Operational risk assessment model for marine vessels

Abstract This paper presents a practical approach to quantify the risk associated with different systems in a marine vessel using the existing operational database. A structured bow-tie methodology is proposed to assess risk. The first step was the development of probable failure scenarios for four different events, namely, fire and explosion, propulsion engine failure, power failure, and maneuverability failure. The second step includes the formulation of corresponding bow-tie models representing these scenarios using vessel configuration and process information. Using the failure data for different elements obtained from the vessel's maintenance logbook and incident records, the frequency of events and failure rates of the safety barriers are estimated to quantify risk. Operational data from the vessel, a single engine ice-breaker bulk career navigating mainly in the Canadian sub-arctic region, validated the proposed model. The methodology is verified by comparing the model's observations with an alternative dataset (actual failure scenario from the ship). The proposed methodology is expected to serve as a useful tool for marine vessel's safety and risk management.

[1]  Vikram Garaniya,et al.  Review and analysis of fire and explosion accidents in maritime transportation , 2018 .

[2]  S. A. Eide,et al.  Component failure rate data sources for probabilistic safety and reliability , 2010 .

[3]  Anthony M. Smith,et al.  Reliability-Centered Maintenance , 1992 .

[4]  Agustín Blanco-Bazán Specific Regulations for Shipping and Environmental Protection in the Arctic: The Work of the International Maritime Organization , 2009 .

[5]  J. Moubray Reliability-centred maintenance , 1995 .

[6]  Frank Pearson Lees,et al.  Loss prevention in the process industries : hazard identification, assessment, and control , 1980 .

[7]  Vladimir R. Kuzmin,et al.  Risk management model of winter navigation operations. , 2016, Marine pollution bulletin.

[8]  Jakub Montewka,et al.  A framework for risk analysis of maritime transportation systems: A case study for oil spill from tankers in a ship–ship collision , 2015 .

[9]  Faisal Khan,et al.  SHIPP methodology: Predictive accident modeling approach. Part II. Validation with case study , 2011 .

[10]  Jinxian Weng,et al.  Development of a quantitative risk assessment model for ship collisions in fairways , 2017 .

[11]  Jakub Montewka,et al.  Maritime transportation risk analysis: Review and analysis in light of some foundational issues , 2015, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[12]  Principal Consultant,et al.  MARINE SHIPPING QUANTITATIVE RISK ANALYSIS , 2010 .

[13]  Bekir Sahin,et al.  A Root Cause Analysis for Arctic Marine Accidents from 1993 to 2011 , 2015 .

[14]  Floris Goerlandt,et al.  An analysis of wintertime navigational accidents in the Northern Baltic Sea , 2017 .

[15]  Michael Moosemiller Avoiding pitfalls in assembling an equipment failure rate database for risk assessments. , 2006, Journal of hazardous materials.

[16]  Marvin Rausand,et al.  Reliability Centred Maintenance , 2008 .

[17]  A. J. Mokashi,et al.  A study of reliability-centred maintenance in maritime operations , 2002 .

[18]  Jakub Montewka,et al.  A quantitative approach for risk assessment of a ship stuck in ice in Arctic waters , 2017, Safety Science.

[19]  F. Khan,et al.  Marine transportation risk assessment using Bayesian Network: Application to Arctic waters , 2018, Ocean Engineering.

[20]  Xinping Yan,et al.  Use of HFACS and fault tree model for collision risk factors analysis of icebreaker assistance in ice-covered waters , 2019, Safety Science.

[21]  Xinping Yan,et al.  Risk influencing factors analysis of Arctic maritime transportation systems: a Chinese perspective , 2018 .

[22]  Osiris A. Valdez Banda,et al.  A risk analysis of winter navigation in Finnish sea areas. , 2015, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[23]  Brian Veitch,et al.  Arctic shipping accident scenario analysis using Bayesian Network approach , 2017 .

[24]  Ccps Guidelines for Chemical Process Quantitative Risk Analysis , 1999 .

[25]  A. N. Cockcroft,et al.  International convention on standards of training, certification and watchkeeping for seafarers, 1978, as amended , 2012 .

[26]  D J Hovey,et al.  PIPELINE ACCIDENT, FAILURE PROBABILITY DETERMINED FROM HISTORICAL DATA , 1993 .

[27]  Øystein Jensen,et al.  Arctic shipping guidelines: towards a legal regime for navigation safety and environmental protection? , 2008, Polar Record.

[28]  Qiang Meng,et al.  An Overview of Maritime Waterway Quantitative Risk Assessment Models , 2012, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[29]  Chen Meng,et al.  Preventive Maintenance Policies for Equipment Under Condition Monitoring Based on Two Types of Failure Rate , 2016, Journal of Failure Analysis and Prevention.

[30]  Anastassios N. Perakis,et al.  DEVELOPMENT OF A DIESEL ENGINE RELIABILITY DATABASE (DEREL) FOR THE U.S. COAST GUARD. , 1999 .