Figure 2 - uploaded by Davit Shahnazaryan
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
During seismic events, industrial plants are prone to disasters induced by the damage to their components and subsequent release of possibly harmful material. This risk of structural and non-structural element damage, as well as the potential release of toxic materials, compels to safeguard workers within an industrial plant. This study presents an...
Contexts in source publication
Context 1
... providing sufficient details regarding description and component typologies, the relative distribution of the plant's components and equipment was often lacking. Based on available plant layouts of several industrial facilities located in Italy, which were mainly petrochemical processing plants, the relative positions of the selected components and buildings were decided based on engineering judgement to provide a navigable area for a hypothetical worker ( Figure 2). Additionally, the vulnerability of all components and buildings was identified as necessary for risk estimation and likely path identification of toxic materials released into the atmosphere. ...
Context 2
... is important to note that structural and environmental health risk levels are not associated with the same IM level, meaning that depending on IM, the structural risk might be level 4, while due to the level of concentration of toxic substances released, the environmental health risk might be level 6, or the contrary. Additionally, it is highly unlikely to have environmental risks inside the administration building of Figure 2 independent of the IM level. As per the combination rule employed in this study, if health risk was assigned a level of 7, while the structural risk was assigned a level of 5, the combined risk to be used by the navigation system will be level 7, requiring hospitalisation; that is, the highest risk governs. ...
