Abstract

Computation of gas dispersal in urban places or hilly grounds requires a large amount of computer time when addressed with conventional multidimensional models. Those are usually based on two-phase flow or Navier-Stokes equations. Different classes of simplified models exist. Among them, two-layer shallow water models are interesting to address large-scale dispersion. Indeed, compared to conventional multidimensional approaches, 2D simulations are carried out to mimic 3D effects. The computational gain in CPU time is consequently expected to be tremendous. However, such models involve at least three fundamental difficulties. The first one is related to the lack of hyperbolicity of most existing formulations, yielding serious consequences regarding wave propagation. The second is related to the non-conservative terms in the momentum equations. Those terms account for interactions between fluid layers. Recently, these two difficulties have been addressed in Chiapolino and Saurel (2018) and an unconditional hyperbolic model has been proposed along with a Harten-Lax-van Leer (HLL) type Riemann solver dealing with the non-conservative terms. In the same reference, numerical experiments showed robustness and accuracy of the formulation. In the present paper, a third difficulty is addressed. It consists of the determination of appropriate drag effect formulation. Such effects also account for interactions between fluid layers and become of particular importance when dealing with heavy-gas dispersion. With this aim, the model is compared to laboratory experiments in the context of heavy gas dispersal in quiescent air. It is shown that the model accurately reproduces experimental results thanks to an appropriate drag force correlation. This function expresses drag effects between the heavy and light gas layers. It is determined thanks to various experimental configurations of dam-break test problems.

Highlights

  • Such models admit more complex cloud geometries than integral models, they suffer from similar drawbacks as they are inappropriate for describing a cloud influenced by complex topographies [4]

  • As only the height and speed of the dense gas layer are of interest, a single-layer shallow water model is attractive

  • In the present heavy-gas dispersion context, the single-layer shallow water approach is inaccurate as shown in the numerical experiments of Chiapolino and Saurel, 2018 [8]

Read more

Summary

Heavy-Gas Dispersal

Gas dispersal may occur in many urban places, industrial plants and natural environments. In the present heavy-gas dispersion context, the single-layer shallow water approach is inaccurate as shown in the numerical experiments of Chiapolino and Saurel, 2018 [8]. It is adjusted to address heavy gas dispersion into a quiescent atmosphere and on a flat ground This step is necessary to validate the hyperbolic two-layer shallow water model in its simple form, i.e., considering only wave propagation and drag effects. Relevant literature on the last subject is, for instance, the works of Teshukov, 2007 [9] and Richard and Gavrilyuk, 2012 [10] where a model for turbulent shear shallow water flows is derived. The present approach based on two-layer shallow water equations is very different from usual atmospheric models that are unsuitable for describing a cloud of dense gas influenced by urban structures or hilly grounds. A background of two-layer shallow water models is presented hereafter

Two-Layer Shallow Water Approach
Hyperbolic Two-Layer Shallow Water Model
HLL-Type Riemann Solver and Godunov-Type Method
Experimental Apparatus
Course of Operations
Processing of the Shadowgraphs
Experimental Configurations and Data
Scaling Law
Expected Evolution of the Cloud
Results and Discussion
Velocity Relaxation
Results and Comparisons
Concluding Remarks
Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call