Safety assessment in plant layout design using indexing approach: Implementing inherent safety perspective. Part 1 - Guideword applicability and method description

Journal of Hazardous Materials

Volumn 160, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 100-109

  Tugnoli, Alessandro ^a   Khan, Faisal ^b   Amyotte, Paul ^c   Cozzani, Valerio ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

^b MEMORIAL UNIVERSITY OF NEWFOUNDLAND   (Canada)

^c DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Domino effect; Hazard indices; Index assessment; Inherent safety; Layout design; Process industries; Safety assessment

Indexed keywords

APPLICATIONS; DESIGN; HAZARDS; INTERSECTIONS; PLANT LAYOUT;

DOMINO EFFECT; HAZARD INDICES; INDEX ASSESSMENT; INHERENT SAFETY; LAYOUT DESIGN; PROCESS INDUSTRIES; SAFETY ASSESSMENT;

PROCESS ENGINEERING;

ACCIDENT; DESIGN; HAZARD ASSESSMENT; LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; PLANNING METHOD; SAFETY;

ARTICLE; BUILDING INDUSTRY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC ASPECT; HAZARD ASSESSMENT; PROCESS CONTROL; RISK ASSESSMENT;

ACCIDENTS, OCCUPATIONAL; ALGORITHMS; COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; FACILITY DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION; MODELS, STATISTICAL; OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH; TERMINOLOGY AS TOPIC;

EID: 54049116687     PISSN: 03043894     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.02.089     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Khan F.I., and Abbasi S.A. The world's worst industrial accident of the 1990s. Proc. Safety Prog. 18 (1999) 135-145
2. Cozzani V., Tugnoli A., and Salzano E. Prevention of domino effect: from active and passive strategies to inherently safer design. J. Hazard. Mater. A139 (2007) 209-219
3. Mecklenburg J.C. Plant Layout (1973), John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA
4. Lees F.P. Loss Prevention in the Process Industries. second ed. (1996), Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, UK
5. Papageorgiou L., and Rotstein G.E. Continuous domain mathematical models for optimal process plant layout. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 37 (1998) 3631-3639
6. Georgiadis M.C., Schilling G., Rotstein G.E., and Macchietto S. A general mathematical programming approach for process plant layout. Comp. Chem. Eng. 23 (1999) 823-840
7. Barbosa-Pòvoa A.P., Mateus R., and Novais A.Q. Optimal design and layout of industrial facilities: a simultaneous approach. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 41 (2002) 3601-3609
8. Deb S.K., and Bhattacharyya B. Solution of facility layout problems with pickup/drop-off locations using random search techniques. Int. J. Prod. Res. 43 (2005) 4787-4812
9. Nolan P.F., and Bradley C.W.J. Simple technique for the optimization of lay-out and location for chemical plant safety. Plant/Operations Prog. 6 (1987) 57-61
10. Penteado F.D., and Ciric A.R. An MILP approach for safe process plant layout. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 4 (1996) 1354-1361
11. Patsiatzis D.I., Knight G., and Papageorgiou L.G. An MILP approach to safe process plant layout. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 82 (2004) 579-586
12. Kletz T.A. What you don't have, can't leak. Chem. Ind. 6 (1978) 287-292
13. Kletz T.A. Cheaper, Safer Plants, or Wealth and Safety at Work (1984), Institution of Chemical Engineers, Rugby, UK
14. Kletz T.A. Process Plants: A Handbook for Inherent Safer Design (1998), Taylor & Francis, Bristol, PA, USA
15. Gupta J.P., Hendershot D.C., and Mannan M.S. The real cost of process safety-a clear case for inherent safety. Proc. Safety Environ. Protect. 81 (2003) 406-413
16. Khan F.I., and Amyotte P.R. I2SI: a comprehensive quantitative tool for inherent safety and cost evaluation. J. Loss Prev. Proc. Ind. 18 (2005) 310-326
17. Kletz T.A. Inherently safer plants. Plant/Operations Prog. 4 (1985) 164-167
18. Ashford N.A. The Encouragement of Technological Change for Preventing Chemical Accidents: Moving Firms from Secondary Prevention and Mitigation to Primary Prevention, Center for Technology, Policy and Industrial Development (1993), MIT, Cambridge, MA, USA
19. Bollinger R.E., Clark D.G., Dowell III A.M., Ewbank R.M., Hendershot D.C., Lutz W.K., Meszaros S.I., Park D.E., and Wixom E.D. In: Crowl D.A. (Ed). Inherently Safer Chemical Processes: A Life Cycle Approach (1996), American Institute of Chemical Engineers, New York, NY, USA
20. Kletz T.A. Inherently safer design-the growth of an idea. Proc. Safety Prog. 15 (1996) 5-8
21. Hendershot D.C. Inherently safer chemical process design. J. Loss Prev. Proc. Ind. 10 (1997) 151-157
22. Khan F.I., and Amyotte P.R. How to make inherent safety practice a reality. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 81 (2003) 2-16
23. Edwards D.W., and Lawrence D. Assessing the inherent safety of chemical process routes: is there a relation between plant cost and inherent safety?. Proc. Safety Environ. Protect. 71 (1993) 252-258
24. Heikkilä A., Hurme M., and Järveläinen M. Safety considerations in process synthesis. Comp. Chem. Eng. 20 Suppl. (1996) S115-S120
25. A. Heikkilä, Inherent safety in process plant design, Ph.D. Thesis, VTT Publication 384, Espoo, Finland, 1999.
26. Gentile M., Rogers W.J., and Mannan M.S. Development of an inherent safety index based on fuzzy logic. AIChE J. 49 (2003) 959-968
27. Palaniappan C., Srinivasan R., and Tan R. Expert system for the design of inherently safer processes. 1. Route selection stage. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 41 (2002) 6698-6710
28. Palaniappan C., Srinivasan R., and Tan R. Expert system for the design of inherently safer processes. 2. Flowsheet development stage. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 41 (2002) 6711-6722
29. INSIDE Project, The INSET Toolkit, Integrated Version, November 2001.
30. Koller G., Fischer U., and Hungerbuhler K. Assessing safety, health, and environmental impact early during process development. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 39 (2000) 960-972
31. Koller G., Fischer U., and Hungerbühler K. Comparison of methods suitable for assessing the hazard potential of chemical processes during early design phases. Proc. Safety Environ. Protect. 79 (2001) 157-166
32. Khan F.I., Husain T., and Abbasi S.A. Safety weighted hazard index (SWeHI): a new, user-friendly tool for swift yet comprehensive hazard identification and safety evaluation in chemical process industries. Proc. Safety Environ. Protect. 79 (2001) 65-80
33. Tyler B.J. Using the Mond Index to measure inherent hazards. Plant/Operations Prog. 4 (1985) 172-175
34. Etowa C.B., Amyotte P.R., Pegg M.J., and Khan F.I. Quantification of inherent safety aspects of the Dow indices. J. Loss Prev. Proc. Ind. 15 (2002) 477-487
35. Khan F.I., Sadiq R., and Amyotte P.R. Evaluation of available indices for inherently safer design options. Proc. Safety Prog. 22 (2003) 83-97
36. Suardin J., Mannan M.S., and El-Halwagi M. The integration of Dow's fire and explosion index (F and EI) into process design and optimization to achieve inherently safer design. J. Loss Prev. Proc. Ind. 20 (2007) 79-90
37. Khan F.I., and Amyotte P.R. Integrated inherent safety index (I2SI): a tool for inherent safety evaluation. Proc. Safety Prog. 23 (2004) 136-148
38. Hendershot D.C. Designing safety into a chemical process. Proc. 5th Asia Pacific Responsible Care Conference. Shanghai, China, Nov. 7-10 (1999)
39. Khan F.I., and Abbasi S.A. Models for domino effect analysis in chemical process industries. Proc. Safety Prog. 17 (1998) 107-123
40. Khan F.I., and Abbasi S.A. An assessment of the likelihood of occurrence, and the damage potential of domino effect (chain of accidents) in a typical cluster of industries. J. Loss Prev. Proc. Ind. 14 (2001) 283-306
41. Cozzani V., Gubinelli G., and Salzano E. Criteria for the escalation of fires and explosions. Proc. Seventh Proc. Plant Safety Symp., AIChE. New York, NY, USA, 225 (2005)
42. Cozzani V., Gubinelli G., and Salzano E. Escalation thresholds in the assessment of domino accidental events. J. Hazard. Mater. A129 (2006) 1-21
43. Salzano E., and Cozzani V. A fuzzy set analysis to estimate loss intensity following blast wave interaction with process equipment. J. Loss Prev. Proc. Ind. 19 (2006) 343-352
44. Khan F.I., Husain T., and Hejazi R.F. An overview and analysis of site remediation technologies. J. Environ. Mgt. 71 (2004) 95-122