Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Fuel Storage Tanks in Italy

[+] Author and Article Information
Valerio De Biagi

Department of Structural,
Geotechnical and Building Engineering,
Politecnico di Torino,
Torino 10129, Italy
e-mail: valerio.debiagi@polito.it

Bernardino Chiaia

Department of Structural,
Geotechnical and Building Engineering,
Politecnico di Torino,
Torino 10129, Italy
e-mail: valerio.debiagi@polito.it

Luca Fiorentini

TECSA Srl Pero,
Milano 20016, Italy
e-mail: luca.fiorentini@tecsasrl.it

Cristina Zannini Quirini

ARCOS Engineering,
Torino 10129, Italy
e-mail: cristina.zannini@arcos-engineering.it

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received December 21, 2017; final manuscript received May 15, 2018; published online December 14, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Fabrizio Paolacci.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 141(1), 010905 (Dec 14, 2018) (7 pages) Paper No: PVT-17-1263; doi: 10.1115/1.4040313 History: Received December 21, 2017; Revised May 15, 2018

Seismic hazard represents one of the possible triggering causes for NaTech accidents in refineries and production plants. The vulnerability of steel storage tanks was evaluated within the framework of a rapid risk assessment. Tanks dataset is composed of 70 refinery items in located in various parts of Italy and the seismic calculations are performed in accordance to API 650 Annex E Standard. The paper summarizes the results of the investigation through two normalized parameters related to the masses and to the seismic load. Some trends in the solution are highlighted. The empirical fragility curve obtained from the analysis is compared with similar curves found in the literature and the resulting similarities (and dissimilarities) are critically discussed.

Copyright © 2019 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Showalter, P. S. , and Myers, M. F. , 1994, “ Natural Disasters in the United States as Release Agents of Oil, Chemicals, or Radiological Materials Between 1980-1989: Analysis and Recommendations,” Risk Anal., 14(2), pp. 169–182. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Krausmann, E. , and Mushtaq, F. , 2008, “ A Qualitative Natech Damage Scale for the Impact of Floods on Selected Industrial Facilities,” Nat. Hazards, 46(2), pp. 179–197. [CrossRef]
Young, S. , Balluz, L. , and Malilay, J. , 2004, “ Natural and Technologic Hazardous Material Releases During and after Natural Disasters: A Review,” Sci. Total Environ., 322(1–3), pp. 3–20. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Fabbrocino, G. , Iervolino, I. , Orlando, F. , and Salzano, E. , 2005, “ Quantitative Risk Analysis of Oil Storage Facilities in Seismic Areas,” J. Hazard. Mater., 123(1–3), pp. 61–69. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Chiaia, B. , De Biagi, V. , Zannini Quirini, C. , Fiorentini, L. , Rossini, V. , and Carli, P. , 2016, “ A Framework for Natech Seismic Risk Assessment in Industrial Plants,” Int. J. Forensic Eng., 3(1/2), pp. 86–105. [CrossRef]
Salzano, E. , Iervolino, I. , and Fabbrocino, G. , 2003, “ Seismic Risk of Atmospheric Storage Tanks in the Framework of Quantitative Risk Analysis,” J. Loss Prev. Process Ind., 16(5), pp. 403–409. [CrossRef]
Malhotra, P. K. , Wenk, T. , and Wieland, M. , 2000, “ Simple Procedure for Seismic Analysis of Liquid-Storage Tanks,” Struct. Eng. Int., 10(3), pp. 197–201. [CrossRef]
Ibrahim, R. A. , 2005, Liquid Sloshing Dynamics: Theory and Applications, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Brunesi, E. , Nascimbene, R. , Pagani, M. , and Beilic, D. , 2014, “ Seismic Performance of Storage Steel Tanks During the May 2012 Emilia, Italy, Earthquakes,” J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 29(5), p. 04014137. https://ascelibrary.org/doi/10.1061/%28ASCE%29CF.1943-5509.0000628
Morris, G. , Bradley, B. , Walker, A. , and Matuschka, T. , 2013, “ Ground Motions and Damage Observations in the Marlborough Region From the 2013 Lake Grassmere Earthquake,” Bullettin New Zealand Soc. Earthquake Eng., 46(4), pp. 169–186. http://www.nzsee.org.nz/db/Bulletin/Archive/46(4)0169.pdf
Dizhur, D. , Simkin, G. , Giaretton, M. , Loporcaro, G. , Palermo, A. , and Ingham, J. , 2017, “ Performance of Winery Facilities During the 14 November 2016 Kaikōura Earthquake,” Bull. New Zealand Soc. Earthquake Eng., 50(2), pp. 206–224. http://www.nzsee.org.nz/db/Bulletin/Archive/50(2)0206.pdf
Italian Republic, 2008, “ Norme Tecniche per Le Costruzioni,” Gazzetta Ufficiale della Repubblica Italiana, Rome, Italy, Standard No. DM 14/01/2008.
API, 2013, “Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage,” American Petroleum Institute, Washington, DC, Standard No. API 650. http://www.api.org/publications-standards-and-statistics/publications-updates/publication-updates/~/link.aspx?_id=2C5262950E25473AA416F91B7F4DF1EE&_z=z
CEN, 2006, “Eurocode 8: Design Provisions of Earthquake Resistance of Structures,” European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium.
O'Rourke, M. J. , and So, P. , 2000, “ Seismic Fragility Curves for on-Grade Steel Tanks,” Earthquake Spectra, 16(4), pp. 801–815. [CrossRef]
FEMA, 2010, “HAZUS-MH 2.1 Technical manual - Earthquake Model,” U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC.
Johnson, N. L. , Kotz, S. , and Balakrishnan, N. , 1994, Continuous Univariate Distributions, 2nd ed., Wiley, New York.
Eidinger, J. M. , Avila, E. A. , Ballantyne, D. , Cheng, L. , der Kiureghian, A. , Maison, B. F. , O'Rourke, T. D. , and Power, M. , 2001, Seismic Fragility Formulations for Water Systems, American Lifelines Alliance, Reston, VA.
Girgin, S. , and Krausmann, E. , 2013, “ Rapid-n: Rapid Natech Risk Assessment and Mapping Framework,” J. Loss Prev. Process Ind., 26(6), pp. 949–960. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Sketch of the tank with the indication of the main geometric properties. The tank has six shell courses and the position of the fluid level is marked with dashed line.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Histograms of diameter, shell height, volume, density of the stored petroleum distillate (or raw material), equivalent uniform thickness, and peak ground acceleration at the site of the 70 analyzed tanks. The X-axes report the values of the parameters, Y-axes the number of entries.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

The Φ-values are plotted against the corresponding values of Ψ. The value of the peak ground acceleration (in percentiles of g) for each point is indicated.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

The Ψ-values are plotted against the corresponding values of Φ. The value of the anchorage ratio J for each point is indicated.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

The values of the anchorage ratios J are plotted with respect to the corresponding values of Ψ for the tanks having Φ < 65. The black dashed line relates to the quadratic fitting.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Φ–Ψ plot in which the critical items are marked with circles

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Comparison between the fragility curves resulting from median and standard deviation parameters found in the literature and the ECD resulting from stage 1 analysis described herein: (a) O'Rourke and So (2000), (b) O'Rourke and So (2000)—fill ≥ 50%, (c) HAZUS (2010)—near full, unanchored, (d) Eidinger et al. (2001)—fill ≥ 50%, (e) Eidinger et al. (2001)—fill ≥ 50%, unanchored, and (f) Eidinger et al. (2001)—fill ≥ 90%.



Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In