Integration of HOFs into ATEX Risk Assessment Methodology

被引:3
|
作者
Geng, Jie [1 ]
Mure, Salvina [1 ]
Camuncoli, Gianfranco [1 ]
Demichela, Micaela [2 ]
机构
[1] ARIA srl, Corso Mediterraneo 140, I-10129 Turin, Italy
[2] SAfeR, Politecn Turin, Dipartimento Sci Appl Technol, Turin, Italy
关键词
11;
D O I
10.3303/CET1436098
中图分类号
TQ [化学工业];
学科分类号
0817 ;
摘要
The current ATEX (Explosive Atmosphere) risk assessment methodology relies on a semi-quantitative approach based on the following indexes: probability of an explosive atmosphere formation, probability of the presence of an effective ignition source and consequences. The whole risk assessment procedure can be separated into four steps - area classification, ignition sources identification, consequence analysis, and risk evaluation. However, when reviewing the whole ATEX risk assessment procedures and their results, despite many operations on plant and equipment containing dangerous substances are performed by operators, the human and organizational influences are neglected. The study proposed in this paper is to develop an ATEX risk assessment methodology with the integration of human and organizational factors (HOFs), in order to provide an advanced methodology able to analyse the HOFs influences on ATEX hazards. The developed ATEX risk assessment methodology introduces in the procedure the Technique for Human Error Rate Prediction (THERP) to identify human and organizational weaknesses, and also provides a tool for calculating the human error probability (HEP) in the first two risk steps - area classification and ignition sources identification. During the risk evaluation procedure, human risk level, based on the results of HEP, has been introduced into the original ATEX risk assessment methodology.
引用
收藏
页码:583 / +
页数:2
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Methodology of natural risk assessment in Russia
    Osipov, V. I.
    Larionov, V. I.
    Burova, V. N.
    Frolova, N. I.
    Sushchev, S. P.
    NATURAL HAZARDS, 2017, 88 : 17 - 41
  • [22] Risk assessment methodology for chemical facilities
    Jaeger, CD
    PROBABILISTIC SAFETY ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT, VOL I AND II, PROCEEDINGS, 2002, : 1471 - 1476
  • [23] A bioterror risk-assessment methodology
    Rivera, SN
    Gaudioso, J
    Barnett, N
    Salerno, RM
    SCIENTIST, 2004, 18 (13): : 10 - 11
  • [24] A methodology for the risk assessment of contaminants in cosmetics
    Griem, P
    Scheffler, H
    Schuh, W
    NAUNYN-SCHMIEDEBERGS ARCHIVES OF PHARMACOLOGY, 2002, 365 : R163 - R163
  • [25] The methodology of quantitative risk assessment studies
    Maxime Rigaud
    Jurgen Buekers
    Jos Bessems
    Xavier Basagaña
    Sandrine Mathy
    Mark Nieuwenhuijsen
    Rémy Slama
    Environmental Health, 23
  • [26] Risk assessment methodology for network integrity
    Monton, V
    Ward, K
    Wilby, M
    Masson, R
    BT TECHNOLOGY JOURNAL, 1997, 15 (01) : 223 - 234
  • [27] A METHODOLOGY FOR LANDSLIDE RISK ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT
    Alexoudi, M. N.
    Manolopoulou, S. B.
    Papaliangas, Th. T.
    JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND ECOLOGY, 2010, 11 (01): : 317 - 326
  • [28] A risk assessment methodology for the Internet of Things
    Sicari, Sabrina
    Rizzardi, Alessandra
    Miorandi, Daniele
    Coen-Porisini, Alberto
    COMPUTER COMMUNICATIONS, 2018, 129 : 67 - 79
  • [29] A RISK-ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY IN TUNNELLING
    Ceric, Anita
    Marcic, Danijela
    Ivandic, Kreso
    TEHNICKI VJESNIK-TECHNICAL GAZETTE, 2011, 18 (04): : 529 - 536
  • [30] Methodology of natural risk assessment in Russia
    V. I. Osipov
    V. I. Larionov
    V. N. Burova
    N. I. Frolova
    S. P. Sushchev
    Natural Hazards, 2017, 88 : 17 - 41