«上一篇
 文章快速检索 高级检索

 应用科技  2020, Vol. 47 Issue (2): 6-11  DOI: 10.11991/yykj.201903019 0

### 引用本文

ZHANG Yin, JIANG Hongliang, YANG Junjie, et al. Structure design of explosion door on the offshore platform and research of its anti-explosion performance[J]. Applied Science and Technology, 2020, 47(2): 6-11. DOI: 10.11991/yykj.201903019.

### 文章历史

1. 哈尔滨工程大学 船舶工程学院，黑龙江 哈尔滨 150001;
2. 大连船舶重工集团有限公司，辽宁 大连 116005

Structure design of explosion door on the offshore platform and research of its anti-explosion performance
ZHANG Yin1, JIANG Hongliang2, YANG Junjie1, HUANG Shizhang1
1. College of Shipbuilding Engineering, Harbin Engineering University, Harbin 150000, China;
2. Dalian Shipbuilding Industry Co., Ltd., Dalian 116005, China
Abstract: In order to improve the safety of oil and gas compartments of offshore platforms and minimize the loss after explosion, the equivalent TNT method is used in this paper to calculate the equivalent explosive mass of combustible materials in the compartment, and the dynamic explicit method is used to calculate the integrated coupling model of explosive-air-field- explosion door, and its dynamic response is obtained. The results show that increasing the thickness of the front panel and the number of internal skeleton beams can significantly improve the anti-explosion performance of the explosion door. With the increase of arch height of arch-shaped explosion doors, the displacement response of arch-shaped anti-explosion door increases at first and then decreases. Only when the arch height is greater than a certain value, the anti-explosion resistance performance of arch-shaped explosion doors will be better than that of flat-plate anti-explosion door.
Keywords: oil and gas explosion    explosion door    anti-explosion performance    equivalent TNT method    dynamic explicit method    structure design    steam cloud    explosion

1 舱室可燃物爆炸载荷

 ${W_{{\rm{TNT}}}} = aW{{{H_f}} / {{H_{{\rm{TNT}}}}}}$

TNT炸药爆炸冲击载荷的超压峰值与时间关系式为

 $p\left( t \right) = {p_0} + {p_m}\left( {1 - \dfrac{t}{{{t_d}}}} \right){{\rm{e}}^{{{ - ct} / {{t_d}}}}}$

 $r = \frac{R}{{\sqrt[3]{W}}}$

 $\left\{ \begin{array}{l} p = \dfrac{{1.379}}{r} + \dfrac{{0.543}}{{{r^2}}} - \dfrac{{0.035}}{{{r^3}}} + \dfrac{{0.000\;6}}{{{r^4}}},\;0.05 \leqslant r \leqslant 0.3\\ p = \dfrac{{0.607\;6}}{r} - \dfrac{{0.032}}{{{r^2}}} + \dfrac{{0.209}}{{{r^3}}},\;0.3 \leqslant r \leqslant 1\\ p = \dfrac{{0.064\;9}}{r} + \dfrac{{0.397\;3}}{{{r^2}}} + \dfrac{{0.322\;6}}{{{r^3}}},\;1 \leqslant r \leqslant 10 \end{array} \right.$

2 海洋平台防爆门结构设计

3 防爆门抗爆性能影响因素

3.1 骨架形式的影响

2×2形式防爆门中的中心位置为板格中心，同时也是最大位移出现的位置。但在1×1和3×3式防爆门中，防爆门中心为骨架梁的交叉节点，最大位移出现在附近板格区域中心，对比该两点的位移响应，如图89所示。3种结构形式下的防爆门最大位移节点处的响应对比如图10所示。

3.2 拱高的影响

3.3 面板厚度的影响

3.4 骨架厚度的影响