Fire and explosion assessment on oil and gas floating production storage offloading (FPSO): An effective screening and comparison tool |
| |
| Authors: | Jaffee A Suardin A Jeff McPhate Anthony Sipkema Matt Childs M Sam Mannan |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Mary Kay O’Connor Process Safety Center, Artie McFerrin Department of Chemical Engineering, Texas A&M University System, 3122 TAMU, College Station, TX 77843-3122, USA;2. Shell International Exploration Production, Inc., 200 N Dairy Ashford, Houston, TX, USA;3. Riskbytes, Inc., PO Box 2005, Houston, TX 77252, USA;1. National Centre for Maritime Engineering and Hydrodynamics, Australian Maritime College, University of Tasmania, Launceston, Tasmania, 7248, Australia;2. School of Engineering, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, 2109, Australia;3. Centre for Risk, Integrity and Safety Engineering, Faculty of Engineering & Applied Science, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, NL, Canada;4. Hydrogen Safety Engineering and Research Centre (HySAFER), Ulster University, Newtownabbey, Northern Ireland, UK;1. Institute of Hydrogen Economy, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 Johor Bahru, Malaysia;2. Faculty of Chemical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 Johor Bahru, Malaysia;3. Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John''s, NL A1B 3X5, Canada;1. Faculty of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, Istanbul Technical University, Turkey;2. Faculty of Marine Sciences, Ordu University, Turkey;3. Graduate School of Engineering, Kyushu University, Japan;4. Graduate School of Engineering, Hiroshima University, Japan;5. Hiroshima University, Osaka University, Japan;1. Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John''s, NL, Canada, A1B 3X5;2. Faculty of Engineering, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada, B3H 4R2;1. College of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Zhejiang University, 310058 Hangzhou, China;2. Ningbo OPR Offshore Engineering Co. Ltd, 315500 Ningbo, China;3. Department of Mechanical and Engineering, University College London, WC1E 7JE London, United Kingdom;4. The Korea Ship and Offshore Research Institute, Pusan National University, 609-735 Busan, South Korea |
| |
| Abstract: | Fires and explosions have been identified as major potential hazards for Oil and Gas Floating Production Storage Offloading (FPSO) installations and pose risk to personnel, assets, and the environment. Current fire and explosion assessment (FEA) tools require physical effect modeling software and follows standards from API, ISO, and engineering practices. However, the tools are not specific to any particular system such as an FPSO, and do not provide comprehensive guidance for safety engineers to perform FEA.This paper discusses the development of a screening and comparison tool for FEA on FPSOs and the incorporation of an expert system into the tool. The results are computerized using MS Excel/VBA to provide a structured and comprehensive assessment on each equipment and module handling natural gas, crude oil, methanol and diesel on FPSO topsides.This tool features built-in calculations for jet and pool fire size estimation for gas/liquid releases, and the ability to perform Quantitative Risk Analysis (QRA) to specify the personnel and equipment risk for varying leak sizes and process conditions. Control and recovery measures are incorporated as an expert system based on report findings, engineering practices, and relevant standards. Bowtie analysis is applied in the tool to define detailed control and recovery measures for the FPSO based on the incident scenarios. An explosion assessment is performed by incorporating physical effect modeling software results.Unique features provided in the tool include fire and radiation contour mapping on an FPSO layout to help determine personnel and equipment risk more accurately and fire pump sizing that can be used to verify the amount of water deluge system required to mitigate fires and explosions. In addition, flexibility of data input (process data, failure rate data, etc.) and user interfaces assist safety engineers to screen and compare process alternatives, check design quality, and evaluate design options at any design stage. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
