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

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2025.07.1040

Abstract

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

CLC Number:

X932爆炸安全与防火、防爆

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.

Figures/Tables 13

Table 1

Fig.1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Fig.4

Table 2

Fig.5

Fig.6

Fig.7

Fig.8

Fig.9

Fig.10

Fig.11

References 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. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.04.0839
	YU Xirui, HE Xu, KONG Depeng. Apriori algorithm-based statistical analysis of hydrogen accidents[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(4):128-134. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.04.0839
[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