Abstract
Accidents involving domino effects are more serious than other type of accidents. Although there have been studies on such accidents, it is still difficult to examine the actual factors and causes since the domino effect is influenced nonlinearly by factors involving flame, overpressure, and flying objects. We considered the case of adding new facilities to an existing system in a given site. The layout of new facilities suggests positions that minimize the domino effects, based on nonlinear optimization taking domino factors into account. We quantitatively calculated the domino risk of each facility through the concept of combined domino factors (flame, overpressure, and missile). Also, we identified variations of domino damage extent of the target system through comparison of the impacts of domino effect when additional facilities were installed. Simulated annealing was adopted for searching optimal positions. As a case study, we applied the proposed method to the case of adding DME storage tanks in the existing LPG charging facilities. The presented framework of the quantitative assessment of domino risk and safety standard for the layout of additional facilities would be useful for proper layout design for improved accident prevention.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
F. I. Khan and S. A. Abbasi, Process Safety Progress, 17(2), 107 (1998).
T. Abbasi and S. A. Abbasi, J. Hazard. Mater., 141, 489 (2007).
K. Park, M. S. Mannan, Y. D. Jo, J.Y. Kim, N. Keren and Y. Wang, J. Hazard. Mater., A137, 62 (2006).
J.Y. Lee, H. S. Kim and E. S. Yoon, J. Chem. Eng. Japan, 39(7), 731 (2006).
C. M. Pietersen, J. Hazard. Mater., 20, 85 (1988).
D. I. Pstdistzis, G. Knight and L.G. Papageorgiou, Chem. Eng. Res. Design, 82(A5), 579 (2004).
A. Tugnoli, F. Khan, P. Amyotte and V. Cozzan, J. Hazard. Mater., 160, 110 (2008).
CCPS, Guidelines for Chemical Process Quantitative Risk Analysis, CCPS of the AIChE, Wiley (1999).
V. Cozzani, G. Gubinelli and E. Salzano, J. Hazard. Mater., A129, 1 (2006).
The Mathworks, Global Optimization Toolbox 3 (2004).
MHIDAS, Major Hazard Incident Data Service, Health and Safety Executive (2001).
J. S. Koo, S. Kim, H. Kim and E. S. Yoon, Korean J. Chem. Eng., 26, 262 (2009).
A Chemical Engineering Progress, Fire & Explosion Index Hazard Classification Guide, AIChE (1987).
V. Cozzani, G. Gubinelli, G. Antonioni, G. Spadoni and S. Zanelli, J. Hazard. Mater., A207, 14 (2005).
V. Cozzani and A. Tugnoli, J. Hazard. Mater., A139, 209 (2007).
TNO, Methods for the Calculation of the Physical Effects, Apeldoorn, the Netherlands (1996).
P. L. Holden and A. B. Reeves, Ins. Chem. Eng. Symposium, 93 (1985).
A.M. Birk, J. Loss Prevention Process Ind., 9, 173 (1996).
CCPS, Guidelines for Engineering Design for Process Safety, CCPS of the AIChE, Wiley (1993).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
So, W., Kim, YH., Lee, C.J. et al. Optimal layout of additional facilities for minimization of domino effects based on worst-case scenarios. Korean J. Chem. Eng. 28, 656–666 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11814-010-0445-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11814-010-0445-7