Dynamic Risk Analysis in the Chemical and Petroleum Industry
Chapter 6 - Proactive Approaches of Dynamic Risk Assessment Based on Indicators
References (0)
Cited by (15)
Safety evaluation of leak in a storage tank using fault tree analysis and risk matrix analysis
2021, Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process IndustriesA comprehensive approach to analyze the risk of floating roof storage tanks
2021, Process Safety and Environmental ProtectionCitation Excerpt :Therefore, utilizing reliable methods for analyzing the potential risks are vital for a resilient system, that would lead to effective development of the failure preventive and mitigating programs (Han and Weng, 2011). According to a study by Paltrinieri et al. (2016), indicators that address human and organizational factors make it possible to assess risk with preventive capabilities (leading indicators) (Paltrinieri et al., 2016). Lagging indicators are a form of reaction monitoring that requires reporting and investigating specific accidents to identify system weaknesses (Paltrinieri et al., 2016).
A system engineering approach to subsea spill risk management
2020, Safety ScienceCitation Excerpt :Different approaches have been suggested to dynamically update the risk level. Some of these are based on Bayesian networks (Khakzad et al., 2016, 2014), while others are proactive approaches based on indicators (Paltrinieri et al., 2016). For what concerns subsea leak detection principles and risk-based inspection, Bay and Bay (2014) represent an important starting point from which building advanced approaches for risk management.
Learning about risk: Machine learning for risk assessment
2019, Safety ScienceCitation Excerpt :Heterogeneous indicators are considered to describe the safety barrier “stop drive-off”. Considering operational and organizational factors (e.g. number of simulator hours carried out by the DPO in the last three months), in addition to technical ones (e.g. the number of thruster controls failures in the last three months), aims at producing proactive risk evaluation (Paltrinieri et al., 2016a; Scarponi and Paltrinieri, 2016). Nevertheless, these indicators reflect different projections in time.
Serious games for industrial safety: An approach for developing resilience early warning indicators
2019, Safety ScienceCitation Excerpt :Webb, 2009) – critically affecting the understanding and management of systems’ states (Cabrera Aguilera et al., 2016; Erikson, 2009; Glendon, 2009; Hudson, 2009). An important lesson learnt from this debate is the need to adopt a dynamic and agile methodology to continuously identify and refine the most appropriate indicators within the safety culture under examination (Bellamy, 2009; Hale, 2009; Paltrinieri et al., 2016; Paltrinieri and Khan, 2016; Webb, 2009), rather than proposing unmotivated efforts in labelling indicators as leading or lagging (Wreathall, 2009). Since the early Resilience Engineering documents (Dekker, 2006), it is acknowledged that the observational interest should be focused on performance variability, intended to be the source of both success and failure (Patriarca et al., 2018; Righi et al., 2015).
Integrated risk assessment for oil and gas installations in sensitive areas
2018, Ocean EngineeringCitation Excerpt :New techniques of dynamic risk assessment are necessary to overcome QRA staticity by considering the process behaviour (Khakzad et al., 2016; Paltrinieri et al., 2016; Scarponi et al., 2016; Scarponi and Paltrinieri, 2016). In the present work, the RB methodology (Paltrinieri et al., 2016; Scarponi et al., 2016) represents a preliminary response to this need and was chosen to support the dynamic risk evaluation for the analysis of the reference case described in Section 2. In the marine environment, it is estimated that about 14 million barrels (2.2 Mm3) of oil are released in the sea annually.