Quantitative Risk Assessment: Common Pitfalls in Top Event Frequency Calculation

The main goal of process safety is to analyse and reduce risks related to industrial processes in order to ensure that the final risk on people and environment is as low as possible. To establish whether the risk related to the process is tolerable or not it is therefore necessary to calculate the risk associated with the events under consideration and to compare the result with the selected tolerability criteria: this is the common approach used in Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) analysis. The risk associated with an event, whatever is its nature (on people, on the environment or financial) is a function of the likelihood of the event (generally expressed in events/year) and the consequences (expressed in terms of damage) of the event itself. The aim of this article is to focus on the first parameter (frequency evaluation): the main goal is not to write a math paper on frequency calculation (there are a lot of articles and specialised sources in the scientific literature that deal with the theory of probability calculation and, therefore, it would not make sense to focus on math) but to report the main conceptual errors in frequency calculation found in existing risk analysis reports. Frequency calculation depends especially on the quality of the performed hazard identification study (e.g HAZOP) and on the proper identification of the common cause failures present within a complex system which, if not properly identified, can lead to an incorrect assessment of the likelihood of a dangerous event. The final scope is to show how it is possible to fall into pitfalls during frequencies calculation if the hazards identification is not properly performed and if dependencies between safeguards are not properly assessed: usually these errors lead to obtain frequency values that have no physical meaning.

Publication Details

Journal
SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
Published
2024-10-01
Primary Topic
Literature and Cultural Memory
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Quantitative Risk Assessment: Common Pitfalls in Top Event Frequency Calculation

SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
Literature and Cultural Memory
article

Quantitative Risk Assessment: Common Pitfalls in Top Event Frequency Calculation

article en

Abstract

The main goal of process safety is to analyse and reduce risks related to industrial processes in order to ensure that the final risk on people and environment is as low as possible. To establish whether the risk related to the process is tolerable or not it is therefore necessary to calculate the risk associated with the events under consideration and to compare the result with the selected tolerability criteria: this is the common approach used in Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) analysis. The risk associated with an event, whatever is its nature (on people, on the environment or financial) is a function of the likelihood of the event (generally expressed in events/year) and the consequences (expressed in terms of damage) of the event itself. The aim of this article is to focus on the first parameter (frequency evaluation): the main goal is not to write a math paper on frequency calculation (there are a lot of articles and specialised sources in the scientific literature that deal with the theory of probability calculation and, therefore, it would not make sense to focus on math) but to report the main conceptual errors in frequency calculation found in existing risk analysis reports. Frequency calculation depends especially on the quality of the performed hazard identification study (e.g HAZOP) and on the proper identification of the common cause failures present within a complex system which, if not properly identified, can lead to an incorrect assessment of the likelihood of a dangerous event. The final scope is to show how it is possible to fall into pitfalls during frequencies calculation if the hazards identification is not properly performed and if dependencies between safeguards are not properly assessed: usually these errors lead to obtain frequency values that have no physical meaning.

SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
Openalex Percentile: Top 18%
Literature and Cultural Memory
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Quantitative Risk Assessment: Common Pitfalls in Top Event Frequency Calculation · SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS