Ruibang Sun1, Peng Chen1,2, Liyang Li1, Yang Liu1, Xu Zhai1. 1. School of Emergency Management and Safety Engineering, China University of Mining and Technology (Beijing), Beijing 100083, China. 2. State Key Laboratory of Coal Resources and Safety Mining, China University of Mining and Technology (Beijing), Beijing 100083, China.
Abstract
Transformer oil jet fire is one of the most dangerous types of fires in substations. The combustion behavior of transformer oil jet fire produces uncontrollable hazards to personnel and equipment and even triggers a domino effect. However, the jet fire combustion behavior of such materials as transformer oil has not been revealed before. Investigation of the combustion behavior of transformer oil jet fire has positive implications for the prevention and control of substation fires. In this paper, KI25X transformer oil was used as fuel. A series of transformer oil jet fire experiments were conducted with variable orifice diameters (5, 10, and 15 mm) with heat release rates ranging from 200 to 659.2 kW. The results showed that the entrainment coefficient of transformer oil jet fire was greater than that of pure gas phase jet fire. The entrainment coefficient of transformer oil jet fire was 0.029. Using dimensionless theory, it was proposed that the imaginary point source was proportional to the 0.317 power of Froude number. Based on the point source model, a dimensional analysis model with Reynolds number was developed. The radiation fraction of transformer oil jet fire was proportional to the -0.133 power of Reynolds number. This study played an important role in improving the jet combustion behavior of transformer oil.
Transformer oil jet fire is one of the most dangerous types of fires in substations. The combustion behavior of transformer oil jet fire produces uncontrollable hazards to personnel and equipment and even triggers a domino effect. However, the jet fire combustion behavior of such materials as transformer oil has not been revealed before. Investigation of the combustion behavior of transformer oil jet fire has positive implications for the prevention and control of substation fires. In this paper, KI25X transformer oil was used as fuel. A series of transformer oil jet fire experiments were conducted with variable orifice diameters (5, 10, and 15 mm) with heat release rates ranging from 200 to 659.2 kW. The results showed that the entrainment coefficient of transformer oil jet fire was greater than that of pure gas phase jet fire. The entrainment coefficient of transformer oil jet fire was 0.029. Using dimensionless theory, it was proposed that the imaginary point source was proportional to the 0.317 power of Froude number. Based on the point source model, a dimensional analysis model with Reynolds number was developed. The radiation fraction of transformer oil jet fire was proportional to the -0.133 power of Reynolds number. This study played an important role in improving the jet combustion behavior of transformer oil.
A substation is an important carrier
of power transmission.[1−3] Transformer oil is widely used as an insulating material
in substations.[4−6] However, jet fire accidents often occur due to the
thermal runaway
of transformer oil.[7−9] Many scholars have been puzzled by substation safety
problems.[10] Gómez-Mares et al.[11] investigated 84 jet fire events and found that
50% of the events induced a domino effect. A typical example is the
substation fire accident in Xi’an, China, in 2016. Transformer
oil jet fire occurred and caused serious equipment damage. Therefore,
quantification of transformer oil jet combustion behavior is of great
significance to substation fire safety.When transformer oil
jet fire occurs in a substation, the fire hazard degree is directly
determined by fire characteristic parameters such as flame height,
flame temperature, and flame radiant heat flux.[12−18] In previous studies, scholars have carried out a lot of research
on flame height.[19−21] Based on the Heskestad[22,23] flame height
model, Bradley et al.[24] studied the flame
height of six kinds of gas fuel jet fires. Based on the Suris[25] flame height model, Gopalaswami et al.[26] studied the propane jet flame height at exit
velocities varying from 25 to 210 m/s. Imamura et al.[27] studied the flame height characteristics of hydrogen jet.
Laboureur et al.[28] studied the characteristics
of LPG jet flame height. Hu et al.[29] studied
the change of propane flame height with different environment pressures.
The correlation between the entrainment coefficient and the flame
Froude number was also developed. For the study of flame temperature,[30−32] Heskestad[33] introduced a virtual point
source to study the correlation between the flame temperature and
the flame height. Gómez-Mares et al.[34] carried out the propane jet flame experiment and proposed the quadratic
polynomial between flame temperature and flame height. Hu et al.[35] found that under different ambient pressures,
the virtual point source of propane jet fire was dimensionless in
correlation with the flame Froude number by 2/5 power law function.
About the study of flame radiation heat flux,[36] based on the hydrogen jet fire experiment, Lowesmith et al.[37,38] proposed a multipoint source radiation model. Zhou et al.[39,40] proposed a line source model to improve the radiation model. In
addition, Zhou et al.[41,42] studied the correlation between
the propane jet fire radiation fraction and the Froude number. Hu
et al.[43] established a correlation between
the radiation fraction and the Reynolds number based on the propane
jet fire experiment.It can be seen that all this literature
considered the flame height,
flame temperature, and flame radiation heat flux of gas fuel jet fire
in detail. However, another typical liquid fuel jet fire exists in
actual production and life. The oil filling equipment in a substation
is subjected to external thermal load, and the transformer oil in
the oil filling equipment sprays out, which means that a jet fire
characterized by liquid fuel is formed. The flame color of transformer
oil jet fire is brighter than that of gas jet fire. Transformer oil
jet fire generates more carbon black. The flame height generated by
transformer oil jet fire is higher. The jet fire combustion behavior
of transformer oil has not been revealed. Therefore, it is necessary
to reveal the combustion behavior of transformer oil jet fire.
The Aim of This Study
The above studies
focus on the combustion characteristics of jet fire caused by gas
fuels. However, the jet flame generated by thermal runaway in a substation
cannot be directly applied to the classical gas jet flame combustion
model. Therefore, it is extremely important to reveal the combustion
behavior of transformer oil jet fire. Research on these problems is
conducive to the current substation fire prevention.In this
paper, first, the background and purpose of this study were expounded.
Then, a series of transformer oil jet combustion experiments were
carried out to study jet fire combustion characteristics. Finally,
the combustion behavior of transformer oil jet fire was analyzed and
discussed. On the basis of theoretical analysis and scaling analysis,
three new correlations describing the combustion behavior of transformer
oil jet are further developed.
Experimental
Setup
Experimental System
The schematic
of the experimental setup is shown in Figure . The jet fire experiment was carried out
in a cylindrical vessel. The top three orifice diameters were 5, 10,
and 15 mm, respectively. A circular oil tank with a diameter of 30
cm was placed under the vessel. The vessel sidewall was 10 cm high.
A load cell (AND GP-61ks; range: 0–60 kg) was placed underneath
the vessel to collect fuel mass loss rates. A fireproof board was
placed between the oil vessel and the load cell to protect the load
cell. A CCD camera (SONY NEX-FS700; frame rate: 25 fps) and an infrared
thermal imager camera (DALI TECHNOLOGY DL700; frame rate: 25 fps)
were used to collect flame images. An 8K-type thermocouple (OMEGA;
diameter, 1 mm) was used to measure the axial centerline temperature
of flame. The bottom of the thermocouple was at the orifice of the
vessel. The thermocouple spacing was 0.3 m. A water-cooled radiometer
(OMEGA; maximum range: 50 kW/m2) was used to measure the
incident radiation heat feedback on the flame surface. The radiometer
was 1 m away from the vessel. Before measuring the incident radiation
flux, the radiation blocking effect was calibrated. KI25X transformer
oil was used as fuel in the experiment. All experiments were completed
in a closed hall to eliminate the influence of the environment on
flame combustion. Three experiments were conducted in each group.
The experimental conditions are shown in Table .
Figure 1
Schematic of the experimental setup.
Table 1
Test Conditions
group number
vessel diameter (cm)
orifice diameter (mm)
heat release rate (kW)
1
5
5
200
2
5
10
235.2
3
5
15
250
4
8
5
212
5
8
10
289.2
6
8
15
405.6
7
10
5
214
8
10
10
468
9
10
15
659.2
Schematic of the experimental setup.
Experimental Method
The flame image
processing method is shown in Figure . First, the original image was obtained by processing
the original flame video frame (Figure a). Then, the original flame image color was removed
to obtain a grayscale image (Figure b). Subsequently, the appropriate threshold is selected
based on the Otsu[44] method to transform
the gray image into a binary image (Figure c). The flame average image (Figure d) was obtained by removing
the nonflame zone interference. Finally, the Tecplot was used to convert
the flame average image into the probability cloud image (Figure e). As shown in Figure , the flame height
was defined as the axial distance between the orifice and the intermittent
distribution of 0.5.[32]
Figure 2
Flame image treatment
process. (a) Original image, (b) grayscale
image, (c) binary image, (d) average image, and (e) probability cloud
image.
Figure 3
Definition of flame height.
Flame image treatment
process. (a) Original image, (b) grayscale
image, (c) binary image, (d) average image, and (e) probability cloud
image.Definition of flame height.The calculation method of flame radiation fraction is shown in Figure . The flame center
could be obtained from the flame intermittent contour shown in Figure . Based on the point
source model, the flame radiation fraction was calculated as follows:[43]where χR is
the flame radiation fraction, Rf is the
distance from the vertical flame midpoint height to the radiometer
position (m), IR is the radiation flux
(kW/m2), and Q̇ is the heat release
rate (kW).where Rf is the distance
from the vertical flame midpoint height to
the radiometer position (m), R is the horizontal
radiometer-nozzle distance (m), h is the flame height
(m), and HR is the radiometer height (m).
Figure 4
Calculation
of flame radiation fraction (χR).
Calculation
of flame radiation fraction (χR).
Results and Discussion
Flame
Height Evolution Behavior
Figure a shows the height
evolution of jet flame with a heat release rate of 235.2 kW and an
orifice diameter of 10 mm. With the development of flame, the trend
of flame height increased first and then decreased. As a large amount
of transformer oil was sprayed from the vessel, the entrainment around
the flame was enhanced. It can be seen that the flame height increased
significantly from 225 to 255 s.
Figure 5
(a) Height evolution of jet flame with
a heat release rate of 235.2
kW and an orifice diameter of 10 mm. (b) Variation of flame height
at different heat release rates.
(a) Height evolution of jet flame with
a heat release rate of 235.2
kW and an orifice diameter of 10 mm. (b) Variation of flame height
at different heat release rates.Figure b shows
variation of flame height at different heat release rates. The following
was observed: (1) With the increase in heat release rate, the flame
height increased. (2) With the increase in orifice diameter, the flame
height increased significantly. This can be attributed to the enhancement
of flame turbulence with the increase in orifice diameter. The enhancement
of turbulence would improve the mixing degree of fuel and the surrounding
air. The increase in orifice diameter increased the degree of air
entrainment, resulting in a significantly enhanced flame height. Therefore,
for jet diffusion flame, the flame height was closely related to the
entrainment mechanism.To quantify the flame entrainment coefficient,
Hu et al.[29] established a generalized flame
entrainment
coefficient solution model, as follows:where Q̇*
is the dimensionless heat release rate, ΔT is the temperature rise at height z (°C),
ΔTf is the temperature rise at the
flame tip (°C), α is the entrainment coefficient, Z is the vertical height above the orifice (m), h is the flame height (m), and D is the
orifice diameter (m).where Q̇*
is the dimensionless heat release rate, Q̇
is the heat release rate (kW), the fuel effective heat of combustion
is 40 MJ kg–1,[45] ρ0 is the ambient air density (kg/m3), c0 is the specific heat at constant pressure (kJ kg–1 K–1), T0 is the ambient temperature (K), g is the gravitational
acceleration (m/s2), and D is the orifice
diameter (m).As shown in Figure , the entrainment coefficient of transformer oil jet
fire was significantly
greater than that of gas jet fire. It can be seen that there were
significant differences between the entrainment mechanism of gas jet
fire and that of transformer oil jet fire. This can be attributed
to Rayleigh–Taylor instability and Kelvin–Helmholtz
instability. Due to the presence of droplets, fuel mass flow increased.
Therefore, the heat release rate of liquid jet fire was greater than
that of gas jet fire. With the increase in heat release rate, Rayleigh–Taylor
instability occurred at the boundary between fuel and the surrounding
environment. In addition, the momentum difference between fuel and
the surrounding environment resulted in Kelvin–Helmholtz instability.
The combined effect of the two led to the enhancement of flame entrainment.
Figure 6
Calculation
of flame entrainment coefficient.
Calculation
of flame entrainment coefficient.
Flame Radiation
The flame radiation
of hydrocarbons was mainly generated by carbon black particles. Radiation
fraction (χR) was the key parameter to characterize
flame radiation. The radiation fraction was greatly affected by the
fuel flow state. Figure a shows the variation of jet fire radiation fraction with different
flow rates. It can be seen that the radiation fraction decreased with
the increase in flow velocity. With the increase in flow velocity,
the flame turbulence was intensified. This led to the flame bottom
fuel and surrounding oxygen mixing more fully. Therefore, the radiation
fraction decreased with the increase in flow velocity. In addition,
the radiation fraction decreased with the increase in nozzle diameter.
Figure 7
(a) Variation
of flame radiation fraction with different flow velocities.
(b) Correlation between radiation fraction and Reynolds number.
(a) Variation
of flame radiation fraction with different flow velocities.
(b) Correlation between radiation fraction and Reynolds number.Obviously, the flame radiation fraction was obviously
affected
by the degree of flame turbulence. Therefore, Hu et al.[43] used the Reynolds number to characterize radiation
fraction, as follows:where χR is
the flame radiation fraction, and R is
the Reynolds number.where R is the Reynolds number, μ is the coefficient of viscosity
(Pa s), ρs is the fuel density (kg/m3), U is the flow rate of fuel (m/s), and D is the orifice diameter (m).As shown in Figure b, based on the Hu model, the
correlation between the radiation fraction
of transformer oil jet fire and the Reynolds number was established,
as follows:where χR is
the flame radiation fraction, and R is
the Reynolds number.The radiation fraction fluctuated in the
range of 0.28–0.4.
The radiation fraction decreased with the increase in Reynolds number.
Flame radiation was affected by the fuel retention time and carbon
black formation time. On the one hand, liquid fuels increased the
shear stress between fuel and the surrounding air, leading to enhanced
turbulence. Turbulence made the fuel ejection speed significantly
increase. Therefore, the fuel retention time was shortened. On the
other hand, turbulence strengthened fuel entrainment. The increased
mixing of fuel and air led to a more adequate combustion reaction.
Therefore, the spatial concentration of carbon black decreased. In
addition, it can be seen that the fitting line of Hu was significantly
different from that of this study. This can be attributed to the fuel
state. The radiation fraction of gas jet fire was significantly affected
by turbulence. The radiation fraction of the Hu model decreased significantly
in a small Reynolds number range. However, the combustion efficiency
of liquid fuel was lower than that of gas fuel because the droplet
participates in combustion after evaporation. The performance of the
transformer oil model was less obvious than that of the Hu model.
Flame Temperature
The thermal buoyancy
of flame was determined by the heat release rate. The initial height
of the fire source varied with thermal buoyancy. To correct the initial
flame height, Heskestad[33] introduced the
concept of a virtual point source to reveal the thermal buoyancy of
the flame. Based on the plume equation,[35] the virtual point source was substituted, as follows:where Q̇*
is the dimensionless heat release rate, ΔT is the temperature rise at height z (°C), T0 is the ambient temperature (°C), Z is the vertical height above the orifice (m), Z0 is the virtual origin (m), and D is the orifice diameter (m).The axial centerline temperature
and height of the axisymmetric fire source were as follows:Figure shows the
location of the virtual point source with different heat release rates.
It can be seen that for the same orifice diameter, with the increase
in heat release rate, the thermal buoyancy of the flame increased.
Correspondingly, the virtual point source location rose.
Figure 8
(a) Virtual
point source location with a heat release rate of 200
kW. (b) Virtual point source location with a heat release rate of
235.2 kW. (c) Virtual point source location with a heat release rate
of 250 kW. (d) Virtual point source location with a heat release rate
of 212 kW. (e) Virtual point source location with a heat release rate
of 289.2 kW. (f) Virtual point source location with a heat release
rate of 405.6 kW. (g) Virtual point source location with a heat release
rate of 214 kW. (h) Virtual point source location with a heat release
rate of 468 kW. (i) Virtual point source location with a heat release
rate of 659.2 kW.
(a) Virtual
point source location with a heat release rate of 200
kW. (b) Virtual point source location with a heat release rate of
235.2 kW. (c) Virtual point source location with a heat release rate
of 250 kW. (d) Virtual point source location with a heat release rate
of 212 kW. (e) Virtual point source location with a heat release rate
of 289.2 kW. (f) Virtual point source location with a heat release
rate of 405.6 kW. (g) Virtual point source location with a heat release
rate of 214 kW. (h) Virtual point source location with a heat release
rate of 468 kW. (i) Virtual point source location with a heat release
rate of 659.2 kW.To further explore the
dimensionless model of the virtual point
source, Heskestad[33] established the correlation
between the virtual point source and the dimensionless heat release
rate. Hu et al.[35] established the correlation
between the virtual point source and the flame Froude number.This study introduced the Froude number to explore the correlation
between the virtual point source and the Froude number, as follows:where F is the Froude number, Z0 is
the virtual origin (m), and D is the orifice diameter
(m).where F is the Froude number, U is
the flow rate
of fuel (m/s), g is the gravitational acceleration
(m/s2), and D is the orifice diameter
(m).where Q̇
is the heat release rate (kW), m′ is the mass loss rate (g/s), ΔHc is the effective heat of combustion (MJ kg–1), U is the flow rate of fuel (m/s), ρs is
the fuel density (kg/m3), and D is the
orifice diameter (m).where Z0 is the virtual origin (m), Q̇ is the
heat release rate (kW), ΔHc is the
effective heat of combustion (MJ kg–1), ρs is the fuel density (kg/m3), g is the gravitational acceleration (m/s2), and D is the orifice diameter (m).Therefore, the dimensionless
relationship between the virtual point
source and the Froude number was as follows:where F is the Froude number, Z0 is
the virtual origin (m), and D is the orifice diameter
(m).Figure shows the
dimensionless correlation between the Froude number and the virtual
point source. It can be seen that for the same orifice diameter, with
the increase in Froude number, the position of the virtual point source
increased. However, the upward trend gradually slowed down. This can
be attributed to the change in buoyancy acting on the flame. When
the Froude number was small, buoyancy dominated. Therefore, as the
Froude number increased, the thermal buoyancy of the flame increased.
Correspondingly, the location of the virtual point source rose significantly.
With the increase in Froude number, the buoyancy drive gradually lost
its dominant position. Therefore, the rising trend of virtual point
source location gradually slowed down.
Figure 9
Correlation between Froude
number and virtual point source.
Correlation between Froude
number and virtual point source.
Conclusions
Substations played an important
role in global power transmission.
Transformer oil jet fire posed great harm to substations. However,
the combustion behavior of transformer oil jet fire was still unclear.
To reveal the combustion behavior of transformer oil jet fire, a series
of combustion experiments of transformer oil jet fire with different
heat release rates were carried out. The flame height, flame temperature,
and flame radiation heat flux with different orifice diameters were
analyzed. This paper investigated the dimensionless correlation between
a series of dimensionless parameters and flame characteristic parameters.
The major research results include the following:The flame height of transformer oil
jet increased with the increase in heat release rate. The entrainment
coefficient of transformer oil jet fire was 0.029. It can be seen
that the entrainment coefficient of transformer oil jet fire was significantly
greater than that of gas jet fire. This can be attributed to Rayleigh–Taylor
instability and Kelvin–Helmholtz instability.The radiation fraction of transformer
oil jet fire decreased with the increase in flow velocity, which was
consistent with the feedback of gas jet fire. The radiation fraction
fluctuated in the range of 0.28–0.4. Based on the dimensionless
theoretical analysis, the dimensionless correlation between the Reynolds
number and the radiation fraction was proposed: χR = 1.79R–0.133. In this study, the radiation
fraction model well described the radiation fraction of transformer
oil jet combustion, and the correlation coefficient was 0.9. However,
it was not applicable to gas jet fire.For the same orifice diameter, with
the increase in heat release rate, the virtual point source location
rose. The dimensionless correlations between the virtual point source
and the dimensionless heat release rate and flame Froude number had
been proposed. In this study, we propose a dimensionless correlation
between the virtual point source and the Froude number: Z0/D = 0.36F0.317. When the Froude number was small, as the Froude number increased,
the location of the virtual point source rose significantly. With
the increase in Froude number, the rising trend of virtual point source
location gradually slowed down.