DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Quantitative Risk Analysis for Railway Tunnels

철도터널 화재에 대한 정량적 위험도 분석

  • Park, Jung Hyun (Graduate school, Department of Civil Engineering, Inha University) ;
  • Shim, Cha Sang (Graduate school, Department of Civil Engineering, Inha University)
  • Received : 2017.04.18
  • Accepted : 2017.05.24
  • Published : 2017.06.30

Abstract

What is particularly noteworthy from Korean and foreign railway tunnel disaster prevention standards is that for the sake of rapid evacuation, more stringent standards for provision of evacuation passages, which require high cost, are being applied. Korean standards stipulate that passage installation should be determined in accordance with the level of risk through a QRA analysis of each tunnel with 1km or longer length. As, however, detailed application criteria as fire occurrence probability, fire occurrence scenario, size of fires and evaluation criteria for level of social risk are not available, additional costs may be incurred due to excessive design. Thus, standards of an appropriate level need to be established. With this backdrop, this study selects detailed application conditions of a reasonable and appropriate level through a study and analysis of relevant documents and analyzes the maximum length of tunnels to which the application of evacuation passages, or the application major evacuation promotion facilities, can be relaxed, together with a QRA analysis of model tunnels (for high speed rail) with different tunnel lengths. In addition, the QRA results on tunnels, including those on the Honam high-speed rail, and analysis results for the model tunnels, are compiled, ; the ultimate results are compared with Korean and other countries' standards related to evacuation promotion facilities, As a result, The appropriateness of application standards are reviewed. These results are expected to be utilized as basic material for establishing a reasonable disaster prevention plan that will consider safety and economies.

국내외 철도터널 방재기준들에서 특히 주목할 만한 것은 신속한 대피를 위해 많은 비용이 소요되는 대피통로 설치 기준을 강화 적용하고 있다는 점인데, 국내 기준의 경우 1km 이상 연장의 터널별 QRA 분석을 통해 위험수준에 따라 설치여부를 결정하도록 하고 있으나, QRA 분석에 필요한 화재발생확률, 화재발생 시나리오, 화재규모, 사회적 위험도 평가기준 등에 대한 세부적용기준들이 정립되어 있지 않음으로써 과다설계로 인한 사회적 추가비용이 발생할 수도 있으므로 이에 대한 적정 수준의 기준 정립이 필요하다. 이에 본 연구에서는 관련문헌 조사 분석을 통해 합리적이고 적정한 수준의 세부적용조건들을 선정하여 서로 다른 터널연장을 가진 모델 터널(고속철도용)들에 대한 QRA 분석과 동시에, 중요 대피촉진시설중 하나인 대피통로 미적용 가능한 터널최대연장에 대해 분석하였다. 또한, 현재 호남고속철도 등 터널들에 대한 QRA 결과와 모델 터널의 분석결과를 종합, 피난촉진시설 관련 국내외 기준들과의 비교를 통해 적용기준의 적정성 검토를 수행하였다. 이들 결과들은 향후 안전성과 경제성이 고려된 합리적인 방재계획 수립을 위한 기초자료로써 활용될 수 있을 것으로 기대한다.

Keywords

References

  1. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (2004) Regulations on Safety Standards for Railway Facilities.
  2. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (2011) Railway Facilities Safety Standard.
  3. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (2016) Railway Design Standards(subbase).
  4. Korea Railroad Research Institute (2006) Evaluation Procedure for Safety Analysis of Railway Tunnels (Supervision).
  5. Korea Railroad.Korea Rail Network Authority (2016) Statistical Yearbook of Railroad 2015.
  6. Yooshin engineering corporation (2008) Korea Rail Network Authority, Prepared for QRA criteria for vehicle fire intensity and quan-titative risk assessment of Honam High Speed Railway 1-2.
  7. G & B engineering corporation (2010) Korea Rail Network Authority, Prepared for QRA criteria for vehicle fire intensity and quantitative risk assessment of Daegok-Sosa Double Track Railway.
  8. K. Both (2004) Present-day design fire scenarios and comparison with test results and real fire : Structures & Equipment, 1st International Symposium, Safe & Reliable Tunnels, Praha Czech, pp. 66-67.
  9. A. Beard, R. Carvel (2005) The Handbook of Tunnel Fire Safety, Thomas Telford, UK.
  10. H. Ingason (2009) Design fire curves in tunnels, Fire Safety Journal, 44, pp. 259-265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.firesaf.2008.06.009
  11. H. Ingason (2007) Model scale railcar fire tests, Fire Safety Journal, 42, pp. 271-282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.firesaf.2006.11.004
  12. International union of railways (2003) Safety in railway tunnels, UIC Leaflet 779-9 R.
  13. International union of railways (2002) Safety in railway tunnels, UIC 779-9 R.

Cited by

  1. Probabilistic evaluation of the railway track infrastructure components failure risk vol.230, pp.2261-236X, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201823001017