Advertisement

Methodology for Quantified Risk Assessment

  • Jan-Erik VinnemEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Springer Series in Reliability Engineering book series (RELIABILITY)

Abstract

Although risk may be assessed in both a qualitative and quantitative way, this book primarily deals with quantitative methods. Thus qualitative risk assessment and safety review methods are not covered explicitly in this chapter, which provides a brief overview of the methodology for QRA with the main emphasis on the main steps. Further details are presented in the following chapters.

Keywords

Fault Tree Analysis Fault Tree Analysis Hazard Identification Safety Critical System Fatality Risk 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. AEA (1997) Hydrocarbon release statistics review. AEA Technology, Warnington 1998 Jan. Report no. 16189000/01Google Scholar
  2. Amdahl J, Eberg E, Holmås T, Landrø H et al (1995) Ultimate collapse of offshore structures exposed to fire. In: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on offshore mechanics and arctic engineering. ASME Press, New York, pp 18–22Google Scholar
  3. AME (2003) Pipeline and Riser loss of containment data for offshore pipelines (PARLOC) 2001. Advanced Mechanics and Engineering Ltd (AME), GuildfordGoogle Scholar
  4. Andersen LB (1998) Stochastic modeling for the analysis of blowout risk in exploration drilling. Reliab Eng Syst Safety 61:53–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Aven T, Vinnem JE (2007) Risk management, with applications from the offshore petroleum industry. Springer, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Bea R, Moore W (1994) Reliability based evaluations of human and organisation errors in reassessment and requalification of platforms. In: Proceedings of the 13th international conference on offshore mechanics and arctic engineering, Houston, USA, 27 Feb, March 3Google Scholar
  7. Bea R (1995) Quality, reliability, human and organisation factors in design of marine structures. In: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on offshore mechanics and arctic engineering. ASME Press, Denmark, 18–22 JuneGoogle Scholar
  8. DNV (1981) Causes and consequences of fires and explosions on offshore platforms. Statistical survey of Gulf of Mexico data. Report no.: 81–0057. DNV, HøvikGoogle Scholar
  9. DNV (1993) Causes and consequences of fires and explosions on offshore platforms. Statis-tical survey of Gulf of Mexico data. Report no.: 93–3401. Høvik, DNVGoogle Scholar
  10. DNV (1998) Woad, worldwide offshore accident database. DNV, HøvikGoogle Scholar
  11. Gran BA, Bye R, Nyheim OM, Okstad EH, Seljelid J, Sklet S, Vatn J, Vinnem JE (2012) Evaluation of the risk model of maintenance work on major process equipment on offshore petroleum installations. Loss Prev Process Ind 25(3):582–593Google Scholar
  12. Exprosoft (2006) SINTEF Offshore Blowout Database. http://www.exprosoft.com/blowout.htm
  13. Holand P (1997) Offshore blowouts, causes and control, Gulf publishing, Houston, TexasGoogle Scholar
  14. HSE (1997) Offshore hydrocarbon releases statistics. HMSO, London. Report no.: OTO 97 950Google Scholar
  15. HSE (2003) Ship/platform collision incident database (2001). HMSO, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. HSE (2005a) Accident statistics for fixed offshore units on the UK continental shelf (1980–2003). HMSO, London; 2005; RR349Google Scholar
  17. HSE (2005b) Accident statistics for floating offshore units on the UK continental shelf (1980–2003). HMSO, London; 2005; RR353.Google Scholar
  18. IEC (2000) IEC 61508—Functional safety of electrical/electronic/programmable electronic safety-related systems. IEC, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  19. IEC (2003) IEC 61511—Functional safety—safety instrumented systems for the process industry sector. IEC, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  20. IEEE (1984) Guide to the collection and presentation of electrical, electronic and sensing component reliability data for nuclear power generating stations. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  21. Kirwan B (1994) A guide to practical HRA. Taylor and Francis, LondonGoogle Scholar
  22. Kirwan B, Ainsworth LK (1992) A guide to task analysis. Taylor and Francis, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. Nilsen T, Sandøy M, Rommetveit R, Guarneri A (2001) Risk-based well control planning: the integration of random and known quantities in a computerized risk management tool. SPE68447Google Scholar
  24. Norwegian oil and gas (2004) OLF 070—application of IEC 61508 and IEC 61511 in the Norwegian petroleum industry. OLF, Stavanger, p 2004Google Scholar
  25. OGP (2010) Quantitative risk assessment, datasheet directory. London: OGP; 2010 March, report no.: 434Google Scholar
  26. OREDA (2009) Offshore reliability data handbook, 5th edn. SINTEF, TrondheimGoogle Scholar
  27. PSA (2012) Trends in risk level on the Norwegian continental shelf, main report, (in Norwegian only, English summery report), Petroleum Safety Authority, Stavanger, 25.4.2012Google Scholar
  28. Rausand M (2011) Risk assessment: Theory, methods, and applications (statistics in practice), Wiley, NYGoogle Scholar
  29. Reliability Analysis Centre (1991) NPRD, nonelectronic parts reliability data. System Reliability Centre: New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Rosenberg T, Nielsen T (1995) Blowout risk modelling. In: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on offshore mechanics and arctic engineering; 18–22 June 1995; ASME Press, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  31. Scandpower Risk Management (2006) Ignition modelling in risk analysis. Scand-power; 2006 Feb. Kjeller, Norway; Report No.: 27.390.033/R1Google Scholar
  32. SINTEF (1998) Blowout database, Safety and Reliability Department. SINTEF; Trondheim, NorwayGoogle Scholar
  33. SINTEF (2010) Reliability data for safety instrumented systems—PDS data handbook, 2010 edn. ISBN 978-82-14-04849-0, SINTEF A13502Google Scholar
  34. Standard Norway (2010) Risk and emergency preparedness analysis, Z–013. Standard Norway, OsloGoogle Scholar
  35. Vinnem JE, Pedersen JI, Rosenthal P (1996) Efficient risk management: use of computerized qra model for safety improvements to an existing installation. In: 3rd international conference on health, safety and environment in oil and gas exploration and production; New Orleans, USA. SPE paper 35775Google Scholar
  36. Vinnem JE, Hauge S (1999) Operational safety of FPSOs, MP3; riser failure due to inadequate response to rapid wind change. NTNU, TrondheimGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Faculty of Science and TechnologyUniversity of StavangerStavangerNorway

Personalised recommendations