	毕娟, 李希建, 陈刘瑜. 预测冲击地压危险性等级R型因子Fisher判别[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(12): 103-109.
[15]	韩波, 李刚, 马赫, 苑春苗. 机械加工伴生粉尘爆炸危险性分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(9): 51-55.