|本期目录/Table of Contents|

[1]岑康,李欢,王泳龙,等.LNG加气站槽车卸车直供过程泄漏后果分析*[J].中国安全生产科学技术,2021,17(4):77-84.[doi:10.11731/j.issn.1673-193x.2021.04.013]
　CEN Kang,LI Huan,WANG Yonglong,et al.Quantitative analysis on leakage consequences during unloading and direct refueling process of tank truck at LNG refueling station[J].JOURNAL OF SAFETY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,2021,17(4):77-84.[doi:10.11731/j.issn.1673-193x.2021.04.013]
点击复制

LNG加气站槽车卸车直供过程泄漏后果分析*
分享到：

《中国安全生产科学技术》[ISSN:1673-193X/CN:11-5335/TB]

卷:
17
期数:
2021年4期
页码:
77-84
栏目:
职业安全卫生管理与技术
出版日期:
2021-04-30

文章信息/Info

Title:
Quantitative analysis on leakage consequences during unloading and direct refueling process of tank truck at LNG refueling station
文章编号:
1673-193X(2021)-04-0077-08
作者:
岑康; 李欢; 王泳龙; 李薇; 付祥廷
（1.西南石油大学 土木工程与测绘学院，四川 成都 610500；
2.四川川港燃气有限责任公司，四川 成都 610000；
3.四川川油工程技术勘察设计有限公司，四川 成都 610000）
Author(s):
CEN Kang1;  LI Huan1;  WANG Yonglong2;  LI Wei1;  FU Xiangting3
(1.School of Civil Engineering and Geomatics,Southwest Petroleum University,Chengdu Sichuan 610500,China;
2.Sichuan Chuangang Urban Gas Company,Chengdu Sichuan 610000,China;
3.Sichuan Chuanyou Engineering Survey and Design Company,Chengdu Sichuan 610000,China)
关键词:
LNG加气站; 槽车; 储罐; 泄漏后果; 量化分析
Keywords:
LNG refueling station;  tank truck;  storage tank;  leakage consequence;  quantitative analysis
分类号:
X937
DOI:
10.11731/j.issn.1673-193x.2021.04.013
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
为研究LNG加气站槽车直接供液过程泄漏后果严重程度，采用HAZOP辨识槽车供液和储罐供液典型泄漏场景，基于PHAST分析不同泄漏场景下LNG液池半径、蒸汽云扩散距离及积聚时长、爆炸超压和池火热辐射影响范围，定量评价槽车供液可能造成的事故后果扩大程度。结果表明：槽车供液泄漏事故的LNG液池最大半径、蒸汽云最大扩散距离、爆炸超压最大影响半径和池火热辐射最大半径，分别为储罐供液的5.7,1.7,2.3,7.9倍；槽车在无人值守条件下泄漏形成的LNG液池最大半径和蒸汽云积聚时长，分别为有人值守下的1.85,56倍；日供液量较大加气站不宜采用槽车直接为汽车供液模式，而应采用先卸车入罐、再储罐供液的模式；应落实槽车卸车轮班值守制度，并与周边社区建立有效的应急联动方案。
Abstract:
Using LNG tank trucks to directly refuel the vehicles for a long time had become a common supply guarantee measure for the LNG refueling stations with a large daily refueling load and the insufficient storage tank for meeting the turnover demand.However,it would cause the extended unloading time and the increased leakage risk.Taking a typical LNG threelevel refueling station as the research object,the HAZOP method was used to identify the typical leakage scenarios in the processes of tank truck refueling and storage tank refueling.The LNG liquid pool radius,vapor cloud diffusion distance and accumulation time,explosion overpressure and influence range of pool fire thermal radiation under different leakage scenarios were analyzed based on PHAST,and the extent of accident consequences expansion caused by tank truck refueling was quantitatively evaluated.The results showed that the maximum radius of LNG liquid pool,the maximum diffusion distance of vapor cloud,the maximum influence radius of explosion overpressure and the maximum radius of pool fire thermal radiation in the leakage accident of tank truck refueling were respectively 5.7 times,1.7 times,2.3 times and 7.9 times of those with the storage tank refueling.The maximum radius of the LNG liquid pool and the accumulation time of vapor cloud formed by the leakage of tank truck under unattended conditions were respectively 1.85 times and 56 times of those under manned conditions.It showed that the gas refueling station with a large daily refueling amount should not use tank trucks to directly refuel the vehicles,but should adopt the mode of unloading the truck into the tank and then using the tank refueling.A shift duty system for the tank truck unloading should be implemented,and an effective emergency linkage plan should be established with the surrounding communities.

参考文献/References:

［1］中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验疫总局.移动式压力容器安全技术监察规程:TSG R0005—2011［S］.北京:中国标准出版社,2011.
［2］BAALISAMPANG T,ABBASSI R,GARANIYA V,et al.Modelling an integrated impact of fire,explosion and combustion products during transitional events caused by an accidental release of LNG［J］.Process Safety and Environmental Protection,2019,128:259-272.
［3］郭开华,王文静,皇甫立霞，等.LNG站场防火间距及安全性分析［J］.天然气工业,2012,32(10):90-94. GUO Kaihua,WANG Wenjing,HUANGFU Lixia,et al.Fireproof spacing between equipment and safety analysis at LNG stations［J］.Natural Gas Industry,2012,32(10):90-94.
［4］GERBEC M,PONTIGGIA M,ANTONIONI G,et al.Comparison of UDM and CFD simulations of a time varying release of LPG in geometrical complex environment［J］.Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries,2016,45:56-68.
［5］MA G,HUANG Y.Safety assessment of explosions during gas stations refilling process［J］.Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries,2019,60:133-144.
［6］KANG W,QIAN X M,HE Y R,et al.Failure analysis integrated with prediction model for LNG transport trailer and thermal hazards induced by an accidental VCE:a case study［J］.Engineering Failure Analysis,2020,108:104350.
［7］王志寰,李成兵,周宁.大型LNG接收站泄漏事故灾害效应分析与预测［J］.天然气工业,2019,39(5):145-153. WANG Zhihuan,LI Chengbing,ZHOU Ning.Analysis and prediction on the disaster effect of leakage accidents at large LNG receiving stations［J］.Natural Gas Industry,2019,39(5):145-153.
［8］BAALISAMPANG T,ABBASSI R,GARANIYA V,et al.Accidental release of Liquefied Natural Gas in a processing facility:effect of equipment congestion level on dispersion behaviour of the flammable vapour［J］.Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries,2019,61:237-248.
［9］ZHU G,GUO X,YAN Y,et al.Experiment and simulation research of evolution process for LNG leakage and diffusion［J］.Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries,2020,64:104041.
［10］CHU B,CHANG D J.Effect of full-bore natural gas release on fire and individual risks:a case study for an LNG-Fueled ship［J］.Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering,2017,37:234-247.
［11］屈宜生,胡伟.液化天然气(LNG)储运罐车泄漏应急处置技术与方法［J］.中国安全生产科学技术,2013,9(4):99-103. QU Yisheng,HU Wei.Emergency disposal technology and method for leakage of liquefied natural gas (LNG) storage tank［J］.Journal of Safety Science and Technology,2013,9(4):99-103.
［12］罗丹,廖婵娟,余欣柔.2013-2017年我国危险化学品运输事故统计分析及预防对策［J］.中国公共安全(学术版),2019,54(1):34-38. LUO Dan,LIAO Chanjuan,YU Xinrou.2013-2017 statistics and preventive measures of hazardous chemicals transportation accidents in China［J］.China Public Security(Academy Edition),2019,54(1):34-38.
［13］岑康,涂昆,姚婷,等.LNG卫星站安全仪表系统功能安全评价［J］.中国安全生产科学技术,2016,12(S1):70-77. CEN Kang,TU Kun,YAO Ting，et al.Functional safety assessment of safety instrumented system for LNG satellite station［J］.Journal of Safety Science and Technology,2016,12(S1):70-77.
［14］史腾飞,管义锋.基于PHAST的CNG运输船装卸载过程气体泄漏后果评估［J］.船舶工程,2016,38(12):83-87. SHI Tengfei,GUAN Yifeng.Consequence evaluation of gas leakage in CNG carrier loading and unloading process based on PHAST,ship ［J］.Engineering,2016,38(12):83-87.
［15］范洪军,张晖,徐建勇.LNG加注趸船的池火危险距离分析［J］.中国造船,2013(4):186-195. FAN Hongjun,ZHANG Hui,XU Jianyong.Assessment of the hazard distance of pool fire for LNG bunkering pontoon［J］.Ship-Building of China,2013(4):186-195.
［16］安超,李磊,张爱良,等.基于FLACS CFD的不同气油比油气混输管道泄漏火灾后果对比［J］.中国安全生产科学技术,2019,15(6):67-73. AN Chao,LI Lei,ZHANG Ailiang，et al.Comparison of consequences caused by leakage fire of oil-gas mixed transmission pipeline with different gas-oil ratios based on FLACS CFD［J］.Journal of Safety Science and Technology,2019,15(6):67-73.

相似文献/References:

[1]武志峰,高艳霞.防护堤高度对LNG扩散行为影响研究[J].中国安全生产科学技术,2015,11(6):137.[doi:10.11731/j.issn.1673-193x.2015.06.022]
　WU Zhi-feng,GAO Yan-xia.Study on influence to diffusion behaviors of LNG by dike height[J].JOURNAL OF SAFETY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,2015,11(4):137.[doi:10.11731/j.issn.1673-193x.2015.06.022]
[2]岑康,任国强,王政新,等.基于SIL评估的LNG加气站安全仪表系统问题分析及改进建议*[J].中国安全生产科学技术,2021,17(12):17.[doi:10.11731/j.issn.1673-193x.2021.12.003]
　CEN Kang,REN Guoqiang,WANG Zhengxin,et al.Problems analysis and improvement suggestions for safety instrumented system of LNG fueling stations based on SIL evaluation[J].JOURNAL OF SAFETY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,2021,17(4):17.[doi:10.11731/j.issn.1673-193x.2021.12.003]

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
收稿日期： 2020-08-04
* 基金项目： 国家自然科学基金项目（52074237）;国家安全生产监督管理总局安全生产重大事故防治关键技术项目（Sichuan-0021-2016AQ）；国家级大学生创新创业训练计划项目（201810615003）
作者简介： 岑康，博士，教授，主要研究方向为油气管道完整性评价技术、燃气负荷预测。
更新日期/Last Update: 2021-05-09