LPG 소형저장탱크를 충전용량 기준으로 200 kg, 500 kg 및 1,000 kg으로 정하고, 지상과 지하 설치된 경우에 따른 위험정도를 정량적으로 평가하여 지상에 설치할 경우와 지하에 설치할 경우의 안전성을 비교 평가하여 저장탱크 지하설치식의 타당성을 검토하였다. 정량적 피해영향평가는 사고 피해 예측 기법인 PHAST를 활용하여, 복사열과 과압에 대한 피해정도를 알아본다. 지하 설치된 LPG 소형저장탱크의 경우, PHAST의 특성상 지하 설치된 상태의 입력값 변수 도출을 위해 FDS를 활용하여 얻어진 입력변수 값을 도출하고 PHAST에 입력하여 피해영향평가를 분석한다. 또한, ...
LPG 소형저장탱크를 충전용량 기준으로 200 kg, 500 kg 및 1,000 kg으로 정하고, 지상과 지하 설치된 경우에 따른 위험정도를 정량적으로 평가하여 지상에 설치할 경우와 지하에 설치할 경우의 안전성을 비교 평가하여 저장탱크 지하설치식의 타당성을 검토하였다. 정량적 피해영향평가는 사고 피해 예측 기법인 PHAST를 활용하여, 복사열과 과압에 대한 피해정도를 알아본다. 지하 설치된 LPG 소형저장탱크의 경우, PHAST의 특성상 지하 설치된 상태의 입력값 변수 도출을 위해 FDS를 활용하여 얻어진 입력변수 값을 도출하고 PHAST에 입력하여 피해영향평가를 분석한다. 또한, 프로빗 분석을 통하여 피해영향거리별 인체의 피해영향관계를 도출하여 LPG 소형저장탱크의 지상과 지하 설치에 따른 피해영향평가를 비교·분석한다. 지상 및 지하에 설치된 소형저장탱크의 각각의 피해영향에 대해 비교해보면 지하에 설치된 저장탱크의 경우 Fire ball이 발생하지 않았고, Jet fire에 의한 복사열의 최대 피해영향거리는 저장탱크 용량에 상관없이 지상에 설치할 경우 약 124 m, 지하에 설치할 경우 약 22 m 로 약 6배 차이가 나타났다. 폭발의 과압으로 인한 최대 피해영향거리는 용량에 따라 지상에 설치할 경우 약 76 ~ 131 m, 지하에 설치할 경우 용량에 상관없이 약 8 m 로 약 9 ~ 16배 차이가 나타났다. 또한, PHAST에서 도출된 복사열 및 과압을 활용한 프로빗 분석으로 비교하였다. 가장 위험도가 큰 1,000 kg 기준으로 하였을 때, 1도 화상 경우에 지상은 122 m까지 피해를 입혔으며, 지하는 25 m로 약 5배 차이가 나타났다. 복사열로 인한 사망의 경우는 지상은 110 m, 지하는 10 m로 약 11배 차이가 나타났다. 과압에 의한 고막파열은 지상이 89 m, 지하가 6 m로 약 15배 차이가 발생했다.
LPG 소형저장탱크를 충전용량 기준으로 200 kg, 500 kg 및 1,000 kg으로 정하고, 지상과 지하 설치된 경우에 따른 위험정도를 정량적으로 평가하여 지상에 설치할 경우와 지하에 설치할 경우의 안전성을 비교 평가하여 저장탱크 지하설치식의 타당성을 검토하였다. 정량적 피해영향평가는 사고 피해 예측 기법인 PHAST를 활용하여, 복사열과 과압에 대한 피해정도를 알아본다. 지하 설치된 LPG 소형저장탱크의 경우, PHAST의 특성상 지하 설치된 상태의 입력값 변수 도출을 위해 FDS를 활용하여 얻어진 입력변수 값을 도출하고 PHAST에 입력하여 피해영향평가를 분석한다. 또한, 프로빗 분석을 통하여 피해영향거리별 인체의 피해영향관계를 도출하여 LPG 소형저장탱크의 지상과 지하 설치에 따른 피해영향평가를 비교·분석한다. 지상 및 지하에 설치된 소형저장탱크의 각각의 피해영향에 대해 비교해보면 지하에 설치된 저장탱크의 경우 Fire ball이 발생하지 않았고, Jet fire에 의한 복사열의 최대 피해영향거리는 저장탱크 용량에 상관없이 지상에 설치할 경우 약 124 m, 지하에 설치할 경우 약 22 m 로 약 6배 차이가 나타났다. 폭발의 과압으로 인한 최대 피해영향거리는 용량에 따라 지상에 설치할 경우 약 76 ~ 131 m, 지하에 설치할 경우 용량에 상관없이 약 8 m 로 약 9 ~ 16배 차이가 나타났다. 또한, PHAST에서 도출된 복사열 및 과압을 활용한 프로빗 분석으로 비교하였다. 가장 위험도가 큰 1,000 kg 기준으로 하였을 때, 1도 화상 경우에 지상은 122 m까지 피해를 입혔으며, 지하는 25 m로 약 5배 차이가 나타났다. 복사열로 인한 사망의 경우는 지상은 110 m, 지하는 10 m로 약 11배 차이가 나타났다. 과압에 의한 고막파열은 지상이 89 m, 지하가 6 m로 약 15배 차이가 발생했다.
For the charging capacity of LPG small storage tank, the reference points were set at 200 kg, 500 kg and 1,000 kg. When they were installed both on ground and underground the degree of danger was evaluated quantitatively to compare the safety level of when the tank is installed on the ground versus ...
For the charging capacity of LPG small storage tank, the reference points were set at 200 kg, 500 kg and 1,000 kg. When they were installed both on ground and underground the degree of danger was evaluated quantitatively to compare the safety level of when the tank is installed on the ground versus when it is installed underground. This was done to review the validity of the underground installment of storage tanks. The quantitative assessment of damage effect was conducted by using PHAST, which is a method to forecast incident damages, to review the degree of damage that may be caused by radiant heat and excessive pressure. As for LPG small storage tanks installed underground, given the characteristics of PHAST, the input variable acquired using FDS was used to analyze the damage effects. Moreover, through a probit analysis, the correlation between damage effect distance and damage to the human body was concluded to compare and analyze the damage affects of LPG small storage tanks installed on ground or underground. A comparison of the damage effects of small storage tanks installed on the ground and underground shows that for those installed underground, no fire ball occurred. The maximum damage effect distance by radiation heat due to jet fire was 124 meters when the tank was installed on the ground and 22 meters when it was installed underground, regardless of the tank’s size. This indicates a difference of approximately six-fold. The maximum damage effect distance due to explosions caused by excessive pressure was 76 ~ 131 meters when the tank was installed on the ground with the distance varying according to the capacity of the tank, while when the tank was installed underground, it was approximately 8 m regardless of the tank’s capacity, indicating a difference of approximately 9 ~ 16 fold. Moreover, probit analysis was conducted using the radiation heat and excessive pressure calculated from PHAST. When the reference point was 1,000 kg which has the highest degree of danger, first degree burns occurred up to 122 meters on the ground while when it was underground it was 25 m, indicating a difference of approximately 5 fold. Death due to radiation heat was caused up to 11 meters from the tank on the ground, while the distance was 10 meters when underground, indicating a difference of approximately 11 fold. Rupture in the tympanic membrane due to excessive pressure occurred up to 89 m in distance when on the ground and 6 m when underground, which is an approximately 15 fold difference.
For the charging capacity of LPG small storage tank, the reference points were set at 200 kg, 500 kg and 1,000 kg. When they were installed both on ground and underground the degree of danger was evaluated quantitatively to compare the safety level of when the tank is installed on the ground versus when it is installed underground. This was done to review the validity of the underground installment of storage tanks. The quantitative assessment of damage effect was conducted by using PHAST, which is a method to forecast incident damages, to review the degree of damage that may be caused by radiant heat and excessive pressure. As for LPG small storage tanks installed underground, given the characteristics of PHAST, the input variable acquired using FDS was used to analyze the damage effects. Moreover, through a probit analysis, the correlation between damage effect distance and damage to the human body was concluded to compare and analyze the damage affects of LPG small storage tanks installed on ground or underground. A comparison of the damage effects of small storage tanks installed on the ground and underground shows that for those installed underground, no fire ball occurred. The maximum damage effect distance by radiation heat due to jet fire was 124 meters when the tank was installed on the ground and 22 meters when it was installed underground, regardless of the tank’s size. This indicates a difference of approximately six-fold. The maximum damage effect distance due to explosions caused by excessive pressure was 76 ~ 131 meters when the tank was installed on the ground with the distance varying according to the capacity of the tank, while when the tank was installed underground, it was approximately 8 m regardless of the tank’s capacity, indicating a difference of approximately 9 ~ 16 fold. Moreover, probit analysis was conducted using the radiation heat and excessive pressure calculated from PHAST. When the reference point was 1,000 kg which has the highest degree of danger, first degree burns occurred up to 122 meters on the ground while when it was underground it was 25 m, indicating a difference of approximately 5 fold. Death due to radiation heat was caused up to 11 meters from the tank on the ground, while the distance was 10 meters when underground, indicating a difference of approximately 11 fold. Rupture in the tympanic membrane due to excessive pressure occurred up to 89 m in distance when on the ground and 6 m when underground, which is an approximately 15 fold difference.
AI-Helper
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.