4.7 Article

Safety analysis in process facilities: Comparison of fault tree and Bayesian network approaches

Journal

RELIABILITY ENGINEERING & SYSTEM SAFETY
Volume 96, Issue 8, Pages 925-932

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2011.03.012

Keywords

Bayesian network; Fault tree analysis; Accident analysis; Uncertainty modeling

Funding

  1. Qatar National Research Foundation [08-074-2-015]
  2. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Safety analysis in gas process facilities is necessary to prevent unwanted events that may cause catastrophic accidents. Accident scenario analysis with probability updating is the key to dynamic safety analysis. Although conventional failure assessment techniques such as fault tree (FT) have been used effectively for this purpose, they suffer severe limitations of static structure and uncertainty handling, which are of great significance in process safety analysis. Bayesian network (BN) is an alternative technique with ample potential for application in safety analysis. BNs have a strong similarity to FTs in many respects; however, the distinct advantages making them more suitable than FTs are their ability in explicitly representing the dependencies of events, updating probabilities, and coping with uncertainties. The objective of this paper is to demonstrate the application of BNs in safety analysis of process systems. The first part of the paper shows those modeling aspects that are common between FT and BN, giving preference to BN due to its ability to update probabilities. The second part is devoted to various modeling features of BN, helping to incorporate multi-state variables, dependent failures, functional uncertainty, and expert opinion which are frequently encountered in safety analysis, but cannot be considered by F. The paper concludes that BN is a superior technique in safety analysis because of its flexible structure, allowing it to fit a wide variety of accident scenarios. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available