0
Research Papers

Simulation of Electric-Current-Induced Drowning Accident Scenarios for Boating Safety

[+] Author and Article Information
Tamunoiyala S. Koko

Reliability and Risk, Lloyd’s Register Applied Technology Group,
1888 Brunswick Street, Suite 400, Halifax, NS B3J 3J8, Canada
e-mail: tamunoiyala.koko@lr.org

Bilal M. Ayyub

Fellow ASME
Center for Technology and Systems Management, University of Maryland,
College Park, MD 20742
e-mail: ba@umd.edu

Keith Gallant

Independent Consultant,
97 Williams Lake Road, Halifax, NS B3P1T4, Canada
e-mail: keith@emailopened.com

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received June 17, 2015; final manuscript received November 25, 2015; published online July 1, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Michael Beer.

ASME J. Risk Uncertainty Part B 2(3), 031003 (Jul 01, 2016) (20 pages) Paper No: RISK-15-1078; doi: 10.1115/1.4032262 History: Received June 17, 2015; Accepted December 04, 2015

In the companion paper (Ayyub et al., 2016, “Risk Assessment Methodology for Electric-Current Induced Drowning Accidents,” ASCE-ASME J. Risk Uncertainty Eng. Syst. Part B Mech. Eng., 3(3), pp. XXX-XXX.), the authors developed a methodology to identify hazards associated with electric-current-induced drowning and electric shocks for swimmers around docks, houseboats, and other boats in both freshwater and saltwater; and to assess scenarios and risks associated with these hazards. This paper presents numerical simulations of the electric field and potential in the surrounding water for a number of these electric-current-induced drowning accident scenarios in support of boating safety studies. A boundary-element-based computational tool was employed. A combined experimental and numerical validation study was first undertaken. The tool was then used to compute the electric field and potential in the fluid surrounding the boat with and without a person in the surrounding field for four accident scenarios, including two scenarios with boat at dock in freshwater or saltwater; and two scenarios with boat offshore in freshwater or saltwater. Parametric studies were also undertaken, giving consideration to parameters such as the location of the human with respect to the boat and dock; nature of the water body (freshwater or saltwater); and intensity of the applied current (i.e., at source); and to establish general trends of electric potential and electric field due to the presence of an electric power source in water. The observations from the parametric study are useful for developing information for communicating these risks to swimmers, first responders, boat owners and operators, marina and boatyard owners, and other persons in the vicinity of boats.

Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Ayyub, B. M., Koko, T. S, Blair, A., and Akpan, U. O., 2016, “Risk Assessment Methodology for Electric-Current Induced Drowning Accidents,” ASCE-ASME J. Risk Uncertainty Eng. Syst. Part B Mech. Eng., 3(3), pp. XXX–XXX.
Chuang, J.-M., 1986, “Numerical Solution of Nonlinear Boundary-Value Problems Arising in Corrosion and Electroplating Modeling With Applications to 3D Ships and Marine Structures,” Ph.D. Thesis, Technical University of Nova Scotia, Halifax, NS, Canada.
Becker, A. A., 1992, The Boundary Element Method in Engineering: A Complete Course, McGraw-Hill International, UK.
Adey, R. A., and Niku, S. M., 1992, Computer Modeling of Corrosion Using the Boundary Element Method, ASTM STP 1154, R. S. Munn, ed., American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 248–264.
DeGiorgi, V. G., Thomas, II, E. D., and Kaznoff, A. I., 1992, Numerical Simulation of Impressed Current Cathodic Protection Using Boundary Element Method, ASTM STP 1154, R. S. Munn, ed., American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 265–276.
Adey, R., and Baynham, J., 2000, “Predicting Corrosion Related Electrical and Magnetic Fields using BEM,” UDT Europe.
Wallace, J. C., Brennan, D. P., and Chernuka, M. W., 1997, “Enhancements to Boundary Element Cathodic Protection Simulation Software,” Martec Contract Report.
Wallace, J. C., Brennan, D. P., Palmeter, M. F., and Chernuka, M. W., 1994, “CPBEM Program Suite for the Design of Cathodic Protection Systems for Ships,” .
Zienkiewicz, O. C., and Taylor, R. L., 1989, The Finite Element Method, (Basic Formulations and Linear Problems, Vol. 1), McGraw-Hill Book Company, London, UK.
Lee, C. H., and Sakis-Meliopoulos, A. P., 1999, “Comparison of Touch and Step Voltages Between IEEE Std 80 and IEC 479-1,” IEE Proc. Gener. Transm. Distrib., 146(5), pp. 593–601. 0143-7046 [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Polarization curve for plain carbon steel in seawater

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Interior corrosion problem

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Exterior corrosion problem

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Schematic diagram of the lab experimental setup

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Cross frame with micrometer in the lab experimental setup

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

ANSYS FE meshes for 175-mm water-depth case: (a) low density, (b) medium density, and (c) high density

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

CPBEM meshes for 175-mm water-depth case: (a) typical mesh (full mesh), (b) coarse density, (c) medium density, and (d) high density

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Voltage contours for ANSYS quarter models—case with 175-mm water depth: (a) low density, (b) medium density, and (c) high density

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Effect of mesh density on the electric-potential distribution below the source for various water-depth cases: (a) 175-mm water depth, (b) 250-mm water depth, and (c) 300-mm water depth

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Variation of electric potential with longitudinal distance from the input source at a depth of 25 mm for various water-depth cases: (a) 175-mm water depth, (b) 250-mm water depth, and (c) 300-mm water depth

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Configuration of model for (a) offshore scenarios BOPWF and BOPWS and (b) dock scenarios BDPWF and BDPWS

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Locations of (a) horizontal and vertical planes and (b) transverse and longitudinal lines for plotting graphs of potential and current density

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Electric potential on an offshore boat with human not included: (a) saltwater and (b) freshwater

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Current densities on an offshore boat with human not included: (a) saltwater and (b) freshwater

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Contours of electric potential freshwater (BOPWF scenario, without a human): (a) saltwater (boat included), (b) saltwater (boat removed), and (c) freshwater (boat removed)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Electric-field contours for BOPWF scenario (human not included): (a) saltwater and (b) freshwater

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Electric potential in water for BOPWS and BOPWF scenarios (human not included)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Electric field in water for BOPWS and BOPWF scenarios (human not included)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Electric potential on an offshore boat (human included): (a) saltwater and (b) freshwater

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Electric potential in water for BOPWS and BOPWF scenarios (human included)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Electric field in water for BOPWS and BOPWF scenarios (human included)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

Electric potential in water for BDPWS and BDPWF scenarios (human not included)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 24

Electric field in water for BDPWS and BDPWF scenarios (human not included)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 25

Schematic representation of Case I and Case II models: (a) Case I and (b) Case II

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 26

Boundary-element mesh of Case I and Case II models: (a) Case I and (b) Case II

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 27

Contours showing typical potential distribution for all cases

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 28

Potential and electric-field distributions for Case II configuration while varying source location relative to bank wall (source size: 150×150  mm, source voltage: 120 V, water depth: 1.5 m). (a) Potential versus distance from bank. (b) Electric field (Ex) versus distance from bank. (c) Electric field (Ez) versus distance from bank

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 29

Potential as a function of (a) conductivity and (b) source area at a given location below the source

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Articles from Part A: Civil Engineering
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In