COMPUTATIONALFLUID DYNAMICSMETHODSOF

CALCULATING GAS DISPERSION

IN A BUILDING OR OUTSIDEAS A RESULTOF GAS LEAKS
Ron Pape,Ph.D.
EngineeringSystemsInc.
3851 ExchangeAvenue
Aurora, IL 60504

And

Kim R. Mniszewski,
F'X Engineering,lnc.
244 Ogden Avenue, Suite I l4
Hinsdale.IL 60521

ABSTRACT
'l'he
NIS'| Fire DynamicsSimulator(FDS) computerprogramhas beenusedto
predictthe dispersionof gasesinsidebuildingsand outdoorslbr a variety of scenarios.
'l'hc
l'he authclrspresentexamplcsol-applications ol-Ir[)S tbr dispcrsionof gascs.
examplesincludedispersionof vaporfiom a gasolinespill in a room,a naturalgasleak in
apizza restaurant,gasplumesfrom undergroundlcakage,comparisonof a naturalgas
leak to a propanetank rupturein a shipping/receivingarea,and a simple assessment of
odoranttransportin naturalgasdispersion.
INTRODUCTION

The Fire DynamicsSimulator(FDS) computermodel hasbeendevelopedby the National

Instituteof Standardsand Technology(NIS'f). Although FDS was developedprimarily
for simulation of fire phenomena(l), (2), (3), (4), and (5), it is a more general
computationalfluid dynamics computer code suitable for application in a much wider
range of fluid dynamicsproblems. The FDS model is unique in that it is liee to the
public.and it enjoyscontinualfundingsupportand technicalevolutionthroughthe ef-forts
of NIST and other researchers. In recent years the FDS model has increasedour
understandingof complex fire phenomenaand has even beenusedto model the early fire
development in the 911 incident(6).

Although F'DSwas developedfor predictingfire dynamics,it has wider applicability. Of

specific importancewith respectto this paper,FDS has been usedto model dispersionof
gasesinsideand outsideof buildings. Mniszewskiand Pape(7) have usedFDS fbr pure
dispersionanalyseswithout combustionand comparedpredictedresultsto experiments
and analyticalpredictions. FDS has also been used for indoor air quality calculationsby
Musser, et al. (8) In the area of ComputationalWind lrngineering,Rehm, McGrattan,
and Baum,havetestedFDS (9) ( l0).

The authors use the l.'DS model extensively lor applicationssuch as these. I'he F'DS
model has been testedagainstexperimentaldata fbr a variety of situations,however the
preponderance of such validationtestshave becn conccrnedwith the prcdictionclf firc
effects. This paperis concernedwith predictionof gas dispersionusing FDS. Several
examplesof dispersionmodeling using FDS are presented. With proper validation, this
modeling technique should be of value in many gas industry applications,particularly
thoseinvolvingpublic salbtystudies.

As FDS is free to the public, continually being improved and updatedand user-lriendly,
this sophisticatedand powerful computationalfluid dynamicsmodeling tool is available
fbr anyonewho takesthe time to leam it. in contrastto other CIFDmodelswhich may be
more costlyto learnand use.

DESCRIPTION OF THE FDS MODEL

FDS is a computationalfluid dynamics(CFD) model developedat the NationalInstitute

of Standards and Technology(NIST). Computationalf'luiddynamicsis the mathematical
solution of the equationsthat describe fluid motion. [rDS stands for Fire Dynamics
Simulator. Although the FDS code has beendevelopedfor predictionof fire behavior,it
is applicable for general fluid dynamics computations.such as wind f'low around
obstacles.The FDS code is a Navier-Stokes equationsolverfbr low Mach numbers.The
FDS equationsdescribethe motion of a fluid, such as air, and include conservationof
mass, momentum, and energy relations. Analyses presented in this paper were
accomplished usingVersionsI .0 through4.0 of the code.
The FDS computercode is describedin detail in a number of references(l), (2), (3), (4)
and (5). As describedin thesedocuments,FDS solvesthe fluid dynamicsequationsfor
low Mach number flows. The governingequationsare the equationsfor conservationof
mass,momentum,and energy.where energyconservationis included in the equationfor
flow divergence.The simplified equationsthat are solvednumericallyare given below:

Mass: :c *) o V . p u 0 (1)
r1 |

Momentum: , + + ( u ' V ) u+ v V - ( p - p , ) g = f + V (2)

[)iversenceConstraint:

t / /
V . u = - 1 . tv . k v T ' * v .lIc n , d T ' o -Dy,.yt !y,,r o ' l * -t : - L l \+ (3)
p',r\ , )\r*',T P,,)tlr

wherep is massdensity,p, is the ambientdensity,t is time. u is velocity(bold indicates

vector quantities), I is the perturbationpressure.p,, is the backgroundpressure,cn is
specificheat.T is temperature. k is thermalconductivity.D; is diffusivity for speciel, Y1
is the mass fraction for specie I, g is gravitational acceleration,f is the body force
(excludinggravity),and r is the shearstress.["orthe low Mach Numbcr fbrm. prcssureis
written as the averagebackgroundpressureadded to the hydrodynamicpressureand a
flow-induced perturbationpressure,V. The cquation of state in the model is the ideal
gaslaw.

The FDS model has two solution options for capturing turbulence. These are direct
numericalsimulation(DNS) and largeeddy simulation(LES). All simulationspresented
in this report used the LIJS approach.l,argc cddy simulationallows direct numerical
solution of the larger scale lluid motion (including large turbulenteddies)but greatly
reducesthe requiredcomputationaltime by calculatingthe sub-grid scaleviscosity using
an eddy viscositybased(in FDS) on the Smagorinskyviscositymodel. (ll) (12) The
ability to use larger grid elementsand account fbr the sub-grid mixing using the
Smagorinskyviscosity allows solution of complex three-dimensionalproblems in
practical computationaltimes and memory requirements.Large eddy simulation is now
an option in many CFD codes,as well as FDS.

Diflusion is treatedsimilarlyfbr all gasspeciesin the model.wherediffusioncoefficients

arethe same. This tendsto put into questionthe usefulness of the model in quiescent
applications. However,it is reassuringthat in most fuel-gasleakagescenarios,the mass
transferof the subjectgastendsto be dominatedby the bulk movementfrom the gas
release,turbulentmixing and buoyancyeff'ects,not diffusion. Thus.it is expectedthat in
most cases.the physicsof the modelwill approximatethe realworld reasonably well.
The primary limitation of the code is its validity for low Mach numbers. This requires
that the maximum flow velocitiesbe well below the speedof soundin the medium being
analyzed.When consideringthe fact that the speedof soundin air at ambientconditions
is about340 m/s (1100 fils). this is not reallya practicalrestrictionfor a wide varietyof
problems,particularlyinvolving lire development,dispersionof gasesand wind flow
aroundstructures.For dispersionanalyses,the low Mach numberrestrictionmay be
significantif it is necessaryto modelthe detailsof a high velocitygasjet very ncara
leak,but generallythe detailedleak flow right at the sourceis not importantas long as the
overall leak flow rate is accountedfor.
'l'he
geometriesol-structures in IrDS simulationsmust bc represented as compositesmade
of rectangular solidblocks.This is sometimes listedas a linritationof the FDS code
becausecurved surfacesare approximatedby a stair-steparrangement.However,when
this restrictionis balancedagainstthe simplificationsand consequentefficiencythat
results.the block structureis well worth it.

F'iguresI md 2 are examplesof resultsfrom IiDS analyseso1'lire (what FDS was

original designedfor). Figure I is the simple burning of an itcm undera hood, showing
thc flow of hot gasesusingtraccrparticlcsand hcatingof a ncarbysurface.Figurc2
showsa kitchenrangefrre in a townhouse.Flameplumesare shownspreadingthrough
the rooms. Many optionsare availableto allow for displayingquite a numberof
parameters,including temperature,smokedensity,heatrelease,gasconcentrations,etc.

FDS VALIDATION

A greatdeal of effort has beenexpendedby NIST in the last severalyearsin the

validation of the FDS model involving fire phenomena.The currcntedition of the FDS
'l'cchnical
Rel-crencc Guidc (4) providesa long list ref'ercnccs
liom many sourccsciting
validationcasesand applicationtechniques.Much of the validationwork hasbeen
concemedwith fire phenomena.Mniszewski and Pape(7) have testedF'DSfor pure
dispersionanalyseswithout combustionand comparedpredictedresultsto experiments
and analltical predictions.Musser.et al. (8) haveusedFDS tbr indoorair quality
calculations.Rehm,McGrattan,and Baum,havetestedFDS (9) ( l0) lbr predictionof
wind flow aroundbuildings.

The FDS version4 lJser's(iuidc (13) statesthat"AlthoughfrDSwasdesigned

specificallyfbr frre simulations.it can be usedfor otherfluid flow simulationsthat do not
include fire or heataddition of aurykind". This guide also presentsan exampleof a
releaseof helium into a compartmentfilled with air. Dr. McGrattenof NIST is the main
architectof the FDS software.IIe hasencouraged thc authorsin the useof thc modelfor
dispersionapplications, and hasprovideduseful guidance on how to implementit
properly.
 Figure l. IdealizedFire Experiment Simulation.

ffiffir ,Y.f*{ffi

wry*R
Figure2. Exampleof FDS for Fire DevelopmentAnalysis.

SuggestedAdditional Experimental Validations. Although therehas beensome

testingof the FDS computercode for dispersionanalysis,for gas industryapplicationsit
would be desirableto conducta numberof highly instrumented experimentalvalidations
involving sometypical gas
natural leak scenarios.One suggested approachmight
include:

l. Indoor/typicalresidentialsingle-familyhome/2 storywith basement leak

scenarioinvolving a failed flexibleconnectorat the kitchenrange
 2. Indoor commercialfacility - leak scenarioinvolving a rupturedI %" gaspipe
3. Outdoor Scenario - leak scenariosinvolving undergroundpipe ruptureat
variousflow rates

While thereare safetyconcernsin using undilutednaturalgasfor suchtesting,the useof

diluted gastestingor useof an appropriatesimulantgasmay help qualm public concem
and allow testingin real buildings. With naturalgassourceconcentrationskept below
the LEL at perhaps50% LEL for safety,the masstransferphenomenashouldbe
reasonablysimilar to sourcesat undilutedconcentrations.If a simulantgaswere used,
molecularweight and diffusion characteristicswould have to be consideredand proper
scalingof resultsevaluated.A reasonable arrayof gassensorswould be neccssary
throughouteachtestingvolume. Infiltrationwould needto be consideredin indoor
testingto somedegree. Suchadditionaltesting,with correspondingvalidationanalyses
using FDS, would increaseconf.idencein the predictionsof FDS for suchcases.

Propaneleak scenarios
can be consideredsimilarly.

EXAMPLES OF DISPERSIONANALYSES USING FDS

Severalexamplesol gasdispersionsimulationswerediscussedpreviouslyby Mniszewski

'I'he
and Papein (7). at that time (not repeatedhere)includethe
casesdiscussed
following:

o Mixing Theory
Comparisonwith One Room Model Perl-ect

Perfbctmixing theory predictionswere comparedto FDS simulationresultslbr

dispersionof gasinsidea singleroom. Calculationswerecompletedlbr dispersion
within thc room with and without room fbrcedventilation.Whcreasperl-cctmixing
theoryis basedon formationof two distinctlayers.FDS predictsa more gradual
transitionfrom the concentrationswithin the upperspacesof the room and the lower
spaces.

o Comparison in a Wind
with'l'heoryfbr VaporDispersion

Predictionsof dispersionin an imposedwind o1'vaporsleaking fiom a componentin

a chemicalprocessplant (e.g.a valve or pump) were comparedto concentration
profilesproducedfiom an idealizedpoint sourceof vapors.for which therewas an
analyticsolution. Exceptnearto the source,wheregeometryeffbctare significant.
the FDS resultscomparedquite good to the ideal point sourcesolution.

o Comparisonwith Experimentfbr PropaneMigrationin a Room

FDS was usedto simulate an experiment fbr which there appearedto be a good
descriptionof the setupand resultsin a paperin the literature. The experiment
involveddispersionof a 50:50mixtureof propaneand carbondioxidein a room with

6
 air infiltration. FDS over-predictedthe experimentalgasconcentrations, which may
haveresultedfrom an oversimplificationof the distributionof air infiltration.

Dispersionof Vaporsfiom a GasolineSpill in a Room

Severalexperimentswere performedinsidean enclosuresimulatinga closedgaragewith

a water heaterin a corner. In the centerof the floor, therewas a gasolinespill or a release
of a simulant(carbondioxide). Initially.the enclosurewas kept closed.eitherwith or
without room forcedventilation.At six minutesinto the experiment,fbrcedventilation
was introducedthrough a slot at f'loor level at the oppositeend of the enclosure,
simulatingcrackingopen a garagedoor with outsidewind. Figure3 showsthe
concentrations of gasolinevaporsbeforeand afterthe outsidewind was introduced
throughthe slot. The FDS predictionsof time lbr flammableconcentrations to reachthe
water heatercombustionchambermatchedthe time to explosionin the gasolinetests
reasonably well.

. , i

Figure 3. GasolineSpill in Room With Water Heater.

NaturalGas Dispersionin a PizzaRestaurant

'l'his
exampleinvolves an undergroundnaturalgas leak causedby extemal forces,
adjacentto an old commercialbuilding with a graniteblock foundation. Iterative
modelingwas utilizedto establishthe rateof leakageinto the basemenl.usingthe known
timing betweenleak initiationand thc explosion.andthc probableignition source
(furnacepilot) locationas constraints.Figure4 is a vertical slice of gasconcentrations
for one leak rate scenarioshowingconcentrationdistributionof naturalgasthroughout
'l'he
the building. gasconcentrationis shownto be highestnearthe sourceof the outside
leak in the basement, while openstairwaydoorsallow gasto riseand lill gradelevel
areas.
 Figure 4. Gas Dispersionin a Pizza Restaurant.

Gas Plumesfrom UndereroundLeakage

'fhis
exampleinvolvesthe possibleuseof modelingto estimatethe abovcgroundgas
plumeavailablefiom a varietyol-undcrgroundleaksizesand wind conditions.Figure5
showsan exampleof resultsfrom a 1270CFtl naturalgas leak distributedover a square
meter,with a wind speedof 2.24 mph (0.1 m/s). Suchresultsmay allow a field engineer
to estimateleakageratebelow by simply measuringsomepointswithin the gasplume
and wind conditions.

Natural Gas VersusPropaneDispersionin a Shipping/ReceivingArea

An explosionoccurrcdinsidethe shipping/rcceiving areaof a fbod processingfacility.

The shipping/receiving arcawas coveredby a peakedroof, but it was otherwiseopento
the outdoorsand wind penetration.Figure6 showsthe facility with the white roofed at
the middle coveringthe shipping/receivingarea. Figure7 showsthe layout of the facility
with the roof removed.T'heshipping/receiving areahad two lorklift trucksin the rearleft
cornerand the propanetank on one was beingchanged.One possiblecausescenario
involved an overfilled propanetank rupturing. A secondcausescenariothat was
evaluatedinvolved a naturalgasleak emanatingfrom a floor crack at the right-handside
of the shipping/receiving area,behinda plywoodpartition. Figure8 showsthe resultsfor
the naturalgascase,and Figure9 showsthe resultsfor thc propanctank rupturc. Clearly,
the propanetank rupture was capableof producing a large flammable cloud whereasthe
naturalgas leak producedconcentrationsin the spacewell below the lower explosion
limit.
 s m o t e v r e w 4 0 5 F e b 1 42 0 0 5

il

0r5

014

0 t2

0rl

009

008

!6

1$;, 005

003

,-
0 0"1

I
Frrne5i6
l L n ei J J

Figure 5. Dispersionof Gas From An Underground Leak.

Figure6. FoodProcessing
Facility.
 i l

r'-----J-, ,,.,

.3..-
q--

Figure 7. Facility Layout.

i N"G"tLllllu

,rVh 40
NaturHff
'n@as &0
h f$r zu*
*:.

fl"t0)
o

Figure 8. Natural Gas Leak Scenario.

l0
 \ t
qY.
!'l' miflm LEL*
'I l l

f,
'Pnolgam
ll" ilm-frn

Figure 9. PropaneTank Rupture Scenario.

OdorantTransport
'fhe
final caseto be discusscdwas done to evaluatethe propensityfor odorantto separate
from naturalgasduringdispersionin air. A simplecubicalenclosurewas considered.A
small sectit-rn of the f'loorwas given a100o/oconcentration
of methane,but no lbrcedflow
into the enclosure.Odorantwas appliedto the methaneat concentrations up to l% by
volume. Irigure l0 showsthe result fbr this case,with the methanegasrising to the
ceiling as a plume by naturalconvectiondue to its low dcnsity. When the methane
sourcewas at thc ceiling it.iustcollcctedbcncaththe cciling. Whenthc sourccwas on the
sidewall, a wall plumeroscto the cciling. In all cases,odorantconccntrationwas
'l'he
monitored. odorantconcentrationremainedidenticallyat the fraction of the gas
'fhere
concentrationat which it was injected,without deviationin any case. was no
separationof the odorantliom the carriergas.

CONCLUSIONS

Basedon the varietyof gasdispersionanalysesthat havebeenconducted.the following

conclusionsare reached:

o FDS is valid for conductingdispersionanalyses

o Someof the validationsof FDS for dispersionand examplesof dispersion
applicationsusingFDS havebeenpresentedin this paper.
o More validationof FDS fbr dispersionproblemsis needed.
Suggestionsare provided fbr more detailedexperimentalvalidation.
o Benefitsto the Gas lndustry from theseefforts will includebetteranalysistools
for public safetystudies.

1t
 SlieP
SmnkPViPw4n4 Nnv16 Tnnd

'.{i
, l

nnq

nn4

0.04

nn?

0.03

nn2

nn2

0.01

q nF-3

4.5E-3

nnn iu
!

F r a m e9: 5 0
Timp 342 tl

Figurc 10. MethanePlumeWith OdorantInjected

REFERENCES

l . McGrattan, K.B, et al. "Fire Dynamics Simulator-TechnicalReference Guide",

NISTIR 6467,National Instituteof Standardsand Technology,January 2000
2. Mc(irattan, K.B, et al, "liire DynamicsSimulatorVersion 2) -'l'echnical[tefcrence
Guide", NISTIR 6783. National Instituteof Standardsand Technology.November
2001
1
J. McGrattan, K.B, et al, "Fire Dynamics Simulator (Version 3) -Technical Reference
Guide", NIS'flR 6783 2002 Ed., National Instituteof Standardsand Technology,
November2002.
4 . McGrattan, K.B, "fiire Dynamics Simulator (Version 4) -Technical Reference
Guide", NIST Special Publication 1018, National Institute of Standardsand
Technology.July 2004.
5 . McGrattan. K., "Computational Fluid Dynamics and Fire Modeling,"
(ftp.nist.gov/pub/bfrl/mcgratta/fds3/MANUALS/class2002.pdf) Fall 2001.
"ProgressReport on the FederalBuilding and Fire Salbty Investigationof the World
TradeCenterDisaster."NIST SpecialPublication1000-5.June2004.

t2
7. Mniszewski, K.R., and R. Pape, "The Use of FDS for Estimation of Flammable
GasAy'aporConcentrations,"3'o Technical Symposiumon Computer Applications in
Fire ProtectionEngineering,Societyof Fire ProtectionEngineers,12-13September
2001.
8. Musser, A., K.B. McGrattan, and J. Palmer, "Evaluation of a F'ast, Simplified
Computationalfluid DynamicsModel for Solving Room Airflow Problems,NISTIRn
6760. NationalInstituteof Standardsand Technology.Gaithersburg, Maryland,June
2001.
9. Rehm, R.G., K.8., McGrattan,and H.R. Baum, "An Efficient Large Eddy Simulation
Algorithm for Computational Wind Engineering:Application to Surface Pressure
Computations on a SingleBuilding."NISl'lR 6371.
10.Rehm, R.G., K.8.. McGrattan,and H.R. Baurn,"L.argeIrddy Simulationo1'Flow
Over a wooded Building Complex," Wind and Structures,Vol. 5 no. 2-4 (2002) 291-
300.
1l. Smagorinsky.J.. "General Circulation Experimentswith Primative I,.quations,"
M o n t h l yW e u t h eRr e v i e w . 9 1N. u m b e r3 , 1 9 6 3 p. p . 9 9 - 1 6 4 .
12.Smagorinsky,J., S. Manabe,and J.L. Holloway, "Numerical resultsfiom a Nine-
Levef GeneralCirculation Model of the Atmosphere,"Monthly ll/eatherReview,93,
N u m b e r1 2 .1 9 6 5 ,p p . 7 2 7 - 7 6 8 .
13.McGrattan,K.B. et al "Fire DynamicsSimulator(version4) lJser'sGuide",NIST
Special Publication 1019, National Institute of Standardsand T'echnology,February
2005

1 a
I J