Next Article in Journal / Special Issue
Influence of the Precoat Layer on the Filtration Properties and Regeneration Quality of Backwashing Filters
Previous Article in Journal
Study of the Effect of an Environmentally Friendly Flood Risk Reduction Approach on the Oman Coastlines during the Gonu Tropical Cyclone (Case Study: The Coastline of Sur)
Previous Article in Special Issue
Kinetic Modelling of Biodegradability Data of Commercial Polymers Obtained under Aerobic Composting Conditions
Article

A Critical Review of the Equivalent Stoichiometric Cloud Model Q9 in Gas Explosion Modelling

1
School of Engineering, Warwick University, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK
2
BP, I&E Engineering, London SW1Y 4PD, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Retired, formerly BP, no email address.
Academic Editor: Antonio Gil Bravo
Eng 2021, 2(2), 156-180; https://doi.org/10.3390/eng2020011
Received: 24 March 2021 / Revised: 9 April 2021 / Accepted: 12 April 2021 / Published: 16 April 2021
Q9 is widely used in industries handling flammable fluids and is central to explosion risk assessment (ERA). Q9 transforms complex flammable clouds from pressurised releases to simple cuboids with uniform stoichiometric concentration, drastically reducing the time and resources needed by ERAs. Q9 is commonly believed in the industry to be conservative but two studies on Q9 gave conflicting conclusions. This efficacy issue is important as impacts of Q9 have real life consequences, such as inadequate engineering design and risk management, risk underestimation, etc. This paper reviews published data and described additional assessment on Q9 using the large-scale experimental dataset from Blast and Fire for Topside Structure joint industry (BFTSS) Phase 3B project which was designed to address this type of scenario. The results in this paper showed that Q9 systematically underpredicts this dataset. Following recognised model evaluation protocol would have avoided confusion and misinterpretation in previous studies. It is recommended that the modelling concept of Equivalent Stoichiometric Cloud behind Q9 should be put on a sound scientific footing. Meanwhile, Q9 should be used with caution; users should take full account of its bias and variance. View Full-Text
Keywords: gas explosion; equivalent stoichiometric cloud; Q9; explosion risk assessment; model evaluation gas explosion; equivalent stoichiometric cloud; Q9; explosion risk assessment; model evaluation
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Tam, V.H.Y.; Tan, F.; Savvides, C. A Critical Review of the Equivalent Stoichiometric Cloud Model Q9 in Gas Explosion Modelling. Eng 2021, 2, 156-180. https://doi.org/10.3390/eng2020011

AMA Style

Tam VHY, Tan F, Savvides C. A Critical Review of the Equivalent Stoichiometric Cloud Model Q9 in Gas Explosion Modelling. Eng. 2021; 2(2):156-180. https://doi.org/10.3390/eng2020011

Chicago/Turabian Style

Tam, Vincent H.Y., Felicia Tan, and Chris Savvides. 2021. "A Critical Review of the Equivalent Stoichiometric Cloud Model Q9 in Gas Explosion Modelling" Eng 2, no. 2: 156-180. https://doi.org/10.3390/eng2020011

Find Other Styles

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop