\

PERGAMON International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 378384

Safety assessment of hydrogen disposal on vents and ~are

stacks at high ~ow rates
Pierre Benarda\\ Vasile Mustafab\ D[R[ Hayb
a
Institut de recherche sur l|hydro`ene\ Universite du Quebec a Trois!Rivieres\ Trois!Riveres\ Quebec\ Canada
b
Tektrend International\ Montreal\ Quebec\ Canada

Abstract

We compare the point source and solid ~ame models for assessing the thermal ~ux levels from hydrogen vent ~ares[
Substantial disagreement exists between the solid ~ame approach and the point source model close to the base of the
~are stack[ In this region\ the solid ~ame model is more reliable and may result in higher estimates of the maximum
thermal ~ux from the ~are stack[ We use the solid ~ame model to determine restrictions on vent heights and the location
of buildings[ 0888 International Association for Hydrogen Energy[ Published by Elsevier Science Ltd[ All rights
reserved[

0[ Introduction K in order to prevent an in~ow of lique_ed air and the

The disposal of hydrogen through vent and ~are stacks
must comply with several requirements to ensure the
safety of personnel and equipment[ These restrictions
cover the ~ow rate\ the diameter of the pipe\ the height of
the stack and the location of nearby structures[ Hydrogen
~ow rates of 9[9909[991 kg s0 may be vented directly
into the atmosphere\ but ~ow rates larger than 9[0 kg:s
should be disposed of by ~aring 0[ Accidental de~a!
grations and detonations are most likely to occur for
small ~ow rates\ where signi_cant concentrations of air
can then be found inside 1\ 2 the stack[ Small ~ow rates
may also cause the ~ame to dip back into the stack[ The
~ow rates must therefore remain above a lower limit\
which is determined by the stack diameter[ On the other
hand\ the stream velocities of the out~ow in ~are stacks
must also remain below a lower limit "which is a function
of the fuel concentration and the gradient of the jet vel!
ocity# in order to avoid a blow!o} of the ~ame 3[ This
could lead to dangerously high concentrations of hydro!
gen close to the disposal system[ Finally\ restrictions must
be imposed on the length of the stack[ Vents for liquid
hydrogen must be long enough to allow the out~ow of
hydrogen vapor to warm up to a temperature above 70
 Corresponding author
formation of a potentially combustible mixture of air
and hydrogen within the stack[ Combustible mixture of
hydrogen and air in con_ned volumes are particularly
dangerous since they are likely to result in a detonation[
A _nal restriction on ~are stacks and vents is that the
radiation ~ux resulting from the intentional or accidental
ignition of the out~ow will not harm people or damage
nearby buildings and structures[ In this paper we present
an analysis of the thermal ~ux emanating from ~are
stacks and vents using the Apostrophe code\ which was
developed by us as a tool to assess the hazards arising
from liquid and gaseous hydrogen out~ows[ The basic
properties of hydrogen ~ares are reviewed in the next
section[ This is followed by a discussion on the thermal
~ux estimation methods used by Apostrophe[ Finally\ we
discuss thermal level predictions for the solid ~ame model
in relation to established safety criteria as a function of
the ~ow rate[
1[ Flow rates and ~ame lengths
The rate!limiting mechanism of a ~ame resulting from
the ignition of a non!premixed out~ow of fuel is the
di}usion of hydrogen into the surrounding atmosphere[
Di}usion ~ames can be turbulent or laminar\ depending
on the Reynolds number "Re#[ The Reynolds number is

9259!2088:88:,19[99 0888 International Association for Hydrogen Energy[ Published by Elsevier Science Ltd[ All rights reserved
PII] S 9 2 5 9 ! 2 0 8 8 " 8 7 # 9 9 9 7 6 ! 0
389 P[ Benard et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 378384

equal to Re  v9d9:m\ where v9 and d9 are respectively the
characteristic velocity and length scale of the problem\
and where m is the kinematic viscosity[ For ~ares\ d9 is
the pipe diameter "D# and v9 is the ~ow velocity of the
gas\ given by the following expression]
3Q
v9  \ "0#
pD1
where Q is the volumetric ~ow rate of the gas[ For hydro!
gen\ the Reynolds number of the gas ~ow at ambient
temperature can be as much as 19 times larger than the
~ame\ because the kinematic viscosity increases with tem!
perature[ Turbulent ~ames will occur for large out~ows
and small pipe diameters[ Chemical kinetics and di}usion
both contribute to the rate limiting mechanism of tur!
bulent ~ames[
In the laminar regime\ the shape of the ~ames is char!
acterized 5\ 6 by the Froude number Fr\ which measures
the relative importance of momentum e}ects over buoy!
ancy[ For low values of Fr\ the ~ame is buoyant and
becomes much wider than the pipe[ Large values\ on
the other hand\ lead to momentum!driven ~ames[ The
Froude number of the ~are problem is equal to v91:"`D#
where ` is the acceleration of gravity "8[70 m s1#[ Exper!
imental and theoretical work 5 on ~ares have shown that
the ratio of the ~ame length "h# over the pipe diameter is
expected to be proportional to the Froude number Fr to
some power m
h Werthenbach correlation systematically underestimates
 Frm[ "1#
D the ~ame length[ The Schmitt correlation yields a better
The experimental data on ~are lengths has been cor!
related 5\ 6 with the following de_nition of Fr]
The data used for this correlation covered the range 0[3
kg:s to 21 kg:s[ Other experimental correlations have
been developed for the ~ame length of ~ares from stacks
and vents for ~ow rates in the second regime[ Schmitt|s
correlation 7 predicts the following relationship between
the ~ame length\ the mass ~ow rate and the heat of
combustion Hc]
h  2[694092"QHc#9[360 "4#
where Hc  008[82 MJ:kg[ Hydrogen is therefore
expected to have longer ~ames than hydrocarbon
fuels\ because of its greater heat of combustion per
unit of mass^ despite the fact that it requires a smaller
amount of air 8[ When applied to hydrogen\ eqn "3#
becomes
h  12[546Q9[360[ "5#
The Schmitt correlation predicts a ~ame length of 7 m
for a ~ow rate of 9[0 kg:s[ Flames as high as 12 m can be
expected from ~ow rates of 0 kg s0[ Expression "5# agrees
7 with the experimental results for hydrogen ~ow rates
ranging from 0[3 kg s0 to 4 kg s0[ A second equation
for the ~ame length as a function of the ~ow rate was
proposed 4 by Werthenbach]
h  07[403Q9[3[ "6#
Figure 0 shows a comparison of the Werthenbach and
Schmitt correlations using data taken from Ref[ 7[ The
_t to the experimental values\ despite the fact that it
consistently predicts higher values[ The experimental

"Q:rD1#1
Fr  [ "2#
`D
The exponent m is equal 5 to 0:2 for Froude numbers
in the ranging from 093095 and drops to 0:4 for higher
values "095098#[ For even larger values of Fr\ the
exponent is believed to drop to 9[09 and then to zero
6[ The correlation of the NASA and Bureau of Mines
experiments with the Froude number show 6 that the
exponent m is respectively equal to 9[21 and 9[07 for
low and high Froude numbers\ in good agreement with
theory[ In the second regime\ where m  0:4\ the ~ame
length becomes independent 4\ 5 of the pipe diameter D[
A piecewise power law _t of the h:D data summarized
in Ref[ 6 as a function of the Froude number yields the
following correlation
h
 0[93Fr0:2 for Fr 574\699
D Fig[ 0[ Hydrogen ~ame height predictions as a function of ~ow
rate "Schmitt and Werthenbach models# compared with exper!
h imental data from Refs[ 8 and 00[ A power law _t of the data
and  5[13Fr9[1 for Fr 574\699[ "3#
D yields h  15[05Q9[3 "the exponent m is set to 9[3#[
 P[ Benard et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 378384 380

data is bracketed by the Schmitt and Werthenbach
expressions[ Flame length data from Ref[ 01 also sup!
port the Schmitt correlation[
In the turbulent regime\ the ~ame length is expected
to become proportional to the diameter of the pipe[ It
becomes comparable to hydrocarbon ~ares 7[ An
expression due to Hawthorne\ Weddel and Hottel has
been used to estimate the ~ame length for fuels in this
regime 4\ 8\ 02[ Validated for Fourde numbers smaller
than 047\999\ the predicted L:D ratio 4 for hydrogen
was found to be close to 049 and the ratio of the jet radius
"R# to pipe diameter 4 R:D is 03\ leading to a h:R ratio
iating surface[ The radiative heat transfer from a ~ame
to a target is given by the expression
3
qflame:tar  Qflame:tar:Atar  tosFtar:flame "TflameT93#[
"8#
In this model\ the ~ame is assumed to be a uniformly
radiating cylinder whose temperature is equal to the aver!
age ~ame temperature[ The view factor "or con_guration
factor# for a cylindrical radiator to a small rectangular
surface facing in is given by the following expression]

0 0 1
of 09[6[ 0 H
Fvertical
tar:cylinder "L\H#  tan0
Finally\ an important factor a}ecting the shape of a pL zL10
hydrogen ~are is the presence of a crosswind\ especially
for low values of the Froude number[ For a given dis!
charge velocity and fuel jet diameter\ the total ~ame
length of a hydrogen ~are is expected to increase with
H
0
X1L
zXY
tan0
X X"L0#
Y"L0#
tan0
X 11
L0
L0

increasing wind velocity\ in contrast with hydrocarbon r h

with L  \H  \X  "0L#1H1
fuels\ which have the opposite behavior 8[ R R

and Y  "0L#1H1[ "09#

2[ Estimation of the thermal ~ux from ~ares
The Apostrophe program can estimate the thermal ~ux
from a ~are using either the point source or the solid
~ame models[ The solid ~ame model is more reliable at
closer distances to the ~are[ The point source model\
however\ can yield thermal ~ux estimates without any
detailed knowledge of the geometric features of the ~ame[
R is the average or typical radius of the ~ame\ and h is
the ~ame length "see Fig[ 1#[ For a ground level ~are\ eqn
"09# can be used in eqn "8#[ As mentioned earlier\ the
e}ect of a crosswind on ~ares can be important 8[ In
this case\ the relevant view factor is that of a vertical
observer facing a tilted cylinder 03[ For a ~are of length
h at a vent opening located at height l\ the view factor

2[0[ Point source model

The point source model assumes that the thermal radi!

ation emanates from a point 02\ 03[ It can be modi_ed
7 for a ~are\ in which case it predicts that the incident
thermal ~ux at a horizontal distance d from a ~are of
length h on a stack of height l is given by the expression]
hQHc d
q 
3p "0h:11d 1#2:1

d
 8369hQ kW:m1\ "7#
"0h:1#1d 1#2:1
where h is the fraction of the combustion energy released
as thermal radiation[ Typical values of h range from 9[06
9[31 for hydrocarbon fuels 02[ For hydrogen\ estimates
of h ranging from 9[04 to 9[19 and 9[069[14 have been
reported 3\ 7[ The radiative output coe.cient h of gase!
ous hydrogen di}usion ~ames is smaller 03 "h  8[4
05[8# than liquid supported di}usion ~ames "h  9[14#[

2[1[ Solid ~ame model Fig[ 1[ Parameters of the view factors for a ~are from a stack h
is the ~ame length\ l is the stack height\ r is the horizontal
The solid ~ame model 01\ 02 is based on the assump! distance between the target and the ~ame\ R is the radius of the
tion that the ~ame can be regarded as a uniformly rad! ~ame and D the pipe diameter[
381 P[ Benard et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 378384

from a cylinder at height l with respect to the ground
level observer must be used 03[
The transmittivity t\ which depends on the CO1 and
H1O content of the ambient atmosphere\ can be con!
servatively set to one[ The ~ame temperature for hydro!
gen di}usion ~ames from leaks and spills is 0819 K
according to the Bowen report 05[ Values as low as
01620262 K have been reported for ~ares 7[ Using a
value of 1207 K for the ~ame temperature will lead to a
thermal ~ux 1[02 greater than if a value of 0819 K had
been used[ The predicted centerline temperature for
hydrogen ~ares is close to the adiabatic ~ame tem!
perature of hydrogen in air 00[
In the solid ~ame model\ the total ~ux is a function of
the h:R ratio\ where R is the average radius of the ~ame[
In general\ the high burning rate of hydrogen is expected
to lead to large h:R ratio[ An estimate for the radius can
be obtained by using the Baron estimate for the maximum
radius 09 of a jet _re\ which is 05[56 times smaller
than the length of the ~ame[ For large h:R ratios\ the
viewfactor for a cylindrical ~ame at ground level has the
limiting value]
R
Fvertical
tar:cylinder"L\H : #  [ "00#
of eqn "01# with the average prefactor lead to thermal
~ux values of 07 kW:m1\ 02[4 kW:m1 and 5[6 kW:m1 for
distances of 26[4 m\ 49 m and 099 m[ These values are in
better agreement with experiments than the ones pre!
dicted by the point source model 7[ For ground level
~ares\ the solid ~ame model leads to more accurate esti!
mates of the thermal ~ux than the point source model
used in Ref[ 5 for ~ux values as close as nearly a third
of the ~ame length\ without the need of the ~ame length[
If the average radius of the ~are pool is taken as the
characteristic radius of the ~ame\ a ~ame temperature of
1252 K is obtained[ Although this result is close to the
adiabatic ~ame temperature of hydrogen "1207 K#\ it is
much larger than the measured 7 infrared ~ame tem!
perature of 09990099 C[
The thermal ~ux predicted by the solid ~ame and the
point source models is shown in Fig[ 2[ The adiabatic
~ame temperature leads to a much larger thermal ~ux
than the ~ux predicted by the point source model[ How!
ever the value 0819 K leads to comparable levels at large
distances[ Both models predict a maximum value of the
thermal ~ux at ground level[ The point source model
predicts a maximum at a distance

X0 1
1r 0 h
d 0 [
Close to the ~ame\ therefore\ the thermal ~ux is expected 1 1
to decrease more slowly than the 0:r1 behavior predicted
For the solid ~ame model\ the predicted maximum does
by the point source model[ Equation "00# also shows
not follow this simple relationship[ Since the validity of
that the average ~ame radius is a crucial parameter for
the point source model is restricted to distances larger
ground!level ~ares[ Good agreement "better than 09)#
than the total length of the ~ame "hl#\ where the geo!
is obtained between the thermal ~ux calculated using
metric features of the _re can be neglected\ predictions
eqns "09# and "00# for thermal ~uxes higher than 3 kW:m1\
from the point source model on the maximum thermal
when the transmittivity\ the emissivity and the ~ame tem!
~ux are unreliable[
peratures are set to 0[9\ 9[0 and 0819 K respectively[
3
Larger values of the product to"Tflame T93# increases the
accuracy of the approximation and extends its range of
applications[ Use of eqn "09# leads to the following
expression for the thermal ~ux for a ground level ~are as
a function of distance[
3
1tos"TflameT93#R
qflame:tar  "01#
r
The 0:r1 behavior will occur for large values of r:R[ Equa!
tion "01# can be compared with the thermal ~ux data 7
from a ground level hydrogen out~ow ~ared from a pool
of 079 m1[ Values of 19 kW:m1\ 09 kW:m1 and less than
7 kW:m1 were observed at distances of 26[4 m\ 49 m and
099 m respectively[ The ~ame length was about 099 m[
The average radius of the pool "calculated from the sur!
face area# was 6[45 m[ This corresponds to a ratio of
h:D  5[5[ A _t of the above thermal ~ux data with Fig[ 2[ Comparison of the thermal ~ux predictions of the point
expression "09# yields an average value of source and the solid ~ame models for a 6[5 m stack and a ~ow
3
1tos"TflameT93#R equal to 509 kW:m[ Use of the value rate of 9[0 kg s0[ The ~ame temperature was set to 1207 K
0399 K as the average ~ame temperature leads to an "dotted line# and 0819 K "dashed line#[ The full line shows the
e}ective ~ame radius of 03[1 m or a h:R ratio of 6[ Use solid ~ame model with h  9[1[
 P[ Benard et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 378384
3[ Discussion
Because of its larger range of applicability\ the solid
~ame model will be used to predict the maximum thermal
~ux received by a human target at ground level[ We will
consider two criteria for safety assessment] the safe level
for inde_nite exposures of humans to a thermal ~ux
source "0[3 kW m1# and the minimum threshold to ignite
wooden structures "01[5 kW m1#[ The _rst criteria apply
to human beings and the second to buildings and struc!
tures[ The _rst criteria will set the absolute height of
the stack\ and the second can be used to establish the
con_guration of nearby structures[ The absolute height
ha is de_ned as the sum of the average height of the target
"1 m# and of the relative height l required to establish a
maximum ~ux level of 0[3 kW m1[ The emissivity will
be set to 9[0 and the transmittivity to 0[9[ Figure 3 shows
the maximum thermal level for a ~ame temperature of
1207 K as a function of the absolute height of the vent
"ha#\ for three values of the ~ow rate] 9[0\ 0[9 and 4[9
kg:s[ For a maximum thermal ~ux of 0[3 kW m1\ ha
must be equal to 5[8\ 05[4 and 22 m\ respectively[ The
height di}erence Dl between the top of the neighboring
structures and the vent opening must be greater than 9[5\
0[4 and 2[1 m "respectively# in order for the incident ~ux
to remain below 01[5 kW m1[
Figure 4 shows ha as a function of the ~ow rate cal!
culated using the Schmitt and Werthenbach models and
~ame temperatures of 1207 K and 0819 K[ For large ~ow
rates\ the height restriction Dl is smaller by a factor of
8[54\ which is roughly equivalent to the ratio of the ~ux
levels[ Although the ratio of the ~ame length to radius is
the same for the two models\ the choice of the model
to estimate the ~ame length is an important parameter[
Variations of up to 49) can be observed between the
two models at the same ~ame temperature[ These vari!
Fig[ 3[ Maximum thermal ~ux on a 1 m upright target at ground
level as a function of the vent height for ~ow rates of 9[0\ 0 and
4 kg s0[
382
Fig[ 4[ Absolute height ha as a function of the ~ow rate calculated
using the Schmitt and Werthenbach models and ~ame tem!
peratures of 1207 K and 0819 K[ The emissivity was set to 9[0
and the transmittivity to 0[9[
ations are of the same order of the di}erences between
~ame length predictions themselves[ It is important to
point out that the variations between the models for the
~ame length stem from the di}erent values of the average
~ame radius that they predict[ Thus the model chosen to
estimate the average radius of the ~ame is important[ For
_xed values of R\ the incident ~ux will not depend much
on the ~ame length since the contribution of the cyl!
indrical ~ame to the ground level ~ux decreases rapidly
along the z!axis[ The average ~ame temperature\
however\ has the greatest impact on the height estimates\
due to the quartic dependence of the radiative ~ux on
the temperature of the ~ame[ For both the Schmitt and
Werthenbach models\ the ratio of l at 1207 K to its value
at 0819 K is 0[80\ which is somewhat below the ratio of
the temperatures to the fourth power "1[01#[
Figure 5 shows the ratio l:D for a maximum thermal
~ux of 0[3 kW m1 as a function of the Froude number[
The ~ame length was calculated using the piecewise _t
from the NASA and Bureau of Mines data "Eqn "3##[
The ratio l:D for 01[5 kW m1 is 8[54 times smaller than
the corresponding value for 0[3 kW m1[
The restrictions on the height of the vent and height
di}erences between rooftops and the vent opening is
shown in Table 0 as a function of the mass ~ow[ Flow
rates larger than 9[0 kg s0 are typical for low!pressure
storage systems[ The maximum diameter of the stack to
prevent the ~ame from dipping back is 47 cm for this
~ow rate[ A ~ow rate of about 9[2 can be expected from
the gaseous out~ow of a liquid hydrogen storage unit
with a vent diameter of 5 cm[ Table 0 shows conservative
restrictions for hydrogen disposal system on the total
height of the vent stacks and on the height di}erence
between the nozzle and the rooftops based on thermal
~ux emanating from a ~are[ The ~ame temperature\ the
383 P[ Benard et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 378384
Fig[ 5[ Renormalized height di}erence between ~ame and target
required to limit the thermal ~ux to 0[3 kW:m1\ as a function of
the Froude number[ Expression "3# was used for the ~ame height[
The ~ame temperature was 1207 K and the emissivity was 9[0[
The height di}erence for a maximum thermal ~ux of 01[5 kW
m1 is 8[45 times smaller than the one shown on this graph[ The
right vertical axis shows the predicted height di}erence for a
stack with a pipe diameter of 05[34 cm[
Table 0
Total vent height "Ha# and height di}erence "DH# between vent
opening and rooftop of structures to achieve maximum thermal
~uxes of 0[3 kW m1 and 01[5 kW m1\ respectively
Flow rate Ha "in m# DH "in m#
"kg s0# T~ame  1207 K T~ame  1207 K
9[2 09[1 9[74
0[9 05[4 0[4
1[4 13[2 1[21
4 21[8 2[10
emissivity and the transmittivity were set to 1207 K\ 9[0
and 0[9 respectively[ The ~ame height was calculated
using the Schmitt formula and the Baron maximum
radius for the h:R ratio[
The NFPA standards for Gaseous and lique_ed hydro!
gen systems at consumer sites "NFPA 49B and NFPA
49B# recommend a minimum elevation of 6[5 m for vents
and pressure relief systems 06\ 07[ A human being at
ground level will face a maximum thermal ~ux of 1[11
kW m1 if the depressurization out~ow "9[2 kg s0# from
a vent 6[5 m high is ignited[ Although this level of thermal
~ux is above 0[3 kW m1\ a level of 3[9 kW m1 must be
reached for pain to be felt after 19 s[ The ignition of a
hydrogen out~ow of 4 kg s0 would result in a maximum
~ux of 7[09 kW m1 on a human being[ The maximum
~ow rate for which the absolute height h  6[5 m results
in a maximum ~ux of 0[3 kW m1 is 9[142 kg s0[ The
maximum thermal ~ux at ground level will exceed 01[5
kW m1 for ~ow rates above 20[1 kg s0[
4[ Conclusions
We have compared the point source and solid ~ame
models for assessing the thermal ~ux levels from hydro!
gen vent ~ares using the Apostrophe program[ Although
the point source model is known to give good results far
from the ~ame\ the geometric features of the ~ame must
be taken into account in the high thermal ~ux region
critical for safety assessment of people and structures[ In
this region\ a simple form can be used for the viewfactor
of ground level ~ares[ The thermal level predicted close
to the ~ame by the solid ~ame model are higher than the
ones expected from the point source approach[ At long
distances\ both models predict identical levels if a ~ame
temperature of 0819 K is used[ The solid ~ame model
predicts that the maximum value of the thermal ~ux on
an average human target from a ~are with Q  9[2 kg
s0 located 6[5 m above the ground are slightly above the
safety level for inde_nitely long exposure[ Other restric!
tions must also be observed for the safe disposal of vent
and ~are stacks[ In particular\ the distance from the vent
outlet to any ignition source must be maximized to avoid
an unwanted ignition[ Furthermore\ vent outlets must be
set in such a way that the out~ow can never enter a
con_ned area or an intake[ Finally\ nearby structures
must be separated from the vent by a distance greater
than the expected ~ame length\ bearing in mind that the
wind may have any direction\ so that the hydrogen ~ame
"which is invisible# cannot impinge on nearby structures[
Acknowledgements
We wish to thank Professor Tapan K[ Bose for useful
discussions[ We gratefully acknowledge the support of
Natural Resource Canada and Tektrend International
in!house research and development[
References
0 Edeskuty FJ\ Stewart WF[ LA!UR\ 77!1934\ 0879[
1 Grumer J\ Strasser A\ Singer JM\ Gussey PM\ Rowe VR[
Bureau of Mines Report of Investigation BM!RI!6346\
0869[
2 Lapin A[ Advances in Cryogenic Engineering\ vol[ 0\ 0856[
3 Safety Standard For Hydrogen and Hydrogen Systems
"NSS 0639[05#\ O.ce of Safety and Mission Insurance\
NASA\ 0886[
4 Lewis B\ von Elbe G[ Combustion\ Flames and Explosions
of Gases\ 2rd ed[ Academic Press\ 0876[
5 Thomas PH[ 8th Symposium "Int# on Combustion\ 0851\
p[ 733[
 P[ Benard et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 378384
6 Hydrogen Safety Manual] Advisory Panel On Experimental
Fluids and Gases\ Lewis Research Center\ National Aero!
nautics and Space Administration Washington D[C[\ N64!
61898\ 0857[
7 Munos F[ Hydrogen Safety Aspects on test facilities[ In]
Verzioglu TN\ Derive C\ Pottier J\ editors[ Hydrogen
Energy Progress IX\ 0881\ p[ 0030[
8 Brzustiwski TA\ Gollahalli SR\ Sullivan HF[ Comb[ Sci[
Tech[0[ 0864^00]18[
09 Lees FP[ Hazard Identi_cation\ Assessment and Control
in Loss Prevention in the Process Industry[ Butterworth!
Heinemann\ 0879[
00 Fishburne ES\ Pergament HS[ 06th Symposium "Int# on
Combustion\ 0867\ p[ 0952[
01 Hawthorne WR\ Weddell DS\ Hottel HC[ 2rd Symposium
on Combustion\ Flame and Explosion Phenomena[ Bal!
timore] Williams and Wilkins\ 0838[
384
02 Methods for the calculation of physical e}ects resulting
from releases of hazardous materials "liquids and
gases#\ Committee for the Prevention of Disasters\ TNO\
0881[
03 Crocker WP\ Napier DH[ I[ Chem E Symposium Series No
86\ 0875^048[
04 Burgess D\ Zabetakis MG[ Fire and Explosion Hazards
associated with lique_ed natural gas\ US Department of
the Interior "Bureau of Mines#\ 0851[
05 Bowen TL[ Investigation of Hazards associated with using
hydrogen as a military fuel "AD!A903 016#\ Naval Ship
Research + Development Center\ US Department of Com!
merce\ 0864[
06 NFPA 49A Standard for Gaseous Hydrogen Systems at
Consumer sites\ 0883[
07 NFPA 49B Standard for Lique_ed Hydrogen Systems at
Consumer sites\ 0883[