Application of Computational Modeling for Explosive Hazard Assessments

Clutter, J. Keith

doi:10.1260/2041-4196.4.3.293

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…CAMBER is an object-oriented framework that utilises a variety of material models and reaction laws. The mesh adaptation was used to resolve structures under severe deformation, and the code maps out the locations of gradients in properties [25]. In CAMBER, a finite-volume formulation is used.…”

Section: Numerical Modelling Assumptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of Aluminium Powder Properties for Modelling Free Air Explosions

Sielicki

Clutter²,

Sumelka

et al. 2022

Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aluminium is a component in many energetic formulations. Therefore, its combustion is one of the main thermochemical processes that govern the output from the energetics. Modelling aluminium combustion is a challenging task because the process is highly complex and difficult to measure. Here, tests of aluminium powder were conducted in an effort to isolate the burning of the aluminium and to determine an adequate representation of this process. Charges of 100 g and 500 g were tested, and the size of the Al/air cloud and the ratio of components in the Al/air mixture were determined, which has not been published previously. This information was used to assess the validity of the assumption that the detonation of the mixture was representative of the event. Parameters for the Jones–Wilkins–Lee equation of state for the explosive mixture and detonation products were defined. Simulations of the tests were performed, and the results were consistent with the field test data, indicating that detonation occurred when there was a mixture of 70–75% Al and 25–30% air by mass.

show abstract

Section: Numerical Modelling Assumptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of Aluminium Powder Properties for Modelling Free Air Explosions

Sielicki

Clutter²,

Sumelka

et al. 2022

Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Here, the mesh is adapted in those regions where there was a gradient in any of the four variable fields. CAMBER also employs logic that adapts ahead of the gradients to better capture the moving fronts (Clutter, 2006(Clutter, , 2013. Figure 4 shows two instances in time from the simulation of 27 lbs of explosive.…”

Section: Comparison Of Current Modeling To Test Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is done by performing simulations of charge sizes for which test data and results from earlier simulations have been produced. The current code is titled CAMBER (Cartesian Adaptive Meshing for Blast, Explosions, and Releases), and details of the model are provided by Clutter (2006Clutter ( , 2013 and Heynes and Clutter (2011). Details on testing and earlier simulations are available in earlier reports by ABS Consulting (2002, 2003.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of charge shape on blast containment chamber survivability

Clutter¹,

King²

2016

International Journal of Protective Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Computational modeling is routinely used to design protective systems such as blast containment chambers. Hydrocodes are used to define the loads produced if the explosive items were to detonate and finite element analysis codes to calculate the response of the chamber. These efforts typically assume the explosive is a spherical charge. This article investigates the effect this assumption has on the blast loads and the calculated response of the chamber. First, simulations benchmarking a hydrocode with adaptive meshing and Jones-Wilkins-Lee equation of state are performed. How various aspects of the scenario affect the loading on the vessel is discussed. The code is next used to calculate the loading from a spherical charge and one representative of a configuration typically found in actual use of storage vessels. The more realistic charge configuration is found to produce higher loads on the vessel walls. The structural response of the chamber to both charge configurations is calculated using finite element analysis. The non-ideal configuration is found to produce a very different response than the typically assumed ideal spherical charge.

show abstract

Leveraging CFD in Earlier Design Stages to Capture Critical Effects and Sensitivities with Simple Cost Effective Approaches to Explosion Modeling

Clutter¹,

Staszak²

2020

Day 4 Thu, May 07, 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Computational modeling (CFD) has made great strides in the last 20 years in fighting and overcoming its "expensive" stigma. The oil & gas industry has embraced the use of CFD to assess everything from the design of equipment, optimization of process flows, and hazards modeling of fire and explosion events all in an effort to strive for the goal of inherently safer designs. In current offshore facility design, CFD modeling, to assess the consequences of vapor cloud explosions has been established as common practice. For most major projects, CFD explosion modeling is used heavily in Feed and Detailed (later) stages of design. At these stages hundreds of scenarios are simulated and combined with extensive probabilistic and statistical calculations to define design loads of critical systems and assess risk. The primary advantage of using CFD is that it incorporates more details of the design and provides more realistic and design specific analysis. In the case of explosions, CFD provides valuable data for design, particularly explosion data that is significantly more accurate than that from simple open field models. Despite this adoption within the design process and decades of advances, CFD modeling practitioners still admit that there are increases of cost and time, when compared to the ever-present phenomenological approaches. This has kept many design processes from utilizing CFD in the earliest stages; namely Concept and pre-Feed. The arguments have traditionally been along the lines of:The design is progressing and changing too fast to allow time for CFD models to be built.,There is insufficient model detail to construct viable CFD models.,The early stage concerns can be captured "well enough" with simple approaches., etc. Modeling representations and approaches can be simplified and streamlined, while still providing the advantages of CFD. Variability in geometric representations can be captured with physics representations rather than needing to create predictive CAD geometry. These types of simplifications can increase the ability to simply change and update models and conduct early stage sensitivities in projects, while still capturing critical explosion effects. The purpose of this paper will be to show how these simplified approaches can be used in an effective and efficient manner in early stages of design. That the traditional arguments against early adoption of CFD can be countered, with the end result being greater early stage information and influence on the design. Allowing effective change at a time in the process when it is not cost prohibitive and other controls have yet to prohibit design changes. The result being a continued improvement in the goal of inherently safer design.

show abstract

Application of Computational Modeling for Explosive Hazard Assessments

Cited by 3 publications

References 19 publications

Identification of Aluminium Powder Properties for Modelling Free Air Explosions

Identification of Aluminium Powder Properties for Modelling Free Air Explosions

Effect of charge shape on blast containment chamber survivability

Leveraging CFD in Earlier Design Stages to Capture Critical Effects and Sensitivities with Simple Cost Effective Approaches to Explosion Modeling

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About