Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Jun 26;16(13):4608.
doi: 10.3390/ma16134608.

Research on the Rule of Explosion Shock Wave Propagation in Multi-Stage Cavity Energy-Absorbing Structures

Shihu Chen  1 , Wei Liu  2 , Chaomin Mu  3
Affiliations

Research on the Rule of Explosion Shock Wave Propagation in Multi-Stage Cavity Energy-Absorbing Structures

Shihu Chen et al. Materials (Basel). .

Abstract

The propagation laws of explosion shock waves and flames in various chambers were explored through a self-built large-scale gas explosion experimental system. The propagation process of shock waves inside the cavity was explored through numerical simulation using Ansys Fluent, and an extended study was conducted on the wave attenuation effect of multiple cavities connected in a series. The findings show that the cavity's length and diameter influenced the weakening impact of shock waves and explosive flames. By creating a reverse shock wave through complicated superposition, the cavity's shock wave weakening mechanism worked. By suppressing detonation creation inside the cavity, the explosive flame was weakened by the cavity's design. The multi-stage cavity exhibited sound-weakening effects on both shock waves and explosive flames, and an expression was established for the relationship between the suppression rate of shock force and the number of cavities. Diffusion cavities 35, 55, 58, and 85 successfully suppressed explosive flames. The multi-stage cavity efficiently reduced the explosion shock wave. The flame suppression rate of the 58-35 diffusion cavity explosion was 93.38%, whereas it was 97.31% for the 58-35-55 cavity explosion. In engineering practice, employing the 58-58 cavity is advised due to the construction area, construction cost, and wave attenuation impact.

Keywords: cavity structure; explosion shock wave; explosive flame; propagation law.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Gas explosion experimental system schematic diagram, (a) the system’s general schematic diagram, (b) the schematic diagram of the positions of pipelines, cavities, and sensors.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Field schematic diagram of the experimental setup for gas explosions.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Multi-stage combined cavities.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Multi-stage combined cavities.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Straight pipe explosion shock waves and flames.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Explosion flame intensity of single-stage cavities of various sizes.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Explosion flame intensity of single-stage cavities of various sizes.
Figure 6
Figure 6
The effects of the length and width on the explosion flame suppression rate.
Figure 7
Figure 7
The multi-stage cavity shock wave’s peak overpressure.
Figure 7
Figure 7
The multi-stage cavity shock wave’s peak overpressure.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Intensity of flames in multi-stage combination cavities.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Intensity of flames in multi-stage combination cavities.
Figure 9
Figure 9
Flowchart for geometric modeling.
Figure 9
Figure 9
Flowchart for geometric modeling.
Figure 10
Figure 10
Schematic of grid division in geometric modeling.
Figure 11
Figure 11
Comparison of the outcomes of numerical simulation and experiment.
Figure 12
Figure 12
Comparison of experimental and numerical simulation results.
Figure 12
Figure 12
Comparison of experimental and numerical simulation results.
Figure 13
Figure 13
Comparison of experimental and numerical simulation findings.
Figure 13
Figure 13
Comparison of experimental and numerical simulation findings.
Figure 14
Figure 14
The relationship between the number of cavities and the shock wave suppression rate.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Zhao P., Liu H., Ho C., Li S., Liu Y., Lin H., Yan M. Evaluating Methane Adsorption Characteristics of Coal-Like Materials. Materials. 2020;13:751. doi: 10.3390/ma13030751. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fang X., Jiang B., Yuan L., Liang Y., Ren B., Tao W., Li X. Experimental Study on Atomization Characteristics of Gas–Liquid Two-Phase Flow Nozzle and Its Dust Removal Effect. Materials. 2022;15:565. doi: 10.3390/ma15020565. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Liu W., Xu X., Mu C. Experimental Study on Two-Phase Explosion Suppression of Gas/Pulverized Coal by Explosion Suppressant. ACS Omega. 2022;7:16644–16652. doi: 10.1021/acsomega.2c00987. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wang Q., Jiang X., Deng J., Luo Z., Wang Q., Shen Z., Shu C., Peng B., Yu C. Analysis of the effectiveness of Mg(OH)2/NH4H2PO4 composite dry powder in suppressing methane explosion. Powder Technol. 2023;417:118255. doi: 10.1016/j.powtec.2023.118255. - DOI
    1. Luo Z., Su Y., Chen X., Zheng L. Effect of BC powder on hydrogen/methane/air premixed gas deflagration. Fuel. 2019;257:116095. doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2019.116095. - DOI

LinkOut - more resources