LOPA 및 SIF기법에 의한 LPG 인수기지의 안전성향상에 대한 연구

이일재; 김래현; Il Jae Lee; Rae Hyun Kim

Korean Chemical Engineering Research, Vol.53, No.4, 431-439, August, 2015

DOI10.9713/kcer.2015.53.4.431 Export Citation

LOPA 및 SIF기법에 의한 LPG 인수기지의 안전성향상에 대한 연구

Safety Enhancement of LPG Terminal by LOPA & SIF Method

이일재, 김래현 ^{1, †}

한국가스안전공사, 369-811 충북 음성군 맹동면 원중로 1390
¹서울과학기술대학교 화공생명공학과

Il Jae Lee, and Rae Hyun Kim^{1, †}

Korea Gas Safety Co., Wonjung-ro, Maengdong-myeon, Eumseong-gun, Chungcheongbuk-do 369-811, Korea
¹Department of Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering, Seoul National University of Science&Technology, 232 Gongneung-ro, Nowon-gu, Seoul 139-743, Korea

E-mail:

초록

본 연구에서는 LPG(Liquefied Petroleum Gas) 인수기지에 대해 HAZOP(Hazard and Operability), LOPA(Layer of Protection Analysis) 및 SIL(Safety Integrity Level) 위험성 평가기법을 적용하여, 국내 LPG 인수기지 중 사고발생시 피해영향이 가장 큰 부탄 및 프로판 저장탱크를 중심으로, 사고위험성을 감소시킬 수 있는 방안을 고찰하였다. HAZOP 기법을 통해 잠재위험성을 분석하여 사고시나리오를 도출하고, 사고피해영향이 큰 시나리오를 선정하여 LOPA를 분석하였다. LOPA 분석시에는 해당시나리오에 대한 IPL(Independent Protection Layer)을 분석하여 완화된 결과의 빈도를 도출한 후, 설정된 위험성 허용기준(1.0×10-05/년)에 대한 충족여부를 판단하였다. LOPA의 독립방호계층으로서 SIF(Safety Instrumented Functions)의 경제성을 분석하여 SIF가 현장의 특성에 맞는 IPL이 되도록 개선안을 제시하였다. 또한, 독립방호계층으로서 해당공정에 사용된 SIF의 수준을 분석해보고, SIF의 수준에 따라 공정의 사고발생빈도가 어느 정도 변화하는지를 당해 공정에서 도출된 사고시나리오를 중심으로 연구하였다.

The methods which decrease the accident hazards of LPG(Liquefied Petroleum Gas) terminal on the basis of butane & propane storage tanks by applying HAZOP(Hazard and Operability), LOPA(Layer of Protection Analysis) and SIL(Safety Integrity Level) are suggested. The accident scenarios were derived by analyzing latent risks through the HAZOP. The scenarios which would have the big damage effect in accidents were selected and then LOPA was assessed by analyzing IPL(Independent Protection Layer) about the correspond accident scenarios. The improved methods were proposed on the basis of level of SIF(Safety Instrumented Functions) as a IPL considering satisfied condition of risk tolerance criteria(1.0×10-05/y). In addition, The proposed IPLs were basis on the economic analysis. The effect of SIF as a IPL considering the changes of accident frequency was studied in case of the accident scenarios derived from the concerned process.

Keywords:LPG Terminal;HAZOP;LOPA;SIF

[References]

Kim JH, “Safety Enhancement of Chemical Process using SIL Method,” M. S. (2010).
Center for Chemical Process Safety, CCPS, “Guidelines for Hazard Evalution Process,” NewYork, 1-380(1989).
Center for Chemical Process Safety, CCPS, “Layer of Protection Analysis,” NewYork, 1-258(2001).
International Electrotechnical Commision, IEC, “Functional Safety Instrumented Systems for the Process Industry,” IEC61508(2003).
“A” Company, “Technical Data for LPG Terminal Operation,” (2013).
Instrumentation & Systems and Automation Society, SA “Safety Integrity Level Selection,” North Carolina, 1-244(2002).
Dowell AM, “Layer of Protection Analysis and Inherently Safer Process,” 1-220(1999).
Instrumentation & Systems and Automation Society, ISA, “Application of Safety Instrumented Systems for the Process Industries,” ANSI/ISA-84.02, North Carolina(1996).
Center for Chemical Process Safety, CCPS, “Guidelines for Chemical Process Quantitative Risk Analysis,” NewYork, 267-276(2000).
Crowl & Louvar, “Chemical Process Safety-Fundmentals with Applications,” Prentice Hall PTR, NJ, 448-454(2002).
SINTEF Industrial Management, “OREDA: Offshore Reliability Data,” Trondheim, Norway(2002).
Center for Chemical Process Safety, CCPS “Guidelines for Process Equioment Reliability Data,” NewYork(1989).
Reliability Information Analysis Center, RICA “Nonelectronic Parts Reliability Data,” (1996).
ABS Consulting, PSI, “Layor of Protection Analysis,” TN(2003).
Roodbol HG, “Risk Analysis of Six Potentially Hazardous Industrial Object in the Rijnmond Area, A Pilot Study,” (1982).
Marszal EM, Fuller BA, Shah JN, Process Saf. Prog., 18(4), 189 (1999)
Chae DJ, “Paradigm of Domestic Gas Development,” M.S. (2003).

[Referenced By]

[Related Articles]

[1] Kim JH, “Safety Enhancement of Chemical Process using SIL Method,” M. S. (2010).

[2] Center for Chemical Process Safety, CCPS, “Guidelines for Hazard Evalution Process,” NewYork, 1-380(1989).

[3] Center for Chemical Process Safety, CCPS, “Layer of Protection Analysis,” NewYork, 1-258(2001).

[4] International Electrotechnical Commision, IEC, “Functional Safety Instrumented Systems for the Process Industry,” IEC61508(2003).

[5] “A” Company, “Technical Data for LPG Terminal Operation,” (2013).

[6] Instrumentation & Systems and Automation Society, SA “Safety Integrity Level Selection,” North Carolina, 1-244(2002).

[7] Dowell AM, “Layer of Protection Analysis and Inherently Safer Process,” 1-220(1999).

[8] Instrumentation & Systems and Automation Society, ISA, “Application of Safety Instrumented Systems for the Process Industries,” ANSI/ISA-84.02, North Carolina(1996).

[9] Center for Chemical Process Safety, CCPS, “Guidelines for Chemical Process Quantitative Risk Analysis,” NewYork, 267-276(2000).

[10] Crowl & Louvar, “Chemical Process Safety-Fundmentals with Applications,” Prentice Hall PTR, NJ, 448-454(2002).

[11] SINTEF Industrial Management, “OREDA: Offshore Reliability Data,” Trondheim, Norway(2002).

[12] Center for Chemical Process Safety, CCPS “Guidelines for Process Equioment Reliability Data,” NewYork(1989).

[13] Reliability Information Analysis Center, RICA “Nonelectronic Parts Reliability Data,” (1996).

[14] ABS Consulting, PSI, “Layor of Protection Analysis,” TN(2003).

[15] Roodbol HG, “Risk Analysis of Six Potentially Hazardous Industrial Object in the Rijnmond Area, A Pilot Study,” (1982).

[16] Marszal EM, Fuller BA, Shah JN, Process Saf. Prog., 18(4), 189 (1999)

[17] Chae DJ, “Paradigm of Domestic Gas Development,” M.S. (2003).