Dynamic Risk Analysis in the Chemical and Petroleum Industry 2016
DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-12-803765-2.00007-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reactive and Proactive Approaches

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In general, aggregation is a very hard task for the risk analyst. In this work, reference to the aggregation rules proposed by Scarponi et al [26] has been made; these are briefly described below.…”
Section: Aggregation Of Indicatorsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In general, aggregation is a very hard task for the risk analyst. In this work, reference to the aggregation rules proposed by Scarponi et al [26] has been made; these are briefly described below.…”
Section: Aggregation Of Indicatorsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Tools providing real time monitoring of safety have also been proposed, as an example Kanes et al [24], based on pre-identified risk factors and process safety related data, quantified increases in risk level in oil and gas industry by using Bayesian Networks. Dynamic risk assessment techniques based on proactive indicators, such as those suggested by Paltrinieri et al [25], Scarponi et al [26], Scarponi and Paltrinieri [27], can bring additional benefits, since risk analysis is supplemented by information related to early warnings of unwanted events. The integration of a set of collected indicators may provide risk assessment with dynamic and proactive features.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The relative importance of a safety barrier within the RB model increases with its proximity to the final major event. This importance is demonstrated by the sensitivity analysis performed on barrier i by assessing its Birnbaum-like measure I B (i) = ∂R ∂FP i (Figure 6), where R is the total risk and FP is the barrier failure probability [15,69]. The failure of a safety barrier at the beginning of a sequence of barriers can be considered relatively less critical than the failure of the last safety barrier that separates the target from a major accident.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Table 3 reports Risk Barometer steps. Further details can be found elsewhere [50,51]. Step Description Input Output 1…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%