Fuzzy logic approach for identifying representative accident scenarios

Abstract Selecting representative accident scenarios (RAS) is one of the most discussed and important aspects of the HAZOP process, which is the main part of risk analysis. During that process, several uncertainties can occur, which may lead to critical oversights with further consequences for life and property. These mainly concern the semi-quantitative process of risk ranking, especially the evaluation of the frequency and severity of the categories of potential accident scenarios. According to our experience, other sources of uncertainty, which are hardly taken into account at this stage of the analysis, are connected with the effects of the type and performance of the safety barriers and protection measures as well as the impact of the quality of HAZOP analysis on the risk ranking process. The latter aspect depends on many continuously changing factors that are generally related to the safety culture that exists in a specific organization. These aspects are always the focal area for discussion by analysts, and these were hardly taken into account in our previous research. In this study, both aspects, the effects of the protection layers and the quality of hazard identification analysis on the selection of RASs, are considered. The major idea is connected with the extension of the classical HAZOP study by the application of a modified risk ranking method to identify potential accident scenarios. For that process, we propose applying appropriate correction indexes concerning both aspects. The impacts of the safety layers were assessed by the efficacy index (EI), which evaluates the effectiveness of the safety barriers, and the effects of the quality of HAZOP analysis were assessed by the quality index (QI). Both indexes were used to develop the risk correction index (RCI) that was used to modify the final risk, which was the basis for selecting the RASs. The analysis was performed in two ways: 1. traditional and 2. with fuzzy logic support. Both approaches were applied to the case study concerning the storage of liquefied natural gas (LNG). The results illustrated the sensitivity of the risk ranking matrix to the risk correction index and proved the advantages of the fuzzy risk ranking methodology in relation to the traditional approach. The proposed RAS selection process supports the credibility of the risk analysis by taking into account its further application in the subsequent stages of risk analysis and then in emergency planning.

[1]  Adam S. Markowski,et al.  Fuzzy logic approach to calculation of thermal hazard distances in process industries , 2014 .

[2]  Michalis Christou,et al.  Identification of reference accident scenarios in SEVESO establishments , 2005, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[3]  Adam S. Markowski,et al.  ExSys-LOPA for the chemical process industry , 2010 .

[4]  Hans J. Pasman,et al.  Risk assessment by means of Bayesian networks: A comparative study of compressed and liquefied H2 transportation and tank station risks , 2012 .

[5]  M. Konstantinidou,et al.  Comparison of techniques for accident scenario analysis in hazardous systems , 2004 .

[6]  Lotfi A. Zadeh,et al.  Fuzzy Sets , 1996, Inf. Control..

[7]  Palash Dutta,et al.  Uncertainty Modeling in Risk Assessment Based on Dempster–Shafer Theory of Evidence with Generalized Fuzzy Focal Elements , 2015 .

[8]  Jun Okamoto,et al.  Modeling accident scenarios from databases with missing data: A probabilistic approach for safety-related systems design , 2018 .

[9]  Faisal Khan,et al.  Methods and models in process safety and risk management: Past, present and future , 2015 .

[10]  V. R. Renjith,et al.  Fuzzy FMECA (failure mode effect and criticality analysis) of LNG storage facility , 2018, Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries.

[11]  T. E. Maddison,et al.  Appropriate Risk Assessment Methods for Major Accident Establishments , 2003 .

[12]  Muhammet Gul,et al.  A fuzzy multi criteria risk assessment based on decision matrix technique: A case study for aluminum industry , 2016 .

[13]  Adam S. Markowski,et al.  A fuzzy logic and probabilistic hybrid approach to quantify the uncertainty in layer of protection analysis , 2016 .

[14]  Valerio Cozzani,et al.  Assessment and comparison of two early warning indicator methods in the perspective of prevention of atypical accident scenarios , 2012, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[15]  Valerio Cozzani,et al.  Reference criteria for the identification of accident scenarios in the framework of land use planning , 2013 .

[16]  Adam S. Markowski,et al.  Uncertainty aspects in process safety analysis , 2010 .

[17]  Faisal Khan,et al.  A criterion for developing credible accident scenarios for risk assessment , 2002 .

[18]  M Sam Mannan,et al.  Fuzzy risk matrix. , 2008, Journal of hazardous materials.

[19]  Il Moon,et al.  Integration of Accident Scenario Generation and Multiobjective Optimization for Safety-Cost Decision Making in Chemical Processes , 2006 .

[20]  Adam S. Markowski,et al.  Uncertainty techniques in liquefied natural gas (LNG) dispersion calculations , 2013 .

[21]  Menglan Duan,et al.  A fuzzy risk matrix method and its application to the installation operation of subsea collet connector , 2017 .

[22]  Christian Delvosalle,et al.  ARAMIS project: a comprehensive methodology for the identification of reference accident scenarios in process industries. , 2006, Journal of hazardous materials.

[23]  Adam S. Markowski,et al.  Selection of representative accident scenarios for major industrial accidents , 2017 .

[24]  Ian T. Cameron,et al.  A blended hazard identification methodology to support process diagnosis , 2012 .

[25]  Alexander Guzman Urbina,et al.  Measuring the benefit of investing in pipeline safety using fuzzy risk assessment , 2017 .