Domino Effect Analysis Using Bayesian Networks

Risk Analysis

Volumn 33, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 292-306

  Khakzad, Nima ^a   Khan, Faisal ^a   Amyotte, Paul ^b   Cozzani, Valerio ^c  

^a MEMORIAL UNIVERSITY OF NEWFOUNDLAND   (Canada)

^b DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Bayesian network; Domino effect; Risk analysis

Indexed keywords

COMMON CAUSE FAILURE; COMPLEX INTERACTION; DOMINO EFFECTS; MODELING TECHNIQUE; PROBABILISTIC FRAMEWORK; PROCESSING FACILITIES; PROPAGATION PATTERN; SYNERGISTIC EFFECT;

FLEXIBLE STRUCTURES; PROBABILITY; RISK ANALYSIS;

BAYESIAN NETWORKS;

BAYESIAN ANALYSIS; INFORMATION MANAGEMENT; METHODOLOGY; NUMERICAL MODEL; PROBABILITY; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS;

EID: 84873126148     PISSN: 02724332     EISSN: 15396924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01854.x     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Council Directive 96/82/EC of 9 December 1996 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances. Official Journal of the European Communities, L 10/13, Brussels, January 14, 1997, 0013-0033.
2. Abdolhamidzadeh B, Abbasi T, Rashtchian D, Abbasi SA. Domino effect in process industry accidents-An inventory of past events and identification of some patterns. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2011; 24:575-593.
3. Darbra, RM, Palacios A, Casal J. Domino effect in chemical accidents: Main features and accident sequences. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2010; 183:565-573.
4. CSB. Refinery Explosion and Fire. Investigation Report No. 2005-04-I-TX, Washington, DC, 2007. Available at: http://www.csb.gov/assets/document/CSBFinalReportBP.pdf, Accessed on January 1, 2012.
5. Bagster DF, Pitblado RM. The estimation of domino incident frequencies-An approach. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 1991; 69:195-199.
6. Gledhill J, Lines I. Development of Methods to Assess the Significance of Domino Effects from Major Hazard Sites. CR Report 183, Sudbury, UK: Health and Safety Executive, 1998.
7. Eisenberg NA, Lynch CJ, Breeding RJ. Vulnerability Model: A Simulation System for Assessing Damage Resulting from Marine Spills, Report CG-D-136-75. Rockville, MD : Enviro Control Inc., 1975.
8. Vilchez AJ, Montiel H, Casal J. Arnaldos J. Analytical expressions for the calculation of damage percentage using the probit methodology. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2001; 14:193-197.
9. Cozzani V, Salzano E. The quantitative assessment of domino effects caused by overpressure part I. probit models. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2004; A107:67-80.
10. Khan F, Abbasi SA. Models for domino analysis in chemical process industries. Process Safety Progress, 1998; 17:107-123.
11. Cozzani V, Gubinelli G, Salzano E. Escalation thresholds in the assessment of domino accidental events. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2006; 129:1-21.
12. Khan F, Abbasi SA. DOMIFFECT (DOMIno eFFECT): User-friendly software for domino effect analysis. Environmental Modeling and Software, 1998; 13:163-177.
13. Landucci G, Gubinelli G, Antonioni G, Cozzani V. The assessment of the damage probability of storage tanks in domino events. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 2009; 41:1206-1215.
14. Vilchez AJ, Sevilla S, Montiel H, Casal J. Historical analysis of accidents in chemical plants and in the transportation of hazardous materials. Journal of Loss Prevention in Process Industries, 1995; 8:87-96.
15. Kourniotis SP, Kiranoudis CD, Markatos NC. Statistical analysis of domino chemical accidents. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2000; 71:239-252.
16. Cozzani V, Gubinelli G, Antonioni G, Spadoni G, Zanelli S. The assessment of risk caused by domino effect in quantitative area risk analysis. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2005; A127:14-30.
17. Antonioni G, Spadoni G, Cozzani V. Application of domino effect quantitative risk assessment to an extended industrial area. Journal of Loss Prevention in Process Industries, 2009; 22:614-624.
18. Abdolhamidzadeh B, Abbasi T, Rashtchian D, Abbasi SA. A new method for assessing domino effect in chemical process industry. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2010; 182:416-426.
19. Reniers GLL, Dullaert W, Ale BJM, Soudan K. The use of current risk analysis tools evaluated towards preventing external domino accidents. Journal of Loss Prevention in Process Industries, 2005; 18:119-126.
20. Reniers GLL, Dullaert W. DomPrevPlanning: User-friendly software for planning domino effects prevention. Safety Science, 2007; 45:1060-1081.
21. Cozzani V, Antonioni G, Spadoni G. Quantitative assessment of domino scenarios by a GIS-based software tool. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industry, 2006; 19:463-477.
22. Jensen FV, Nielsen TD. Bayesian Networks and Decision Graphs, 2nd ed. New York : Springer, 2007.
23. Weber P, Medina-Oliva G, Simon C, Iung B. Overview on Bayesian networks applications for dependability, risk analysis and maintenance areas. Engineering Application of Artificial Intelligence, 2010; 25: 671-682.
24. CCPS. Guidelines for Chemical Process Quantitative Risk Analysis, 2nd ed. New York : AIChE, 2000.
25. Van Den Bosh CJH, Weterings RAMP. Methods for the Calculation of Physical Effects (Yellow Book). The Hague, NL : Committee for the Prevention of Disasters, 1997.
26. Assael MJ, Kakosimos KE. Fires, Explosions, and Toxic Gas Dispersions: Effects Calculation and Risk Analysis. NW : CRC Press, Taylor and Francis Group, 2010.
27. Rai K, Van Ryzin J. A generalized multihit dose-response model for low-dose extrapolation. Biometrics, 1981; 37:341-352.
28. Torres-Toledano JG, Sucar LE. Bayesian networks for reliability analysis of complex systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 1998; 1484:195-206.
29. Bobbio A, Portinale L, Minichino M, Ciancamerla E. Improving the analysis of dependable systems by mapping fault trees into Bayesian networks. Journal of Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2001; 71:249-260.
30. Khakzad N, Khan F, Amyotte P. Safety analysis in process facilities: Comparison of fault tree and Bayesian network approaches. Journal of Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2011; 96:925-932.
31. Bearfield G, Marsh W. Generalizing event trees using Bayesian networks with a case study of train derailment. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2005; 3688:52-66.
32. Khakzad N, Khan F, Amyotte P. Dynamic Safety analysis of process systems by mapping bow-tie into Bayesian network. Journal of Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2012; doi: 10.1016/j.psep.2012.01.005.
33. Nguyen QB, Mebarki A, Ami Saada R, Reimeringer M. Integrated probabilistic framework for domino effect and risk analysis. Journal of Advances in Engineering Software, 2009; 40:892-901.
34. Delvosalle C, Fievez C, Pipart A, Debray B. ARAMIS project: A comprehensive methodology for the identification of reference accident scenarios in process industries. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2006; 130:200-219.
35. Paltrinieri N, Dechy N, Salzano E, Wardman M, Cozzani V. Lessons learned from Toulouse and Buncefield disasters: From risk analysis failures to the identification of atypical scenarios through a better knowledge management. Risk Analysis, 2011; doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01749.x.
36. HUGIN Expert Software version 7.4, 2010. Available at: http://www.hugin.com.
37. Cozzani V, Salzano E. The quantitative assessment of domino effects caused by overpressure part II. Case studies. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2004; A107:81-94.
38. Khan F, Abbasi SA. Assessment of risks posed by chemical industries-application of a new computer automated tool MAXCRED III. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 1999; 12:455-469.