IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i9p3078-d351649.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Application of an Enhanced Version of Recursive Operability Analysis for Combustible Dusts Risk Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Marco Barozzi

    (Department of Science and High Technology, Università degli Studi dell’Insubria, via Vico, 46, 21100 Varese, Italy)

  • Sabrina Copelli

    (Department of Science and High Technology, Università degli Studi dell’Insubria, via Vico, 46, 21100 Varese, Italy)

  • Martina Silvia Scotton

    (Department of Science and High Technology, Università degli Studi dell’Insubria, via Vico, 46, 21100 Varese, Italy)

  • Vincenzo Torretta

    (Department of Theoretical and Applied Sciences, Università degli Studi dell’Insubria, via Vico, 46, 21100 Varese, Italy)

Abstract

Organic dust explosions were and are still today a critical issue in the food, pharmaceutical, and fine chemical industry. Materials such as flour, corn starch, sugar and APIs represent a cause of severe accidents. In this framework, we investigated a modified version of Recursive Operability Analysis−Incidental Sequence Diagrams (ROA–ISD), called ROA Plus−ISD, specifically tailored to describe industrial processes involving organic combustible dusts. Compared to more classical techniques such as Hazard and Operability (HazOp), ROA−ISD allows for a direct generation of fault trees, providing a useful tool to connect Qualitative with Quantitative Risk Analysis (QRA). ROA Plus−ISD is very similar to ROA−Cause Consequence Diagrams (CCD), which has already proven to be an effective tool to perform both risk assessment on existing plants and reconstructing already occurred accidents, given its logical structure and width of the application fields. In this work, we modified specific parts of the standard ROA−CCD method: (1) the Failure Mode and Operability Analysis (FMEA) database has been structured in order to retrieve the well-known explosion pentagon (for dusts) and all the instruments, devices, apparatuses and controllers typical of industries which process organic dusts; (2) a new comprehensive list of process variables has been compiled. In this way, it is possible to tailor the information required for the generation of the fault trees concerning top events involving mainly dust explosions and fires. This method has been implemented in order to reconstruct the dynamics of the February 2008 Imperial Sugar refinery plant accident (Port Wentworth, GA, USA). Results demonstrated the applicability of the enhanced method by highlighting the criticalities of the process already showed by a previously detailed reconstruction performed by the Chemical Safety Board.

Suggested Citation

  • Marco Barozzi & Sabrina Copelli & Martina Silvia Scotton & Vincenzo Torretta, 2020. "Application of an Enhanced Version of Recursive Operability Analysis for Combustible Dusts Risk Assessment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-22, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:9:p:3078-:d:351649
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/9/3078/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/9/3078/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Khakzad, Nima & Khan, Faisal & Amyotte, Paul, 2012. "Dynamic risk analysis using bow-tie approach," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 36-44.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Liu, Aihua & Chen, Ke & Huang, Xiaofei & Li, Didi & Zhang, Xiaochun, 2021. "Dynamic risk assessment model of buried gas pipelines based on system dynamics," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    2. Li, Mei & Liu, Zixian & Li, Xiaopeng & Liu, Yiliu, 2019. "Dynamic risk assessment in healthcare based on Bayesian approach," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 327-334.
    3. Bhardwaj, U. & Teixeira, A.P. & Guedes Soares, C., 2022. "Casualty analysis methodology and taxonomy for FPSO accident analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 218(PB).
    4. Zio, E., 2018. "The future of risk assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 176-190.
    5. Michael Felix Pacevicius & Marilia Ramos & Davide Roverso & Christian Thun Eriksen & Nicola Paltrinieri, 2022. "Managing Heterogeneous Datasets for Dynamic Risk Analysis of Large-Scale Infrastructures," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-40, April.
    6. Li, Weijun & Sun, Qiqi & Zhang, Jiwang & Zhang, Laibin, 2024. "Quantitative risk assessment of industrial hot work using Adaptive Bow Tie and Petri Nets," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 242(C).
    7. Jie Xue & Genserik Reniers & Jie Li & Ming Yang & Chaozhong Wu & P.H.A.J.M. van Gelder, 2021. "A Bibliometric and Visualized Overview for the Evolution of Process Safety and Environmental Protection," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(11), pages 1-29, June.
    8. Landucci, Gabriele & Argenti, Francesca & Tugnoli, Alessandro & Cozzani, Valerio, 2015. "Quantitative assessment of safety barrier performance in the prevention of domino scenarios triggered by fire," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 30-43.
    9. Peng Zhang & Guojin Qin & Yihuan Wang, 2019. "Risk Assessment System for Oil and Gas Pipelines Laid in One Ditch Based on Quantitative Risk Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-21, March.
    10. Wybo, Jean-Luc, 2013. "Large-scale photovoltaic systems in airports areas: safety concerns," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 402-410.
    11. Alsulieman, Abdullah & Ge, Xihe & Zeng, Zhiguo & Butenko, Sergiy & Khan, Faisal & El-Halwagi, Mahmoud, 2024. "Dynamic risk analysis of evolving scenarios in oil and gas separator," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 243(C).
    12. Yang, Yongsheng & Khan, Faisal & Thodi, Premkumar & Abbassi, Rouzbeh, 2017. "Corrosion induced failure analysis of subsea pipelines," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 214-222.
    13. Khakzad, Nima & Khan, Faisal & Paltrinieri, Nicola, 2014. "On the application of near accident data to risk analysis of major accidents," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 116-125.
    14. Nima Khakzad & Sina Khakzad & Faisal Khan, 2014. "Probabilistic risk assessment of major accidents: application to offshore blowouts in the Gulf of Mexico," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 74(3), pages 1759-1771, December.
    15. Hong, Bingyuan & Shao, Bowen & Guo, Jian & Fu, Jianzhong & Li, Cuicui & Zhu, Baikang, 2023. "Dynamic Bayesian network risk probability evolution for third-party damage of natural gas pipelines," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 333(C).
    16. Panagiotis Sotiralis & Konstantinos Louzis & Nikolaos P Ventikos, 2019. "The role of ship inspections in maritime accidents: An analysis of risk using the bow-tie approach," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 233(1), pages 58-70, February.
    17. Taleb-Berrouane, Mohammed & Khan, Faisal & Hawboldt, Kelly, 2021. "Corrosion risk assessment using adaptive bow-tie (ABT) analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    18. Xiaoxia Liang & Fang Duan & Ian Bennett & David Mba, 2020. "A Comprehensive Health Indicator Integrated by the Dynamic Risk Profile from Condition Monitoring Data and the Function of Financial Losses," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-25, December.
    19. Magoua, Joseph Jonathan & Li, Nan, 2023. "The human factor in the disaster resilience modeling of critical infrastructure systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 232(C).
    20. Jun Zhang & Haifeng Bian & Huanhuan Zhao & Xuexue Wang & Linlin Zhang & Yiping Bai, 2020. "Bayesian Network-Based Risk Assessment of Single-Phase Grounding Accidents of Power Transmission Lines," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-17, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:9:p:3078-:d:351649. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.