Ship Collision Risk Assessment and Sensitivity Analysis for Sea-crossing Bridges

(1)

Received March 22, 2013/ revised May 8, 2013/ accepted June 26, 2013

Copyright ⵑ 2013 by the Korean Society of Civil Engineers

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0)

ǣǣȀȀǤǤȀͳͲǤͳʹ͸ͷʹȀǤʹͲͳ͵Ǥ͵͵ǤͷǤͳ͹ͷ͵

ǤǤǤ

㬲♿ጎᶇ⮎#ᢾ㬚#⛞⇓㍧ᦊ#Ⳃ㮖ᦂ#㦇ᆾ#⇍#↺ᇎᦂ#⍂⛛

ࢼ૳ֱȵଲনߦ

Bae, Yong Gwi*, Lee, Seong Lo**

Ship Collision Risk Assessment and Sensitivity Analysis for Sea-crossing Bridges

ABSTRACT

In the design phase of sea-crossing bridge projects, ship collision problem is mostly participated in decision of substructure section and it would be performed by risk assessment and impact simulations. Ship collision risk is assessed by probability model which is similar to method Gof Guide Specification and Commentary for Vessel Collision Design of Highway Bridge(AASHTO, 2009). However, several factors used in the applicable code are limited to inland waterways or have many local characteristics. Accordingly, it should be needed judgement of engineer or referred to related criteria, research finding. In this study risk assessment for In-cheon bridge and review of existing substructure's impact risk and resistance capacity are performed using the 2010's ship passage data. And then consideration regarding to presumption and applied instance of factors needed for risk assessment and related research findings are performed on the basis of AASHTO Guide‘s Method. As a result of study, adequate variable region of factors needed for risk assessment is defined and sensitivity analysis for appropriate region is performed. Consequently, factors that should be applied carefully or needed for direct analysis of local data are confirmed. This research could be fundamental material to risk assessment related to design for sea-crossing bridge taken into account ship collision.

Key words : Ship collision, Design phase, Risk assessment, Sensitivity analysis

Ⅹಾ

ᅙ⧕ᔢƱప⥥ಽ᱾✙᮹ᖅĥ݉ĥᨱᕽᖁၶ∊࠭ྙᱽ۵ᵝಽƱప⦹ᇡǍ᳑᮹݉໕đᱶᨱšᩍ⦹íࡹ໑, ᭥⨹ࠥ⠪a᪡∊࠭᜽ဍ౩ᯕᖹ॒ᮥ

☖⧕ᖅĥෝᙹ⧪⦹íࡽ݅. ᖁၶ᮹∊࠭᭥⨹ᮡ݅᧲⦽⪶ශ༉ߙᨱ᮹⧕⠪aࡹ໑ݡℕಽAASHTO Guide(2009)᮹Method᪡ᮁᔍ⦹݅.

ə్ӹ⧕ݚʑᵡᨱᕽᔍᬊࡹ۵ᯝᇡ᫵ᗭ۵ԕයᙹಽᨱǎ⦽ࡹᨕᯩÑӹḡᩎᱢᯙ᫵ᯙᯕv⦹ᩍᖅĥᯱ᮹❱݉ᯕ᫵Ǎࡹအಽšಉʑᵡᯕӹ

ᩑǍđŝ॒ᮥₙŁ⦹ᩍđᱶ⧕᧝⦽݅. ᅙᩑǍᨱᕽ۵2010֥ᖁၶᬕ⧎ߑᯕ░ෝᔍᬊ⦹ᩍᯙ⃽ݡƱᨱݡ⦽᭥⨹ࠥ⠪aෝᙹ⧪⦹Łʑ᳕⦹ᇡ Ǎ᳑ၰႊ⪙Ǎ᳑ྜྷᨱݡ⦽᭥⨹ࠥၰԕ∊࠭ᖒ܆ᮥá☁⦹ᩡ݅. əญŁAASHTO Guide᮹Methodෝʑᵡᮝಽ⦹ᩍ᭥⨹ࠥ⠪aᨱ⦥᫵

⦽᫵ᗭॅ᮹⇵ᱶႊჶŝᱢᬊᔍಡ, šಉᩑǍđŝᨱݡ⦽Łₑᮥᙹ⧪⦹ᩡ݅. ᯕಽᇡ░᭥⨹ࠥ⠪aᨱ⦥᫵⦽᫵ᗭॅ᮹ᱢᱩ⦽aᄡᩢᩎᮥᱶ ᮹⦹Ł⧕ݚǍeᨱݡ⦽ၝqࠥᇥᕾᮥᙹ⧪⦹ᩡᮝ໑ᖅĥ݉ĥᨱᕽᖅĥᯱaᵝ᮹⦹ᩍᱢᬊ⧕᧝⦹Ñӹḡᩎᱢᯙߑᯕ░᮹Ḣᱲᇥᕾᯕ⦥᫵

⦽᫵ᗭॅᯕ⪶ᯙࡹᨩ݅. ᯕჩᩑǍ۵⧕ᔢƱపᨱݡ⦽ᖁၶ∊࠭ᮥŁಅ⦽ᖅĥ᜽᭥⨹ࠥᇥᕾŝšಉ⦹ᩍʑᅙᱢᯙₙŁᯱഭaࢁäᮝಽ❱݉

ࡽ݅.

áᔪᨕ ᖁၶ∊࠭, ᖅĥ݉ĥ, ᭥⨹ࠥ⠪a, ၝqࠥᇥᕾ

ĵܓėॡ

(2)

1. ᕽು

⧕ᔢƱపᖅĥ᜽ƱపǍ᳑ྜྷᨱݡ⦽ᖁၶ᮹∊࠭ྙᱽ۵ḡḥ, ၵ௭॒ŝ޵ᇩᨕǍ᳑ྜྷ᮹݉໕ᮥđᱶḴ۵ๅᬑᵲ᫵⦽᫵ᗭᯕ݅.

ǎԕᨱᕽ۵ᖁၶ∊࠭ŝšಉ⦹ᩍ⧕᫙᮹ᖅĥʑᵡᯕӹʑᚁᨱ᮹

᳕⦹۵ Ğᬑa ฯᦹᮝӹ ↽ɝᨱ۵ šಉ ᩑǍ(႑ᬊȡ ॒, 2008;

ᯕĥ⯍॒, 2011; ᯕᖒಽ॒, 2006a; ᯕᖒಽ॒, 2006b; ᳑⪙⩥, 2009)aฯᯕḥ⧪ࡹᨩᮝ໑, ⧕ᔢƱపÕᖅᯕ⪽ၽ⧕ḡ໕ᕽᖅĥ

᜽ ⧕ݚ ᩑǍđŝॅᯕ ᱢᬊࡽ ᔍಡࠥ ۹ᨕӹŁ ᯩ݅.

ᖁၶ∊࠭ྙᱽ۵⧕ᔢƱప᮹ĥ⫮, ᖅĥၰᮁḡšญ॒᮹b

݉ĥᨱᕽ༉ࢱᵲ᫵⦹í݅൉ᨕᲙ᧝⦹۵᫵ᗭᯕ݅. ᖅĥ݉ĥᨱᕽ ۵ᵝಽƱప⦹ᇡǍ᳑᮹݉໕đᱶᨱšᩍ⦹íࡹ໑, ᭥⨹ࠥ⠪a᪡

∊࠭᜽ဍ౩ᯕᖹ॒ᮥ☖⧕ᖅĥෝᙹ⧪⦹íࡽ݅. ʑ᳕᮹ǎԕ

ᖅĥʑᵡᨱ۵ᖁၶ∊࠭ᨱݡ⦹ᩍᔢᖙ⦹íȽᱶ⦹ḡᦫᦹᮝӹ↽

ɝࠥಽƱᖅĥʑᵡᨱᕽ⦽ĥᔢ┽ᖅĥჶ(2012)ᮥ₥┾⦹໕ᕽᖁၶ

∊࠭⦹ᵲᨱݡ⦽ᔢᖙ⦽Ƚᱶᯕᱽ᜽ࡹᨩ݅. ⦽ĥᔢ┽ᖅĥჶᨱᕽ ۵Guide Specification and Commentary for Vessel Collision Design of Highway Bridge(2009, ᯕ⦹ AASHTO Guide)᮹

ᖙaḡᖅĥႊჶᵲᨱᕽMethodⳒ, ᭥⨹ࠥ⠪aᨱ᮹⦽ᖅĥႊჶ

ᮥ₥┾⦹Łᯩ۵ߑ, ↽ɝǎԕᨱᕽᖅĥࡽ⧕ᔢƱపॅᮡ᭥⨹ࠥ

⠪aෝ☖⦹ᩍᖁၶ∊࠭ᨱ ݡ⦽ᖅĥ⦹ᵲᮥᔑᱶ⦹ÑӹƱప᮹

ᦩᱥᖒ ⠪a᮹ ༊ᱢᮝಽ ᙹ⧪ࡽ ᔍಡa እƱᱢ ฯᮡ ⠙ᯕ݅.

Method Ⳓᨱ᮹⦽᭥⨹ࠥ⠪aႊჶᮡ⪶ශʑၹ⧕ᕾᮥ☖⦹ᩍ

ᖁၶ᮹⩶┽, Ⓧʑ, ၰ⦹ᵲ᳑Õᨱ᮹⧕ᇥඹࡽᙹಽෝᯕᬊ⦹۵

ᩑeᖁၶ᮹ᙹ, ᖁၶ᮹⧎ಽᯕ┩⪶ශ, ⧎ಽෝᯕ┩⦽ᖁၶᯕƱbᯕ ӹᔢ❱ŝ∊࠭⧁ʑ⦹⦺ᱢ⪶ශ, ⧎ಽෝᯕ┩⦽ᖁၶŝ∊࠭⧁

ভƱపᯕ❭ƕࢁ⪶ශᮥŁಅ⧉ᮝಽ៉Ʊప᮹ᖁၶ∊࠭᭥⨹ࠥෝ

⠪a⦹Ł᭥⨹ࠥ⠪ađŝಽᇡ░ᖅĥᖁၶᮥ⧊ญᱢᮝಽᔑᱶ⧁

ᙹᯩ۵ႊჶᯕ݅(ᯕᖒಽ॒, 2006a). ə్ӹAASHTO Guideᨱᕽ

ᔍᬊࡹ۵ᖅĥ᫵ᗭ᮹ᯝᇡ۵ɝᔍᱢ⇵ᱶႊჶᯕÑӹԕයᙹಽa

ၽݍ⦽ၙǎԕ᮹ ☖ĥᯱഭಽᇡ░⇵ᱶࡽäᯕအಽ⧕ᔢƱపᯕ

ݡᇡᇥᯙǎԕ᮹ᔢ⫊ᮥŁಅ⦹ʑ᭥⧕ᕽ۵ᖙĥᱢᯙ⧕ᔢƱప᮹

ᖅĥᔍಡӹ⧕ᔢᨱᱢᬊࡽ݅ෙᩑǍđŝᨱݡ⦽ᱢɚᱢᯙᇥᕾŝ

á☁a ⦥᫵⦹݅.

ᅙᩑǍᨱᕽ۵AASHTO Guide᮹MethodⳒෝʑᵡᮝಽ⦹ᩍ

ᯙ⃽ݡƱᨱݡ⦽ᖁၶ∊࠭᭥⨹ࠥ⠪aෝᙹ⧪⦹ᩡᮝ໑ᯕෝʑᵡ ᮝಽ⦹ᩍ᭥⨹ࠥ⠪a᫵ᗭॅᨱݡ⦽ၝqࠥᇥᕾᮥᙹ⧪⦹ᩡ݅.

םྙᨱᕽ۵ᯙ⃽ݡƱᖅĥᅕŁᕽၰǍ᳑ĥᔑᕽᔢᨱᙹಾࡽᖅĥ

᫵ᗭෝ↽ݡ⦽ᔍᬊ⦹ᩡᮝӹᱶᅕaᱽ⦽ᱢᯕÑӹၝqࠥᇥᕾᮥ

᭥⦹ᩍᇩa⦝⦹íᄡĞ⧕᧝⦹۵ᖅĥ᫵ᗭ۵ʑᵡᨱᕽᱽ᜽ࡹÑ ӹŖ⦺ᱢᮝಽ┡ݚ⦽ᱲɝႊჶᮥ᯦ࠥ⦹ᩡ݅. ᖅĥ᫵ᗭ᮹ၝqࠥ

ᇥᕾᮥ᭥⦽aᄡᩢᩎᮡAASHTO Guideෝእ೐⦽šಉᖅĥʑᵡ

ၰᩑǍđŝॅ᮹⇵ᱶႊჶŝᱢᬊᔍಡᨱɝÑ⦹ᩍᱶ᮹ࡹᨩᮝ໑, ᯕಽᇡ░ᖅĥ݉ĥᨱᕽᵝ᮹⦹ᩍᱢᬊ⧕᧝⦹Ñӹḡᩎᱢᯙߑᯕ

░᮹ Ḣᱲ ᇥᕾ ॒ᯕ ⦥᫵⦽ ᫵ᗭॅᮥ ⪶ᯙ⦹ᩡ݅.

2. ᭥⨹ࠥ⠪a

2.1 AASHTO Guide Method ɇ

ᯝၹᱢᮝಽᖁၶ᮹∊Ċᨱ᮹⧕ၽᔾ⦹۵↽ᦦ᮹Ğᬑᨱݡ⦽

⦹ᵲᮥḡ╒⧁ᙹᯩ۵ƱపǍ᳑ྜྷᮥᖅĥ⦹۵äᮡᇩa܆⦹݅.

ə్ӹᖁၶ᮹∊Ċᨱ᮹⧕ƱపǍ᳑ྜྷᨱ᯲ᬊ⦹۵ᇡa⦹ᵲ᮹

ኩࠥෝ⇵ᱶ⦹۵äᮡa܆⦹໑, ᇡa⦹ᵲ᮹ኩࠥෝ᦭Łᯩᮝ໕

ᨕਅᙹᬊʑᵡᮥอ᳒⦹۵ᖅĥෝᖁ┾⧁ᙹᯩ݅(Larsen, 1993).

AASHTO Guide(2009) ᨱᕽ۵ᖅĥᖁၶᮥđᱶ⦹ʑ᭥⦽Method ⳑ, Ⳓ, ⳓ᮹ᖙaḡႊჶᮥᱽŖ⦹Łᯩᮝ໑✚⯩, MethodⳒ۵

ᖁၶ᮹ᩑe☖⧪ప, ⧎ಽᯕ┩⪶ශ, ʑ⦹⦺ᱢ⪶ශ, ❭ƕ⪶ශ, ႊ⪙

ĥᙹᨱ᮹⧕ᩑe❭ƕኩࠥ(AF)ෝᔑᱶ⦹ᩍƱప᮹ᵲ᫵ࠥᨱ঑ෙ

⨩ᬊʑᵡᯕԕaࡹࠥಾᖅĥᖁၶᮥᔑᱶ⦹۵ႊჶᯕ݅. ʑᵡᨱᕽ

AF᮹⨩ᬊʑᵡᮡᵲ᫵Ʊపᨱᕽ0.0001, ᯝၹƱపᨱᕽ0.001 ᯕ⦹

aࡹࠥಾ Ƚᱶ⦹Ł ᯩ݅. Ʊప᮹ AF۵ ݅ᮭŝzᯕ ĥᔑࡹ໑, ᱥℕ Ʊపᨱ ݡ⦽ AF۵ ༉ु ᇡᰍ᮹ AFෝ ⧊⦹ᩍ Ǎ⦽݅.

AF=(N)(PA)(PG)(PC)(PF) (1)

ᩍʑᕽ, N : ᙹಽෝᯕᬊ⦹۵ᩑeᖁၶ᮹ᙹ(Vessel frequency) PA : ⧎ಽᯕ┩⪶ශ(Probability of aberrancy) PG : ʑ⦹⦺ᱢ ⪶ශ(Geometric probability) PC : ❭ƕ⪶ශ(Probability of collapse) PF : ႊ⪙ ĥᙹ(Protection factor)

2.2 ֗߆୪଀

ᯙ⃽ݡƱ۵ᯙ⃽ǎᱽŖ⧎ŝᘂࠥǎᱽࠥ᜽ෝᩑđ⦹۵ၝe⚍ᯱ

ᔍᨦᮝಽᵝĞeƱᯙᔍᰆƱ۵ᙹ₉ಡ᮹ᖁၶ⧎⧪᜽ဍ౩ᯕᖹᮥ

ÑℱFig. 1ŝzᯕᵝĞeᰆ800m᮹ᵲeƱbᮥ⡍⧉⦽5Ğe

ᩑᗮᔍᰆƱಽđᱶࡹᨩ݅. ᵝ┲ᮡ230m ׳ᯕ᮹ᩎY⩶⎹Ⓧญ✙

ᵝ┲ᯕᱢᬊࡹᨩᮝ໑ʑⅩ۵⩥ᰆ┡ᖅั૾ᨱ᮹⦽݅ᵝ᜾ʑⅩಽ

ḢĞ3.0m᮹ั૾24}ಽǍᖒࡹᨕᯩ݅. ᖁၶ☖ŝǍeᮡ⧎ಽ⡎

625.5m, ׳ᯕ74.0mෝ⪶ᅕ⦹ᩍ᪶ᅖᬕ⧎ᯕa܆⦹݅(ᯙ⃽ݡƱ

ᖅĥᅕŁᕽ, 2009).

2.3 টࢮധෘ߆

ᯙ⃽⧎᮹ ᖁၶ☖⧪ప ߑᯕ░۵ ᯙ⃽ḡႊ⧕᧲⧎อℎ᮹ Port

Management Information System(ᯕ⦹PORT-MIS)᮹2010֥

(3)

Fig. 1. General View of Cable Stayed Bridge

Table 1. Average Conversion Factor for GT and DWT

Tonnage GT* DWT**

More than 140,000GT 2.000

110,000140,000 GT 1.887

80,000110,000 GT 1.852

60,00080,000 GT 1.818

40,00060,000 GT 1.818

30,00040,000 GT 1.695

20,00030,000 GT 1.623

10,00020,000 GT 1.524

Less than 10,000GT 1.333

*GT : Gross Tonnage

**DWT : Dead Weight Tonnage

Fig. 2. Estimation of Ship Length Fig. 3. Estimation of Ship Width

᯦⇽⧎ᝁŁᱶᅕᨱɝÑ⦹ᩍ★ɪᄥᬕ⧎⬀ᙹෝᔑᱶ⦹ᩡ݅. ⧕ݚ

᜽ᜅ▽ᮡᖁၶ᮹★ᙹෝᬊᱢ★ᙹ, GTಽḲĥ⦹Łᯩᮝӹᯕ۵

ᖙɩ⪚ᮡ᜽ᖅᔍᬊഭ᮹ᇡŝෝ᭥⦽★ᙹಽᵝಽᔍᬊࡹ໑, ᖁၶ∊

࠭ ᖅĥᨱᕽ۵ ⦹ᵲᮥ ᔑᱶ⦹ʑ ᭥⦽ äᯕအಽ ᱢᰍᵲప★ᙹ, DWTಽᱥ⪹⧁⦥᫵aᯩ݅. GT-DWTeᖁၶᱥ⪹ᮡDrewry Shipping Consultants Ltd.(⧕ᬕᔑᨦᩑǍᬱ, 1996)᮹ᖁ᳦ၰᖁ

⩶ᨱ঑ෙ⪹ᔑĥᙹෝ★ɪᄥಽTable 1ŝzᯕᱢᬊ⦹ᩡ݅. ᖁၶ᮹

ᱽᬱᮡAASHTO Guide, ⧎อၰᨕ⧎ᖅĥʑᵡ(2005) ॒ᨱᕽᱽŖ

⦹۵ᖁ᳦ၰ★ɪᄥߑᯕ░ෝᯕᬊ⦹Ñӹᬕ⧎ࡹ۵ᖁၶ᮹⢽ᅙ᳑

ᔍ⪚ᮡᱥᙹ᳑ᔍಽᇡ░⇵ᱶ⧁ᙹᯩ݅. ᅙᩑǍᨱᕽ۵ᯙ⃽⧎ᮥ

ᯕᬊ⦹۵ᖁၶ᮹ʙᯕ᪡⡎ᨱݡ⦽ᱥᙹ᳑ᔍၰ⫭ȡᇥᕾᮥ☖⦹ᩍ

ᖁၶᱽᬱᮥFigs. 2 and 3ŝzᯕ⇵ᱶ⦹ᩡ݅. ᖁၶ★ᙹ᮹⪹ᔑĥᙹ

᪡⇵ᱶࡽᖁၶᱽᬱᯕᱢᬊࡽᯙ⃽ݡƱ᮹ᩑeᖁၶ☖⧪పᮡTable

2᪡ z݅.

(4)

Table 2. Ship Frequency Data

Tonnage DWT N LOA* BM**

300,000350,000 327,844 5 340.5 56.7 250,000300,000 257,411 17 317.5 52.8 200,000250,000 213,518 46 300.9 50.0 150,000200,000 178,088 149 285.6 47.4 100,000150,000 114,863 258 251.7 41.7 80,000100,000 88,840 230 233.7 38.6

60,00080,000 67,357 378 215.8 35.6 40,00060,000 45,966 857 193.3 31.8 20,00040,000 26,800 1,568 165.5 27.2 Less than 20,000 3,047 17,869 88.5 14.3 *LOA : Length Over All

**BM : Width of ships

Table 3. Geometric Probability

DWT x1* x2* F(x1)** F(x2)** PG 327,844 202.8 284.5 0.2243 0.2983 0.0740 257,411 204.7 282.5 0.2405 0.3132 0.0728 213,518 206.1 281.1 0.2533 0.3249 0.0716 178,088 207.4 279.8 0.2662 0.3364 0.0702 114,863 210.3 277.0 0.2983 0.3644 0.0662 88,840 211.8 275.4 0.3176 0.3807 0.0631 67,357 213.3 273.9 0.3386 0.3978 0.0593 45,966 215.2 272.0 0.3672 0.4203 0.0531 26,800 217.5 269.7 0.4056 0.4484 0.0428 3,047 224.0 263.3 0.4943 0.4985 0.0042 *x_n : Distance from collision area

**F(xn) : Cumulative normal distribution function at xn

Table 4. Probability of Collapse(HP=94.08MN)

DWT V P_S H_P/P_S PC

327,844 4.698 322.81 0.291 0.0787 257,411 4.660 283.69 0.332 0.0743 213,518 4.627 256.58 0.367 0.0704 178,088 4.593 232.61 0.404 0.0662 114,863 4.500 183.00 0.514 0.0540 88,840 4.436 158.66 0.593 0.0452 67,357 4.358 135.73 0.693 0.0341 45,966 4.233 108.90 0.864 0.0151

26,800 4.009 78.77 1.194 0.0000

3,047 1.607 10.64 8.839 0.0000

2.4 ාߦଲ೷คࠔ

⧎ಽᯕ┩⪶ශ, PA۵ᖁၶᯕ᳦᳑ᯱ᮹ᝅᙹӹʑĥŁᰆ, እᱶᔢ ᱢᯙʑᔢ᳑Õᮝಽᯙ⦹ᩍᱶ⧕ḥ⧎ಽෝᯕ┩⦹ŁƱపᨱ᭥⨹ᮥ

Ⅹ௹⧁ᙹᯩ۵⪶ශᯕ݅. PA۵⧎ಽᯕ┩᮹ʑᅙᮉŝ⪹Ğᱢᯙ

᫵ᯙᨱ ঑ෙ ᅕᱶĥᙹಽᇡ░ ݅ᮭŝ zᯕ ᱶ᮹ࡹŁ ᯩ݅.

PA=(BR)(R

_B

)(R

_C

)(R

_XC

)(R

_D

) (2)

ᩍʑᕽ, BR : ⧎ಽᯕ┩᮹ ʑᅙᮉ

R

B

: Ʊప᮹ ᭥⊹ᨱ ঑ෙ ᅕᱶĥᙹ

R

_C

: ᖁၶ᮹☖ŝĞಽᨱ⠪⧪⦽ᮁᗮᨱݡ⦽ᅕᱶĥᙹ R

XC

: ᖁၶ᮹☖ŝĞಽ᮹Ḣbႊ⨆ᮁᗮᨱݡ⦽ᅕᱶĥᙹ R

_D

: ☖⧪ᖁၶ᮹ ၡࠥᨱ ݡ⦽ ᅕᱶĥᙹ

ᯙ⃽ݡƱᖅĥᅕŁᕽ(2009)ᨱᕽ۵ݡᔢƱపᯕ᭥⊹⦽ᙹಽෝ

21°ᱶࠥ᮹⫭ᱥ⪚ᮡǞ⯹ᩢᩎᮝಽeᵝ⦹ᩡ݅. ᮁᗮᨱݡ⦽ᅕᱶ ĥᙹ۵R

C

ᨱݡ⧕ᕽอ2.0knotsಽaᱶ⦹ᩡᮝ໑, R

D

۵Łၡࠥಽ

ᇥඹ⦹ᩍ 1.6ᮥ ᱢᬊ⦹ᩡ݅. ᯕಽᇡ░ ĥᔑࡽ ᯙ⃽ݡƱa ״ᯙ

ᙹಽ᮹ PA sᮡ 1.69×10

^-4

ᯕ݅.

2.5 ׆෇෈ୡคࠔ

ʑ⦹⦺ᱢ ⪶ශ, PG۵ ⧎ಽෝ ᯕ┩⦽ ᖁၶᯕ ᰆᧁྜྷᯕ ᯩ۵

Ŕᮝಽ⧎⧕ࢁ⪶ශಽ៉⧎ಽෝᯕ┩⦽ᖁၶ᮹⧎ᱢᇥ⡍۵⧕ݚᖁ ၶ᮹ʙᯕෝ⢽ᵡ⠙₉ಽ⦹۵ᱶȽᇥ⡍ಽᱶ᮹ࡹ໑, PG۵ᱥℕ

⧎ᱢᇥ⡍ ᩢᩎᨱ ݡ⦽ ∊࠭⎵ᜅ ᩢᩎ᮹ እᮉಽ ᱶ᮹ࡽ݅. ᯕভ

⠪Ɂ᮹ ᭥⊹۵ ⧎⧕ ᙹಽ᮹ ᵲᝍᖁᯕ݅. ᯙ⃽ݡƱ ☖ŝ ᖁၶ᮹

PG sᮡ Table 3ŝ z݅.

2.6 ൞֏คࠔ

❭ƕ⪶ශᮡᖁၶᨱ᮹⦽∊࠭⦹ᵲŝƱపᇡᰍ᮹ᙹ⠪vࠥ᮹

እᮉಽ៉đᱶࡽ݅. ᖁၶ᮹∊࠭⦹ᵲᮡᖁၶ᮹Ⓧʑ᪡ᗮࠥෝᄡᙹ ಽ⦹۵e݉⦽Ğ⨹᜾ᨱ᮹⧕ᔑᱶࢁᙹᯩᮝӹ, ⧕ᔢƱపᨱᕽ

⦹ᇡǍ᳑᮹ᙹ⠪vࠥ۵ʑᅙᱢᮝಽ࠺ᩎ⦺ᱢᨱթḡ᪡⯂ᙹᖒ܆᮹

šĥᯝᐱอᦥܩ௝ḡၹၰᮁℕ᮹ᩢ⨆ᮥŁಅ⦽ๅᬑᅖᰂ⦽

ŝᱶᮥÑℱ᧝⦽݅. ႑ᬊȡ॒(2012)ᮡᯙ⃽ݡƱ᮹⦹ᇡǍ᳑ᨱ

ᱢᬊࡽ⍡ᯕᝒၰ⩥ᰆ┡ᖅั૾᮹ᱽᬱŝaᔢŁᱶᱱ(⧎อၰᨕ⧎

ᖅĥʑᵡ, 2005)ᮥᯕᬊ⦹ᩍእƱᱢe݉⦽ႊჶᮝಽᙹ⠪vࠥෝ

⇵ᱶ⦹ᩡᮝ໑ᯕಽᇡ░ݡᔢƱప᮹ԕ∊࠭ᖒ܆ŝᩑe❭ƕኩࠥෝ

}ఖᱢᮝಽ⇵ᱶ⦹ᩡ݅. םྙᨱᕽ⩥ᰆ┡ᖅั૾1ᅙ᮹ᙹ⠪vࠥ۵

3.92MNᯕ໑, ᵝ┲ʑⅩᇡ᮹⩥ᰆ┡ᖅั૾ᯕ24ᅙᯕအಽvᰍ⍡

ᯕᝒၰ℁ɝ⎹Ⓧญ✙ั૾ᨱ᮹⦽↽ݡᙹ⠪vࠥH

P

۵94.08MN ᮝಽ⇵ᱶࡹᨩ݅. ᖅĥŝᱶᨱᕽ۵∊࠭ᯕ⡍⧉ࡽ⦹ᵲ᳑⧊ᨱ᮹⦽

ᩢ⨆ᮥŁಅ⦽݅໕እƱᱢᱶၡ⦽ᙹ⠪vࠥෝᔑ⇽⧁ᙹᯩᮥäᮝಽ

(5)

Table 5. Probability of Collapse(H_P=195.22MN)

DWT V PS HP/PS PC

327,844 4.698 322.81 0.605 0.0439 257,411 4.660 283.69 0.688 0.0347 213,518 4.627 256.58 0.761 0.0266 178,088 4.593 232.61 0.839 0.0179 114,863 4.500 183.00 1.067 0.0000 88,840 4.436 158.66 1.230 0.0000 67,357 4.358 135.73 1.438 0.0000 45,966 4.233 108.90 1.793 0.0000

26,800 4.009 78.77 2.478 0.0000

3,047 1.607 10.64 18.340 0.0000

Table 6. AF of Pylon Collapse by Lateral Resistance of Bridge Foundation

DWT N PA(×10^-4) PG PC AF(×10^-4) 327,844 5 1.690 0.0740 0.0787 0.0492 257,411 17 1.690 0.0728 0.0743 0.1552 213,518 46 1.690 0.0716 0.0704 0.3915 178,088 149 1.690 0.0702 0.0662 1.1700 114,863 258 1.690 0.0662 0.0540 1.5572 88,840 230 1.690 0.0631 0.0452 1.1085 67,357 378 1.690 0.0593 0.0341 1.2911 45,966 857 1.690 0.0531 0.0151 1.1627 26,800 1,568 1.690 0.0428 0.0000 0.0000

3,047 17,869 1.690 0.0042 0.0000 0.0000 쨲AF=6.8854×10^-4

Table 7. AF of Pylon Collapse by Lateral Resistance of Bridge Protection

DWT N PA(×10^-4) PG PC AF(×10^-4) 327,844 5 0.0740 0.0740 0.0439 0.0275 257,411 17 0.0728 0.0728 0.0347 0.0724 213,518 46 0.0716 0.0716 0.0266 0.1478 178,088 149 0.0702 0.0702 0.0179 0.3158 114,863 258 0.0662 0.0662 0.0000 0.0000 88,840 230 0.0631 0.0631 0.0000 0.0000 67,357 378 0.0593 0.0593 0.0000 0.0000 45,966 857 0.0531 0.0531 0.0000 0.0000 26,800 1,568 0.0428 0.0428 0.0000 0.0000 3,047 17,869 0.0042 0.0042 0.0000 0.0000

쨲AF=0.5635×10^-4

❱݉ࡽ݅. ݡᔢƱపᨱᱢᬊࡽ࠭⦡᜾ႊ⪙Ǎ᳑ྜྷᮡ100,000DWT ᖁၶᯕ10knots ᗮࠥಽ∊࠭⦹ᩍࠥčॵࠥಾᖅĥࡹᨕᯩ݅. ⧕ݚ

᳑Õᨱᕽ᮹∊࠭⦹ᵲP

S

۵ႊ⪙Ǎ᳑ྜྷᨱ᮹⦽ᙹ⠪vࠥಽeᵝ⧁

ᙹᯩᮝ໑, 195.22MNᯕ݅. bb᮹ᙹ⠪vࠥaᱢᬊࡽ❭ƕ⪶ශᮡ

Tables 4 and 5 ᪡ z݅.

2.7 ंࢼࡦ܄

ᩑe❭ƕኩࠥ᮹ ⨩ᬊʑᵡᮡ Ʊప ༉ु ᇡᰍ᮹ AFෝ ⧊⦹ᩍ

ᱢᬊ⦹íࡽ݅. ᯝၹᱢᮝಽƱప᮹ᔢᇡǍ᳑۵ᬕ⧎⪚ᮡᬕ⧎ᯕ

ᩩᔢࡹ۵↽ݡᖁၶ᮹ษᜅ✙׳ᯕෝᱢᬊ⦹ᩍ⦥᫵⦽⩶⦹Ŗeᮥ

ᯕԕ᮹ᇡᰍᨱ⧁ݚ⦹ᩍᱢᬊ⦹íࡽ݅. AASHTO Guideᨱᕽ۵

ᇡᰍ᮹ᵲ᫵ࠥ᪡ƱℕእᬊᮥŁಅ⦹ᩍᇥ႑⦹ࠥಾǭᰆ⦹Łᯩ݅.

ᇡᰍ᮹ᵲ᫵ࠥ۵ᯕᖒಽ॒(2006b)ᯕᱽᦩ⦽ᔍᱥ᭥⨹ࠥ⠪aෝ

☖⦽ႊჶᯕݡ⢽ᱢᯕ໑, ƱℕእᬊᮡᖅĥŝᱶᨱᕽŖᔍእᔑ⇽ᯱ

ഭᨱɝÑ⦹ᩍᱢᬊ⧁ᙹᯩ݅. ᯙ⃽ݡƱᵝ┲᮹⨩ᬊʑᵡᇥ႑ᮉᮡ

ᔍᱥ᭥⨹ࠥ⠪aᨱᕽ40%, Ʊℕእᬊᨱ᮹⧕25%ಽᔑᱶࡹᨩᮝ໑, ᅙᩑǍᨱᕽ۵᭥đŝෝᔑᚁ⠪Ɂ⦹ᩍ32.5%ಽđᱶ⦹ᩡ݅. ঑௝

ᕽ ᯙ⃽ݡƱ ᵝ┲᮹ ⨩ᬊ ᩑe❭ƕኩࠥ۵ 0.325×10

^-4

ᯕ݅.

2.8 ઴ԩ൞֏थܑ

MethodⳒᨱ ᮹⦽ ᭥⨹ࠥ⠪aᨱᕽ۵ ᩑe❭ƕኩࠥෝ Ʊప᮹

ᵲ᫵ࠥᨱ঑ෙ⨩ᬊʑᵡᮝಽᱢᬊ⦹Ł, Ʊప᮹ᙹ⠪vࠥෝၙḡᙹ ಽ⦹ᩍ⨩ᬊʑᵡᮥอ᳒⦹۵↽ᗭᙹ⠪vࠥෝ᜽⧪₊᪅ჶᨱ᮹⧕

ᔑᱶ⦽݅. ᯕෝᖅĥᙹ⠪vࠥ௝⦹໑, ᖅĥᙹ⠪vࠥෝ∊Ċಆᮝಽ

ᱢᬊ⦹ŁƱపᇡᰍ᮹ᖅĥᗮࠥෝᱢᬊ⦹ᩍᩎᔑ⦹໕ᖅĥᖁၶᮥ

ᔑᱶ⧁ᙹᯩ݅. ᖅĥᙹ⠪vࠥ۵ƱbᯕӹʑⅩ᮹ᖅĥၰǍ᳑⧕ᕾ ᨱᱢᬊࡹ໑, ᖅĥᖁၶᮡƱప᮹ᔢᖙ⧕ᕾ⪚ᮡႊ⪙Ǎ᳑ྜྷᖅĥ

॒ᨱ ᱢᬊࡽ݅.

ᅙᩑǍᨱᕽ۵ݡᔢƱప᮹ᖅĥᙹ⠪vࠥၰᖅĥᖁၶᮥᔑᱶ⦹

Łʑ᳕Ǎ᳑ྜྷᯙᵝ┲ʑⅩ᪡ႊ⪙Ǎ᳑ྜྷᨱ᮹⦽ᙹ⠪vࠥಽᇡ░

Tables 6 and 7ᮡ ᵝ┲ʑⅩ ၰ ႊ⪙Ǎ᳑ྜྷ᮹ ᙹ⠪vࠥᨱ ᮹⦽

Ʊప᮹AFෝ, Table 8ᮡᖅĥᙹ⠪vࠥᨱ᮹⦽Ʊప᮹AFෝӹ┡ԙ

äᯕ݅. bb᮹⦹ᵲ᳑Õᨱ঑ෙᖁၶ∊࠭ᖅĥđŝ۵Table 9᪡

z݅. ႊ⪙Ǎ᳑ྜྷᯕᨧ۵ĞᬑݡᔢƱపᮡ23,225DWT ᯕ⦹᮹

ᖁၶᨱݡ⧕ᕽอčॽᙹᯩᨩᮝ໑, ᇡa⦹ᵲᮥᮁၽ᜽┅۵∊࠭

ኩࠥ۵ႊ⪙Ǎ᳑ྜྷᨱእ⦹ᩍ12.5႑, ⨩ᬊʑᵡᨱእ⦹ᩍ21.5႑ӹ

׳ᦹ݅. ႊ⪙Ǎ᳑ྜྷᨱ᮹⦽ᙹ⠪vࠥ۵2010֥☖⧪పᮥᱢᬊ⦽

ᖅĥᙹ⠪vࠥ215.28MN᮹90.7% ᙹᵡᮝಽ☖⧪ప᷾aᇥᯕᗭ

ɚᱢᮝಽ ၹᩢࡹᨩ޹ äᮝಽ ❱݉ࡽ݅.

(6)

Table 8. AF of Pylon Collapse by Design Lateral Resistance of Bridge DWT N PA(×10^-4) PG PC AF(×10^-4) 327,844 5 1.690 0.0740 0.0370 0.0231 257,411 17 1.690 0.0728 0.0268 0.0560 213,518 46 1.690 0.0716 0.0179 0.0995 178,088 149 1.690 0.0702 0.0083 0.1464 114,863 258 1.690 0.0662 0.0000 0.0000 88,840 230 1.690 0.0631 0.0000 0.0000 67,357 378 1.690 0.0593 0.0000 0.0000 45,966 857 1.690 0.0531 0.0000 0.0000 26,800 1,568 1.690 0.0428 0.0000 0.0000

3,047 17,869 1.690 0.0042 0.0000 0.0000 쨲AF=0.3250×10^-4

Table 9. Result of Ship Collision Design

Classification Bridge foundation

Bridge protection

Design lateral resistance Lateral

resistance(MN)

94.08 (43.7%)

195.22

(90.7%) 215.28 AF(×10^-4) 6.8854

(×21.2)

0.5635

(×1.7) 0.3250 Design Vessel

(DWT)

23,225 (19.1%)

100,002

(82.2%) 121,610

Table 10. Design Result by Tonnage Spacing

Tonnage Spacing

(DWT)

AF(×10^-4) Design lateral resistance

(MN)

Design vessel (DWT) H_P=94.08

(MN)

H_P=195.22 (MN) 10,000

tonnage

6.854 (×1.0)

0.576 (×1.0)

215.11 (99.9%)

121,418 (99.8%) 20,000

tonnage

6.878 (×1.0)

0.570 (×1.0)

214.99 (99.9%)

121,282 (99.7%) AASHTO

Guide 6.887 0.564 215.29 121,621

3. ၝqࠥᇥᕾ

ᖙĥᱢᮝಽ ᖁၶ∊࠭ŝ šಉ⦽ ⪶ශ༉ߙॅᯕ }ၽࡹŁ Ʊప

Õᖅ⥥ಽ᱾✙ᨱᱢᬊࡽၵᯩᮝӹݡℕಽᮁᔍ⦹໑AASHTO Guide(2009)᮹MethodⳒ᪡zᮡ⩶┽ෝaḥ݅. ঑௝ᕽ⧕ᔢƱప ᮹ ᖁၶ∊࠭ᖅĥ᜽ ⧕ݚ ʑᵡ᮹᭥⨹ࠥ ⠪a ႊჶᮥᱢᬊ⦹໕

อ᳒⧁อ⦽ᖅĥ⦹ᵲᮥđᱶ⧁ᙹᯩᮥäᮝಽ❱݉ࡽ݅. ə్ӹ

ʑᵡᨱᕽ᭥⨹ࠥ⠪aෝ᭥⦹ᩍᱶ᮹ࡽ᫵ᗭॅᮡԕයᙹಽᨱǎ⦽

ࡹᨕ ᯩÑӹ ḡᩎᱢᯙ ᫵ᯙᯕ v⦹ᩍ ᖅĥᯱ᮹ ❱݉ᮥ ⦥᫵ಽ

⦹۵ Ğᬑa ᯩᮝအಽ ݅ෙ ᖅĥʑᵡᯕӹ ᩑǍđŝ ⪚ᮡ ݅ෙ

⧕ᔢƱప⥥ಽ᱾✙᮹đŝෝₙ᳑⦹ᩍđᱶ⧕᧝⦹۵Ğᬑaᯩ݅.

ᅙᩑǍᨱᕽ۵AASHTO Guide᮹MethodⳒᨱᕽᱽ᜽ࡽ᫵ᗭॅ

᮹ᔑᱶႊჶŝ⇵ᱶɝÑᨱݡ⦽Łₑᮥᙹ⧪⦹ᩡᮝ໑݅ෙᖅĥʑ ᵡŝᩑǍđŝ, ⧕ᔢƱప⥥ಽ᱾✙ෝₙ᳑⦹ᩍᖅĥ᫵ᗭෝݡᔢƱ పŝzᯕմᮡၵ݅ᨱ״ᯙƱపᨱᅕ݅ᱢ⧊⦽ႊჶᮥᱽᦩ⦹ᩡ݅.

ੱ⦽, ݡᔢƱపᨱᱢᬊa܆⦽ᖅĥ᫵ᗭ᮹aᄡᩢᩎᮥᱶ᮹⦹Ł

⧕ݚ ᫵ᗭॅᨱ ݡ⦽ ၝqࠥ ᇥᕾᮥ ᙹ⧪⦹ᩡ݅.

3.1 টࢮଭ઴ԩധෘ߆

AASHTO Guide ᨱᕽ۵᭥⨹ࠥ⠪aෝ᭥⦽★ɪᇥඹෝ10อ

★ ၙอ᮹ ᖁၶᮡ 2อ★ ᯕ⦹ಽ, 10อ★ ᯕᔢ᮹ ᖁၶᮡ 5อ★

ᯕ⦹ಽ⦹ࠥಾȽᱶ⦹Łᯩ݅. ə్ӹݡ⩶ᖁၶ᮹እᵲᯕiᙹಾ

׳ᦥḡŁᯩᮝ໑⨩ᬊʑᵡᮥอ᳒⦹۵ᩑe❭ƕኩࠥaᵝಽݡ⩶

ᖁၶᨱ᮹⧕ݡᇡᇥđᱶࡹအಽ10อ★ᯕᔢ᮹ᖁၶᨱݡ⦽★ɪ

ᇥඹeĊᮥá☁⧁⦥᫵aᯩ݅. Table 10ᮡᖁၶ᮹★ɪᇥඹ

eĊᮥbb 1, 2อ★ ݉᭥ಽ⦹ᩍ AASHTO Guideᨱ ᱽ᜽ࡽ

ᇥඹႊჶŝ᮹᭥⨹ࠥᇥᕾđŝෝእƱ⦽äᯕ݅. bb᮹ᇥඹႊჶ ᨱ঑ෙ ᇥᕾđŝa ݡℕಽᮁᔍ⦹ᩍ ★ɪ ᇥඹeĊᯕ ᭥⨹ࠥ

ᇥᕾᨱၙ⊹۵ᩢ⨆ᯕⓍḡᦫᦹ۵ߑ, ᯕ۵ᇥඹeĊᄥಽ⧕ݚǍe ᮹ݡ⢽★ᙹෝ⠪Ɂ★ᙹಽᱢᬊ⦹ᩡʑভྙᮝಽ❱݉ࡽ݅. ə్အ ಽ★ɪᄥ⠪Ɂ★ᙹ᮹ᱢᬊᯕa܆⦹݅໕AASHTO Guide ႊჶᮥ

ᱢᬊ⦹ᩍࠥྙᱽaᨧᮝӹ⠪Ɂ★ᙹᱶᅕaaᬊ⦹ḡᦫ݅໕⬉ᮉ ᱢᯙᇡᇥᮥŁಅ⦹ࡹ, ᖙၡ⦹íᇥඹ⧁ᙹಾ᪅₉aᱢᮥäᮝಽ

❱݉ࡽ݅.

3.2 ාߦଲ೷คࠔ(Probability of Aberrancy)

PA۵ᯙŝ⪶ශ(Causation probability)ᯕ௝Łࠥ⦹໑, ᵝಽᖁ ၶ᮹᳭Ⅹ᪡šಉ⦹ᩍ1970֥ݡⅩʑᇡ░ฯᮡᩑǍᯱॅᨱ᮹⧕

ᙹ⧪ࡹᨩ݅. Fujii et al.(1974)ᮡᖁၶ᮹᳑ᱶᇩaᔢ┽ෝƱ☖ప

š⊂ᨱʑⅩ⦽ ᔍŁ ၽᔾ⬀ᙹ᪡ ᙹಽ᮹ ḡ⩶ᱢᯙ᳑Õᨱ ঑ෙ

ʑ⦹⪶ශಽ ᱶప⪵⦹ᩍ ᯝᅙԕ ⧕⩲᮹ ᯙŝ⪶ශᮥ 0.6×10

^-4

~ 1.0×10

^-3

ᮝಽđᱶ⦹ᩡ݅. MacDuff(1974)۵ስ⡢᮹ၵ۹ྙᱽෝ

ᯕᬊ⦹ᩍᙹಽԕ᮹༉ुᖁၶᯕྕ᯲᭥ಽᇥ⡍ࡽ݅۵aᱶ⦹ᨱ

ᔍŁᨱ ݡ⦽ ᯕುᱢ ⪶ශᮥ ĥᔑ⦹Ł ᳭Ⅹ᪡ ∊࠭ᔍŁ ʑಾᨱ

ݡ⦽ šₑŝ᮹ እƱෝ ☖⦹ᩍ ᔢ⪙e᮹ ₉ᯕෝ ᖅ໦⦹ʑ ᭥⦽

ᙹᱶᯙᯱ, ᯙŝ⪶ශᮥ1.0~5.0×10

^-4

ᮝಽđᱶ⦹ᩡ݅. ᯙŝ⪶ශŝ

šಉࡽݡᇡᇥ᮹ᩑǍ۵Fujii ੱ۵MacDuff᮹ᱲɝჶᮥɝÑಽ

⦹Ñӹ✚ᱶᙹᩎᨱᕽᔍŁ᮹☖ĥᯱഭᨱ᮹⧕อॅᨕḥ݅(Larsen,

1993). Ʊపᨱ ᱢᬊࡽ ݡ⢽ᱢᯙ ᯙŝ⪶ශᮡ Table 11ŝ z݅.

(7)

Table 11. Lists of PA Value

Bridge PA

Sunshine Skyway Bridge, U.S.A 1.3×10^-4(ship) 2.0×10^-4(barge) Dames Point Bridge, U.S.A 1.3×10^-4(ship)

4.1×10^-4(barge) Francis Scott Key Bridge, U.S.A 1.0×10^-4(ship)

2.0×10^-4(barge) Chesapeake Bay Bridge and

Tunnel, U.S.A 0.7×10^-4 Vicksburg Bridge, U.S.A 5.4×10^-4 Laviolette Bridge, Canada 0.5×10^-4 Centennial Bridge, Canada 5.0×10^-4

Tasman Bridge, Australia 0.61.0×10^-4 Akashi Bridge, Japan 1.4×10^-4 Great Belt Crossing Bridge,

Denmark

1.1×10^-4(with pilot) 3.2×10^-4(without pilot)

Table 12. Design Result by PA Value

PA (×10^-4)

(MN)

H_P=195.22 (MN) 0.845 3.444

(×0.5)

0.282 (×0.5)

187.96 (87.3%)

92,702 (76.2%) Incheon

bridge 6.887 0.564 215.29 121,621 2.535 10.331

(×1.5)

0.845 (×1.5)

224.40 (104.2%)

132,131 (108.6%)

Table 13. Design Result by Location of Mean

Location of mean

(MN)

H_P=195.22 (MN) 1/4 from

center

4.661 (×0.7)

0.438 (×0.8)

207.55 (96.4%)

113,033 (92.9%) AASHTO

Guide 6.887 0.564 215.29 121,621 3/4 from

center

9.208 (×1.3)

0.676 (×1.2)

219.72 (102.1%)

126,678 (104.2%)

Table 14. Design Result by Standard Deviation

Standard deviation

(MN)

Design vessel (DWT) HP=94.08

(MN)

HP=195.22 (MN) 쩒=0.8LOA 6.441

(×0.9)

0.583 (×1.0)

216.29 (100.5%)

122,753 (100.9%) AASHTO

Guide 6.887 0.564 215.29 121,621 쩒=1.2LOA 6.762

(×1.0)

0.521 (×0.9)

213.01 (98.9%)

119,059 (97.9%)

AASHTO Guideᨱᕽ۵ᯝၹᖁၶŝၵḡᖁᨱݡ⦽ᯙŝ⪶ශ᮹

ʑᅙᮉᮥbb0.6×10

^-4

, 1.2×10

^-4

ᮝಽᱶ᮹⦹Łᮁᗮᖒᇥŝᖁၶ

ᬕ⧎ၡࠥᨱ঑ෙᅕᱶĥᙹෝᱢᬊ⦹Łᯩ݅. ᯕ۵ʑᅙᱢᯙᯙŝ⪶

ශᮥ0.6×10

^-4

ᮝಽᅕŁၵḡᖁ᮹᳦᳑ᖒ܆ᮥᯝၹᖁၶ᮹50% ᱶࠥ

ԏí⠪a⦽äᮝಽ❱݉ࡽ݅. ᅙםྙᨱᕽ۵ݡᔢƱప᮹᭥⨹ࠥᇥᕾ ᨱᱢᬊࡽPA s᮹aᄡᩢᩎᮥ±50% ᱶࠥಽ⦹ᩍၝqࠥᇥᕾᮥ

Table 12᪡zᯕᙹ⧪⦹ᩡ݅. ᇥᕾđŝᨱ঑෕໕, PAa-50%ʭḡ

᯲ᦥḡ۵Ğᬑᖅĥᖁၶᮡ23.8% qᗭࡹᨩᮝ໑, PAa+50%ʭḡ

⍅ḡ۵Ğᬑᖅĥᖁၶᮡ8.6% ᷾aࡹᨩ݅. ᯙŝ⪶ශᮡḡᩎᱢᯙ

᫵ᯙᯕv⦹ʑভྙᨱƱపᯕ״ᯙᙹಽ᮹᭥⊹ᨱ঑௝ๅᬑ݅᧲⦹í

ᱢᬊࡹŁ ᯩᮝ໑ Table 11ᨱ ӹ᪉ ၵ᪡ zᯕ ᄡ࠺ᖒᯕ ⓍŁ ݉

1 ⫭᮹ᔍŁᨱࠥ᷾qᯕⓍíӹ┡ӽ݅. ঑௝ᕽʑᵡᨱᕽᱽ᜽⦹۵

ᯙŝ⪶ශᅕ݅۵⧕ݚᙹಽ⪚ᮡᙹᩎ᮹ᔍŁᯕಆᮥᇥᕾ⦹ᩍ⧕ݚ

sᮥ ᖅĥᨱ ၹᩢ⦹۵ äᯕ ၵ௭Ḣ⧁ äᮝಽ ❱݉ࡽ݅.

3.3 ׆෇෈ୡคࠔ(Geometric Probability)

AASHTO Guide ᨱᕽ۵ᖁၶ∊࠭ᔍŁᯕಆᨱɝÑ⦹ᩍ⧎ಽ ᮹ᵲᝍᮥ⠪Ɂᮝಽ⦹Ł⧕ݚᖁၶ᮹ʙᯕෝ⢽ᵡ⠙₉ಽ⦹۵

ᱶȽᇥ⡍ෝ ᔍᬊ⦹Ł ᯩ݅. ə్ӹ ⧕ݚʑᵡᮡ ᔍŁ ߑᯕ░a

ᱢᮡ⠙ᯕŁ20֥ᯕᔢࡽᯱഭᯕ໑ԕයᙹಽ᮹ၵḡᖁ∊࠭ᔍŁa

ᔢݚ⯩⡍⧉ࡹᨕᯩ݅۵⦽ĥaᯩ݅. ᯕ్⦽ྙᱽෝ⧕đ⦹ʑ

᭥⦹ᩍ ᖙĥᱢᮝಽ ⧕ᔢƱప᮹ ᔍŁʑಾᮥ ⇵aᱢᮝಽ ᳑ᔍ⧁

⦥᫵aᯩāᮝӹᯕ۵⠪Ɂ᮹᭥⊹᪡⢽ᵡ⠙₉᮹᷾qᮝಽݡᄡࢁ

äᮝಽᩩᔢࡽ݅. ঑௝ᕽᅙםྙᨱᕽ۵ᱶȽᇥ⡍᮹⠪Ɂᯕbb

ᙹಽ᮹1/4, 3/4 ᭥⊹ಽᄡ⪵ࡹ۵Ğᬑ᪡⢽ᵡ⠙₉aݡᔢᖁၶ᮹

0.8LOA, 1.2LOAಽᄡ⪵ࡹ۵Ğᬑᨱݡ⦽ၝqࠥᇥᕾᮥᙹ⧪⦹

ᩡ݅. ᇥᕾđŝᨱ঑෕໕, Table 13ŝzᯕ⠪Ɂ᮹᭥⊹ᄡ⪵ᨱ

঑ෙ∊࠭᭥⨹ᮡ±0.3႑, ᖅĥᖁၶᮡ±7.1% ᱶࠥᩡᮝӹ, Table 14 ᪡zᯕ⢽ᵡ⠙₉᮹ᄡ⪵ᨱ঑ෙ∊࠭᭥⨹ŝᖅĥᖁၶᮡbb

±0.1႑, ±2.1% ᱶࠥᩡ݅. ঑௝ᕽᄥࠥ᮹᳑ᔍŝᱶᮥÑ⊹ḡᦫŁ

AASHTO Guide ᮹ Ƚᱶᮥ ᔍᬊ⦹޵௝ࠥ ྙᱽa ᨧᮥ äᮝಽ

❱݉ࡹӹ ⨆⬥ Ʊపᮥ ☖ŝ⦹۵ ᖁၶ᮹ ᬕ⧎ᝅ┽ ᳑ᔍ ᜽ᨱ۵

⠪Ɂᱢᯙᖁၶ᮹᭥⊹᪡᳑ᖁᯱ᮹ᬕ⧎ᵲᝍᮥᅕ݅ᵲᱱᱢᮝಽ

ᇥᕾ⧁ ⦥᫵a ᯩ݅.

AASHTO Guide ෝእ೐⦹ᩍᖁၶ᮹ᬕ⧎ŝšಉࡽᩑǍđŝᨱ

ᕽᖁၶ᮹ ⧎⧕ ⧎ᱢᮡݡᇡᇥ ᱶȽᇥ⡍ಽ ᱶ᮹ࡽ݅. Olsen ॒

(1993) ᮡእƱᱢմᮡ⧕ᩎᯙᯝᅙ᮹Bisan seto ᙹಽ᪡Great

(8)

Table 15. Design Result by Relative Findings

Relative findings

(MN)

H_P=195.22 (MN) Olsen etc. 5.391

(×0.8)

0.447 (×0.8)

208.25 (96.7%)

113,797 (93.6%) Inoue etc. 5.080

(×0.7)

0.422 (×0.7)

206.14 (95.7%)

111,503 (91.7%) AASHTO

Guide 6.887 0.564 215.29 121,621

belt ᨱᕽ᮹š⊂đŝಽᇡ░⧎ᱢᇥ⡍ෝᱶȽᇥ⡍ಽ༉ߙย⦹ᩡ݅.

⢽ᵡ⠙₉۵ᯝၹᱢᯙݡ⩶ᖁၶᱥᰆ᮹ࢱ႑(2×LOA)ಽaᱶ⦹Ł, ᯝၹᱢᯙݡ⩶ᖁၶᮡᖁၶⓍʑᇥ⡍᮹95%ಽᱶ᮹⦹ᩡ݅. Inoue (1977)᪡Kuroda et al.(1983)ᮡ⧎⧕ᙹಽᨱᕽ᪶ᅖ☖⧎ᨱݡ⦽

ᖁၶ᮹⧎ᱢᇥ⡍ෝĞ⨹ᱢᮝಽ݅ᮭŝzᮡ⠪Ɂsŝ⢽ᵡ⠙₉ෝ

aḡ۵ ᱶȽᇥ⡍ಽ ɝᔍ⧁ ᙹ ᯩ݅Ł aᱶ⦹ᩡ݅.

ᩍʑᕽ, W : ⧎⧕ ᙹಽ᮹ ⡎

a : 0.2 ; ᙹಽ ᵲᦺᨱ ᇥญ ⢽᜾ᯕ ᯩᮥ Ğᬑ 0.1 ; ᙹಽ ᵲᦺᨱ ᇥญ ⢽᜾ᯕ ᨧᮥ Ğᬑ

Table 15۵ ⧕ݚᩑǍđŝෝݡᔢƱపᨱᱢᬊ⦹ᩍ᭥⨹ࠥᇥᕾ

ᮥᙹ⧪⦽đŝಽAASHTO Guide۵݅ෙᩑǍđŝᨱእ⦹ᩍ

∊࠭᭥⨹ŝᖅĥᖁၶᯕ݅ᗭ׳í⠪aࡹ۵äᮝಽ᳑ᔍࡹᨩ݅.

঑௝ᕽ⢽ᵡ⠙₉᮹ᱢᬊႊჶᯕӹ⧎⧕⧎ᱢ༉ߙย᜽⠪Ɂ᮹᭥⊹

ᨱ ݡ⦽ ⇵aᱢᯙ ᯱഭ᳑ᔍa ⦥᫵⧁ äᮝಽ ❱݉ࡽ݅.

3.4 ൞֏คࠔ(Probability of Collapse)

❭ƕ⪶ශ, PC۵ᖁၶ᮹∊࠭ᨱ᮹⧕Ǎ᳑ྜྷᯕ❭ƕࢁ⪶ශᯕ݅.

⧎ಽෝᯕ┩⦽ᖁၶᮡƱప᮹⦹ᇡǍ᳑ᨱ∊࠭⧁a܆ᖒᯕๅᬑ

׳ᮝ໑, ᯕ్⦽∊࠭᮹ᯝᇡ۵Ʊపᨱᝍb⦽ᗱᔢᮥⅩ௹⧁ᙹ

ᯩ݅. AASHTO Guideᨱᕽ۵ Cowiconsult(1987)ᨱᕽ }ၽࡽ

⪶ශၡࠥ⧉ᙹෝᱢᬊ⦹ᩍᖁၶ᮹∊࠭⦹ᵲŝƱప⦹ᇡǍ᳑᮹ᱡ

⧎ಆ᮹ šĥᨱ ঑௝ PCෝ ݅ᮭŝ zᯕ ᱶ᮹⦹Ł ᯩ݅.

× = ¡

_©

î©

_¬

= ×íÎì © á ×íÎ âÖÞ×íÎ à ¡

_©

î©

_¬

ß (5)

×íÎ = ¡

_©

î©

_¬

= Îì © á ÞÎí× à ¡

_©

î©

_¬

ßîÖ (6)

¡

©

î©

_¬

= Îì © á Îí× (7)

ᩍʑᕽ, P

S

: ᖁၶ∊࠭ಆ H

P

: Ǎ᳑ྜྷ᮹ ᱡ⧎ಆ

AASHTO Guide ᨱᕽᖁၶ∊࠭ಆP

S

۵Woisin(1976)᮹ྜྷญ

༉ߙᝅ⨹đŝᨱɝÑ⦹Łᯩᮝ໑, ⧕ݚᩑǍᨱᕽ۵ᱥℕ∊࠭⦹ᵲ ᇥ⡍᮹70%ᇥ᭥ᙹෝᔍᬊ⦽⠪Ɂ∊࠭⦹ᵲᮥᔍᬊ⦹Łᯩ݅. ᯕᨱ

ၹ⧕EUROCODE(2001)ᨱᕽ۵Great Belt Bridge Projectᨱᕽ

Pedersen et al.(1993) ᮹ᙹ⊹ᯱഭෝɝÑಽ⦽↽ݡ∊࠭⦹ᵲᮥ

ᔍᬊ⦹Łᯩ݅. ᭥⨹ࠥᇥᕾ᜽EUROCODEᨱᕽᱽᦩࡽ∊࠭⦹ᵲ

ᮥᔍᬊ⦹໕∊࠭⦹ᵲᮥᅕᙹᱢᮝಽ⠪a⦹۵đŝaࡹḡอᖅĥ ᖁၶᮡᕽಽz݅. ᯕ۵ᖅĥᖁၶᯕ∊࠭⦹ᵲĞ⨹᜾ᮝಽᇡ░ᩎᔑ

⦹ᩍᔑᱶࡹʑভྙᯕ݅. Ǎ᳑ྜྷ᮹ᱡ⧎ಆH

P

۵AASHTO Guide ᨱᕽ ᭥⨹ࠥ⠪a᮹ ↽᳦ ༊⢽ᯕ໑, ၙḡᙹa ࡹ۵ sᮝಽ Ⅹʑ

aᱶ⬥᭥⨹ࠥa⨩ᬊʑᵡᮥჸᨕӹ໕⧕ݚs᮹ ᷾qᮥ☖⦹ᩍ

᜽⧪₊᪅ჶᮝಽ⦥᫵⦽Ǎ᳑ྜྷ᮹ᱡ⧎ಆᷪ, ᖅĥᙹ⠪vࠥෝđᱶ

⧁ᙹᯩ݅. ݡᔢƱపᮡᖅĥᙹ⠪vࠥ᮹Ⓧʑᨱ঑௝⦹ᇡǍ᳑᮹

ᯱℕvᖒᯕӹ࠭⦡⪚ᮡᯙŖᖍŝzᮡႊ⪙Ǎ᳑ྜྷᨱ᮹᳕⦹ᩍ

ᖁၶ∊࠭ಆᨱ čॽᙹ ᯩࠥಾ ᖅĥࡽ݅.

AASHTO Guideᨱᕽ ❭ƕ⪶ශᮡ Ʊపᮥ ๅᬑ ⓑ ᖁၶᮝಽ

aᱶ⦹Łݡᔢᖁၶ᮹∊࠭ᨱ᮹⦽ᔢݡᱢᯙᗱᔢእᮉಽᱶ᮹⦹Ł

ᯩᨕእƱᱢ⧊ญᱢᯕ໑ᱢᬊᖒᯕᳬí}ၽࡹᨩᮝӹ∊࠭᭥⊹ӹ

∊࠭ℕၰ⦝∊࠭ℕ᮹✚ᖒ॒ᮡŁಅࡹḡᦫŁᯩ݅. ᳑⪙⩥(2009)

ᮡ∊࠭⦹ᵲ᮹⪶ශ༉ߙŝᵝ┲᮹ᱥ݉ᱡ⧎ ≉᧞ࠥෝ⠪a⦹ᩍ

❭ƕ⪶ශᮥᔑᱶ⦹ᩡᮝӹ∊࠭ݡᔢŝ❭ƕÑ࠺ᯕ⦽ᱶࡹᨕᯩᮝ໑

ᔢݚ⯩ᅕᙹᱢᯙđŝෝᅕᯕŁᯩᨩ݅. Consolazio, G. R.(2010)

॒ᮡၵḡᖁ᮹∊࠭ᨱݡ⦽∊࠭᭥⊹ၰƱప⦹ᇡǍ᳑᮹Ǎ᳑⩶᜾

ᨱ঑ෙ∊࠭᜽ဍ౩ᯕᖹđŝಽᇡ░❭ƕ⪶ශᮥእƱᱢᱶ⪶⦹í

⇵ᱶ⦹ᩡᮝӹݡᔢᖁၶᯕ݅᧲⦽Ğᬑᨱ۵᜽eᗭእᱢᯙ⊂໕ᯕ

ᯩᨕᯝၹᱢᯙ⧕ᔢƱప᮹ᖅĥ݉ĥᨱᕽၵಽᱢᬊ⦹ʑᨱ۵ᨕಅᬙ

äᮝಽ❱݉ࡽ݅. ⨆⬥Ŗᬊᵲᯙ⧕ᔢƱపᨱݡ⦽༉ܩ░ยŝၽᔾ

ᔍŁᨱ ݡ⦽ ∊࠭ ၰ ᬕ⧎᜽ဍ౩ᯕᖹ ॒ᮥ ⪽ᬊ⦹ᩍ AASHTO Guide ʑၹ᮹❭ƕ⪶ශᮥ⠪a⦹Łᯕෝ}ᖁ⦹ʑ᭥⦽⇵aᱢᯙ

ᩑǍa ⦥᫵⦽ äᮝಽ ❱݉ࡽ݅.

3.5 ࢺ෹ծ৤(Protection Factor)

ႊ⪙ĥᙹ۵AASHTO Guide 2009֥❱ᨱᔩ೎í⇵aࡽ᫵ᗭ ಽ៉⦹ᇡǍ᳑ᨱ᯲ᬊ⦹۵∊࠭ಆᯕᰆᧁྜྷᨱ᮹⧕ᅕ⪙ࡹ۵ᱶࠥ

ෝŁಅ⦹ʑ᭥⦽äᯕ݅. ᩩෝॅᨕ✚ᱶƱb, ʑⅩaᦵⅩӹ

ᖍᨱ᮹⧕᪥ᱥ⯩ᅕ⪙ࡽ݅໕PF۵0ᯕࡹ໑, ᙹᝍᯕԏᦥᯝᇡᖁၶ

อᱲɝa܆⦹Ñӹᰆᧁྜྷ॒ᨱ᮹⧕ᅕ⪙ࡹŁᯩ݅໕ᅕ⪙ᱶࠥෝ

(9)

Table 16. Design Result by Navigating Speed

VT

(knots)

(MN)

H_P=195.22 (MN) 6.0 1.623

(×0.2)

0.000 (×0.0)

130.81 (60.8%)

44,900 (36.9%) 8.0 3.958

(×0.6)

0.083 (×0.1)

173.05 (80.4%)

78,579 (64.6%) Incheon

bridge 6.887 0.564 215.29 121,621

Table 17. Available Risk Distribution Model

Risk distribution model Pylon Pier Preliminary risk assessment 40% 10%

Replacement cost 25% 25%

Arithmetic mean 32.5% 17.5%

Łಅ⦹ᩍ ᱢᱶ ĥᙹෝ ᔍᬊ⦹í ࡽ݅. ə్ӹ ᅕ⪙ࡹ۵ ᱶࠥᨱ

ݡ⦽ᱶపᱢᯙḡ⢽۵ᙹพࡹᨕᯩḡᦫᦹ݅. ǎԕᨱᕽࠥႊ⪙ĥᙹ

᪡ᮁᔍ⦽}ֱ᮹᭥⨹ࠥᇥ႑༉ߙᯕᱽᦩࡹᨩ݅. ᯕᖒಽ॒(2010)

ᮡ∊࠭᭥⨹ᮥᙹಽᩢᩎᨱšĥᨧᯕᙹಽᵲᝍᮝಽᇡ░3×LOA ჵ᭥ᨱ ᯩ۵ ༉ु ᇡᰍᨱ ⧁ݚ⦹Ł, ᯕಽᇡ░ ᙹಽᩢᩎᨱ ᯩ۵

ᇡᰍ᮹᭥⨹ࠥ⠪aෝᙹ⧪⧕᧝⦹໑ᯕভ, ƱపǍᖒᇡᰍ᮹AF᮹

⧊ᮡƱపᱥℕ᮹⨩ᬊAFᅕ᯲݅í⠪aࢁᙹࠥᯩ݅ŁᅕŁ⦹ᩡ

݅. ᅙםྙ᮹ݡᔢƱపᮡ✚ᄥ⦽ᰆᧁྜྷᯕᨧ۵⧕ᔢᨱ᭥⊹⦹Ł

ᯩᮝအಽ ႊ⪙ĥᙹ۵ 1.0 ⪚ᮡ ᱢᬊ⧁ ⦥᫵a ᨧᮝအಽ ᔍᬊࡽ

ʑᵡ᮹ ᄡĞ ᔍ⧎ᨱ ݡ⦽ ᩢ⨆ᮥ ၼḡ ᦫ۵݅.

3.6 টࢮଭ౦ܕুܑ

ᖁၶᯕ ⧎ԕᨱ ḥ᯦⦹Ñӹ ᙹಽ᮹ อłᇡ ⪚ᮡ Ʊపŝ zᮡ

᭥⨹ྜྷɝ⃹ෝḡԁভᷪ, ᬕ⧎᜽bᄥ⦽ᵝ᮹ෝ᫵⦹۵ᔢ⫊ᨱᕽ۵

qᗮᬕ⧎ᯕӹ⦥᫵⦽ᱽၹ᳑⊹ෝ≉⧕᧝⦽݅. ə్ӹᱲᦩ᜽᪡

zᯕ1י✙ԕ᫙ಽᬕ⧎⧁ᙹ۵ᨧᮝ໑, ᗮࠥaԏ݅Ł⧕ᕽ᳦᳑ᖒ

܆ᯕྕ᳑Õᳬ݅Ł⧁ᙹ۵ᨧ݅. ᯕ۵ᖁၶ᮹ᬕ⧎ᨱᩢ⨆ᮥၙ⊹۵

᫵ᗭaᖁ᳦ᯕӹࠥᖁᔍ᮹Ğ⨹ၰḡᩎᱢᯙ✚ᖒᯕๅᬑv⦹အಽ

ᯝťᱢᮝಽđᱶࢁᙹᯩ۵ᔍ⧎ᯕᦥܩ໑, ᳦᳑ᖒ܆ᮡᯕುᱢᯙ

ĥᔑđŝ᪡ࠥฯᮡ₉ᯕaᯩʑভྙᯕ݅(ࠥᖁᔍ⩲⫭). ə్ӹ

⧎ĥԕᨱᕽᖁၶ᮹ᬕ⧎ᗮࠥ۵᧞15י✙ᯕ⦹᮹እƱᱢᱢᮡ

ჵ᭥᮹Ǎeԕᨱᯩᮝ໑, ⇵ᱶႊჶᯕᨕಖŁᅖᰂ⦹ᩍᅕᙹᱢᮝಽ

ᔑᱶࡹ޵௝ࠥƱపᨱݡ⦽ᖁၶ∊࠭ᖅĥ᜽ᨱ۵ๅᬑᮁᬊ⧁äᮝ ಽ ❱݉ࡽ݅. ᯕ۵ ᖁၶ᮹ ∊࠭ಆŝ ∊࠭ᨱթḡ ᔑᱶ᜽ ᗮࠥ᮹

ᩢ⨆ᯕ ๅᬑ Ⓧʑ ভྙᯕ݅.

Pedersenᮡ ᖁၶ᮹ ᬕ⧎ᗮࠥಽ ⧎ԕᗮࠥ᪡ ᔍᬊᗮࠥෝ bb

6~8 י✙, 10~15י✙ಽᱶ᮹⦹ᩡᮝ໑, Great Belt Bridge Project ᨱᕽᖁၶ᮹ᬕ⧎ᗮࠥෝ10י✙ಽ⦹ᩍᖁၶ∊࠭ᖅĥᨱᱢᬊ⦹ᩡ

݅. ǎԕᨱᕽ۵ḡႊ⧕᧲⧎อℎ᮹Ł᜽ಽ✚ᱶǍeᨱݡ⦽ᱽ⦽ᗮ

ࠥෝȽᱶ⦹Łᯩ۵ߑ, ᯙ⃽⧎ᖁၶ☖⧎Ƚ⊺}ᱶŁ᜽ᦩ(2010)ᨱ ᕽ۵ᩢ᳦ݡƱ᪡ᯙ⃽ݡƱෝ⡍⧉⦹۵Ǎᩎ᮹↽ݡᗮࠥෝ12י✙

ᯕ⦹ಽȽᱶ⦹Łᯩᮝӹ, Ʊపᇡɝᨱᕽ۵ⅾ★ᙹ5อ★ᯕᔢ᮹

ᖁၶᮡ10י✙ᯕ⦹, 10อ★ᯕᔢ᮹ᖁၶᮡ7י✙ᯕ⦹ಽᱽ⦽⦹Ł

ᯩ݅. Ų᧲⧎ᮡ⧕ᔢƱ☖šᱽᬕᩢȽᱶᨱᕽ┡ᖁၶ᮹☖⧎ᦩᱥ

ᱡ⧕᪡⧎ಽᔢᱢℕ⩥ᔢႊḡෝ᭥⦽↽ᱡᗮࠥෝ6י✙ಽȽᱶ⦹Ł

ᯩ݅. ᇡᔑ⧎⧎ჶ॒ᨱš⦽Ƚ⊺(2012)ᨱᕽ۵ԉ⧎ݡƱ᪡ᩢࠥݡ Ʊ, ᇡᔑݡƱ, ᇢ⧎ݡƱᯙɝᨱᕽⅾ★ᙹ500★ᯕ⦹᮹ᯝᇡᩍ~ᖁ

ᮥᱽ᫙⦽༉ुᖁၶ᮹↽Ł⧎⧪ᗮಆᮥ8י✙ᯕ⦹ಽᱽ⦽⦹Ł

ᯩ݅. ⠪┾ݚḥ⧎ᮡ⧎ĥԕ⧎⧪ᖁၶ↽Łᗮಆᱽ⦽ᨱš⦽Ł᜽

(2012)ᨱᕽᕽ⧕ݡƱa⡍⧉ࡽ⧕ᩎ᮹↽Łᗮಆᮥ8י✙ᯕ⦹ಽ

ᱽ⦽⦹Łᯩ݅. ᩍᙹ⧎ᮡ⧕ᔢƱ☖šᱽᬕᩢȽᱶ(2010)ᨱᕽŲ᧲

ݡƱa ⡍⧉ࡽ ⧕ᩎᮥ ᬕ⧎⦹۵ ᖁၶ᮹ ↽ݡᗮಆᮥ 12י✙(݉,

᭥⨹⪵ྜྷᬕၹᖁᮡ10י✙ᯕ⦹)ಽȽᱶ⦹Łᯩᮝ໑, ↽ᗭᗮಆᮥ

6י✙ಽ Ƚᱶ⦹Łᯩ݅. ༊⡍⧎ᮡ⧎อ᜽ᖅᬕᩢᖙ⊺(2012)ᨱᕽ

༊⡍ݡƱa⡍⧉ࡽ⧕ᩎ᮹↽Łᗮࠥෝ12י✙ᯕ⦹ಽȽᱶ⦹Ł

ᯩᮝ໑, ༊⡍ݡƱᇡɝŝzᯕᖁၶ☖⧎ᯕၡḲ⦹۵ᙹᩎᨱᕽ۵

ᦩᱥᬕ⧎ᨱ ⦥᫵⦽ šᱽෝ ၼࠥಾ ᳑⊹⦹Ł ᯩ݅.

Ʊపᨱݡ⦽ᖁၶ∊࠭ᮡᖅĥᖁၶ᮹∊࠭ಆᮥƱప⪚ᮡႊ⪙Ǎ

᳑ྜྷᯕčॽᙹᯩ۵ḡašÕᯕʑভྙᨱ ᯝၹᱢᯙݡ⩶ᖁၶᯕ

እƱᱢ᧲⪙⦽ᬕ⧎ᖒ܆ᮥၽ⭹⦹۵ჵ᭥ ԕᨱᕽ᮹↽ᱡᗮࠥa

šᝍ᮹ݡᔢᯕࡽ݅. ǎԕᵝ᫵⧎᮹ᯝၹᱢᯙᬕ⧎ᱽ⦽↽ݡᗮࠥ۵

8~12י✙ჵ᭥ᨱᕽbbđᱶࡹᨩᮝӹ↽ᗭᗮࠥ۵ݡᇡᇥ6י✙

ಽȽᱶ⦹Łᯩᨩ݅. ᅙםྙᨱᕽ۵ᯙ⃽ݡƱᨱᱢᬊࡽ10י✙ෝ

bb8י✙, 6י✙ಽᱽ⦽⦹۵Ğᬑᨱݡ⦽ၝqࠥᇥᕾᮥTable 16 ŝ zᯕ ᙹ⧪⦹ᩡ݅. ᬕ⧎ᗮࠥ ᱽ⦽ᨱ ঑௝ ∊࠭᭥⨹ᮡ ↽ᗭ

1/5~3/5 qᗭࡹᨩᮝ໑, ᖅĥᖁၶᮡ36.9~64.6%ʭḡqᗭࡹᨩ݅.

ᖁၶ᮹ᬕ⧎ᗮࠥ ᄡ⪵ᨱ ঑ෙၝqࠥa ๅᬑ Ⓧʑভྙᨱ ᯕෝ

⪽ᬊ⦽Ğᱽᱢᯙᖅĥaa܆⦹āᮝӹᖁၶ᮹ ᧲⪙⦽ᵝ⧪ᖒᮥ

⪶ᅕ⧁ ᙹ ᯩࠥಾ 8י✙ ᯕᔢᮥ ᱢᬊ⦹۵ äᮥ ǭᰆ⦹໑, ⨆⬥

Ʊప᮹ᮁḡšญෝ᭥⦹ᩍᇡाᯕ⦽Ğᬑᨱ۵ ᯝᇡݡ⩶ᖁၶᨱ

ݡ⧕ᕽ۵8י✙ᯕ⦹ಽᱢᬊ⦹۵äࠥa܆⧁äᮝಽ❱݉ࡽ݅.

3.7 ंࢼࡦ܄

ᖁၶ∊࠭ᮥȽᱶ⦹Łᯩ۵ᵝ᫵ʑᵡᨱᕽᩑe❭ƕኩࠥ᮹⨩ᬊʑ ᵡᮡƱపǍ᳑ྜྷᱥℕᨱݡ⧕ᱶ᮹⦹Łᯩᮝ໑⧕ݚ⨩ᬊ⊹ෝƱప

ᇡᗮǍ᳑ྜྷᨱᇥ႑⦹۵äᮡᖅĥᯱ᮹❱݉ᨱ঑ෙ݅. AASHTO Guide ᨱᕽ۵ᇡᰍ᮹ᵲ᫵ࠥ᪡ƱℕእᬊᮥŁಅ⦹ᩍᇥ႑⦹ࠥಾ

ǭᰆ⦹Łᯩᮝ໑, ᯕᖒಽ॒(2006b)ᮡᔍᱥ᭥⨹ࠥ⠪aෝ☖⦽⨩

(10)

Table 18. Design Result by Risk Distribution Model Risk

distribution model

(MN)

H_P=195.22 (MN) Replacement

cost

6.885 (×1.0)

0.563 (×1.0)

221.59 (102.9%)

128,843 (105.9%) Arithmetic

mean 6.887 0.564 215.29 121,621 Preliminary

risk assessment

6.885 (×1.0)

0.563 (×1.0)

208.98 (97.1%)

114,596 (94.2%)

ᬊʑᵡᇥ႑༉ߙᮥᱽᦩ⦹ᩡ݅. ᅙםྙᨱᕽ۵Ʊℕእᬊŝᔍᱥ

᭥⨹ࠥ⠪aෝ☖⦽ႊჶəญŁࢱaḡႊჶᮥᔑᚁ⠪Ɂ⦽Ğᬑᨱ

ݡ⦽᭥⨹ࠥᇥᕾᮥᙹ⧪⦹ᩡ݅. Table 17ᮡםྙᨱᱢᬊࡽᇥ႑༉

ߙᯕ໑, Table 18ᮡᇥ႑༉ߙᨱ঑ෙ᭥⨹ࠥᇥᕾđŝ۵ӹ┡ԙ

äᯕ݅. ᇥ႑༉ߙ᮹ᄡ⪵ᮉᯕ15% ᱶࠥᯙäᨱእ⦹ᩍ঑ෙ᭥⨹ࠥ

ᇥᕾđŝ۵ᖅĥᖁၶᯕ6.0% ᱶࠥಽ᳑ᔍࡹᨕƱℕእᬊᯕӹᔍᱥ

᭥⨹ࠥ⠪a॒ŝzᯕŖ⦺ᱢᮝಽ┡ݚ⦽ႊჶᯕᔍᬊࡽ݅໕ḡ႑ ᱢᯙ ᩢ⨆ᮥ ၙ⊹۵ ᫵ᗭ۵ ᦥܭ äᮝಽ ❱݉ࡽ݅.

4. đು

ᅙᩑǍᨱᕽ۵2010֥ᖁၶᬕ⧎ߑᯕ░ෝᔍᬊ⦹ᩍᯙ⃽ݡƱ᮹

Guide(2009)᮹MethodⳒᨱᕽᱽ᜽ࡽᖅĥ᫵ᗭॅ᮹ᔑᱶႊჶŝ

⇵ᱶɝÑၰšಉᩑǍđŝᨱݡ⦽Łₑᮥᙹ⧪⦹ᩍᖅĥ݉ĥᨱᕽ

ᵝ᮹⦹ᩍ ᱢᬊ⧕᧝ ⦹Ñӹ ḡᩎᱢᯙ ߑᯕ░᮹ Ḣᱲ ᇥᕾ ॒ᯕ

⦥᫵⦽᫵ᗭॅᮥ⪶ᯙ⦹ᩍaᄡᩢᩎᮥᱶ᮹⦹Łᯕᨱݡ⦽ၝqࠥ

ᇥᕾᮥ ᙹ⧪⦹ᩡ݅.

ᯙ⃽ݡƱ᮹ ᖁၶ∊࠭ ᭥⨹ࠥ۵ ႊ⪙Ǎ᳑ྜྷ ᖅ⊹ಽ ᯙ⦹ᩍ

6.88×10

^-4

ᨱᕽ0.56×10

^-4

ᮝಽqᗭࡹᨩᮝӹᖅĥᖁၶᮡ10י✙ʑᵡ ᮝಽ121,610DWTಽᔑᱶࡹᨕᖅĥݚ᜽᮹ݡᔢᖁၶ100,000DWT ᨱ እ⦹ᩍ׳íᔑᱶࡹᨩ݅. ᯕ۵ᖅĥ᜽☖⧪ప᷾aᇥᯕᗭɚᱢᮝ ಽၹᩢࡽäᮝಽ❱݉ࡹӹᝅᱽಽ۵ᯙ⃽ݡƱᇡɝ᮹ᬕ⧎ᗮࠥa

ᖁၶȽ༉ᨱ঑௝7.0י✙ʭḡᱽ⦽ࡹŁᯩᮝအಽᬕᩢᨱ۵ݡℕಽ

ྙᱽaᨧᮥäᮝಽᅕᯙ݅. ݉, ᖁၶ☖⧪ప᷾aᇥၰᬕ⧎᳑Õ

॒᮹༉ܩ░ยᮥእ೐⦹ᩍ ݡᔢƱప᮹ᖁၶ∊࠭ݡ⦽ᮁḡšญ

ၰ ᄥࠥ᮹ ᇥᕾŝ áᔍa ⦥᫵⧁ äᮝಽ ❱݉ࡽ݅.

᭥⨹ࠥ⠪aᨱ⦥᫵⦽᫵ᗭॅ᮹ၝqࠥᇥᕾᨱᕽ۵ᖅĥᗮࠥ᮹

ᩢ⨆ᯕaᰆⓑäᮝಽ᳑ᔍࡹᨩ݅. ᅙםྙᨱᕽ۵ᵝ᫵⧎Ǎᄥ

ᱽ⦽ᗮࠥෝₙ᳑⦹ᩍaᯕऽ௝ᯙᮥᱽ᜽⦹ᩡᮝӹᖁၶ᮹᳦ඹӹ

Ⓧʑᨱ঑ෙᬕ⧎ᗮࠥ᪡ᵝ⧪ᖒ܆᮹šĥaᱶพࡽ݅໕ᅕ݅ᱶ⪶

⦹Ł⬉ᮉᱢᯙᖅĥaa܆⧁äᮝಽ❱݉ࡽ݅. ⧎ಽᯕ┩⪶ශᮡḡᩎ ᱢᯙ✚ᖒᯕ૽ಘ⦽ݡ⢽ᱢᯙᖅĥ᫵ᗭಽaᄡᩢᩎᯕմŁᄡ࠺ᖒᯕ

Ⓧ໑᭥⨹ࠥᇥᕾᨱࠥእƱᱢⓑᩢ⨆ᮥၙ⊹အಽAASHTO Guide ᅕ݅۵⧕ݚᙹᩎ᮹ᔍŁᯱഭၰḡᩎᱢᯙߑᯕ░ෝḢᱲᇥᕾ⦹۵

äᯕᅕ݅ᱶ⪶⦽ᖅĥaࢁäᮝಽ❱݉ࡽ݅. ʑ⦹⦺ᱢ⪶ශᮡ

⠪Ɂ᮹᭥⊹᪡⢽ᵡ⠙₉᮹Ⓧʑᄡ⪵ᨱ঑ෙᇥᕾđŝ᮹ᄡ⪵ᮉᯕ

±10% ᯕԕಽAASHTO Guide᮹ʑᵡᮥᵡᬊ⦹ᩍࠥྙᱽaᨧᮥ

äᮝಽ❱݉ࡹӹ⇵aᱢᯙᩑǍaᙹ⧪ࡽ݅໕ ⠪Ɂᱢᯙᖁၶ᮹

᭥⊹᪡᳑ᖁᯱ᮹ᬕ⧎ᵲᝍᮥᅕ݅ᵲᱱᱢᮝಽᇥᕾ⧁⦥᫵aᯩᮥ

äᮝಽ ❱݉ࡽ݅.

Ʊపᨱݡ⦽ᖁၶ∊࠭᭥⨹ࠥᇥᕾᮡ⧕ݚǍeᮥ☖ŝ⦹۵݅᧲

⦽ᖁၶॅᵲᨱᕽᖅĥᨱᱢᬊ⧁ᖁၶ᮹ᙹᵡŝ∊࠭⦹ᵲᮥ⪶ශᱢ ᮝಽđᱶ⦹۵ๅᬑᵲ᫵⦽ŝᱶᮝಽᖅĥ᮹┡ݚᖒŝǍ᳑ྜྷ᮹

Ğᱽᖒᮥ❱݉⦹۵ɝÑaࡽ݅. ᯕჩᩑǍෝ☖⦹ᩍ᭥⨹ࠥᇥᕾᨱ

⦥᫵⦽ ᖅĥ ᫵ᗭॅ᮹ ᱲɝႊჶŝ ✚⯩ ᵝᦩᱱᮥ ࢱᨕ᧝ ⦹۵

ᖅĥ᫵ᗭෝ⪶ᯙ⦹ᩡᮝ໑ᯕಽᇡ░ᝅྕᨱᕽ⧕ᔢƱపᨱݡ⦽᭥

⨹ࠥ⠪aၰ✚ᱶ᫵ᗭ᮹ᝍ⊖ᱢᯙᇥᕾᮥ᭥⦽ʑⅩᯱഭಽ៉

⪽ᬊࢁ ᙹ ᯩᮥ äᮝಽ ❱݉ࡽ݅.

References

AASHTO (2009). Guide specification and commentary for vessel collision design of highway bridges.

Bae, Y. G. and Lee, S. L. (2008). “Analysis of ship collision behavior of pile supported structure.” Journal of KSCE, KSCE, Vol. 28, No. 3A, pp. 323-330 (in Korean).

Bae, Y. G. and Lee, S. L. (2012). “Determination of channel width and span length for offshore bridges considering the ship collision problem.” Yooshin Technical Proceedings, Yooshin Engineering Corporation, No. 19, pp. 73-87 (in Korean).

Bae, Y. G. and Lee, S. L. (2012). “Ship impact risk assessment of incheon bridge.” Proceedings of KSCE Annual Conference, KSCE, Vol. A, pp.1506-1509 (in Korean).

Busan Regional Maritime Affairs and Port Office (2012). Internal notification or guideline regarding to port operation or ship navigation (in Korean).

CHO, H. H. (2009). Probability analysis of ship-bridge collision using ship maneuvering simulation, Ph.D. Dissertation, Seoul National University, Korea (in Korean).

Consolazio, G. R., Davidson, M. T. and Getter, D. J. (2010). Vessel crushing and structural collapse relationships for bridge design, University of Florida Civil and Coastal Engineering.

Cowiconsult (1987). General principles for risk evaluation of ship collisions, strandings, and contact incidents, Technical Note dated January (unpublished).

EUROCODE 1 (2001). Basic of design and actions on structures,

(11)

European Standard.

Fujii, Y., Yamanouchi, H. and Mizuki, N. (1974). “Some factors affecting the frequency of accidents in marine traffic.” Journal of Navigation, Vol. 27.

Harbor and Fishery Design Criteria (2005). Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisherie (in Korean).

Incheon Bridge Corporation (2009). Incheon bridge project design report.

Incheon Regional Maritime Affairs and Port Office (2012). Internal notification or guideline regarding to port operation or ship navigation (in Korean).

Inoue K. (1977). “On the separation of traffic at straight waterway by distribution model of ship paths.” Journal of Nautical Society of Japan. No. 56.

Kuroda K. and Kita. H. (1983). Probabilistic modelling of ship collision with bridge piers, IABSE Colloquium on Ship Collision with Bridges and Offshore Structures, Copenhagen.

Larsen O. D. (1993). Ship collision with bridge, IABSE.

Lee G. H. and Hong, G. Y. (2011). “A study for the evaluation of ship collision forces for the design of bridge pier.” Journal of KSCE, KSCE, Vol. 31, No. 3A, pp. 199-206 (in Korean).

Lee, S. L. and Bae, Y. G. (2006a). “Ship collision risk assessment for bridges.” Journal of KSCE, KSCE, Vol. 26, No. 1A, pp. 1-9 (in Korean).

Lee, S. L. and Bae, Y. G. (2006b). “Ship collision risk of suspension bridge and design vessel load.” Journal of KSCE, KSCE, Vol. 26, No. 1A, pp. 11-19 (in Korean).

Lee, S. L. and Bae, Y. G. (2010). “Application of ship collision risk distribution model depending on bridge and channel layout.”

Proceedings of KSMI Spring Conference, KSMI, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 132-135 (in Korean).

MacDuff, T. (1974). The probability of vessel collisions, Ocean Industry.

Mokpo Regional Maritime Affairs and Port Office (2012). Internal notification or guideline regarding to port operation or ship navigation (in Korean).

Olsen. D. F., Drejfeldt S. R. and Olsen N. H. (1993). Theoretical modelling and application of a ship col1ision risk model to bridges crossing navigable waters.

Pedersen P. T., Valsgard S., Oisen D. and Spangenberg S. (1993).

“Ship impacts: Bow Collisions.” International J. of Impact Engineering, Vol. 13, pp. 163-57.

Pyeongtaek Regional Maritime Affairs and Port Office (2012).

Internal notification or guideline regarding to port operation or ship navigation (in Korean).

Shipping Statistics Handbook (1996). Korea maritime institute (in Korean).

The Korean Highway Bridge Standard Specifications (2012). (Limit State Design), Korea Road & Transportation Association (in Korean).

Woisin, G. (1976). The collision tests of the GKSS, Jahrbuch der Schiffbautechnischen Gesellschaft, Vol. 70, Berlin.

Yeosu Regional Maritime Affairs and Port Office (2012). Internal

notification or guideline regarding to port operation or ship

navigation (in Korean).

(12)

Ship Collision Risk Assessment and Sensitivity Analysis for Sea-crossing Bridges

Ǥ ǤǤ

ࢼ૳ֱ ȵଲনߦ

Bae, Yong Gwi*, Lee, Seong Lo**

Ship Collision Risk Assessment and Sensitivity Analysis for Sea-crossing Bridges

ABSTRACT

Key words : Ship collision, Design phase, Risk assessment, Sensitivity analysis

Ⅹಾ

ᅙ⧕ᔢƱప⥥ಽ᱾✙᮹ᖅĥ݉ĥᨱᕽᖁၶ∊࠭ྙᱽ۵ᵝಽƱప⦹ᇡǍ᳑᮹݉໕đᱶᨱšᩍ⦹íࡹ໑, ᭥⨹ࠥ⠪a᪡∊࠭᜽ဍ౩ᯕᖹ॒ᮥ

☖⧕ᖅĥෝᙹ⧪⦹íࡽ݅. ᖁၶ᮹∊࠭᭥⨹ᮡ݅᧲⦽⪶ශ༉ߙᨱ᮹⧕⠪aࡹ໑ݡℕಽAASHTO Guide(2009)᮹Method᪡ᮁᔍ⦹݅.

ə్ӹ⧕ݚʑᵡᨱᕽᔍᬊࡹ۵ᯝᇡ᫵ᗭ۵ԕයᙹಽᨱǎ⦽ࡹᨕᯩÑӹḡᩎᱢᯙ᫵ᯙᯕv⦹ᩍᖅĥᯱ᮹❱݉ᯕ᫵Ǎࡹအಽšಉʑᵡᯕӹ

⦽᫵ᗭॅᯕ⪶ᯙࡹᨩ݅. ᯕჩᩑǍ۵⧕ᔢƱపᨱݡ⦽ᖁၶ∊࠭ᮥŁಅ⦽ᖅĥ᜽᭥⨹ࠥᇥᕾŝšಉ⦹ᩍʑᅙᱢᯙₙŁᯱഭaࢁäᮝಽ❱݉

ࡽ݅.

áᔪᨕ ᖁၶ∊࠭, ᖅĥ݉ĥ, ᭥⨹ࠥ⠪a, ၝqࠥᇥᕾ

1. ᕽು

⧕ᔢƱపᖅĥ᜽ƱపǍ᳑ྜྷᨱݡ⦽ᖁၶ᮹∊࠭ྙᱽ۵ḡḥ, ၵ௭॒ŝ޵ᇩᨕǍ᳑ྜྷ᮹݉໕ᮥđᱶḴ۵ๅᬑᵲ᫵⦽᫵ᗭᯕ݅.

ǎԕᨱᕽ۵ᖁၶ∊࠭ŝšಉ⦹ᩍ⧕᫙᮹ᖅĥʑᵡᯕӹʑᚁᨱ᮹

᳕⦹۵ Ğᬑa ฯᦹᮝӹ ↽ɝᨱ۵ šಉ ᩑǍ(႑ᬊȡ ॒, 2008;

ᯕĥ⯍॒, 2011; ᯕᖒಽ॒, 2006a; ᯕᖒಽ॒, 2006b; ᳑⪙⩥, 2009)aฯᯕḥ⧪ࡹᨩᮝ໑, ⧕ᔢƱపÕᖅᯕ⪽ၽ⧕ḡ໕ᕽᖅĥ

᜽ ⧕ݚ ᩑǍđŝॅᯕ ᱢᬊࡽ ᔍಡࠥ ۹ᨕӹŁ ᯩ݅.

ᖁၶ∊࠭ྙᱽ۵⧕ᔢƱప᮹ĥ⫮, ᖅĥၰᮁḡšญ॒᮹b

݉ĥᨱᕽ༉ࢱᵲ᫵⦹í݅൉ᨕᲙ᧝⦹۵᫵ᗭᯕ݅. ᖅĥ݉ĥᨱᕽ ۵ᵝಽƱప⦹ᇡǍ᳑᮹݉໕đᱶᨱšᩍ⦹íࡹ໑, ᭥⨹ࠥ⠪a᪡

∊࠭᜽ဍ౩ᯕᖹ॒ᮥ☖⧕ᖅĥෝᙹ⧪⦹íࡽ݅. ʑ᳕᮹ǎԕ

ᖅĥʑᵡᨱ۵ᖁၶ∊࠭ᨱݡ⦹ᩍᔢᖙ⦹íȽᱶ⦹ḡᦫᦹᮝӹ↽

ɝࠥಽƱᖅĥʑᵡᨱᕽ⦽ĥᔢ┽ᖅĥჶ(2012)ᮥ₥┾⦹໕ᕽᖁၶ

∊࠭⦹ᵲᨱݡ⦽ᔢᖙ⦽Ƚᱶᯕᱽ᜽ࡹᨩ݅. ⦽ĥᔢ┽ᖅĥჶᨱᕽ ۵Guide Specification and Commentary for Vessel Collision Design of Highway Bridge(2009, ᯕ⦹ AASHTO Guide)᮹

ᖙaḡᖅĥႊჶᵲᨱᕽMethodⳒ, ᭥⨹ࠥ⠪aᨱ᮹⦽ᖅĥႊჶ

ᮥ₥┾⦹Łᯩ۵ߑ, ↽ɝǎԕᨱᕽᖅĥࡽ⧕ᔢƱపॅᮡ᭥⨹ࠥ

⠪aෝ☖⦹ᩍᖁၶ∊࠭ᨱ ݡ⦽ᖅĥ⦹ᵲᮥᔑᱶ⦹ÑӹƱప᮹

ᦩᱥᖒ ⠪a᮹ ༊ᱢᮝಽ ᙹ⧪ࡽ ᔍಡa እƱᱢ ฯᮡ ⠙ᯕ݅.

Method Ⳓᨱ᮹⦽᭥⨹ࠥ⠪aႊჶᮡ⪶ශʑၹ⧕ᕾᮥ☖⦹ᩍ

ᖁၶ᮹⩶┽, Ⓧʑ, ၰ⦹ᵲ᳑Õᨱ᮹⧕ᇥඹࡽᙹಽෝᯕᬊ⦹۵

ᩑeᖁၶ᮹ᙹ, ᖁၶ᮹⧎ಽᯕ┩⪶ශ, ⧎ಽෝᯕ┩⦽ᖁၶᯕƱbᯕ ӹᔢ❱ŝ∊࠭⧁ʑ⦹⦺ᱢ⪶ශ, ⧎ಽෝᯕ┩⦽ᖁၶŝ∊࠭⧁

ভƱపᯕ❭ƕࢁ⪶ශᮥŁಅ⧉ᮝಽ៉Ʊప᮹ᖁၶ∊࠭᭥⨹ࠥෝ

⠪a⦹Ł᭥⨹ࠥ⠪ađŝಽᇡ░ᖅĥᖁၶᮥ⧊ญᱢᮝಽᔑᱶ⧁

ᙹᯩ۵ႊჶᯕ݅(ᯕᖒಽ॒, 2006a). ə్ӹAASHTO Guideᨱᕽ

ᔍᬊࡹ۵ᖅĥ᫵ᗭ᮹ᯝᇡ۵ɝᔍᱢ⇵ᱶႊჶᯕÑӹԕයᙹಽa

ၽݍ⦽ၙǎԕ᮹ ☖ĥᯱഭಽᇡ░⇵ᱶࡽäᯕအಽ⧕ᔢƱపᯕ

ݡᇡᇥᯙǎԕ᮹ᔢ⫊ᮥŁಅ⦹ʑ᭥⧕ᕽ۵ᖙĥᱢᯙ⧕ᔢƱప᮹

ᖅĥᔍಡӹ⧕ᔢᨱᱢᬊࡽ݅ෙᩑǍđŝᨱݡ⦽ᱢɚᱢᯙᇥᕾŝ

á☁a ⦥᫵⦹݅.

ᅙᩑǍᨱᕽ۵AASHTO Guide᮹MethodⳒෝʑᵡᮝಽ⦹ᩍ

ᯙ⃽ݡƱᨱݡ⦽ᖁၶ∊࠭᭥⨹ࠥ⠪aෝᙹ⧪⦹ᩡᮝ໑ᯕෝʑᵡ ᮝಽ⦹ᩍ᭥⨹ࠥ⠪a᫵ᗭॅᨱݡ⦽ၝqࠥᇥᕾᮥᙹ⧪⦹ᩡ݅.

םྙᨱᕽ۵ᯙ⃽ݡƱᖅĥᅕŁᕽၰǍ᳑ĥᔑᕽᔢᨱᙹಾࡽᖅĥ

᫵ᗭෝ↽ݡ⦽ᔍᬊ⦹ᩡᮝӹᱶᅕaᱽ⦽ᱢᯕÑӹၝqࠥᇥᕾᮥ

᭥⦹ᩍᇩa⦝⦹íᄡĞ⧕᧝⦹۵ᖅĥ᫵ᗭ۵ʑᵡᨱᕽᱽ᜽ࡹÑ ӹŖ⦺ᱢᮝಽ┡ݚ⦽ᱲɝႊჶᮥ᯦ࠥ⦹ᩡ݅. ᖅĥ᫵ᗭ᮹ၝqࠥ

ᇥᕾᮥ᭥⦽aᄡᩢᩎᮡAASHTO Guideෝእ೐⦽šಉᖅĥʑᵡ

ၰᩑǍđŝॅ᮹⇵ᱶႊჶŝᱢᬊᔍಡᨱɝÑ⦹ᩍᱶ᮹ࡹᨩᮝ໑, ᯕಽᇡ░ᖅĥ݉ĥᨱᕽᵝ᮹⦹ᩍᱢᬊ⧕᧝⦹Ñӹḡᩎᱢᯙߑᯕ

░᮹ Ḣᱲ ᇥᕾ ॒ᯕ ⦥᫵⦽ ᫵ᗭॅᮥ ⪶ᯙ⦹ᩡ݅.

2. ᭥⨹ࠥ⠪a

2.1 AASHTO Guide Method ɇ

ᯝၹᱢᮝಽᖁၶ᮹∊Ċᨱ᮹⧕ၽᔾ⦹۵↽ᦦ᮹Ğᬑᨱݡ⦽

⦹ᵲᮥḡ╒⧁ᙹᯩ۵ƱపǍ᳑ྜྷᮥᖅĥ⦹۵äᮡᇩa܆⦹݅.

ə్ӹᖁၶ᮹∊Ċᨱ᮹⧕ƱపǍ᳑ྜྷᨱ᯲ᬊ⦹۵ᇡa⦹ᵲ᮹

ኩࠥෝ⇵ᱶ⦹۵äᮡa܆⦹໑, ᇡa⦹ᵲ᮹ኩࠥෝ᦭Łᯩᮝ໕

ᨕਅᙹᬊʑᵡᮥอ᳒⦹۵ᖅĥෝᖁ┾⧁ᙹᯩ݅(Larsen, 1993).

AASHTO Guide(2009) ᨱᕽ۵ᖅĥᖁၶᮥđᱶ⦹ʑ᭥⦽Method ⳑ, Ⳓ, ⳓ᮹ᖙaḡႊჶᮥᱽŖ⦹Łᯩᮝ໑✚⯩, MethodⳒ۵

ᖁၶ᮹ᩑe☖⧪ప, ⧎ಽᯕ┩⪶ශ, ʑ⦹⦺ᱢ⪶ශ, ❭ƕ⪶ශ, ႊ⪙

ĥᙹᨱ᮹⧕ᩑe❭ƕኩࠥ(AF)ෝᔑᱶ⦹ᩍƱప᮹ᵲ᫵ࠥᨱ঑ෙ

⨩ᬊʑᵡᯕԕaࡹࠥಾᖅĥᖁၶᮥᔑᱶ⦹۵ႊჶᯕ݅. ʑᵡᨱᕽ

AF᮹⨩ᬊʑᵡᮡᵲ᫵Ʊపᨱᕽ0.0001, ᯝၹƱపᨱᕽ0.001 ᯕ⦹

aࡹࠥಾ Ƚᱶ⦹Ł ᯩ݅. Ʊప᮹ AF۵ ݅ᮭŝzᯕ ĥᔑࡹ໑, ᱥℕ Ʊపᨱ ݡ⦽ AF۵ ༉ु ᇡᰍ᮹ AFෝ ⧊⦹ᩍ Ǎ⦽݅.

AF=(N)(PA)(PG)(PC)(PF) (1)

ᩍʑᕽ, N : ᙹಽෝᯕᬊ⦹۵ᩑeᖁၶ᮹ᙹ(Vessel frequency) PA : ⧎ಽᯕ┩⪶ශ(Probability of aberrancy) PG : ʑ⦹⦺ᱢ ⪶ශ(Geometric probability) PC : ❭ƕ⪶ශ(Probability of collapse) PF : ႊ⪙ ĥᙹ(Protection factor)

2.2 ֗߆୪଀

ᯙ⃽ݡƱ۵ᯙ⃽ǎᱽŖ⧎ŝᘂࠥǎᱽࠥ᜽ෝᩑđ⦹۵ၝe⚍ᯱ

ᔍᨦᮝಽᵝĞeƱᯙᔍᰆƱ۵ᙹ₉ಡ᮹ᖁၶ⧎⧪᜽ဍ౩ᯕᖹᮥ

ÑℱFig. 1ŝzᯕᵝĞeᰆ800m᮹ᵲeƱbᮥ⡍⧉⦽5Ğe

ᩑᗮᔍᰆƱಽđᱶࡹᨩ݅. ᵝ┲ᮡ230m ׳ᯕ᮹ᩎY⩶⎹Ⓧญ✙

ᵝ┲ᯕᱢᬊࡹᨩᮝ໑ʑⅩ۵⩥ᰆ┡ᖅั૾ᨱ᮹⦽݅ᵝ᜾ʑⅩಽ

ḢĞ3.0m᮹ั૾24}ಽǍᖒࡹᨕᯩ݅. ᖁၶ☖ŝǍeᮡ⧎ಽ⡎

625.5m, ׳ᯕ74.0mෝ⪶ᅕ⦹ᩍ᪶ᅖᬕ⧎ᯕa܆⦹݅(ᯙ⃽ݡƱ

ᖅĥᅕŁᕽ, 2009).

2.3 টࢮധෘ߆

ᯙ⃽⧎᮹ ᖁၶ☖⧪ప ߑᯕ░۵ ᯙ⃽ḡႊ⧕᧲⧎อℎ᮹ Port

Management Information System(ᯕ⦹PORT-MIS)᮹2010֥

᯦⇽⧎ᝁŁᱶᅕᨱɝÑ⦹ᩍ★ɪᄥᬕ⧎⬀ᙹෝᔑᱶ⦹ᩡ݅. ⧕ݚ

᜽ᜅ▽ᮡᖁၶ᮹★ᙹෝᬊᱢ★ᙹ, GTಽḲĥ⦹Łᯩᮝӹᯕ۵

ᖙɩ⪚ᮡ᜽ᖅᔍᬊഭ᮹ᇡŝෝ᭥⦽★ᙹಽᵝಽᔍᬊࡹ໑, ᖁၶ∊

࠭ ᖅĥᨱᕽ۵ ⦹ᵲᮥ ᔑᱶ⦹ʑ ᭥⦽ äᯕအಽ ᱢᰍᵲప★ᙹ, DWTಽᱥ⪹⧁⦥᫵aᯩ݅. GT-DWTeᖁၶᱥ⪹ᮡDrewry Shipping Consultants Ltd.(⧕ᬕᔑᨦᩑǍᬱ, 1996)᮹ᖁ᳦ၰᖁ

ǤǤǤ

ࢼ૳ֱȵଲনߦ

áᔪᨕ ᖁၶ∊࠭, ᖅĥ݉ĥ, ᭥⨹ࠥ⠪a, ၝqࠥᇥᕾ