Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||HYSAFE Standard Benchmark Problem SBEP-V11 - Predictions of Hydrogen Release and Dispersion from a CGH2 Bus in an Underpass|
|Authors:||VENETSANOS Alexander; PAPANIKOLAOU Efi; HANSEN Olav; MIDDHA Pankrul; GARCIA Javier; HEITSCH Matthias; BARALDI Daniele; ADAMS Paul|
|Citation:||INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY vol. 35 no. 8 p. 3857-3867|
|Publisher:||PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD|
|Type:||Articles in periodicals and books|
|Abstract:||One of the tasks of the HySafe Network of Excellence was the evaluation of available CFD tools and models for dispersion and combustion in selected hydrogen release scenarios identified as "standard benchmark problems" (SBEPs). This paper presents the results of the HySafe standard benchmark problem SBEP-V11. The situation considered is a high pressure hydrogen jet release from a compressed gaseous hydrogen (CGH2) bus in an underpass. The bus considered is equipped with 8 cylinders of 5 kg hydrogen each at 35 MPa storage pressure. The underpass is assumed to be of the common beam and slab type construction with I-beams spanning across the highway at 3 m centres (normal to the bus), plus cross bracing between the main beams, and light armatures parallel to the bus direction. The main goal of the present work was to evaluate the role of obstructions on the underside of the bridge deck on the dispersion patterns and assess the potential for hydrogen accumulation. Four HySafe partners participated in this benchmark, with 4 different CFD codes, ADREA-HF, CFX, FLACS and FLUENT. Four scenarios were examined in total. In the base case scenario 20 kg of hydrogen was released in the basic geometry. In Sensitivity Test 1 the release position was moved so that the hydrogen jet could hit directly the light armature on the roof of the underpass. In Sensitivity Test 2 the underside of the bridge deck was flat. In Sensitivity Test 3 the release was from one cylinder instead of four (5 kg instead of 20). The paper compares the results predicted by the four different computational approaches and attempts to identify the reasons for observed disagreements. The paper also concludes on the effects of the obstructions on the underside of the bridge deck.|
|JRC Directorate:||Energy, Transport and Climate|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.