

RAKESHWARAN SENGUTTUVAN Inventory can be reduced by giving credit to

automation for leak suppression systems. Refer purple book for details.
o Like
5d


Muhammed Nasim PM thanks! but reducing inventory will not make much difference in risk
value..
o Like
4d


Ahmed Elghmati AMIChemE MSc (Eng) can you please give me more details of your
leak/rupture scenarios and process
o Like
4d


Muhammed Nasim PM process is typical upstream operation which involve separation and
stabilization.. there r few leakage scenarios and pipeline/vessel rupture cases.
o Like
o 1
4d


kehinde Shaba Your FN curve has two dimensions - frequency (f) and Number of fatalities (N) -
so that's your starting point. Whilst you fN curve is cumulative, it is still possible to identify what are
 the high "fN" pairs are and focus on these intially. Without the specifics of your site, it is not possible
to comment accurately, but general strategies can be suggested - reduce N population exposed to the
risk (e.g. by separation distance, revised manning, escape provisions, protection etc). Reduce f by
eliminating hazards where possible (inherent safer design) or limiting their frequency (e.g. buried
pipeline, increased pipe wall thickness, ignition sources etc.). Also verify that your calculations and
assumptions are not negatively influencing the result (e.g. via a mistake). You'd be surprised at how
many times "modelling issues" has been the real culprit. Good luck. Show less
o Like
o 2
3d


Muhammed Nasim PM kehinde Shaba thanks buddy.. very valuable information..
o Like
2d


Mike Bilio Reduce N the numbers exposed and reduce F by improving containment integrity
o Like
o 2
1d


Muhammed Nasim PM Mike Bilio how to reduce? where should be the credit given to? example
plz
o Like
1d


Kris Thorsteinsson If your F-N study used generic failure rates without any adjustment factor
applied, it is possible with an abundance of caution to use an adjustment factor based on the quality
of process safety management. The Management Systems Factor in API RP 581 is one approach; risk
software vendors such as DNV and Exida have their own approaches. The basic concept is that the
 best run plants may have failure rates much better than average and vice versa for the worst run
plants. The scale range is possibly 1000 according to some studies.Show less
o Like
o 1
1d


Alan Esteves, PhD Reducing individual risks of the worst scenarios (f or C or both), the quantity
of people exposed or both. Improving RBI, CRM.
o Like
o 1
19h


Muhammed Nasim PM Kris Thorsteinsson thanks kris..
o Like
17h


Muhammed Nasim PM kehinde Shaba is it due to the fact that more number of isolatable
sections? since fn curve use cumulative risk!
o Like
17h


Jan Pranger Identify which scenarios are responsible for exceeding the societal risk standard (if it
exists), then eliminate the scenarios, reduce their probability (by adding independent dafeguards or
improve reliability of existing), or reduce the consequences (by reducing the amount of material
involved in the scenarios), or remove or protect people. In all cases you will probably need a design
change.Show less
o Like
o 1
 16h


Nigel Cann Assuming you have a target (or ALARP) line that you are trying to stay below, then
the highest risks that are causing you problems are the individual pairs on a non-cumulative basis that
are closest perpendicularly to the target line. If your software doesn't let you see the individual pairs
the point of interest is the left most end of your greatest negative slope.
Given your scenario of not many leak and rupture points but having problems, it suggests to me that
you have close vulnerable populations that you need to protect. So sort out how you can spot leaks
early so large explosive events don't occur, then look at additional mitigation such as fire walls, water
curtains, blast resistant walls or change your process to less volatile conditions (lower temperature
and pressure).
Also look further than the highest risk as sometimes it is easier to address some of the lower risks -
but keep in mind all risks need to be ALARP!Show less
o Like
9h


Robert Taylor Dear Muhammed, The risk reduction part of risk analysis is often the part most
poorly carried out and is particularly difficult for young engineers. We made a list of typical risk
reduction measures, ranging from inherent safety, to different types of loss prevention engineering,
all the way to exposure reduction. The list currently stands at 72 methods. We made some guidelines
for cost benefit assessment, and practical examples of each. If you connect by mail, the report is
available. Show less