بررسی رفتار احتمالاتی لرزهای برجهای فرآیندی با استفاده از تحلیل دینامیکی افزایشی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه مهندسی عمران، دانشکده فنی و مهندسی، دانشگاه قم، قم، ایران

2 مرکز تحقیقات مهندسی سازه موسسه بین المللی مهندسی زلزله و زلزله شناسی، تهران، ایران

چکیده

برج‌های فرآیندی تحت عنوان مخزن‌‌های ذخیره عمودی از جمله سازه‌‌های صنعتی می‌‌باشد که نقش کلیدی در روند تولید مواد نفتی و مشتقات آن در پالایشگاه‌‌ها دارند. به دلیل آسیب پذیری این سازه‌‌ها در زلزله‌‌های گذشته و عدم وجود آیین‌‌نامه و روش معتبر جهت تحلیل لرزه‌‌ای این سازه‌‌ها، مطالعه‌‌ای بر روی رفتار لرزه‌‌ای یک نمونه برج فرآیندی به ارتفاع 26/5 متر واقع در پالایشگاه جزیره قشم در این مطالعه انجام شده است. از آن‌‌جایی که درنظرگرفتن فنداسیون صلب بدون اندرکنش خاک و سازه نشان‌‌دهنده پاسخ لرزه‌‌ای نزدیک به واقعیت نیست، مدلسازی این برج در نرم‌‌افزار اجزاء محدود Abaqus با درنظرگرفتن اثرات اندرکنش خاک و سازه انجام شده است. جهت مدلسازی خاک از مدل وینکلر استفاده شده و رفتار لرزه‌‌ای برج با استفاده از تحلیل استاتیکی غیرخطی و تحلیل دینامیکی افزایشی مورد تجزیه و تحلیل قرار گرفته است و توابع شکنندگی برای ارزیابی آسیب‌‌پذیری در سطوح مختلف شدت‌‌های لرزه‌‌ای تولید شده است. در این بررسی خرابی‌‌های محتمل شامل خرابی بدنه و دامنه و همچنین واژگونی سازه مورد بررسی قرار گرفته است. با توجه به نمودارهای تحلیل دینامیکی افزایشی، هیچگونه کمانشی در جداره و دامنه برج قبل از وقوع واژگونی مشاهده نشده است. نتایج به دست آمده نشان می‌‌دهد مود خرابی غالب برج واژگونی بوده که با توجه به منحنی شکنندگی به دست آمده برای سازه تا شتاب  g0/1 احتمال واژگونی برج صفر می‌‌باشد و برای شتابg 0/350 این احتمال کمتر از 20% است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Process towers probabilistic seismic behavior evaluation using incremental dynamic analysis

نویسندگان [English]

  • fatemeh kolbadi nezhad 1
  • saeedeh koohestani 1
  • Bijan Sayyafzadeh 1
  • abdolreza sarvghad moghadam 2
  • M. Sharifi 1
1 University of Qom
2 International Research Institute of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering, Tehran.
چکیده [English]

Process towers or vertical vessels are among the industrial structures that play a key role in the production process of petroleum products and their derivatives in refineries and oil and gas industries. Due to the vulnerability of these structures in past earthquakes, and the lack of valid regulations and methods for seismic analysis and design of these structures, a case study on a designed and constructed process tower 26.5 meters high, located in Qeshm Island Refinery, has been conducted in this research. Since considering a rigid foundation, without the interaction of soil and structure, may lead to wrong results, in this study, the tower has been modeled in Abaqus finite element software considering soil behavior. The Winkler model used for soil modeling and the seismic behavior of the tower was investigated using pushover and incremental dynamic analysis, and finally, the resulting fragility curve is presented to show the structure's vulnerability at different levels of seismic intensities. In this investigation, the probable failures, including the failure of the body and the skirt, as well as the overturning of the structure, have been investigated. According to the incremental dynamic analysis results, no buckling was observed in the body and the tower's skirt before the tower overturned. The results show that overturning was the predominant failure mode and the probability of this failure mode until PGA=0.1g is approximately equal to zero, and for PGA= 0.35g, this probability is less than 20%. But for rare seismic intensities, the overturning probability is considerable.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Process towers
  • Seismic assessment
  • fragility curve
  • Incremental dynamic analysis (IDA)
  • Soil structure interaction (SSI)

مراجع

[1] R.N. Rao, J.S. Vishwanatha, M. Mayya, S. Prabhu, G. Santhosh, Design of pressure vessel for improvement of a system in a process unit, International Journal of Mechanical and Production Engineering Research and Development, 9 (2019) 1157-1164.
[2] A.S. Kiremidjian, K. Ortiz, R. Nielsen, B. Safavi, Seismic Risk To Major Industrial Facilities., Report - Stanford University, John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center,  (1985).
[3] B. Rodolfo José Danesi Supervisors, P. Bazzurro, D. Vamvatsikos, Seismic Risk of Industrial Plants: Assessment of a Petrochemical Piperack Using Incremental Dynamic Analysis,  (2015).
[4] Y.H. Fluor, Seismic Response of Industrial Structures Considering Soil-Pile-Structure Interaction,  (2004).
[5] E. Salzano, I. Iervolino, G. Fabbrocino, Seismic risk of atmospheric storage tanks in the framework of quantitative risk analysis, 16 (2003) 403-409.
[6] M. Daali, Industrial Facilities and Earthquake Engineering, 13th WCEE,  (2004).
[7] M. Minavand, Seismic Evaluation and Strengthening of Vertical and Horizontal PressureVessels ABSTRACT :,  (2008).
[8] H.S. Sánchez, Structural Behavior of Process Steel Towers Submitted to Seismic Actions, in:  15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (15WCEE), 2012.
[9] K. Diamanti, I. Doukas, S.A. Karamanos, Seismic analysis and design of industrial pressure vessels, ECCOMAS Thematic Conference - COMPDYN 2011: 3rd International Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering: An IACM Special Interest Conference, Programme,  (2011).
[10] NIST, NIST GCR 12-917-21 Soil-Structure Interaction for Building Structures, 12 (2012) 292.
[11] A. Toudehdehghan, T.W. Hong, A critical review and analysis of pressure vessel structures, IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 469 (2019).
[12] M. Cademartori, C. Morassi, R. Siano, M. Faravelli, E. Brunesi, Seismic risk analysis of pressure vessels, Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 28 (2019) 1025-1031.
[13] J. Puttatt, SEISMIC PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT OF A REACTOR STRUCTURE IN A SEISMIC PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT OF A REACTOR,  (2021).
[14] M.a. Ronagh, Plastic Hinge Length of RC Columns Subjected to Both Far-Fault and Near-Fault Ground Motions Having Forward Directivity, The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 24 (2011) 421-439.
[15] B. Sayyafzadeh, S. Kouhestani, M. Sharifi, Derrick - Supported Flare - Stacks Seismic Fragility Assessment : A Case Study, 2 (2021) 1-16.
[16] K. SUZUKI, Earthquake Damage to Industrial Facilities and Development of Seismic and Vibration Control Technology, Journal of System Design and Dynamics, 2 (2008) 2-11.
[17] E. Krausmann, A.M. Cruz, B. Affeltranger, The impact of the 12 May 2008 Wenchuan earthquake on industrial facilities, Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 23 (2010) 242-248.
[18] ASME, ASME-BPVC-Sec-VIII-Div1-2017-1, ASME-BPVC-Sec-VIII-Div1-2017-1, Div1 (2017) 799.
[19] D.R. Moss, Pressure vessel design manual,  (2004).
[20] T. Jankowiak, T. Lodygowski, Identification of parameters of concrete damage plasticity constitutive model, Foundations of civil and environmental …,  (2005) 53-69.
[21] API Standard 650, Welded Tanks for Oil Storage, Twelfth Edition,  (2013).
[22] H. Asadi-Ghoozhdi, R. Attarnejad, A Winkler-based model for inelastic response of soil–structure systems with embedded foundation considering kinematic and inertial interaction effects, Structures, 28 (2020) 589-603.
[23] A.G. Baghmisheh, M. Mahsuli, Seismic performance and fragility analysis of power distribution concrete poles, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 150 (2021) 106909.
[24] ATC-40, Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete buildings volume 1 ATC-40, ATC 40, Applied Technology Council, 1 (1996) 334.
[25] M. Wieschollek, K. Diamanti, M. Pinkawa, B. Hoffmeister, M. Feldmann, Guidelines for seismic design and analysis of pressure vessels, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Pressure Vessels and Piping Division (Publication) PVP, 8 (2013) 1-10.
[26] Seismic Design of Oil Facilities Code 038-3rd final,  (1389).
[27] C.E. Carraher, G. Barot, General Topics, Polymer News, 30 (2005) 358-360.
[28] The Iranian Standard No. 2800 (National Standard for Seismic. Design of Buildings) .
[29] D. Vamvatsikos, C.A. Cornell, The Incremental Dynamic Analysis and Its Application To Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering, European Conference on Earthquake Engineering,  (2002) 10.
[30] FEMA P58 seismic performance assessment of buildings, NCEE 2014 - 10th U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering: Frontiers of Earthquake Engineering, 1 (2014).
[31] E. Committee for Standardisation, EN 1993-1-6: Eurocode 3 - Design of steel structures - Part 1-6: Strength and Stability of Shell Structures, in, 2011.
[32] M. Pluto, Tank Shell Design According to Eurocodes and Evaluation of Calculation Methods, Faculty of Health, Science and Technology Degree,  (2018) 79.
[33] J.M.F.G. Holst, J.M. Rotter, C.R. Calladine, E. Dunphy, E.S.N.E.E. NORM, DNV, E.C. Carvalho, C.T.C. Sc, O. Park, R.T. Haftka, B.V. Sankar, J.H. Starnes, Eurocode 3 - Design of steel structures - Part 4-2: Tanks Eurocode3-Calculdesstructuresenacier-Partie4-2: Tanks EN 1993-4-2 February, in:  Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2011, pp. 18-20.
[34] S. Biass, C. Bonadonna, F. di Traglia, M. Pistolesi, M. Rosi, P. Lestuzzi, Probabilistic evaluation of the physical impact of future tephra fallout events for the Island of Vulcano, Italy, Bulletin of Volcanology, 78 (2016) 1-22.
نشریه مهندسی عمران امیرکبیر
دوره 55، شماره 8
آبان 1402
صفحه 1561-1578

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار