Study on Overpressure and Disaster Distance of Wood Dust Explosion Based on TNT Equivalent Method

doi:10.12068/j.issn.1005-3026.2025.20230212

Abstract

Abstract:

To quickly assess the overpressure and disaster distance of wood dust explosion， the TNT equivalent method was used to predict the overpressure value of wood dust explosion. The explosion pressure maximum of wood dust was simulated using ANSYS/LS-DYNA. The experimental results show that when the initial pressure is 0 MPa and the dust concentration is 750 g/m³， the error between simulated values and experimental values is within 10%； When the initial pressure is 0.101 MPa and the dust concentration is 730 g/m³， the error between the calculated value and the experimental value is 2.44%， the error between the simulated value and the experimental value is within 7%， and the error between the simulated value and the calculated value is within 8%. It proves that the TNT equivalent method is applicable for predicting the overpressure of wood dust explosion with or without standard atmospheric pressure. Based on the TNT equivalent method， the distribution of dust explosion overpressure in buildings was estimated， and the thresholds for casualties and building damage were analyzed. The research conclusion provides a reference basis for disaster prevention and mitigation measures such as the safe distance determination of hazardous areas for wood dust explosion.

Key words: TNT equivalent method, explosion overpressure, wood dust, ANSYS/LS-DYNA, safe distance

CLC Number:

X 932

Hao-nan ZHANG, Qi YUAN, Chun-miao YUAN, Gang LI. Study on Overpressure and Disaster Distance of Wood Dust Explosion Based on TNT Equivalent Method[J]. Journal of Northeastern University(Natural Science), 2025, 46(1): 119-126.

Figures/Tables 17

Fig.1 Pressure change during wood dust explosion

Fig.2 TG-DSC curves of wood dust

Table 1 Material parameters of TNT explosive

$ρ 0$ /(kg·m^-3)	v/(m·s^-1)	p_CJ/GPa	A/GPa	B/GPa	R₁	R₂	$ω$	E/GPa
1 583	6 880	19.4	307	3.898	4.485	0.79	0.3	6.968 4

Table 1 Material parameters of TNT explosive

$ρ 0$ /(kg·m^-3)	v/(m·s^-1)	p_CJ/GPa	A/GPa	B/GPa	R₁	R₂	$ω$	E/GPa
1 583	6 880	19.4	307	3.898	4.485	0.79	0.3	6.968 4

Table 2 Material parameters of air

$ρ 1$ /(kg·m^-3)	C₀/MPa	C₁	C₂	C₃	C₄	C₅	C₆	E_a/Pa	V
1.290	-0.1	0	0	0	0.4	0.4	0	2.5	1

Table 2 Material parameters of air

$ρ 1$ /(kg·m^-3)	C₀/MPa	C₁	C₂	C₃	C₄	C₅	C₆	E_a/Pa	V
1.290	-0.1	0	0	0	0.4	0.4	0	2.5	1

Table 3 Material parameters of 304 stainless steel

$ρ 2$ /（kg·m^-3）	E_b/GPa	泊松比	A/MPa	B/MPa	$ε ˙ s$ /s^-1	C	N	$σ m a x$ /MPa	$σ s$ /MPa	$ε e$ /mm
7 850	194.02	0.3	460	915	1	0.009 6	0.373 8	843	1 800	0.17

Table 3 Material parameters of 304 stainless steel

$ρ 2$ /（kg·m^-3）	E_b/GPa	泊松比	A/MPa	B/MPa	$ε ˙ s$ /s^-1	C	N	$σ m a x$ /MPa	$σ s$ /MPa	$ε e$ /mm
7 850	194.02	0.3	460	915	1	0.009 6	0.373 8	843	1 800	0.17

Table 4 Grid independence verification

网格尺寸/mm	网格总数×10^-4	监测点压力/MPa
3×3×3	19	0.604
2×2×2	73	0.728
1.5×1.5×1.5	170	0.647

Fig.3 Schematic diagram of explosive，20 L ball， and air model

Fig.4 Location of monitoring grid points

Fig.5 Change of monitoring grid pressure

Table 5 Pressure values and errors for each grid unit

网格编号	坐标/cm	模拟压力/MPa	实验测量压力/MPa	误差/%
H246008	（11.85,0,11.85）	0.728	0.68	7.06
H253751	（0,0,16.25）	0.650	0.68	4.41
H766896	（0,11.85,11.85）	0.732	0.68	7.64
H244680	（0,16.25,0）	0.651	0.68	4.26
H766831	（11.85,11.85,0）	0.744	0.68	9.41
H253730	（16.25,0,0）	0.643	0.68	5.44

Table 5 Pressure values and errors for each grid unit

网格编号	坐标/cm	压力/MPa	实验测量压力/MPa	误差/%
H246008	（11.85,0,11.85）	0.728	0.68	7.06
H253751	（,0,16.25）	0.650	0.68	4.41
H766896	（,11.85,11.85）	0.732	0.68	7.64
H244680	（,16.25,0）	0.651	0.68	4.21
H766831	（11.85,11.85,0）	0.744	0.68	9.41
H253730	（16.25,0,0）	0.643	0.68	5.44

Fig.6 Pressure change diagram during wood dust explosion［6］

Fig.7 Monitoring grid location diagram

Fig.8 Monitoring grid pressure curves

Table 6 Monitoring grid simulated pressure values, experimental values, and calculated values

网格编号	坐标/cm	模拟爆炸超压/MPa	实验		计算
网格编号	坐标/cm	模拟爆炸超压/MPa	最大爆炸超压/MPa	误差/%	最大爆炸超压/MPa	误差/%
H248541	（0,15,7.3）	0.696	0.656	6.10	0.672	3.57
H248450	（7.3,15,0）	0.697	0.656	6.25	0.672	3.72
H575547	（0,7.3,15）	0.620	0.656	5.49	0.672	7.73
H897373	（15,7.3,0）	0.623	0.656	5.03	0.672	7.29
H897264	（7.3,0,15）	0.690	0.656	5.18	0.672	2.68
H575512	（15,0,7.3）	0.635	0.656	3.20	0.672	5.50

Fig.9 Explosion overpressure at different positions from the explosion center

Table 7 The overpressure values of vulnerable buildings and personnel under the maximum overpressure of shock wave

建筑物构件		人体
破坏特征	冲击波最大超压/MPa	损伤程度	冲击波最大超压/MPa
大、小窗户玻璃掉落、窗框可能损坏	0.003 5~0.007	轻微（轻微的挫伤）	0.02~0.03
未加固的混凝土墙或矿渣混凝土墙破坏	0.014~0.021	中等（听觉器官损伤、中等挫伤、骨折等）	0.03~0.05
未加固的砖墙剪切和平移引起的破坏	0.049~0.056	严重（内脏严重挫伤、可引起死亡）	0.05~0.1
波纹钢板构建的轻质拱形建筑物完全破坏	0.245~0.28	极严重（大部分人死亡）	>0.1

References 25

1	Yuan Z， Khakzad N， Khan F，et al.Dust explosions：a threat to the process industries［J］.Process Safety and Environmental Protection，2015，98：57-71.
2	Abbasi T， Abbasi S.A.Dust explosions—cases，causes，consequences，and control［J］.Journal of Hazardous Materials，2007，140（1/2）：7-44.
3	Iarossi I， Amyotte P R， Khan F I，et al.Explosibility of polyamide and polyester fibers［J］.Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries，2013，26（6）：1627-1633.
4	Amyotte P R.Some myths and realities about dust explosions［J］.Process Safety and Environmental Protection，2014，92（4）：292-299.
5	Pang Z H， Zhu N F， Cui Y Q，et al.Experimental investigation on explosion flame propagation of wood dust in a semi‑closed tube［J］.Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries，2020，63：104028.
6	喻孜，胡涛平，郭露，等.不同木粉浓度下爆炸压力的动力学理论模拟［J］.林产工业，2019，46（5）：7-11.
	Yu Zi， Hu Tao‑ping， Guo Lu，et al.The kinetics theoretical simulation of explosion pressure with different wood dust concentrations［J］.China Forest Products Industry，2019，46（5）：7-11.
7	Bu Y J， Yuan C M， Amyotte P R，et al.Ignition hazard of non‑metallic dust clouds exposed to hotspots versus electrical sparks［J］.Journal of Hazardous Materials，2019，365：895-904.
8	Lee M C， Kim Y S， Rie D H.Analysis of explosion characteristics of combustible wood dust in confined system using the thermal decomposition rate and mass loss rate［J］.Applied Thermal Engineering，2016，109：432-439.
9	Islas A， Fernándes A R， Betegón C，et al.Computational assessment of biomass dust explosions in the 20 L sphere［J］.Process Safety and Environmental Protection，2022，165：791-814.
10	Prugh R W.Quantitative evaluation of “bleve” hazards［J］.Journal of Fire Protection Engineering，1991，3（1）：9-24.
11	Cheng R S， Chen W S， Hao H，et al.Dynamic response of road tunnel subjected to internal boiling liquid expansion vapour explosion （BLEVE）［J］.Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology，2022，123：104363.
12	Zhou H， Zheng C， Yue X S，et al.TNT equivalency method in confined space based on steel plate deformation［J］.International Journal of Impact Engineering，2023，178：104587.
13	Guo Y B， Liu C C， Wang D G，et al.Numerical study and safety spacing of buried parallel gas pipelines：a study based on TNT equivalent method［J］.International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping，2018，168：246-257.
14	Guo Y B， He L G， Wang D G，et al.Numerical investigation of surface conduit parallel gas pipeline explosive based on the TNT equivalent weight method［J］.Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries，2016，44：360-368.
15	Crowl D A， Louvar J F.化工过程安全理论及应用［M］.蒋军成，译.北京：化学工业出版社，2006：164.
	（Crowl D A，
	Louvar J F.Chemical process safety theory and applications［M］.Translated by Jiang Jun‑cheng.Beijing：Chemical Industry Press，2006：164.
16	Wu C Q， Hao H.Modelling of simultaneous ground shock and airblast pressure on nearby structures from surface explosion［J］.International Journal of Impact Engineering，2005，31（6）：699-717.
17	国家技术监督局. 粉尘云最大爆炸压力和最大压力上升速率测定方法：［S］.北京：中国标准出版社，1997.
	State Bureau of Quality and Technical Supervision of the People’s Republic of China. Determination for maximum explosion pressure and maximum rate of pressure rise of dust cloud：［S］.Beijing：Standards Press of China，1997.
18	国家质量监督检验检疫总局，中国国家标准化管理委员会. 物质热稳定性的热分析试验方法：［S］.北京：中国标准出版社，2008.
	General Administration of Quality Supervision， Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China，Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China. Thermal analysis test methods for thermal stability of materials：［S］.Beijing：Standards Press of China，2008.
19	中华人民共和国工业和信息化部. 热重-差热分析仪：［S］.北京：机械工业出版社，2017.
	Ministry of Industry and Information of the People’ s Republic of China. Thermo gravimetric-differential thermal analyzer：［S］.Beijing：China Machine Press，2017.
20	Zhang B， Fu P F， Liu Y，et al.Investigation on the ignition，thermal acceleration and characteristic temperatures of coal char combustion［J］.Applied Thermal Engineering，2017，113：1303-1312.
21	Labus M， Lempart M.Studies of polish paleozoic shale rocks using FTIR and TG/DSC methods［J］.Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering，2018，161：311-318.
22	Livermore Software Technology Corporation.LS-DYNA keyword user's manual［M］.Livermore：Livermore Software Technology Corporation，2020.
23	Wang C Z， Wang H X， Shankar K，et al.Dynamic failure behavior of steel wire mesh subjected to medium velocity impact：experiments and simulations［J］.International Journal of Mechanical Sciences，2022，216：106991.
24	奥尔连科.爆炸物理学［M］.孙承纬，译.北京：科学出版社，2011：592.
	П OPЛEHKOЛ.Explosive physics［M］.Translated by Sun Cheng‑wei.Beijing：Science Press，2011：592.
25	吴艳青，刘彦，黄风雷，等.爆炸力学理论及应用［M］.北京：北京理工大学出版社，2021：211.
	Wu Yan‑qing， Liu Yan， Huang Feng‑lei，et al.Theory and application of explosion mechanics［M］.Beijing：Beijing Institute of Technology Press，2021：211.

[1]	LI Gang， CUI Zhen， HU Peng， NI Lei. Propagation Law of Dust Explosion in Double-Sided Branch Structure Pipes [J]. Journal of Northeastern University(Natural Science), 2021, 42(5): 734-740.
[2]	LI Gang， HU Peng， ZHANG Yang-yang， NI Lei. Propagation Law of Dust Explosion in Complex Bend Pipes [J]. Journal of Northeastern University Natural Science, 2020, 41(9): 1316-1320.
[3]	SU Deng-feng， KANG Yong， WANG Xiao-chuan， ZHENG Dan-dan. Model of Loosen Blasting Assisted by High-Pressure Water Jet Spiral-Notch [J]. Journal of Northeastern University Natural Science, 2016, 37(12): 1778-1783.