Design of marine structures with improved safety for environment

Reliability Engineering and System Safety

Volumn 96, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 75-90

  Klanac, Alan ^a   Varsta, Petri ^a  

^a AALTO UNIVERSITY   (Finland)

Author keywords

Design; Environment; Game theory; Multi stakeholder; Risk; Safety; Structure

Indexed keywords

AXIOMATIC DEFINITIONS; DECISION MAKERS; DECISION-MAKING PROBLEM; ENVIRONMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS; GROUP DECISION-MAKING; INCREASED SAFETY; INVESTMENT COSTS; MARINE STRUCTURES; MULTI-STAKEHOLDER; OPTIMUM SOLUTION; RANKING OF ALTERNATIVES; RISK DISTRIBUTION; SAFETY; SAFETY IMPROVEMENT; SAFETY MEASURES; SIDE STRUCTURE; STRUCTURE; TANKER SAFETY;

DECISION MAKING; DECISION THEORY; OCEAN STRUCTURES; OIL TANKERS; PUBLIC RISKS; STRUCTURAL DESIGN;

GAME THEORY;

EID: 78649335828     PISSN: 09518320     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2010.06.016     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (54)

1. International Maritime Organization.International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974. Available at: 〈 http://www.imo.org/ Conventions/contents.asp? topic-id=257&doc-id=647 〉, accessed on 13 Oct 2009.
2. International Maritime Organization. International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto (MARPOL). Available at: 〈 http://www.imo.org/Conventions/ contents.asp?doc-id=678&topic-id=258 〉, accessed on 13 Oct 2009.
3. W.H. Moore, M. Arai, P. Besse, R. Birmingham, E. Bruenner, and Y.K. Chen Design principles and criteria CD Jang, SY Hong, Procedings of the 17th international ship on offshore structures congress, Seoul 2009 587 688
4. J. Vatn A discussion of the acceptable risk problem Reliability Engineering and System Safety 61 1998 11 19
5. RE. Melchers On the ALARP approach to risk management Reliability Engineering and System Safety 71 2001 201 208
6. T. Aven Foundations of risk analysis 2003 Wiley & Sons Chichester
7. Skojng R, Ronold KO. Societal indicators and risk acceptance. In: Proceedings of the 17th international conference on offshore mechanics and Arctic engineering, 1998.
8. O. Ditlevsen Decision modelling and acceptance criteria Structural Safety 25 2003 165 191
9. P Friis-Hansen, and O. Ditlevsen Nature preservation acceptance model applied to tanker oil spill simulations Structural Safety 25 2003 1 34
10. J Wang, JB Yang, and P. Sen Multi-person and multi-attribute design evaluations using evidential reasoning based on subjective safety and cost analyses Reliability Engineering and System Safety 52 1996 113 128
11. J Wang, and O. Kieran Offshore safety assessment and safety-based decision-making the current status and future aspects Journal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering 122 2000 93 99
12. T Rosqvist, and R. Tuominnen Qualification of formal safety assessment: an exploratory study Safety Science 42 2 2004 99 120
13. S French, T Bedford, and E Atherton Supporting ALARP decision making by cost benefit analysis and multiattribute utility theory Journal of Risk Research 8 3 2005 207 223
14. T. Rosqvist Stakeholder compensation model based on decision analysis Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 12 2003 219 223
15. Klanac A, Tabri K, Ehlers S, Nekic A.
16. A Klanac, R Jalonen, and P. Varsta Multi-stakeholder decision-making in the risk-based design of a RO-PAX double bottom for grounding Journal of Engineering for the Maritime Environment 221 1 2007 1 15
17. A Klanac, S Ehlers, and J. Jelovica Optimization of crashworthy marine structures Marine Structures 22 4 2009 670 690
18. Cho K-N, Arai M, Basu R, Besse P, Birmingham R, Bohlmann B, et al. Design principles and criteria. In: Proceedings of the 16th international ship and offshore structures congress. Southampton, 2006. p. 543624.
19. P. Bennett Mutual risk: P&I insurance clubs and maritime safety and environmental performance Marine Policy 25 2001 13 21
20. M. Pyhnen POLSSS: surveying stakeholders about acceptability of risks and system changes Safety Science 35 2000 123 137
21. P. Slovic Perception of risk Science 236 4799 1987 280 285
22. J von Neumann, and O. Morgenstern Theory of games and economic behaviour 1953 Princeton University Press Princeton
23. RL Keeney, and H. Raiffa Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs 1976 John Wiley & Sons New York
24. K.J. Arrow Social choice and individual values 1951 Cowles Foundation and Wiley New York
25. G.A. Hazelrigg The implications of Arrow's impossibility theorem on approaches to optimal engineering design Journal of Mechanical Design 118 2 1996 161 164
26. K. Miettinen Nonlinear multi-objective optimization 1999 Kluwer Academic Publishers Norwell
27. A. Wierzbicki The use of reference objectives in multiobjective optimization G. Fandel, T. Gal, Multiple objective decision making theory and application 1980 Springer Berlin Heidelberg New York 468 486
28. IMO. Guidelines for Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) for use in the IMO rule-making process. International maritime organization, Marine Safety Committee, MSC/Circ.1023, MEPC/Circ.392, 2002.
29. M. Deutsch A theory of co-operation and competition Human Relations 7 1949 129 152
30. K.O.A May Set of independent necessary and sufficient conditions for simple majority decisions Econometrica 20 1952 680 684
31. Nash JF. Non-cooperative games, PhD dissertation, Princeton University, 1950.
32. V.J Bowman Jr On the relationship of the tchebycheff norm and the efficient frontier of multiple-criteria objectives H. Thieriez, S. Zionts, Multiple-Criteria Decision Making 1976 Springer-Verlag New York 76 85
33. VU. Minorsky An analysis of ship collision with reference to protection of nuclear powered plant Journal of Ship Research 3 2 1959 1 4
34. Zhang S. The mechanics of ship collisions. PhD thesis, Technical University of Denmark, Department of Naval Architecture and Offshore Engineering. Lyngby, 1999.
35. Luetzen M. Ship collision damage. PhD thesis. Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby
36. Ritvanen H. A crashworthy ship: comparative risk analysis of AFRAMAX tanker side structures, Master thesis, Helsinki University of Technology, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Ship Laboratory, 2006.
37. Hallquist JO. LS-DYNA. Keyword User's Manual, Version 971. Livermore: Livermore Software Technology Corporation, 2007.
38. Zhang L, Egge ED, Bruhms H. Approval procedure concept for alternative arrangements. In: Proceedings of the third international conference on collision and grounding of ships. Japan, 2004. p. 8797.
39. Ehlers S, Klanac A, Tabri K. Increased safety of a tanker and a RO-PAX vessel by implementing a novel sandwich structure. In: Proceedings of the fourth international conference on collision and grounding of ships. Hamburg, 2007. p. 109115.
40. Konter A, Broekhuijsen J, Vredeveldt A. A quantitative assessment of the factors contributing to the accuracy of ship collision predictions with the finite element method. In: Proceedings of the third international conference on collision and grounding of ships. Izu, 2004. p. 1726.
41. O Ozguc, PK Das, and N Barltrop A comparative study on the structural integrity of single and double side skin bulk carriers under collision damage Marerials and Structures 18 78 2005 511 547
42. International Maritime Organization. Routeing of ships, ship reporting and related matters: Assessment of the traffic in the Baltic Sea West. NAV51/INF 2005; Available at: 〈 http://www.sjofartsverket.se/upload/3986/565568070- 199949298-15-282226%20ARON.pdf 〉, accessed on: 11 Oct 2009.
43. International Maritime Organization. Casualty statistics and investigations: Very serious and serious casualties for the year 1999. FSI.3/Circ.2, 2001; Available at: 〈 http://www.imo.org/includes/ blastDataOnly.asp/data-id%3D5397/2.pdf 〉, accessed on: 4 Aug 2008.
44. International Maritime Organization. Casualty statistics and investigations: very serious and serious casualties for the year 2000. FSI.3/Circ.3, 2002; Available at: 〈 http://www.imo.org/includes/ blastDataOnly.asp/data-id%3D5118/3.pdf 〉, accessed on: 4 Aug 2008.
45. International Maritime Organization. Casualty statistics and investigations: very serious and serious casualties for the year 2001. FSI.3/Circ.4, 2004; Available at: 〈 http://www.imo.org/includes/ blastDataOnly.asp/data-id%3D8934/4.pdf 〉, accessed on: 4 Aug 2008.
46. International Maritime Organization. Casualty statistics and investigations: very serious and serious casualties for the year 2002. FSI.3/Circ.5, 2005; Available at: 〈 http://www.imo.org/includes/ blastDataOnly.asp/data-id%3D11539/5.pdf 〉, accessed on: 4 Aug 2008.
47. International Maritime Organization. Casualty statistics and investigations: very serious and serious casualties for the year 2003. FSI.3/Circ.6, 2005; Available at: 〈 http://www.imo.org/includes/ blastDataOnly.asp/data-id%3D11540/6.pdf 〉, accessed on: 4 Aug 2008.
48. Tuovinen J. Statistical analysis of ship collision. TKK master thesis. Espoo, 2006.
49. Papanikolaou A, Eliopoulou E, Alissafaki A, Aksu A, Tuzcu C, Delautre S, et al. Critical review of AFRAMAX tankers incidents. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on marine science and technology for environmental sustainability ENSUS. Newcastle upon Tyne, 2005.
50. Grey CJ. The cost of oil spills from tankers. In: Proceedings of the international oil spill conference, 1999. Available at: 〈 http://www.itopf.com/-assets/spilcost.pdf 〉, accessed on 11 Oct 2009.
51. IPIECA/ITOPF. Oil spill compensation: a guide to the international conventions on liability and compensation for oil pollution damage. A joint IPIECA/ITOPF publication. Available on: 〈 http://www.ipieca.org/activities/ oilspill/downloads/publications/reports/english/Compensation.pdf
52. E Vanem, O. Endresen, and R. Skjong "Cost-Effectiveness crieteria for marine oil spill preventive measures Reliability Engineering and System Safety 93 2008 1354 1368
53. International maritime organization. FORMAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT, FSA crude oil tankers, Submitted by Denmark, MEPC58/INF.2, 2008.
54. PL. Yu A class of solutions for group decision problems Management Science 19 8 1973 936 946