Articles & Issues
- Language
- English
- Conflict of Interest
- In relation to this article, we declare that there is no conflict of interest.
- Publication history
-
Received August 16, 2010
Accepted October 30, 2010
-
This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/bync/3.0) which permits
unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright © KIChE. All rights reserved.
All issues
Optimal multi-floor plant layout with consideration of safety distance based on mathematical programming and modified consequence analysis
1School of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Seoul National University, Seoul 151-742, Korea 2Department of Chemical Engineering, Myongji University, Gyenggi-do 449-728, Korea 3Automation and Systems Research Institute, Seoul 151-742, Korea
pktcj@pslab.snu.ac.kr
Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering, April 2011, 28(4), 1009-1018(10), 10.1007/s11814-010-0470-6
Download PDF
Abstract
A general mathematical programming formulation which also considers safety factors is presented for solving the multi-floor plant layout problem. In the presence of a risk of physical explosion, the safety distance must be considered to generate more reasonable and safe layouts. The proposed method determines detailed multi-floor process plant layouts using mixed integer linear programming (MILP). To consider the safety distance, a consequence analysis is adopted for calculating an equipment physical explosion probit. As the TNT equivalency method is used, more realistic estimations of equipment damage are possible, generating safer plant layouts. The objective function minimizes the layout cost (total plant area, floor construction costs and connection costs) and explosion damage costs for the multi-floor problem. Two illustrative examples are presented to demonstrate the applicability of the proposed method.
References
Castel CML, Lakshmanan R, Skilling JM, Raman R, Com. Chem. Eng., 22S, S993 (1998)
CCPS, Guidelines for chemical process quantitative risk analysis., 153-203, AIChE J. (2000)
Georgiadis MC, Schilling G, Rotstein GE, Macchietto S, Comput. Chem. Eng., 23(7), 823 (1999)
Patsiatzis DI, Papageorgiou LG, Comput. Chem. Eng., 26(4-5), 575 (2002)
Patsiatzis DI, Knight G, Papageorgiou LG, Chem. Eng. Res. Des., 82(5), 579 (2004)
Penteado FD, Ciric AR, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 35(4), 1354 (1996)
Prugh RW, Quantitative evaluation of BLEVE hazards., 22nd Loss Prevention Symposium (1988)
Suzuki A, Fuchino T, Muraki M, J. Chem. Eng. Japan., 24(2), 226 (1991)
Turton R, Bailie RC, Whiting WB, Shaeiwitz JA, Analysis, synthesis and design of chemical processes., 3rd Ed., 12-22, Prentice Hall (2009)
Lee HK, Kim SB, Lee ES, Lee IB, Korean J. Chem. Eng., 18(4), 422 (2001)
CCPS, Guidelines for chemical process quantitative risk analysis., 153-203, AIChE J. (2000)
Georgiadis MC, Schilling G, Rotstein GE, Macchietto S, Comput. Chem. Eng., 23(7), 823 (1999)
Patsiatzis DI, Papageorgiou LG, Comput. Chem. Eng., 26(4-5), 575 (2002)
Patsiatzis DI, Knight G, Papageorgiou LG, Chem. Eng. Res. Des., 82(5), 579 (2004)
Penteado FD, Ciric AR, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 35(4), 1354 (1996)
Prugh RW, Quantitative evaluation of BLEVE hazards., 22nd Loss Prevention Symposium (1988)
Suzuki A, Fuchino T, Muraki M, J. Chem. Eng. Japan., 24(2), 226 (1991)
Turton R, Bailie RC, Whiting WB, Shaeiwitz JA, Analysis, synthesis and design of chemical processes., 3rd Ed., 12-22, Prentice Hall (2009)
Lee HK, Kim SB, Lee ES, Lee IB, Korean J. Chem. Eng., 18(4), 422 (2001)
