Process route index (PRI) to assess level of explosiveness for inherent safety quantification

Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 216-221

  Leong, Chan T ^a   Shariff, Azmi Mohd ^a  

^a DEPARTMENT OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING   (Malaysia)

Author keywords

Inherent safety; Inherent safety index; Inherent safety quantification; Level of explosiveness; Process route selection; Safety index

Indexed keywords

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING; CHEMICAL REACTIONS; ESTERS; FLAMMABILITY; MIXTURES;

INHERENT SAFETY; INHERENT SAFETY INDEX; INHERENT SAFETY QUANTIFICATION; LEVEL OF EXPLOSIVENESS; PROCESS ROUTE SELECTION; SAFETY INDEX;

EXPLOSIONS;

EID: 61349197429     PISSN: 09504230     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jlp.2008.12.008     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Center for Chemical Process Safety (CCPS). Guidelines for chemical process quantitative risk analysis. 2nd ed. (2000), American Institute of Chemical Engineers, New York
2. Crawley F. Offshore loss prevention. The Chemical Engineer (July 1995) 23-25
3. Crowl D.A., and Louvar J.F. Chemical process safety: Fundamentals with applications (1990), Prentice Hall, USA
4. Edwards D.W., and Lawrence D. Assessing the inherent safety of chemical process routes: is there a relation between plant costs and inherent safety?. Process Safety and Environmental Protection 71 (1993) 252-258
5. Gentile M. (2004). Development of hierarchical fuzzy model for the evaluation of inherent safety. Ph.D. Thesis, Texas A&M University, USA.
6. Gupta J.P., and Edwards D.W. A simple graphical method for measuring inherent safety. Journal of Hazardous Materials 104 (2003) 15-30 Elsevier Science Ltd
7. Heikkilä, A. M. (1999). Inherent safety in process plant design. Ph.D. Thesis, Helsinki University of Technology, Espoo, Finland.
8. Hendershot D.C. Process minimization: making plants safer. Chemical Engineering Progress 96 (2000) 35-40
9. Khan F.I., and Amyotte P.R. Inherent safety in offshore oil and gas activities: a review of the present status and future directions. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 15 (2002) 279-289 Elsevier Science Ltd
10. Khan F.I., and Amyotte P.R. I2SI: a comprehensive quantitative tool for inherent safety and cost evaluation. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 18 (2005) 310-326 Elsevier Science Ltd
11. Kletz T.A. Plant design for safety - A user friendly approach. 2nd ed. (1991), Taylor and Francis
12. Lawrence, D. (1996). Quantifying inherent safety of chemical process routes. Ph.D. Thesis, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK.
13. Leong C.T., and Shariff A.M. Inherent safety index module (ISIM) to assess inherent safety level during preliminary design stage. Process Safety and Environmental Protection Journal (2007) 10.1016/j.psep.2007.10.016 Elsevier
14. Mohd Shariff A., Rusli R., Chan T.L., Radhakrishnan V.R., and Buang A. Inherent safety tool for explosion consequences study. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 19 (2006) 409-418
15. Moore A.D. (1999). http://process-safety.tamu.edu/Research/Inherent%20Safety /Isappr.htm. Accessed 12.02.06.
16. Palaniappan C. (2002), Expert system for design of inherently safer chemical processes. M. Eng. Thesis, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
17. Palaniappan C., Srinivasan R., and Tan R. Selection of inherently safer process routes: a case study. Chemical Engineering and Processing 43 (2004) 647-653
18. Rahman M., Heikkilä A.M., and Hurme M. Comparison of inherent safety indices in process concept evaluation. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 18 (2005) 327-334
19. Warwick, A. R. (1998), Inherent safe design of floating production, storage and offloading vessels (FPSOs). Proceeding of Off-shore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering Conference, Lisbon, Portugal.
20. Zwetsloot G.I.J.M., and Askounes Ashford N. Encouraging Inherently safer production in European firms: a report from the field. [Special Issue]. In: Amendola A., and Wilkinson D. (Eds). Risk assessment and environmental decision making. Journal of Hazardous Materials (1999) 123-144