대한건축학회논문집 (Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea)

  • 제39권10호
  • /
  • Pages.251-262
  • /
  • 2023
  • /
  • 2733-6239(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2733-6247(eISSN)
대한건축학회 (Architectural Institute of Korea)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

플랜트 시설물의 성능기반 내폭설계 도입을 위한 체계 제안

Proposal of Framework for Adoption of Performance based Blast Resistant Design in Plant Facilities

  • 이승훈 (건국대 건축학부 건축공학전공) ;
  • 김한수 (건국대 건축학부)
  • 투고 : 2023.08.10
  • 심사 : 2023.10.10
  • 발행 : 2023.10.30
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

This study aims to provide a framework for adopting performance-based seismic design in plant facilities, taking into account the recent introduction of performance-based design for non-conventional loads. A comparative analysis of existing performance-based designs, including earthquake, wind, and fire was conducted. To establish a basic framework for performance-based blast-resistant design, existing blast-resistant design guidelines were referred to. The design blast load based on the return period was proposed by referring to the QRA results performed by various researchers. In relation to the design blast load, the standoff distance factor was presented for the reduction of the load according to the distance. Through a comprehensive review, blast performance levels, protection standards, and acceptance criteria were proposed. This study can contribute to the development of design standard for the performance-based blast resistant design in plant facilities.

키워드

과제정보

본 연구는 국토교통부/국토교통과학기술진흥원의 지원으로 수행되었음(과제번호 22RMPP-C163162-02)

참고문헌

  1. AASHTO (2017). AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC, 1781.
  2. ACI 375 (2006). Performance-Based Design of Concrete Building for Wind Loads (SP-240), American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 146.
  3. AIK (2021). Performance-Based Seismic Design Guidelines for Reinforced Concrete Building Structures, Architectural Institute of Korea, Seoul, 172.
  4. AIK&KSSC (2022). Performance-Based Fire Resistance Design Guidelines for Steel Buildings, Architectural Institute of Korea, Seoul, 132.
  5. AISC (2013). Design of Blast Resistant Structures(Steel Design Guide 26), American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago, IL, 168.
  6. AISC 360-16 (2016). Specification for Structural Steel Buildings (ANSI/AISC 360-16), American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago, IL, 620.
  7. Alonso, F.D., Ferradas, E.G., Perez, J.F.S., Aznar, A.M., & Gimeno, J.R. (2006). Characteristic Overpressure-Impulse-Distance Curves for Vapour Cloud Explosions Using the TNO Multi-Energy Model, J. Haz. Mater., 137(2), 734-741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2006.04.005
  8. API RP 752 (2009). Management of Hazards Associated with Location of Process Plant Permanent Buildings, American Petroleum Institute, Washington, DC, 27.
  9. API RP 753 (2007). Management of Hazards Associated with Location of Process Plant Portable Buildings, American Petroleum Institute, Washington, DC, 22.
  10. ASCE (1999). Structural Design for Physical Security: State of the Practice, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, 264.
  11. ASCE (2010). Design of Blast-Resistant Buildings in Petrochemical Facilities, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, 300.
  12. ASCE (2011). Blast Protection of Building(ASCE/SEI 59-11), American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, 108.
  13. ASCE (2018). Structural Fire Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, 242.
  14. ASCE (2019). Prestandard for Performance-Based Wind Design, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, 113.
  15. ASCE (2020). Seismic Evaluation and Design of Petrochemical and Other Industrial Facilities, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, 346.
  16. ASCE 7-16 (2017). Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, 346.
  17. ASCE 41-17 (2017). Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, 576.
  18. ATC 40 (1996). Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Building(Volume 1), Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, California.
  19. Bai, Y., Xin, B., Yu, J., Dang, W., Yan, X., & Yu, A. (2021). Risk-based quantitative method for determining blast-resistant and defense loads of petrochemical buildings, J. Loss Prev. Process Industries, 70, 104407.
  20. Benintendi, R. (2018). Process Safety Calculation, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 638.
  21. Benucci, S., Pontiggia, M., & Uguccioni, G. (2012). Explosion Load Calculation for Building Design: Risk-Based versus Consequence-Based Approach, Chemical Engineering Transactions, 26, 153-158.
  22. CCPS (2018). Guidelines for Siting and Layout of Facilities(2nd Edition), Center for Chemical Process Safety, New York, 400.
  23. Chamberlain, G.A. & Puttock, J.S. (2006). Vapour Cloud Explosion Risk Management in Onshore Plant Using Explosion Exceedance Techniques, Hazards XIX Symposium Series No. 151, IChemE, 1-15.
  24. Chris, D.P. (2019). Performance-Based Earthquake Design-Lessons Learned from a Building Code Option, Structure Magazine, 32-33.
  25. CIA (2010). Guidance for the location and design of occupied buildings on chemical manufacturing sites, Chemical Industries Association, London,
  26. CIA (2020). Guidance for the Location and Design of Occupied Buildings on Chemical Manufacturing and Similar Major Hazard Sites, Chemical Industries Association, London, 52.
  27. COSTIN, N.S. (2014). Numerical simulation of detonation of an explosive atmosphere of liquefied petroleum gas in a confined space, Defense Technology, 10(3), 294-297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dt.2014.06.008
  28. CPR 18E (2005). Guidelines for Quantitative Risk Assessment, Committee for the Prevention of Disasters.
  29. Dusenberry, D.O. (2010). Handbook for Blast-Resistant Design of Buildings, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey, 484.
  30. EN 1127-1 (2007). Explosive Atmospheres - Explosion Prevention and Protection, European Committee for Standardization, Brussels.
  31. Eurocode 3 (2005). Design of Steel Structures-Structure Fire Design(EN 1993-1-2:2005), European Committee for Standardization, Brussels.
  32. FEMA 273 (1997). NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC.
  33. FEMA 356 (2000). Prestandard and Commentary for Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC.
  34. FEMA 426 (2003). Reference Manual to Mitigate Potential Terrorist Attacks Against Buildings, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC.
  35. FEMA P-749 (2010). Earthquake Resistant Design Concepts: An Introduction to the NEHRP Recommended Seismic Provisions for New Buildings and Other Structures, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC.
  36. ICC (2018). International Building Code, International Code Council.
  37. IOGP (2010). Process Release Frequencies, International Association of Oil & Gas Producers, London.
  38. ISO (2019). Fire Safety Engineering-Performance of structures in Fire(ISO 24679-1), International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.
  39. Jeong, S.Y., Alinejad, H., Ahn, B.W., & Kang, Thomas H.K. (2021). Performance-Based Design and Inelastic Wind Design of Tall Buildings, J. Wind Eng. Inst. of Korea, 25(3), 119-128. https://doi.org/10.37109/weik.2021.25.3.119
  40. Kang, Thomas H.K. (2020). Inelastic Design Method and Target Performance for the Application of Performance-Based Wind Design, J. Wind Eng. Inst. of Korea Conference, 24(2), 20-20.
  41. KBC 2016 (2016). Korean Building Code 2016 and Commentary, Architectural Institute of Korea.
  42. KDS 17 (2018). Seismic Design General, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport.
  43. KDS 41 (2022). Korean Building Structure Design Standard, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport.
  44. KFS-701 (2020). Standard on Plant Layout and Spacing for Oil and Petrochemical Plants, Korea Fire Protection Association(KFPA), 29.
  45. KGS GC 203 (2018). Code for Seismic Design of Gas Facilities and Aboveground Pipes, Korea Gas Safety.
  46. Lee, S.H., & Kim, H.S. (2021). Study on the Calculation of the Blast Pressure of Vapor Cloud Explosions by Analyzing Plant Explosion Cases, J. Comput. Struct. Eng. Inst. Korea, 34(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.7734/COSEIK.2021.34.1.1
  47. Lee, S.H., & Kim, H.S. (2022). Structural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Members Subjected to Axial and Blast Loads Using Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis, J. Comput. Struct. Eng. Inst. Korea, 35(3), 141-148. https://doi.org/10.7734/COSEIK.2022.35.3.141
  48. MARSH (2018). The 100 Largest Losses 1978-2017, MARSH Ltd., UK, 37.
  49. NFPA 557 (2020). Standard for determination of fire loads for use in structural fire protection design, National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, MA.
  50. NFPA 5000 (2015). Building Construction and Safety Code, National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, MA.
  51. PDC-TR 06-08 (2008). Single Degree of Freedom Structural Response Limits for Antiterrorism Design, US Army Corps of Engineers - Protective Design Center, Omaha, Neb.
  52. PDC-TR 08-07 (2008). Methodology Manual for Component Explosive Damage Assessment Workbook(CEDAW), US Army Corps of Engineers - Protective Design Center, Omaha, Neb.
  53. PEER (2017). Guidelines for Performance-Based Seismic Design of Tall Buildings, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley.
  54. PEER/ATC 72-1 (2010). Modeling and Acceptance Criteria for Seismic Design and Analysis of Tall Buildings, Applied Technology Council, CA.
  55. PIP STC 01018 (2006). Blast Resistant Building Design Criteria, Construction Industry Institute, Austin, Texas.
  56. Ramirez-Marengo, C., Diaz-Ovalle, C., Vazquez-Roman, R., & Mannan, M.S. (2015). A stochastic approach for risk analysis in vapor cloud explosion, J. Loss Prev. Process Industries, 35, 249-256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2014.09.006
  57. RR512 (2007). Review of Significance of Societal Risk for Proposed Revision to Land Use Planning Arrangements for Large Scale Petroleum Storage Sites, Health and Safety Executive, UK, 32
  58. Salaun, N., Hanssen, A.G., & Nilsen, P. E. (2016). Risk-based Structural Response against Explosion Blast Loads: Systematic One-to-one CFD(FLACS) & NLFEA(Impetus Afea solver) Coupling to Derive Quantified Response Exceedance, Chemical Engineering Transactions, 48, 55-60.
  59. SEAOC (1995). Performance based seismic design of buildings(Vision 2000), Structural Engineers Association of California.
  60. Sun, X.Q., & Luo, M.C. (2014). Fire Risk Assessment for Super High-rise Buildings, Prcocedia Engineering, 71, 492-501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2014.04.071
  61. UFC 3-340-02 (2008). Structures to Resist the Effects of Accidental Explosions, US Depart of Defence(DoD).
  62. UKOOA (2003). Fire and Explosion Guidance-Part 1: Avoidance and Mitigation of Explosions, UK Offshore Operators Association Limited, London.
  63. van den Berg, A.C.(1985). The multi-energy method: A Framework for Vapour Cloud Explosion Blast Prediction, J. Haz. Mater., 12(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3894(85)80022-4
  64. Yasseri, S. (2003). Performance-based Fire Resistant Design, FABIG Technical Discussion-Article No. R484, Steel Construction Institute, UK, 3-8.