共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 109 毫秒
1.
一、特气爆炸、燃烧的危险性本文主要以氢化物、氢卤化物及金属烷化物为对象,研究特气的爆炸危险性。它们都是可燃性气体,而且,其中也有分解爆炸性气体。气体的爆炸危险性,一般是根据燃烧热、爆炸极限、最小着火能、着火温度,还 相似文献
2.
3.
4.
可燃性物质包括可燃性气体、液体、蒸气和粉尘等。绝大多数可燃物在国民经济中起着重要作用 ,但是它又会给人身安全和生产带很大的不安全因素。本文简单介绍可燃性爆炸物的形成、爆炸基理、爆炸极限及其影响因素、可燃性气体的应用和防爆措施。1 可燃性爆炸混合物的概念在矿井开采、石油、化工等的生产、贮存、运输过程中 ,如果设备、管道等因故障而泄漏出可燃性气体、液体 (易燃性液体 )或蒸气 ,与空气混合后 ,就会形成具有爆炸危险的混合物 ,一旦浓度达到爆炸极限内就形成了爆炸性混合物。爆炸性混合物是指由两种或两种以上成分组成的爆… 相似文献
5.
统计分析了自1981年以来的18起氧气瓶爆炸事故。其中物理性爆炸2起,化学性爆炸16起,而且这16起均由可燃性气体氢、乙炔、甲烷引起,多为在使用、充装时受剧烈震动、撞击时发生,并且以乡镇企业为多。18起事故共死亡16人。 相似文献
6.
7.
8.
本文利用可燃性气体爆炸极限测定实验台研究了温度、相对湿度、阻燃剂对HFC-32爆炸极限的影响。结果表明:在-5~55℃范围之内,升高温度会促使HFC-32爆炸上限逐渐增大,其爆炸下限逐渐减少,拓宽了HFC-32的爆炸区间;当相对湿度低于60%时,增大相对湿度会导致HFC-32爆炸下限稍微增大,其爆炸上限稍微减少,当相对湿度由60%逐渐增至87%时,其爆炸上限急剧减少,直至爆炸极限范围消失;添加CF_3I或HFC-134a阻燃剂可促使HFC-32爆炸极限范围减少,而且CF_3I的阻燃效果优于HFC-134a,当CF_3I/HFC-32体积比由0增至1或HFC-134a/HFC-32体积比由0增至10时,两种混合气的爆炸范围最终都减少为0。研究结果为抑制HFC-32燃烧提供了重要的理论依据。 相似文献
9.
《中国粉体技术》2017,(6):59-63
以聚乙烯生产工艺爆炸风险评价、聚乙烯粉尘爆炸特征参数、聚乙烯粉尘爆炸灾害动力学传播规律、聚乙烯粉尘与可燃气体杂混物爆炸机理、聚乙烯粉尘防爆控爆技术为主线,综述了国内外聚乙烯粉尘爆炸的研究现状,归纳各方面研究所存在的不足之处;指出未来聚乙烯粉尘爆炸研究发展的5个方向:1)对不同种类聚乙烯粉尘爆炸特性开展比较研究;2)建立可定量预测爆炸特征参数的工程模型;3)深入剖析可燃气体对粉尘爆炸的影响机制及规律;4)运用系统安全分析等方法进一步深入、定量地研究粉尘爆炸风险;5)加强对聚乙烯粉尘爆炸灾害衍化动力学规律及其有效控制技术的研究,为聚乙烯生产工艺安全的深入研究和事故防控提供理论依据和实际指导。 相似文献
10.
可燃性气体通常具有易燃性和易爆性,可燃是指能与氧或氧化剂化合,并产生热和明火。“爆炸”可理解为不可控制的能量急剧释放,它们潜在的危险范围通常以“燃烧极限”和“爆炸极限”表示。爆炸极限又分为上、下限,气体浓度低于下限(LEL)不能燃烧。高于上限(VEL)只能燃烧,只有在两限之间才会产生爆炸可能。当可燃气体与氧或氧化剂混合达到极限而爆炸时,将无法扑救。因此,对于可燃性气体造成的危险,最重要的是做好预防工作。在存在可燃性气体危险环境中工作的人员,应制定一套完整的安全操作程序或规程。并且应该遵守国家有关法规和规程。同时… 相似文献
11.
本文介绍了水下爆破导爆索独立的传爆技术的实际应用,详述了导爆索水下传爆的特点,施工工艺,网路以及参数设计等问题。 相似文献
12.
13.
14.
15.
作为目前市场上运用最广泛的隔爆产品,隔爆翻板阀一般与泄压板联用,以防止粉尘爆炸传播。为了探究粉尘爆炸时泄压与隔爆联用对容器内压力及隔爆效果的影响,进行了工业规模的粉尘爆炸实验。实验结果表明:由于隔爆翻板阀的影响,容器内部出现了二次峰值压力;随着隔爆翻板阀安装距离的增加,容器内两个峰值压力的时间间隔从28.2 ms增加到62.3 ms,且到达隔爆翻板阀前的峰值压力从0.067 MPa上升至0.101 MPa;泄压面积的增大会导致容器内部和隔爆翻板阀前端峰值压力降低,并可能导致隔爆失败。 相似文献
16.
Michael Fox Richard Hastings Scott Lovald Juan Heinrich 《Journal of Failure Analysis and Prevention》2007,7(3):165-174
A failure analysis case study is presented for a two-piece aerosol containing tetrafluoroethane, commonly referred to as Refrigerant
134a. A gentleman was preparing to recharge the air conditioning system of an automobile when the bottom exploded off the
aerosol container, propelling the body of the aerosol container like a rocket, which hit the man in the eye and blinded him
in that eye. The aerosol was never connected to the air conditioner, therefore backpressure from the air conditioner (AC)
compressor was ruled out as a cause for the explosion. The objective of the study was to determine why the aerosol exploded.
Several recently developed test methods were used, including two types of heat-to-burst tests and a puncture chamber to measure
the pressure-versus-temperature behavior of aerosols. More common test methods were also used, such as water bath pressure
tests, hydro pressure burst tests, pneumatic pressure burst tests, hardness measurements, weight measurements, metallography,
scanning electron microscopy (SEM), energy-dispersive spectroscopy (EDS), and an accident scenario recreation. A semi-empirical
correlation between the hardness and weights of the container bottoms was used to determine the explosion temperature and/or
pressure. This semi-empirical correlation agrees in principle with an analysis of the explosion pressures using finite-element
analysis (FEA). The root cause for the explosion was determined to be a lack of strength of the bottom of the two-piece aerosol
coupled with heating the aerosol to temperatures significantly above room temperature. 相似文献
17.
18.
19.
20.
In situ measurements of the sizes and concentrations of dust particles generated by the detonation of high explosives in clay soil near Leesville, La., sandy clay soil near Huntsville, Ala., and sandy soils near Orogrande, N.M. are reported. Measurements were generally made within 1 m of the surface (in one case 10 m) at distances ranging from 10 to approximately 50 m from the detonation point with a combination of Knollenberg lightscattering counters (for particles with equivalent radius in the submicron to 15-microm range) and a Knollenberg optical array probe (for particles of 10-150 microm). Measurements were made for periods of several tens of seconds following detonation. All dust size distributions, irrespective of soil or explosive type, exhibit a bimodal character with mass mean radii of approximately 7 and 70 microm. Peak aerosol mass loadings inferred from the distributions have values ranging from 0.05 to 10 g gm-3 with the larger mode of particles contributing most to the mass loading. Predictions of dust extinction coefficients at visible (0.55-microm) and IR (10.4-microm) wavelengths were made using the measured size distributions together with estimates of dust refractive indices. These predictions suggest that extinction should be nearly neutral (wavelength independent) in agreement with transmission measurements made during some of the tests. Predicted mass extinction coefficients, under the assumption of dust material density of 2.5 g cm-3, are of the order of 0.05 m2 g-1 at both visible and IR wavelengths. This value is also in good agreement with a test-averaged measured value of 0.03 m3 g-1 (at lambda = 10.6 microm) obtained using a short path transmissometer and hi-vol sampler. 相似文献