Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 47 (2017) 129e139

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jlp

Experimental and numerical study of ammonia leakage and

dispersion in a food factory
Wei Tan a, Huang Du a, Liyan Liu a, Tong Su a, Xuanya Liu b, *
a
School of Chemical Engineering &Technology, Tianjin University, Tianjin, 300072, PR China
b
Key Laboratory of Building Fire Protection Engineering and Technology of MPS, PR China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: With the widespread use of ammonia in the industrial fields, more and more accidents are caused by
Received 8 August 2016 ammonia leakage and dispersion. To study the dispersion law of ammonia in a food factory, small scale
Received in revised form wind tunnel experiments were designed. Different initial conditions such as release flow rate, wind
7 March 2017
speed, release height and the heights of concentration sensors were considered. Ammonia concentration
Accepted 7 March 2017
Available online 11 March 2017
was measured near release source, obstacles and far from release source, respectively. The law of
ammonia dispersion is determined by its physical properties, release source conditions and atmospheric
environment. Ammonia concentrated in the axial direction and showed an upward movement near the
Keywords:
Ammonia
source as ammonia's density is lower than the air. We obtained the law of ammonia dispersion in a food
Leakage and dispersion factory through experiments indicating that the concentration of each measuring point is proportional to
Wind tunnel experiments the flow rate. With the increase of wind speed, the concentration of ammonia at different points first
Numerical simulation increased and then decreased. The results showed that the effect of ammonia dispersion was more
Turbulence model obvious under the influence of the wind field. The maximum concentration can be reached under the
wind speed range of 0.8e1.2 m/s. Changing the height of source and measuring point will make a great
difference in the concentration of the measuring point. In the simulation work, RNG k-ε model represents
better agreement with the experimental data. Ammonia movement has a strong concentration gradient
and the horizontal wind field streamlined ammonia movement.
© 2017 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

1. Introduction molecules are small. Therefore, ammonia is very easy to spread.

Ammonia is widely used in chemical and food industry as a
common industrial gas (Cheng et al., 2014), which is mainly used
for producing nitric acid, amine, ammonium, etc. Ammonia is also
used as a refrigerant because of its thermodynamic properties,
which enables it to transfer heat far more efficiently than other
refrigerants. It is particularly effective in the range of 0e30
C to
0 and hence is widely used for food preservation and in the
chemical industry. (Gangopadhyay and Das, 2010) Ammonia is
colorless, toxic and flammable. The atmospheric boiling point of
liquid ammonia is 33.41
C. The critical temperature is
Tc ¼ 132.25
C and the critical pressure is Pc ¼ 11.333 MPa. The
relative density of dry ammonia vapor with respect to air is 0.6.
Under standard conditions, the density of ammonia is 0.7713 kg/m3
at 25
C. The molecular space and interaction force of ammonia
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: liuxuanya@tfri.com.cn (X. Liu).
Ammonia is toxic and the IDLH-15 min is 50 ppm or 36 mg/m3.
Ammonia vapor is flammable in air atmosphere. The flammability
limits are LFL ¼ 14% vol and UFL ¼ 32.5% vol at 25
C (Europe -
Chemsafe) or LFL ¼ 15% vol and UFL ¼ 28% vol at 20
C (USA e
NFPA). Ammonia vapor is difficult to be ignited in air atmosphere
because of its high Minimum Ignition Energy (MIE ¼ 680 mJ).
Ammonia vapor explosions always occurred in buildings and en-
closures. Ammonia is stored in the liquid state under its own vapor
pressure in pressure vessels. The vapor pressure is 4.9748 bar ab
at þ 4
C and 8.852 bar ab at þ 21
C.
Ammonia gas can create a general discomfort with the con-
centration between 150 and 200 ppm. At concentration between
400 and 700 ppm, ammonia gas can cause obvious irritation. At
500 ppm, ammonia gas is immediately harmful to health. (Tran.
et al., 2014) At a certain ammonia concentration (ammonia/air),
ammonia can be explosive with the explosion limit of 15.7%e27.4%
(volume fraction) (Griffiths and Megson, 1984; Inanloo and Tansel,
2015). Ammonia is often stored in the liquid form under a certain
pressure. The leakage of storage tanks due to various reasons such

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2017.03.005
0950-4230/© 2017 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
130 W. Tan et al. / Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 47 (2017) 129e139
as corrosion, lax sealing, and operational errors may lead to a
leaking accident. Ammonia has a strong stimulating effect on eyes
and respiration system. In the case of leakage and dispersion of
ammonia, it is likely to cause the poisoning of the surrounding
population and result in serious environmental pollution.
(Gangopadhyay and Das, 2010) Over the past few decades, a
number of serious leakage accidents occurred across the world. In
2010, an ammonia leakage accident occurred in a frozen plant in
Alabama, United States, resulting in at least 120 people poisoning.
In 2013, a large ammonia leakage and explosion accident occurred
in a food company in Jilin, China, resulting in a total of 120 people
killed and more than 60 people poisoning. When the fire spread to
the ammonia plant, the high temperature caused the fracture of
ammonia pipeline, resulting in the leakage of a large amount of
ammonia. In 2013, gaseous ammonia leakage also occurred in a
food company in Shandong, China, with 7 people killed. The
leakage and dispersion of ammonia can be classified into contin-
uous and instantaneous leakage. Continuous leakage usually occurs
in gaseous form while the instantaneous leakage in the form of gas-
liquid two-phase leakage. Gaseous ammonia leakage usually occurs
in consequence of the damage aging of the pipeline junction and
liquid ammonia leakage occurs in the condition of sudden failure of
pressure vessel. These kinds of liquid ammonia leakage accidents
also occurred in India, Ukraine and other countries, resulting in
casualties and large numbers of people evacuating. The study of
ammonia gas dispersion has been of great importance, as the
serious consequences caused by the malignant accident and the
impact on the environment and society is far more than the acci-
dent itself.
Numerous ammonia gas leakage and dispersion accidents have
been studied, mainly focusing on the toxic gas leakage and
dispersion model. Current research mainly focuses on the theo-
retical and numerical simulation studies. There's a paucity of
experimental studies on either large scale field experiment or small
scale wind tunnel experiment. Large scale field experiment can
accurately simulate the real situation of an accident. Some large
scale experiments were carried out in 1980s such as the Thorney
Island Experiments (1984) (Rodean et al., 1984) and the China Lake
Experiments (1987) (McQuaid, 1987; Brighton and Prince, 1987).
The leakage and dispersion of several different hazardous gases
were studied under different circumstances (Hanna et al., 2012;
Santos et al., 2005; Morgan., 1987). Different forms of release
source and environmental factors were considered (Bouet et al.,
2005), and the ammonia concentration at different positions of
wind field was obtained. Meanwhile, many numerical simulation
studies were conducted to be compared to the field experiments
and, in return, were validated by experimental data. (M.R. Theobald
et al., 2015) Although large scale experiments are closer to real
accident, weather conditions could not be controlled, making it
difficult to study wind speed, wind direction, temperature and
other meteorological parameters. In addition, large scale field ex-
periments are expensive and difficult to repeat. In this case, it is not
easy to find the variation of different variables. Compared to the
large scale field experiments, small scale wind tunnel experiments
can be easier to control different weather conditions (Ohba et al.,
2004). Several studies have been carried out to evaluate ammonia
movement with different methods. The most important of them are
dynamic flux chambers or wind tunnels and micrometeorological
techniques. (Scotto di Perta et al., 2016) However, there are certain
risks in laboratory experiments, as ammonia is highly toxic. On the
other hand, many wind tunnels cannot meet the requirements of
research, according to the size of the food factory. Therefore, most
of the studies concentrated in numerical simulation. (Galeev et al.,
2013a,b; Labovský and Jelemenský, 2010; Tauseef et al., 2011;
Gousseau et al., 2011.
Numerical simulation research is widely used due to its wide
application range, good economy and high accuracy. With the
development of computer technology and the theory of fluid me-
chanics, the importance of calculation fluid dynamics (CFD)
method has been realized in this field and several CFD software has
been developed, such as: FLUENT, FLACS, CFX et al. Numerical
simulation based on experimental verification is the most impor-
tant way of studying natural gas dispersion at present. Many CFD
simulated works using different turbulence models such as k-ε
model, k-u model have been conducted to reproduce the gas
dispersion. Previously, the standard k-ε model and RNG model were
mostly used (Li et al., 2006). However there has not been a
consistent conclusion that which one is more applicable in the field
of gas dispersion (Yoshie et al., 2011). In the previous study, the
turbulence models were evaluated by comparing the numerical
results with experimental data at representative points inside a
scale model. The results showed that the RNG model is recom-
mended for predicting air velocities, airflow patterns and ammonia
concentrations in an indoor climate (Tong et al., 2013).
Regardless of experimental and simulation studies, ammonia
dispersion combined with engineering background of the food
factory using ammonia as refrigerant are few. This gas dispersion of
food factory is different from the open space due to the impact from
the physical layout of obstacles. Ammonia leakage and dispersion
were involved in the complex momentum transfer process.
Although large-scale leak and dispersion experiments of ammonia
have been carried out to study the two-phase cloud evolution
process of liquid ammonia. The lack of experimental data of
ammonia under different atmospheric conditions of the passive
dispersion made it difficult to accurately describe the cloud
dispersion behavior and the consequences of the accident (Bouet
et al., 2005). Thus, the experimental study of ammonia dispersion
in a particular environment is of significant importance theoreti-
cally and practically. The dispersion of ammonia gas is mainly
influenced by its own source conditions and atmospheric envi-
ronment (Flesch et al., 2005). The height of the release source, the
distance between the source and the obstacles and the release flow
rate determine the initial conditions of ammonia leakage. Atmo-
spheric environment such as wind speed, wind direction, temper-
ature et al. has a great effect on the dispersion of ammonia. The
ammonia dispersion rate can be greatly improved under the action
of wind field, and the study of the characteristics of the release
source and the atmospheric conditions is key for the comprehen-
sive study of the dispersion of ammonia gas.
2. Theory
2.1. Dispersion model
The laws of gas dispersion have been studied theoretically. Up to
now a variety of gas dispersion models have been developed. The
classical gas dispersion model is Gaussian model, including the
Gaussian plume model and puff model. The Gaussian plume model
is considered as a valuable tool in predictions of the atmospheric
transport of fungal spores and plant pollen in risk assessments
(Spijkerboer et al., 2002). Gaussian plume model assumes that the
distribution of medium concentration in the horizontal and vertical
directions is followed by Gaussian distribution. Concentration is
calculated by formula:
2
" 2 2
#
Q y2 ðzH2e Þ ðzþH2e Þ
Cðx; y; zÞ ¼ e 2s
z e 2s
z þe 2s
z (1)
2psy sz u
where C(x, y, z) is concentration (kg/s), x is downwind distance(m),
 W. Tan et al. / Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 47 (2017) 129e139
y is transverse wind direction distance(m), z is height from the
ground(m), Q is release rate of leakage(kg/s), u is average wind
speed(m/s), He is effective discharge height(m), sy ,sz are horizontal
and vertical dispersion parameters, respectively.
Gaussian plume model is applied to the experiments conducted
below to simulate the ammonia dispersion in the food factory space
as the small scope of the pipeline rupture is a common situation. In
these experiments, the leakage rate of the release source is
continuous and uniform. The atmospheric dispersion coefficient is
isotropic in the horizontal direction. Gaussian plume model is
applicable based on above conditions (Henderson-Sellers, 1987).
Factors that influence the dispersion of ammonia in the atmosphere
include: (1) wind speed; (2) atmospheric stability; (3) ground
condition; (4) the height of the source distance from the ground;
(6) the dispersion parameter. Among these factors, wind speed,
atmospheric stability and the effect of dispersion parameters on
cloud dispersion are the most significant. On this basis, a series of
models such as phenomenological model, box model, shallow layer
model and random walk model have been developed through ex-
periments on the dangerous gas (Deaves, 1998; Ayrault et al., 1998).
2.2. Similarity principle
Wind tunnel is an equipment to simulate the flow of atmo-
spheric boundary layer, that is mainly used to study the flow field
characteristics and the migration and dispersion of pollutants in
complex terrain or buildings (Peng and Lam, 2016). The size of
small scale wind tunnel experiment is based on the reduction ratio
referred to the similarity criterion of actual size. Actual size is
reduced to wind tunnel experiment according to the actual situa-
tion such as the geometry, mechanics and kinematics characters.
Then the results of small scale experiments can be converted to the
actual results according to the similarity theory. Compared to full-
scale field experiments, small scale wind tunnel experiments can
save cost and reduce the risk of the experiment. In fact, there is no
need for the experiments to simulate all the similar conditions, as
long as the circumstances can meet the main control conditions
while other similar conditions can be relaxed. Five dimensionless
parameters are ensured to be similar to the boundary condition of
the equation: Re, Ri, Pr, Ro, Ec (Cermak, 2012). Based on the actual
layout of the food factory (56 m*30 m), the experimental size was
reduced by 1:40 to.1.4 m*0.75*0.5 m. According to the principle of
similarity and similarity ratio, the concentration distribution of the
experiment can be converted into the concentration distribution of
the actual situation.
2.3. CFD theory
The numerical simulations were implemented using ANSYS
Fluent 15.0. It is based on the Navier-Stokes equation, and can
provide the most complete description for gas dispersion (Gavelli
et al., 2010). The fluid flow is governed by the law of conserva-
tion. The basic conservation laws include the law of mass conser-
vation and the law of momentum conservation, as shown in
eqution (2) and (3), respectively.
vr
þ VðrvÞ ¼ Sm
vt
   
vrui v   vp v vu v vu
þ rui uj ¼  þ mt j þ mt j þ ðr  ra Þgi
vt vxj vxi vxj vxi vxj vxi
The two-equation model is the simplest and commonly used
turbulence model. In this model, the length scale and turbulent
131
velocity are calculated independently using the solution of different
transport equations. The k-ε and k-u model became frequently-
used turbulence model for the solution of practical engineering
problems (Ahsan, 2014). The k-ε and k-u model, along with the
three keε models and SST keu model were adopted in this study.
(Spalding, 1972; Wilcox, 2006.
The standard k-ε is the simplest two-equation model of turbu-
lence in which the solution of two separate transport equations
allows the turbulent velocity and length scales to be independently
determined (Siddiqui and Jha, 2014). Compared with standard k-ε
model, RNG k-ε model provides an additional term in its 3 equation
to improve the accuracy for rapidly strained flows, an analytical
formula to calculate the turbulent Prandtl numbers, and take the
effect of swirl on turbulence into consideration. The realizable
model (Shih et al., 1995) is a modified version of k-ε model, with the
changes introduced aiming at taking account of the realizable
conditions in the expressions for the different terms of the Rey-
nolds stress (Hassid, 2002) The SST k-u model takes into account of
the transport of the turbulent shear stress and gives highly accurate
predictions of the onset and the amount of flow separation under
adverse pressure gradients (Menter, 1994) The corresponding tur-
bulent kinetic energy k equation and the turbulent frequency u
equation are obtained to form the SST k-u model (Yang et al., 2009).
3. Description of experiments
3.1. Experimental preparation
The background of experimental study was based on the use of
ammonia in a food factory, which was located in Tianjin, China.
Industrial ammonia was used as a refrigerant and utilized mainly in
cooling systems of the factory due to its ability to absorb large
amounts of heat during its phase transition (Junior et al., 2012). The
layout of the factory includes three high pressure ammonia storage
tanks, a low pressure tank, four salt water pools (salt water is taken
as food coolant, which is cooled by ammonia), factory area
(including the control room and related equipment. It is the main
activity area of people and the major consideration of ammonia
distribution area). The layout of the food factory is shown in Fig. 1.
The center axis of the ground was taken as the coordinate axes and
the position of each measuring point is shown in the Fig. 1. The
measuring points were distributed on one side of the central axis
due to the symmetric layout.
In simulation experiment, parameters for ammonia leakage and
dispersion rules taken into major consideration are flow rate, wind
speed, leakage height and sensors height. The simulation platform
is composed of 3 parts: wind tunnel system, ammonia release
system and detection system (Fig. 2).
(1) Wind tunnel system: the wind tunnel system can provide
uniform wind field in the experimental area and carry out
the research of ammonia dispersion under the condition of
wind (Zhou et al., 2016). Wind tunnel system consists of a
flow stabilizing section, a test section and an expansion
pressure section. The size of test section is
1.4 m*0.75 m*0.5 m. The flow stabilizing section is composed
of an airflow distribution device, a roughness element
(2)
composition and a variable frequency blower. The air distri-
bution device is composed of cellular devices, screen and
wedge which can increase the turbulence of the flow and
uniform flow field distribution. The roughness elements are
used to simulate the roughness of the ground. The wind
(3)
speed at a range of 0e2.6 m/s in the experimental area is
controlled by the variable frequency fan in the wind tunnel
system.
132 W. Tan et al. / Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 47 (2017) 129e139

Fig. 1. The layout of the experimental area.

Table 1
Position of each measuring point.

Point number Coordinate(cm)

x y z

Point1 35 0 5
Point2 47.5 0 5
Point3 47.5 5 5
Point4 60 0 5
Point5 60 7.5 5
Point6 82.5 12 5
Point7 101 0 5
Point8 120 7.5 5
Point9 140 7 5

Fig. 2 and Table 1. The electrical signal from the sensors is

transferred to computer for storage and analysis. Output
concentrations changing with time are recorded one data per
second.
Fig. 2. Ammonia diffusion experiment platform.

3.2. Experimental method

(2) Ammonia release system: ammonia release system is to
provide the experimental ammonia, including cylinders,
According to the locations of sensors, measuring points are
flow meters, pressure regulators and pipelines. The cylinder divided into three regions, including near release source area (Point
with liquefied ammonia is used as gas source. The size of the
1, 2, 3), near obstacles area (Point 4, 5, 6), and far away from the
release hole is 4 mm. The distance from the release port to
source area (Point 7, 8, 9). The experiments are carried out ac-
the ground is 5 cm. Initial gas pressure in the bottle can be
cording to the following procedures: Read the wind speed, tem-
read by pressure gage (Sun et al., 2015). The flow rate can be
perature and humidity. Open the ammonia cylinder valve to release
adjusted by the pressure reducing valve at a range of 0.3e3 L/
ammonia gas. Measure ammonia concentration of different points
min and the release direction is horizontal.
by concentration sensors under different conditions. Close the
(3) Measurement system: Measurement system consists of a hot
valve after 2 min to stop discharging gas. Data acquisition system
wire anemometer (to detect the inlet wind speed), a gas
keeps working until the concentration of sensors reduce to zero.
concentration sensor (according to the gas concentration of
Repeat 3 times in each working condition.
different measuring points, the following ranges were
selected: 7000 ppm, 5000 ppm, 2000 ppm, 1000 ppm). A
temperature and humidity meter at 1 m high and a data 3.3. Numerical simulation
acquisition and recording software are also included.
Ammonia concentration sensors are to detect the gas volume The physical background and the initial conditions of the
fraction and the positions of the sensor probes are shown in simulation were the same as the above experiments. The front of
the cube was wind velocity inlet. The mesh types included the
 W. Tan et al. / Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 47 (2017) 129e139
Table 2
The experimental parameters of two trails.
Trial number 1 2
Wind velocity(m/s) 0.8 0.8
Release height(cm) 5 5
Release rate(L/min) 0.9 0.6
Sensors height(cm) 5 7.5
structured hexahedral grids and unstructured tetrahedral grids.
Appropriate refinement near the release source and close to the
ground was performed with inflation layers from the ground level.
The total number of the cells was 3.8 million. The grids were
verified by performing a separate grid dependency study which
examined grids consisting of 2.9, 3.3, 3.8 and 4.1 million cells. The
ammonia concentration along downwind direction was compared
between different cells. In the wind tunnel experiment, ammonia
was released at the nozzle exit. The nozzle size, ammonia jet ve-
locity and the height were considered when modeling the behav-
iors of liquefied ammonia releasing from the nozzle. The two trials
were chosen to verify the simulation results in the following
Table 2.
4. Results and discussions
4.1. Basic experimental results
The experimental results of the leakage and dispersion of
ammonia under various conditions showed that the dispersion of
the ammonia gas in the food factory is basically complied with the
dispersion of light gas. The relationship of ammonia concentration
with time is shown in Fig. 3. The release rate was 0.9 L/min, wind
speed was 1.6 m/s, the release height was 5 cm, the measuring
point height was 5 cm, the temperature was 26
C, and the hu-
midity was 40%. Ammonia concentration increased rapidly on the
first stage, and then tended to be stable. After closing the valve, the
concentration tended to decrease rapidly as the same trend with
the previous large scale experimental results (Bauer, 2013). The
average value of the stable period is taken as the concentration of
the experiment. Ammonia gas got into the entrainment stage after
released from the mouth of the pipe into the air. During this period,
the ammonia cloud's internal turbulence caused the entrainment of
Fig. 3. Concentration of each measuring point changed with time under the wind
speed of 1.6 m/s.
133
the surrounding air, leading to the dilution of the cloud and the
decrease of ammonia concentration. From Fig. 4 one can see that
near the release source, concentration is much higher than the
other locations as the distance from the release source is closer. This
is because in the vicinity of the release source, the ammonia that jet
out from the source was relatively concentrated. After a period of
motion, the ammonia was gradually diluted by the wind field with
a continuous supply of fresh air. With the increase of the distance,
ammonia concentration decreased rapidly and assembled in the
midline region. Because of the influence of obstacles, some
ammonia bypassed obstacles and the aggregation of some
ammonia in the windward side of the obstacle made ammonia
concentration higher than both sides of the obstacles. The range of
ammonia concentration became wider after passing the obstacles.
4.2. The effect of source height on the dispersion behavior
Different release height represents the different leakage loca-
tion in actual engineering background. Ammonia in food factory of
continuous leak mainly concentrated in instrumentation, pipe
joints and other weak links. It presents moderate risk of fire and
explosions, when exposed to heat or flames. (Junior et al., 2012)
Ammonia is stored in a liquid form under pressurized conditions.
The capacity of ammonia bottle is 40 L. The internal pressure is
0.5 MPa. When there is a small break in the pipe, the liquid
ammonia evaporates quickly in the form of ammonia gas. Ammonia
gas rapidly spreads into the surrounding environment. If there is a
failure of a pressured vessel, a part of the liquid ammonia will flash
into vapor and the remaining liquid will jet out on the ground to
form liquid pool. In food factory space accidents happened mostly
with small size rupture. The release form is the continuous leakage
of gaseous ammonia. The release height during the trails were
3e7 cm: the bottle discharge pressure was 0.5 MPa, and the leakage
rate was 0.6 L/min. Atmospheric conditions such as the wind ve-
locity was adjusted to 0.8 m/s, temperature was 26
C and relative
humidity was 28%. The measured concentration is shown in Fig. 5:
In Fig. 5, one can see that the release source of 3 cm of every
measuring point concentration is the highest due to the density and
wind field interaction of ammonia, demonstrating the motion law
of upward movement. When the height of the release source is
0e2 cm higher than the measuring point, the concentration of each
point is the lowest, while the concentration of each point is the
highest when the release source is 0e2 cm lower than the
measured point. Previous study showed that concentrations on the
plume centerline were either low or zero both in the recirculation
region and further downwind when the source height was 1.5
times of the obstacles height or above. Most of the plume origi-
nating from a ground level source was entrained and transported in
the horseshoe vortex around the obstacle further downwind of the
recirculation region (Mavroidis et al., 2003). The vertical spread of
the plume was increased, since, for an elevated source, the plume
was deflected upwards when reaching the first row of the array
(Mavroidis and Griffiths, 2001). At an intermediate value of 5 cm as
the release source height, the concentration of point 9 (furthest
point away from the source) is the largest. The position of point 9
reaches the greatest degree of ammonia dispersion. When the
release source height is higher than the measuring point, the
ammonia gas bypasses the obstacle to further upward dispersion.
Therefore, the concentration of the relatively lower position point 9
is lower. On the other hand, when the release source height is lower
than the measuring point, some of the ammonia is blocked by the
big obstacle, resulting also a lower concentration of point 9.
134 W. Tan et al. / Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 47 (2017) 129e139
Fig. 4. The distribution of concentration at the measuring points.
Fig. 5. Concentration of each measuring point varies with the height of the release
source.
4.3. The effect of wind speed on the dispersion behavior
Fan speed was adjusted to study the influence of wind speed on
ammonia dispersion. The release rate was 0.9 L/min, the release
height was 5 cm, measuring point height was 5 cm, temperature
was 26
C, and humidity was 40%. Different measuring point con-
centration is shown in Fig. 6:
The concentration of each point increased firstly and then
reduced with the increasing of wind speed. When the wind speed is
around 0.8 m/s~1.2 m/s, the concentration of each measuring point
is the highest. The wind speed has a great effect on improving the
ammonia dispersion rate. The higher the wind speed is, the higher
air entrainment rate will be. Under low wind conditions (0.4 m/s),
the concentrations of most of the measuring points are low and that
of point 1 is high because ammonia is positively buoyant gas and its
Fig. 6. The concentration of each measuring point varies with the wind speed.
density is less than the air. Thus ammonia movement in the case of
the small wind speed shows the trend of upward, and the con-
centration of ammonia with small wind velocity is very low.
Research shows that two mechanisms determine the behavior of a
plume as it passes through a large group of obstacles: the diver-
gence and convergence of streamlines act as a whole as the fluid
passes around the group of obstacles. The changes to the structure
of the turbulence as eddies are shed from the individual obstacles
(Davidson et al., 1996). The concentration on the central axis de-
creases most rapidly with the increasing wind speed, as the
ammonia in front of the obstacles is more concentrated. In this way,
one can significantly improve the momentum exchange of
ammonia with the air and speed up the dispersion rate by
increasing the wind speed. Point 3, 5, 6 are not on the center line,
that's why their concentrations are very low. With the increase of
wind speed, the decrease of ammonia gas is smaller than that on
 W. Tan et al. / Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 47 (2017) 129e139 135

the center line, which indicates that the concentration dilution

effect of the wind field on the ammonia dispersion center is more
obvious.

4.4. The effect of release rate on dispersion behavior

Variable release rates represent different conditions in ammonia

accidents. The selected release conditions are representative for
accidents from small tanks used as storage for ordinary consumers
(Nielsen et al., 1997). Release rates were changed from 0.3 L/min-
0.9 L/min. The wind speed was 0.8 m/s, release height was 5 cm, the
height of the measuring point was 5 cm, the temperature was 26
C,
and relative humidity was 36.5%. The concentration of each point is
shown in Fig. 7 and Fig. 8:
It can be seen that the concentration of each measuring point
increases with the release rate, and the concentration is propor-
tional to the release rate. The concentration of near release source is
much higher than other points. The measuring point's concentra-
tion in the central axis increases much rapidly with the release rate,
Fig. 8. Concentration of different points with flow rate.
while the trend of other points is not obvious. In the vicinity of the
windward side of the obstacle, concentration increases rapidly with
the release rate, but for the crosswind direction and leeward di-
rection ammonia concentration changes little with different release
rate. The increase of the concentration of each point is not obvious
after the barrier, which explains that the concentration of ammonia
gas is diffused through a series of obstacles and the wind field
makes the distribution more uniform.

4.5. The influence of different measuring points height

In the above studies, all the measuring points were put at the
same height. The distribution of ammonia at different levels has not
been studied. The measuring height were changed to study the
concentration distribution of ammonia in vertical direction. The
release rate was 0.6 L/min, wind speed was 0.8 m/s, release height
was 5 cm, temperature was 26
C, and relative humidity was 40%.
The concentration of each point was shown in Fig. 9.
The concentration of Point 1 is the highest at the height of the
closest distance due to the nearest position. The concentration of
Point 1 is close to 0 when the height of the measuring point is
12.5 cm since ammonia moves below the measuring point. Point 2 Fig. 9. Concentration of different height of measuring points.

is the highest at 10 cm, reflecting the upward movement of

ammonia. Point 4 increases with the measuring point height. For

points that are not in the center line, the concentration is reduced
to almost 0 when the height of the measuring point is raised. The
concentrations of point 5 and 6 (close to source release) continue to
decrease, while little variation of Point 8 and 9 (away from source
release) is observed. Ammonia far from the release source has
spread out and produced little difference in the overall
concentration.
When the height of sensors is 12.5 cm near release source,
ammonia concentration is the lowest as ammonia is not able to
move upward so high. When the height is 5 cm, the lowest con-
centration occurs at Point 2, 4, 5 because these points locates near
the rear of the obstacle and the blocking effect of obstacles is
obvious on the dispersion of ammonia gas. According to the similar
ratio 40:1, 5 cm height corresponds to the actual height of 2 m,
which is close to the height of people. It can be taken as a dangerous
height and at this height, the concentration of each point is rela-
tively low. It can be concluded that in the vicinity of the release
point and not in the center line, the concentration is in a high de-
gree of distribution gradient and changes little for points far away
from the release source.
Fig. 7. Concentration of different measuring points.
136 W. Tan et al. / Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 47 (2017) 129e139
Fig. 10. Comparison of the experimental concentration and simulation concentration.
5. Simulation results
5.1. Numerical model validation
Two trials are selected in the above experimental study to
compare which turbulence equation (standard k-ε, RNG k-ε, real-
izable k-ε, SST k-u) is the most accurate one. For wind inlet, the
hydraulic diameter is 0.6 m and the turbulence intensity is 4.3%. For
release source, the hydraulic diameter is 4 mm and the turbulence
intensity is 3%. The solver type of SIMPLEC and steady state calcu-
lation are used. The concentration diagram of numerical simulation
and experiments is drawn in Fig. 10. It can be seen that standard k-ε
and RNG k-ε simulation results are close to the experimental re-
sults. RNG results matched best with the experiments. However, all
Fig. 11. Concentration cloud image in the axis symmetry plane.
four models have a certain degree of deviation at higher concen-
trations. In the small concentration range, the difference between
the experimental value and the k-ε (standard, RNG) simulation
value is small. These two kinds of turbulence models showed better
performance in low concentration area. In the high concentration
region, most of the values of turbulence equation are lower than
the experimental values, as the turbulence model contains a series
of equations that consists of some empirical formula or empirical
parameters. These factors will have an impact on the simulation
results.
5.2. Concentration field cloud image
As shown in Fig. 11, the movement of ammonia had an upward
trend after release as the density of ammonia is smaller than the air.
From the release source to the obstacle, the distribution of the
ammonia is very concentrated and the concentration gradients are
quite large. Ammonia gas becomes more dispersed after passing
the obstacles due to the blocking effect of obstacles. It is the
maximum ammonia concentration region from the source to the
biggest obstacle. The natural dispersion process of ammonia is the
main process for liquid ammonia release source leakage. The
ammonia moves along the horizontal direction after emission due
to the reduction of pressure and the direction of nozzle. With the
entrainment of air continuously, the wind field has more and more
influence on the movement of the ammonia. In the end, the totally
mixed ammonia and air present a Gaussian dispersion. The cloud
concentration decreases and the concentration range becomes
wider after passing the obstacles (Davidson et al., 1995).
Fig. 12 shows the change of concentration along the direction of
wind direction and these points are above the ground 12 cm in the
middle axis. The concentration increases at first and then decreases
with the axial direction. Concentration near the release source is
very low as the height of the measuring point is higher than the
release height and most of the released ammonia passes under the
 W. Tan et al. / Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 47 (2017) 129e139
Fig. 12. The concentration of the central axis in the plane of 12 cm height.
measuring point. Concentration reaches the maximum in the dis-
tance of 60 cm away from the air inlet and this distance is the area
in front of the big obstacle. On one hand, the density of ammonia
gas is smaller than the air, and ammonia moves upward in the
process of downward wind direction movement. On the other
hand, due to the obstruction of the barrier to the ammonia gas, a
part of the ammonia gas gathers in front of and above the obstacles
that enhances the ammonia concentration. In the presence of fac-
tory building, the relative turbulent viscosity has higher values in
comparison to the unobstructed case. The existence of the obstacles
increases the buoyancy effect (Galeev et al., 2013a,b). The concen-
tration of ammonia decreases rapidly with the distance after
reaching the maximum concentration. This is due to continuous
upward movement of ammonia. And also, in the vicinity of
Fig. 13. Velocity cloud image in the axis symmetry plane.
137
obstacles the wind field turbulence increases in intensity, so
ammonia dispersion rate becomes higher.
5.3. Velocity field cloud image
The same three sections were selected to draw the velocity field
Fig. 13.
The influence of obstacles to the wind field is limited to the
nearby and the rear area of the big obstacle. The concentration far
from the obstacles is very uniform. The wind field has little influ-
ence on the velocity of ammonia in the low velocity zone behind
the obstacles. For an isolated obstacle, air flows separately into the
lateral side, which means that the pollutant released from the
windward units will be diluted quickly (Cui et al., 2016). The wind
field in front of the obstacle moves upward and the wind speed will
be slightly enhanced. The wind speed is larger in the position of the
release source and the top of obstacles. For obstacles on both sides
of the space, the wind speed increases at first and then decreases.
This due to the hindering effect of obstacles on the wind field,
which strengthens the nearby air turbulence, so as to improve the
speed of movement of the region and accelerate the dilution rate of
ammonia.
6. Conclusions
Through the small scale wind tunnel experiments, the leakage
and dispersion of ammonia were studied. Depending on the
properties of ammonia and the wind field, the dispersion of
ammonia was concentrated in the vicinity of the central axis into a
streamline. Wind field can significantly improve the flow field of
turbulent, accelerate ammonia dilution and strengthen the hori-
zontal movement trend. With increasing distance from the source,
the ammonia concentration in the three critical regions showed a
decreasing trend.
The dispersion of ammonia is affected by many factors such as
138 W. Tan et al. / Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 47 (2017) 129e139
release flow rate, wind speed, release height and measuring point
height. Conclusions can be drawn that the concentration is pro-
portional to the release rate. Concentration increases first and then
decreases with the wind speed. The wind speed range leading to
the maximum concentration of ammonia is 0.8e1.2 m/s. When the
release source height is higher than the measuring point by
0e2 cm, the concentration of each point is the lowest. The con-
centration of each point is the highest, in contrast, when the release
source height is lower than the measuring point 0e2 cm. It in-
dicates that the dispersion of ammonia gas has a significant upward
movement trend.
CFD tools is introduced to reproduce the small-scale wind tun-
nel experiment for the natural ammonia leakage in the food factory
environment. The results show that the standard k- ε model and
RNG model are close to the experimental results and the simulation
result is more accurate in the small concentration range
(0e700 ppm). RNG k-ε model represents a better agreement with
the experimental data and most of the models under-estimated the
ammonia behavior in these simulations. So far, we are conducting a
study of an actual situation of ammonia dispersion, including the
choice of turbulence model. It is indicated that the model should
never be set to under-estimate the hazardous material release, as it
may provide risk assessment that may provide less risk prediction.
Ammonia movement has a large concentration gradient. The main
movement trajectory of ammonia gas plume is that it flows through
the obstacles and then to the exit. The smoke plume distribution is
more concentrated. The concentration of ammonia in the non-
central axis region is low, which can be regarded as a safe area.
These results showed an acceptable CFD approach for studying the
consequence of ammonia dispersion in a food factory space. It
provides an effective method in predicting the impact of ammonia
dispersion and can raise concerns over the public safety. These
results are applicable for this simulation, and which model is better
than the others for ammonia release in a broader situation need
further validated on the turbulence study. It is recommended to
calibrate the turbulence parameters and other variables to have
simulation set up that could over-predict than under-predict the
vapor behavior.
The dispersion of ammonia in a food factory is different from
open environment. Obstacles strengthen the turbulence intensity
of flow field nearby so ammonia aggregation effect in the vicinity of
the obstacle is obvious. For personnel intensive workshop area in
front of the release of the windward and leeward side of the source
is the most dangerous areas. Ammonia gas near the obstacle ag-
gregation leads to the windward and leeward sides of the obstacles
higher concentration than both sides of the obstacles.
Acknowledgements
This work is supported by the open subject of Key Laboratory of
Building Fire Protection Engineering and Technology of MPS in
Tianjin (KFKT2014MS04) and science and technology support
program of Tianjin (15ZCZDSF00550).
References
Ahsan, M., 2014. Numerical analysis of friction factor for a fully developed turbulent
flow using keε turbulence model with enhanced wall treatment. Beni-Suef
Univ. J. Basic Appl. Sci. 3 (4), 269e277.
Ayrault, M., Simoe €ns, S., Mejean, P., 1998. Negative buoyancy effects on the
dispersion of continuous gas plumes downwind solid obstacles. J. Hazard.
Mater. 57 (1e3), 79e103.
Bauer, T.J., 2013. Comparison of chlorine and ammonia concentration field trial data
with calculated results from a Gaussian atmospheric transport and dispersion
model. J. Hazard. Mater. 254e255 (1), 325e335.
Bouet, R., Duplantier, S., Salvi, O., 2005. Ammonia large scale atmospheric disper-
sion experiments in industrial configurations. J. Loss Prev. Process Industries 18
(4e6), 512e519.
Brighton, P.W.M., Prince, A.J., 1987. Heavy gas dispersion trials at thorney islande2
overall properties of the heavy gas clouds in the thorney island phase II trials.
J. Hazard. Mater. 16 (11), 103e138.
Cermak, J.E., 2012. Laboratory simulation of the atmospheric boundary layer. AIAA J.
9 (9), 12.
Cheng, C., Tan, W., Liu, L., 2014. Numerical simulation of water curtain application
for ammonia release dispersion. J. Loss Prev. Process Industries 30 (1), 105e112.
Cui, D.J., Mak, C.M., Kwok, K.C.S., Ai, Z.T., 2016. CFD simulation of the effect of an
upstream building on the inter-unit dispersion in a multi-story building in two
wind directions. J. Wind Eng. Industrial Aerodynamics 150, 31e41.
Davidson, M.J., Mylne, K.R., Jones, C.D., Phillips, J.C., Perkins, R.J., Fung, J.C.H.,
Hunt, J.C.R., 1995. Plume dispersion through large groups of obstaclesda field
investigation. Atmos. Environ. 29 (22), 3245e3256.
Davidson, M.J., Snyder, W.H., Lawson, R.E., Hunt, J.C.R., 1996. Wind tunnel simula-
tions of plume dispersion through groups of obstacles. Atmos. Environ. 30 (22),
3715e3731.
Deaves, D.M., 1998. Guidelines for use of vapour cloud dispersion models. Process
Saf. Environ. Prot. 76 (1), 67e68.
Flesch, T.K., Wilson, J.D., Harper, L.A., Crenna, B.P., 2005. Estimating gas emissions
from a farm with an inverse-dispersion technique. Atmos. Environ. 39 (27),
4863e4874.
Galeev, A.D., Salin, A.A., Ponikarov, S.I., 2013a. Consequence analysis of aqueous
ammonia spill using computational fluid dynamics. J. Loss Prev. Process In-
dustries 26 (4), 628e638.
Galeev, A.D., Starovoytova, E.V., Ponikarov, S.I., 2013b. Numerical simulation of the
consequences of liquefied ammonia instantaneous release using FLUENT soft-
ware. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 91 (3), 191e201.
Gangopadhyay, R.K., Das, S.K., 2010. Ammonia leakage from refrigeration plant and
the management practice. Process Saf. Prog. 27 (1), 15e20.
Gavelli, F., Chernovsky, M.K., Bullister, E., Kytomaa, H.K., 2010. Modeling of LNG
spills into trenches. J. Hazard. Mater. 180 (1e3), 332e339.
Gousseau, P., Blocken, B., van Heijst, G.J.F., 2011. CFD simulation of pollutant
dispersion around isolated buildings: on the role of convective and turbulent
mass fluxes in the prediction accuracy. J. Hazard. Mater. 194 (5), 422e434.
Griffiths, R.F., Megson, L.C., 1984. The effect of uncertainties in human toxic
response on hazard range estimation for ammonia and chlorine. Atmos. Envi-
ron. 18 (6), 1195e1206.
Hanna, S., Britter, R., Argenta, E., Chang, J., 2012. The Jack Rabbit chlorine release
experiments: implications of dense gas removal from a depression and
downwind concentrations. J. Hazard. Mater. 213e214 (3), 406e412.
Hassid, S., 2002. On the gravitational terms of the k-3 and other turbulence models.
Ocean. Dyn. 52 (4), 169e178.
Henderson-Sellers, B., 1987. Gaussian Plume Model. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg.
Inanloo, B., Tansel, B., 2015. Explosion impacts during transport of hazardous cargo:
GIS-based characterization of overpressure impacts and delineation of flam-
mable zones for ammonia. J. Environ. Manag. 156 (6), 1e9.
Junior, M.M., Santos, M.S.e., Vidal, M.C.R., de Carvalho, P.V.R., 2012. Overcoming the
blame game to learn from major accidents: a systemic analysis of an Anhydrous
Ammonia leakage accident. J. Loss Prev. Process Industries 25 (1), 33e39.
Labovský, J., Jelemenský, L.,  2010. CFD simulations of ammonia dispersion using
“dynamic” boundary conditions. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 88 (4), 243e252.
Li, X.-X., Liu, C.-H., Leung, D.Y.C., Lam, K.M., 2006. Recent progress in CFD modelling
of wind field and pollutant transport in street canyons. Atmos. Environ. 40 (29),
5640e5658.
Mavroidis, I., Griffiths, R.F., 2001. Local characteristics of atmospheric dispersion
within building arrays. Atmos. Environ. 35 (16), 2941e2954.
Mavroidis, I., Griffiths, R.F., Hall, D.J., 2003. Field and wind tunnel investigations of
plume dispersion around single surface obstacles. Atmos. Environ. 37 (21),
2903e2918.
McQuaid, J., 1987. Heavy gas dispersion trials at Thorney Islande2 design of the
thorney island continuous release trials. J. Hazard. Mater. 16 (11), 1e8.
Menter, F.R., 1994. Eddy viscosity transport equations and their relation to the k-3
model. J. Fluids Eng. Trans. Asme 95 (4), 876e884.
Morgan, J.D.L., 1987. Dispersion phenomenology of LNG vapor in the burro and
coyote LNG spill experiments. J. Heat Transf. 109 (4), 952e960.
Nielsen, M., Ott, S., Jørgensen, H.E., Bengtsson, R., Nyre n, K., Winter, S., Ride, D.,
Jones, C., 1997. Field experiments with dispersion of pressure liquefied
ammonia. J. Hazard. Mater. 56 (1), 59e105.
Ohba, R., Kouchi, A., Hara, T., Vieillard, V., Nedelka, D., 2004. Validation of heavy and
light gas dispersion models for the safety analysis of LNG tank. J. Loss Prev.
Process Industries 17 (5), 325e337.
Peng, H.Y., Lam, H.F., 2016. Turbulence effects on the wake characteristics and
aerodynamic performance of a straight-bladed vertical axis wind turbine by
wind tunnel tests and large eddy simulations. Energy 109, 557e568.
Rodean, H.C., Hogan, W.J., Urtiew, P.A., Goldwire, H.C.J., McRae, T.G., Morgan, D.L.J.,
1984. Vapor burn analysis for the Coyote series LNG spill experiments. In: Other
Information: Portions Are Illegible in Microfiche Products. Original Copy
Available until Stock Is Exhausted pp. Medium: X; Size: Pages: 89.
Santos, J.M., Griffiths, R.F., Roberts, I.D., Reis Jr., N.C., 2005. A field experiment on
turbulent concentration fluctuations of an atmospheric tracer gas in the vicinity
of a complex-shaped building. Atmos. Environ. 39 (28), 4999e5012.
Scotto di Perta, E., Agizza, M.A., Sorrentino, G., Boccia, L., Pindozzi, S., 2016. Study of
aerodynamic performances of different wind tunnel configurations and air inlet
velocities, using computational fluid dynamics (CFD). Comput. Electron. Agric.
 W. Tan et al. / Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 47 (2017) 129e139
125, 137e148.
Shih, T., Liou, W.W., Shabbir, A., Yang, Z., Zhu, J., 1995. A new k-epsilon eddy vis-
cosity model for high reynolds number turbulent flows. Comput. Fluids 24,
227e238.
Siddiqui, M.I.H., Jha, P.K., 2014. Assessment of turbulence models for prediction of
intermixed amount with free surface variation using coupled level-set volume
of fluid method. Isij Int. 54 (54), 2578e2587.
Spalding, B.D., 1972. Lectures in Mathematical Models of Turbulence. Academic
Press.
Spijkerboer, H.P., Beniers, J.E., Jaspers, D., Schouten, H.J., Goudriaan, J., Rabbinge, R.,
van der Werf, W., 2002. Ability of the Gaussian plume model to predict and
describe spore dispersal over a potato crop. Ecol. Model. 155 (1), 1e18.
Sun, Q., Liu, J., Liu, A., Guo, X., Yang, L., Zhang, J., 2015. Experiment on the separation
of tail gases of ammonia plant via continuous hydrates formation with TBAB.
Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 40 (19), 6358e6364.
Tauseef, S.M., Rashtchian, D., Abbasi, S.A., 2011. CFD-based simulation of dense gas
dispersion in presence of obstacles. J. Loss Prev. Process Industries 24 (4),
371e376.
139
Theobald, M.R., Sanz-Cobena, A., Vallejo, A., Sutton, M.A., 2015. Suitability and
uncertainty of two models for the simulation of ammonia dispersion from a pig
farm located in an area with frequent calm conditions. Atmos. Environ. 102
(167), 167e175.
Tong, G., Zhang, G., Christopher, D.M., Bjerg, B., Ye, Z., Cheng, J., 2013. Evaluation of
turbulence models to predict airflow and ammonia concentrations in a scale
model swine building enclosure. Comput. Fluids 71 (1), 240e249.
Tran, Pascaline H., Lapadula, Gerard D., Liu, Xinsheng, 2014. Ammonia Oxidation
Catalyst for Coal Fried Utilities. BASF Corporation.
Wilcox, D.C., 2006. Turbulence Modeling for CFD. Dcw Industries La Canada Cali-
fornia Usa, pp. 363e367.
Yang, Y., Gu, M., Jin, X., 2009. New Inflow Boundary Conditions for Modeling the
Neutral Equilibrium Atmospheric Boundary Layer in SST K-u Model.
Yoshie, R., Jiang, G., Shirasawa, T., Chung, J., 2011. CFD simulations of gas dispersion
around high-rise building in non-isothermal boundary layer. J. Wind Eng. In-
dustrial Aerodynamics 99 (4), 279e288.
Zhou, X., Kang, L., Yuan, X., Gu, M., 2016. Wind tunnel test of snow redistribution on
flat roofs. Cold Regions Sci. Technol. 127, 49e56.