硫化氢泄漏事故多发生在化学合成、石油炼化、煤矿作业和硫磺回收等过程中，是化工生产过程中的重大灾害之一，硫化氢泄漏严重时会致人窒息或死亡。为更加安全地保护人体和环境免受危害，进一步提升对硫化氢泄漏事故的应急处置能力，本文开展了基于钠基碱醇胺法的硫化氢捕消剂配制与喷洒技术研究。主要结论如下：

依据硫化氢气体的物化性质和吸收特性，开展了不同体系溶剂脱除硫化氢实验。钠基碱盐与有机醇胺溶液在吸收硫化氢方面表现出稳定的脱硫性能，可作为硫化氢捕消基体材料。1.2wt%的过氧化氢溶液能显著促进碳酸根、碳酸氢根离子对硫化氢的吸收，同时可以氧化N-甲基二乙醇胺和异丙醇胺的羟基（-OH）和胺基（-NH），形成的中间产物进一步与硫化氢反应生成硫单质，从而提高捕消基体材料整体脱硫性能。

通过搭建的硫化氢捕消喷洒模拟实验台，开展不同风速影响下的硫化氢泄漏捕消模拟实验，测试不同粒径、不同角度对捕消剂吸收硫化氢的影响。结果表明，硫化氢气体的运移与扩散易受风流的影响，风流的作用降低了整体硫化氢捕消效率。同时，喷洒角度越大、粒径越小，雾滴与硫化氢分子的接触时间越长，捕消效率越高。喷洒粒径为0.6mm、角度为60~90°时为喷头的最佳喷洒参数，喷洒60s内捕消效率分别达到了88.0%和73.4%。

建立了硫化氢捕消喷洒处置系统，利用粒子群算法引入最小喷洒面积、喷洒量等约束条件，构建了喷头布局优化模型，模拟在50m×70m网格区域内喷头布局优化。采用模糊PID控制方法对处置系统的喷洒压力和流量进行反馈控制，定义模糊集和模糊规则库，利用MATLAB软件建立了喷洒控制Simulink 模型，模糊PID控制在应对不同硫化氢浓度变化时，能及时调节喷洒输出压力，优化喷洒控制策略，避免系统对捕消剂的喷洒不足。同时，系统输出响应时间约为1.2s，与传统PID控制相比响应速度提高了73.33%，超调量降低了24%，保持较高的响应速度，满足了喷洒系统对喷头压力的分级调控，对硫化氢泄漏捕消处置技术研究具有重要意义。

Hydrogen sulfide leakage accidents often occur in processes such as chemical synthesis, petroleum refining, coal mine operations, and sulfur recovery. They are one of the major disasters in the chemical production process. Severe leaks of concentration hydrogen sulfide can cause suffocation or death. In order to more safely protect the human body and the environment from harm and further improve the emergency response capabilities to hydrogen sulfide leakage accidents, this article carried out research on the preparation and spraying technology of hydrogen sulfide capture and disinfectant based on sodium alkali alcohol amine solution. The main conclusions are as follows:

Based on the physical and chemical properties and absorption characteristics of hydrogen sulfide gas, experiments on hydrogen sulfide removal by solvents in different systems were carried out. Sodium alkali salt and organic alcohol amine solution show high desulfurization performance in absorbing hydrogen sulfide and can be used as hydrogen sulfide capture and elimination matrix materials. 1.2wt% hydrogen peroxide solution can significantly promote the absorption of hydrogen sulfide by carbonate and bicarbonate ions, and can also oxidize the hydroxyl (-OH) and amine groups (NH), the intermediate product formed further reacts with hydrogen sulfide to generate elemental sulfur, thereby improving the overall desulfurization performance of the capture and elimination matrix material.

By building a hydrogen sulfide capture and elimination spraying simulation experimental platform, we carried out hydrogen sulfide leakage capture and elimination simulation experiments under the influence of different wind speeds to test the effects of different particle sizes and different angles on the absorption of hydrogen sulfide by the capture and elimination agent. The results show that the migration and diffusion of hydrogen sulfide gas are easily affected by wind flow, and the effect of wind flow reduces the overall hydrogen sulfide capture and elimination efficiency. At the same time, the larger the spray angle, the smaller the particle size, and the longer the contact time between mist droplets and hydrogen sulfide molecules, the higher the capture and elimination efficiency. When the spraying particle size is 0.6mm and the angle is 60~90°, the optimal spraying parameters of the nozzle are achieved. The capture and elimination efficiencies within 60 seconds of spraying reach 88.0% and 73.4% respectively.

A hydrogen sulfide capture and elimination spraying and disposal system was established. The particle swarm algorithm was used to introduce constraints such as minimum spray area and spray volume, and a sprinkler head layout optimization model was constructed to simulate the optimal layout of sprinklers in a 50m×70m grid area. The Fuzzy PID control method is used to feedback control the spraying pressure and flow rate of the disposal system. Fuzzy sets and Fuzzy rule libraries are defined. MATLAB software is used to establish a spraying control Simulink model. Fuzzy PID control can adjust in time when responding to changes in different hydrogen sulfide concentrations. Spray output pressure, optimize spray control strategy, and avoid under-spraying or over-spraying of capture and disinfectant by the system. At the same time, the system output response time is about 1.2s. Compared with traditional PID control, the response speed is increased by 73.33%, and the overshoot is reduced by 24%. It maintains a high response speed and meets the hierarchical regulation of nozzle pressure by the spray system. Research on hydrogen sulfide leakage capture and disposal technology is of great significance.

[1] 辛保泉, 卢卫, 张相建, 等. 硫化氢泄漏后果定量分析方法及指标响应规律[J]. 过程工程学报, 2018, 18(S1): 82-88.

[2] 莫昌艺, 赵广乐, 任亮, 等. 后精制反应温度对加氢裂化产物分布和性质的影响研究[J]. 石油炼制与化工, 2023, 54(11): 16-21.

[3] 陈坤, 徐龙君. 重庆开县“3.25”天然气井泄漏事故原因及影响分析[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2017, 16(04): 25-28.

[4] 杨海维. 采油厂集输管道和设备硫化氢腐蚀评估与维护分析[J]. 中国设备工程, 2024(08): 180-182.

[5] 潘跃东. 石化企业硫化氢中毒事故分析与防治[J]. 安全、健康和环境, 2018, 18(04): 5-7.

[6] 辛保泉, 喻健良, 党文义, 等. 复杂地形高含硫天然气风洞扩散实验及安全防护距离[J]. 天然气工业, 2020, 40(11): 149-158.

[7] 赵桂利, 赵祥迪, 姜春雨, 等. 有毒气体重大突发泄漏情景设计及仿真分析[J]. 安全、健康和环境, 2020, 20(09): 5-10.

[8] 罗佳洁. 油气田开发中硫化氢产生机理和防治研究[J]. 化工管理, 2016, (02): 149.

[9] 赵杰. 华北地区含硫化氢地下储气库脱硫运行技术[J]. 石油与天然气化工, 2019, 48(06):1-6.

[10] 张吉东, 俞英, 黄海燕. 油气田硫化氢形成机理及影响因素研究[J]. 科技创新与应用, 2014, 99(23): 143.

[11] 李瑛. 流化床煤气炉炉内脱硫分析研究[J]. 云南环境科学, 2015, (03): 55-58.

[12] 马玉贞, 陶明信, 张新民, 等. 煤层气及天然气中的H2S与SO2及其危害性[J]. 地质学报, 2015, (10): 1408-1415.

[13] 石永胜, 陈大方. 加氢装置硫化氢的产生及安全防护[J]. 内蒙古石油化工, 2011, 37(20): 75-76.

[14] Westmoreland P R, Harrison D P. Evaluation of candidate solids for high-temperature desulfurization of low-Btu gases[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2014, 10(7): 659-661.

[15] 蒋兰军, 扬林. 硫化氢脱除技术发展现状[J]. 河南化工, 2016, 29(09): 20-22.

[16] Meij R. Trace element behavior in coal-fired power plants[J]. Fuel processing technology, 2010, 39(1-3): 199-217.

[17] Akiti Jr T T, Constant K P, Doraiswamy L K, et al. Development of an advanced calcium-based sorbent for desulfurizing hot coal gas[J]. Advances in environmental research, 2018, 5(1): 31-38.

[18] Dou B, Wang C, Chen H, et al. Research progress of hot gas filtration, desulphurization and HCl removal in coal-derived fuel gas: A review[J]. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 2012, 90(11): 1901-1917.

[19] 王学谦, 宁平.硫化氢废气治理研究进展[J].环境污染治理技术与设备,2014,(04):77-85.

[20] Cecilia J, Soriano M, Correia L M, et al. Fe2O3 supported on hollow micro/mesospheres silica for the catalytic partial oxidation of H2S to sulfur[J]. Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2020, 294: 109875.

[21] 刘云相, 臧金秋, 杨传玺, 等. 干法脱硫技术在日用玻璃窑炉烟气治理中的应用[J]. 科技创新与应用, 2022, 12(27): 1-5.

[22] 李东亮, 王康军, 李运甲, 等. 中低品位菱镁矿煅烧产物硫化氢脱除性能研究[J]. 金属矿山, 2022, 555(09): 223-229.

[23] 张辛亥, 胡震, 薛韩玲, 等. 对矿井中硫化氢脱除剂的配制及表征[J]. 西安科技大学学报, 2021, 41(01): 29-35.

[24] 王卫文. 硫化氢的净化技术及研究进展[J]. 能源环境保护, 2017, 24(03): 9-13.

[25] 樊辉, 陈陆建, 赵红, 等. 活性炭基脱硫剂吸附脱除天然气中H2S的研究[J]. 天然气化工, 2011, 36(01): 34-38.

[26] Cepollaro M, Caputo D, Gargiulo N, et al. H2S catalytic removal at low temperature over Cu- and Mg-activated carbon honeycombs[J]. Catalysis Today, 2022, 390-391.

[27] 胡云霞, 闫仁庚, 奚惠民, 等. 石油天然气脱硫剂的研究[J]. 精细石油化工, 2013, (06): 34-36.

[28] 刘小群, 江宏富, 姚文锐, 等. 硫化氢脱除技术研究进展[J]. 安徽化工, 2021, (05):33-37.

[29] Bahadori A. Natural gas processing: technology and engineering design[M]. Gulf Profes-sional Publishing, 2014.

[30] Gupta A K, Ibrahim S, Al Shoaibi A. Advances in sulfur chemistry for treatment of acid gases[J]. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 2016, 54: 65-92.

[31] Dejaloud A, Habibi A, Vahabzadeh F. DBT desulfurization by Rhodococcus erythropolis PTCC 1767 in aqueous and biphasic systems[J]. Chemical Papers, 2020, 74: 3605-3615.

[32] Asghar U, Rafiq S, Anwar A, et al. Review on the progress in emission control techno- logies for the abatement of CO2, SOx and NOx from fuel combustion[J]. Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering, 2021, 9(5): 106064.

[33] 包飞. 生物法脱除含硫气体中硫化氢试验研究[J]. 硫酸工业, 2022, (06): 6-8.

[34] 汪家铭. Shell-Paques生物脱硫技术及其应用[J]. 化肥设计, 2018, 48(02): 39-42.

[35] Ramirez M, Gómez J M, Cantero D, et al. Hydrogen sulfide removal from air by Acidi- thiobacillus thiooxidans in a trickle bed reactor[J]. Folia microbiologica,2009,54:409-414.

[36] 陈水泉, 臧萌, 孙烁, 等.石油生物脱硫技术研究进展[J].石油学报,2023,39(04):910-921.

[37] Borhani T N G, Afkhamipour M, Azarpour A, et al. Modeling study on CO2 and H2S sim ultaneous removal using MDEA solution[J]. Journal of industrial and engineering chemistry, 2016, 34: 344-355.

[38] Shah Mansi S, Tsapatsis M, Siepmann J. Hydrogen sulfide capture: from absorption in polar liquids to oxide, zeolite, and metal-organic framework adsorbents and membranes. Chemival Reviews, 2017, 117(14): 9755-9803.

[39] 张照飞. 锰基-蠕虫状介孔高温煤气脱硫剂的制备及性能研究[D]. 天津:天津大学, 2014.

[40] 张峰, 王振宇. 新型硫化氢脱除剂对原油破乳脱盐的影响[J]. 石油炼制与化工, 2018, 49(09): 37-42.

[41] 王长守, 司伟, 王军. 新型硫化氢脱除剂YD-005的研制与应用[J]. 应用化工, 2018, 47 (05): 988-990.

[42] 李伟华, 王加雄, 邓奇根. 密闭空间硫化氢泄漏喷淋捕消实验研究[J]. 工业安全与环保, 2023, 49(01): 1-4.

[43] 刘奎. 喷洒吸收液治理煤矿H2S影响因素试验研究[J]. 煤矿安全, 2016, 47(02): 29-32.

[44] 邹兵, 朱胜杰, 石昕. 硫化氢捕消剂清除硫化氢效果研究[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2012, 8(09): 48-51.

[45] 张婷婷, 张茂东, 李超. 石化企业硫化氢泄露的水喷淋控制研究[J]. 科学技术与工程, 2015, 15(05): 202-206.

[46] Dahlan I, Lee K T, Kamaruddin A H, et al. Analysis of SO2 sorption capacity of rice husk ash (RHA)/CaO/NaOH sorbents using response surface methodology (RSM): untreated and pretreated RHA[J]. Environmental science technology, 2008, 42(5): 1499-1504.

[47] 郝文阁, 赵光玲, 王东鹏, 等．石灰石湿法脱硫过程中 SO2 吸收数学模型[J]. 环境工程学报, 2018, 2(7): 969-972.

[48] 郝磊, 高雄, 陈铁英. 基于ICEM 和FLUENT 温室雾化喷头内部流场分析[J]. 农机化研究, 2016, 38(6): 88-92.

[49] Sakai T, Sadakata M, Saito M, et al. Mean diameters and drop size distribution of suspension sprays[J]. Atomization and Spray Technol, 2011, 1: 147-164.

[50] 刘定平, 李史栋. 4种脱硫喷嘴雾化特性对比试验[J]. 流体机械, 2013, 41(04): 1-6.

[51] Gałaj J, Drzymała T, Piątek P. Analysis of influence of tilt angle on the distribution of water droplets diameters in a spray generated by the Turbo Master 52 nozzle[J]. Procedia Engineering, 2017, 172: 300-309.

[52] Yao S, Zhang J, Fang T. Effect of viscosities on structure and instability of sprays from a swirl atomizer[J]. Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, 2012, 39: 158-166.

[53] Shafaee M, Banitabaei S A, Esfahanian V, et al. An investigation on effect of geometrical parameters on spray cone angle and droplet size distribution of a two-fluid atomizer[J]. Journal of mechanical science and technology, 2011, 25: 3047-3052.

[54] Butts T R, Butts L E, Luck J D, et al. Droplet size and nozzle tip pressure from a pulse-width modulation sprayer[J]. Biosystems engineering, 2019, 178: 52-69.

[55] Han H, Wang P, Li Y, et al. Effect of water supply pressure on atomization charac- teristics and dust-reduction efficiency of internal mixing air atomizing nozzle[J]. Advanced Powder Technology, 2020, 31(1): 252-268.

[56] Rozali S N, Paterson A H, Hindmarsh J P, et al. Atomization Beheaviour of Juice-Fibren Suspensions in a Two-Fluid Nozzle[J]. Journal of Food Engineering, 2019, 256: 53-60.

[57] 山泽银. 卷烟加料喷嘴雾化特性分析与试验研究[D]. 昆明: 昆明理工大学, 2016.

[58] 王宇, 李晓, 张明建, 等. 烟草加料过程中双流体喷嘴雾化粒径的分布特性 [J]. 烟草科技, 2018, 51(3): 78-86.

[59] Pezo M L, Pezo L, Dragojlović D, et al. Experimental and computational study of the two-fluid nozzle spreading characteristics[J]. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 2021, 166: 18-28.

[60] 李俏, 杨斌, 王鹏程, 等. 应用Fluent流场模拟分析与结构改进雾化喷嘴[J]. 化学工程与装备, 2017, 246(07): 13-15.

[61] 张婷婷, 张茂东, 李超. 石化企业硫化氢泄露的水喷淋控制研究[J]. 科学技术与工程, 2015, 15(5): 202-206.

[62] 张天保. 高含硫天然气净化厂硫化氢泄漏风险管控探讨[J]. 石化技术, 2020, 27(04): 44-45.

[63] 汪满. 硫化氢捕消器自动及远程应急处理控制系统[J]. 化学工程与装备, 2019, (05): 264-265.

[64] 石昕, 朱胜杰, 杨芳. 硫化氢泄漏监测与应急处置技术研究[J]. 山东化工, 2015, 44 (12): 130-132.

[65] 廖凯. 面向含硫井站天然气泄漏毒性事故的应急决策研究[D]. 重庆: 重庆科技学院, 2021.

[66] 邓奇根, 王颖南, 吴喜发, 等. 煤矿硫化氢防治技术研究进展[J]. 科技导报, 2018, 36 (02): 81-87.

[67] 李环, 杨威, 郭晓晓, 等. 高含硫气井硫化氢泄露扩散模拟和应急处置[J]. 科技视界, 2015, 147(24): 72-74.

[68] 赵忠军. 天然气净化装置硫化氢泄漏情景构建及应急能力建设[J]. 安全、健康和环境, 2022, 22(09): 1-5.

[69] 刘波. 普光气田采气厂集输系统硫化氢泄漏监测与控制技术[J]. 石化技术, 2017, 24(10): 235-236.

[70] 酒江波, 赵东风, 马金秋. 石油化工系统硫化氢中毒危害分级与控制措施研究[J]. 石油化工安全环保技术, 2012, 28(04): 23-27.

[71] 崔国刚, 李磊, 薛忠林, 等. 天然气泄露应急处置系统研究与应用[J]. 计算机与应用化学, 2012, 29(12): 1488-1490.

[72] 殷振华, 陆天堂, 钱宇宁, 等. 环境预警与应急处置系统分析与设计[J]. 科技创新导报, 2012, 252(36): 36-37.

[73] 李宝德, 吕靖, 李晶. 基于前景理论和概率语言术语的突发事件应急响应决策方法[J]. 系统管理学报, 2023, 32(06): 1164-1175..

[74] Zhang J, Gao Z, Liu X. An optimization approach for the sprinkler layout in a subway station based on fire dynamics simulation. Fire Technology, 2018, 53: 1275-1291.

[75] 宋寒冬, 陈正寿, 杜炳鑫, 等. 基于改进秃鹰算法的自旋转水射流喷头布局优化方法[J]. 计算机集成制造系统, 1-24[2024-05-13].

[76] 陈卓, 张翰钊, 刘波, 等. 粒子群优化算法在气田集输管网布局中的应用[J]. 油气田地面工程, 2023, 42(04): 32-38.

[77] Liang Y, Tu Y, Ju Y, et al. A multi-granularity proportional hesitant fuzzy linguistic To- dim method and its application to emergency decision making[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2019, 36: 101081.

[78] Wu Z, Xu J, Jiang X, et al. Two MAGDM models based on hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets with possibility distributions: VIKOR and TOPSIS[J]. Information Sciences, 2019, 473: 101-120.

[79] 杜冲, 陈昌进, 许锋, 等. 基于模糊PID的轨道巡检机器人速度环控制器设计[J]. 机械设计与制造工程, 2023, 52(11): 27-31.

[80] 范子彦, 李立君, 李宇航, 等. 油茶果采摘机阀控液压马达模糊神经网络PID控制[J]. 液压与气动, 2021, 45(11): 76-85.

[81] Keramitsoglou I, Cartalis C, Kassomenos P. Decision support system for managing oil spill events[J]. Environmental Management, 2003, 32: 290-298.

[82] Kwan M P, Lee J. Emergency response after 9/11: the potential of real-time 3D GIS for quick emergency response in micro-spatial environments[J]. Computers, environment and urban systems, 2005, 29(2): 93-113.

[83] 晁宏洲, 蒋东辉, 艾国生, 等. 高效原油硫化氢脱除剂研究与试验[J]. 石油地质与工程, 2008, (06): 126-128.

[84] 何勇, 吴剑坚, 方慧, 等. 植保无人机雾滴沉积效果研究综述[J]. 浙江大学学报, 2018, 44(04): 392-398.