IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/eurjdp/v5y2017i1d10.1007_s40070-017-0067-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dynamic risk analysis for operational decision support

Author

Listed:
  • Stein Haugen

    (Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NTNU)

  • Nathaniel John Edwin

    (Safetec Nordic AS)

Abstract

Quantitative risk assessments for offshore oil and gas installations have been developed and used to support decision making about major hazards risk for more than 30 years. Initially, these studies were used to support the design process, aiming to develop installations that could be operated safely throughout their lifetime. As installations were put into operation, the studies were updated with as-built and operational information to provide a basis for making decisions also in the operational phase. This was however only partially successful, and the general impression has been that the studies have not been very actively used in operations. Many explanations have been given, the most common being that the reports were too complicated and written for risk analysis experts, not operations personnel on offshore installations and that the results could not be updated sufficiently often to reflect changes in risk on a day-by-day basis. This may be a part of the explanation, but in this paper, we have looked into the decision context and the types of decisions made in operation, compared to those in the design phase. Based on this, it is concluded that the focus of existing models need to be extended to cover activity risk in a more detailed way, as well as the risk associated with the technical systems. Instead, a revised methodology for developing quantitative risk assessments is proposed, focusing on the parameters and activities that change during operation. The methodology has also been tested on an offshore installation, to investigate the feasibility in practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Stein Haugen & Nathaniel John Edwin, 2017. "Dynamic risk analysis for operational decision support," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 5(1), pages 41-63, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:eurjdp:v:5:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s40070-017-0067-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s40070-017-0067-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40070-017-0067-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40070-017-0067-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Oecd, 2005. "Living PSA and its Use in the Nuclear Safety Decision-making Process; Development and Use of Risk Monitors at Nuclear Power Plants," OECD Papers, OECD Publishing, vol. 5(7), pages 1-39.
    2. Majdara, Aref & Nematollahi, Mohammad Reza, 2008. "Development and application of a Risk Assessment Tool," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 93(8), pages 1130-1137.
    3. Nicola Paltrinieri & Faisal Khan & Valerio Cozzani, 2015. "Coupling of advanced techniques for dynamic risk management," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(7), pages 910-930, August.
    4. Røed, Willy & Mosleh, Ali & Vinnem, Jan Erik & Aven, Terje, 2009. "On the use of the hybrid causal logic method in offshore risk analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 445-455.
    5. Khakzad, Nima & Khan, Faisal & Paltrinieri, Nicola, 2014. "On the application of near accident data to risk analysis of major accidents," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 116-125.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pan, Yue & Ou, Shenwei & Zhang, Limao & Zhang, Wenjing & Wu, Xianguo & Li, Heng, 2019. "Modeling risks in dependent systems: A Copula-Bayesian approach," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 416-431.
    2. Kasai, Naoya & Matsuhashi, Shigemi & Sekine, Kazuyoshi, 2013. "Accident occurrence model for the risk analysis of industrialfacilities," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 71-74.
    3. Bhardwaj, U. & Teixeira, A.P. & Guedes Soares, C., 2022. "Casualty analysis methodology and taxonomy for FPSO accident analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 218(PB).
    4. Ayoub, Ali & Stankovski, Andrej & Kröger, Wolfgang & Sornette, Didier, 2021. "Precursors and startling lessons: Statistical analysis of 1250 events with safety significance from the civil nuclear sector," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    5. Zio, E., 2018. "The future of risk assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 176-190.
    6. Shengli, Liu & Yongtu, Liang, 2019. "Exploring the temporal structure of time series data for hazardous liquid pipeline incidents based on complex network theory," International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, Elsevier, vol. 26(C).
    7. Michael Felix Pacevicius & Marilia Ramos & Davide Roverso & Christian Thun Eriksen & Nicola Paltrinieri, 2022. "Managing Heterogeneous Datasets for Dynamic Risk Analysis of Large-Scale Infrastructures," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-40, April.
    8. Zhipeng Zhou & Chaozhi Li & Chuanmin Mi & Lingfei Qian, 2019. "Exploring the Potential Use of Near-Miss Information to Improve Construction Safety Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-21, February.
    9. Keisuke Himoto, 2020. "Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling of Post‐Earthquake Ignition Probabilities Considering Inter‐Earthquake Heterogeneity," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(6), pages 1124-1138, June.
    10. Wang, Fan & Li, Heng & Dong, Chao, 2021. "Understanding near-miss count data on construction sites using greedy D-vine copula marginal regression," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    11. Marhavilas, P.K. & Koulouriotis, D.E., 2012. "A combined usage of stochastic and quantitative risk assessment methods in the worksites: Application on an electric power provider," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 97(1), pages 36-46.
    12. Liu, Shengli & Liang, Yongtu, 2021. "Statistics of catastrophic hazardous liquid pipeline accidents," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    13. Y-F Wang & M Xie & M S Habibullah & K-M Ng, 2011. "Quantitative risk assessment through hybrid causal logic approach," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 225(3), pages 323-332, September.
    14. Bandeira, Michelle Carvalho Galvão Silva Pinto & Correia, Anderson Ribeiro & Martins, Marcelo Ramos, 2018. "General model analysis of aeronautical accidents involving human and organizational factors," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 137-146.
    15. Guo, Qingjun & Amin, Shohel & Hao, Qianwen & Haas, Olivier, 2020. "Resilience assessment of safety system at subway construction sites applying analytic network process and extension cloud models," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    16. Qi Tong & Thomas Gernay, 2022. "A hierarchical Bayesian model for predicting fire ignitions after an earthquake with application to California," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 111(2), pages 1637-1660, March.
    17. Fam, Mei Ling & He, Xuhong & Konovessis, Dimitrios & Ong, Lin Seng, 2020. "Using Dynamic Bayesian Belief Network for analysing well decommissioning failures and long-term monitoring of decommissioned wells," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    18. Hongyang Yu & Faisal Khan & Brian Veitch, 2017. "A Flexible Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling Technique for Risk Analysis of Major Accidents," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(9), pages 1668-1682, September.
    19. Muhammad Zubair & Gyunyoung Heo, 2013. "Advancement in living probabilistic safety assessment to increase safety of nuclear power plants," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 227(5), pages 534-539, October.
    20. Saleh, J.H. & Marais, K.B. & Bakolas, E. & Cowlagi, R.V., 2010. "Highlights from the literature on accident causation and system safety: Review of major ideas, recent contributions, and challenges," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(11), pages 1105-1116.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:eurjdp:v:5:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s40070-017-0067-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.