Visualisation and integration of consequence modelling as a part of engineering process
Karpiola, Asta (2020)
Karpiola, Asta
2020
Ympäristö- ja energiatekniikan DI-ohjelma - Programme in Environmental and Energy Engineering
Tekniikan ja luonnontieteiden tiedekunta - Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences
This publication is copyrighted. You may download, display and print it for Your own personal use. Commercial use is prohibited.
Hyväksymispäivämäärä
2020-12-09
Julkaisun pysyvä osoite on
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:tuni-202011238137
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:tuni-202011238137
Tiivistelmä
This study researched the visualisation of consequence modelling results and the integration of the chosen scenario to the consequence modelling and the risk identification of the risk analysist. The used modelling software in this study was Phast 8.2. The methods examined in this study are meant to be used in the future. The execution of consequence modelling is regulated by legislation. The consequence modelling has been perceived as a detached subject, and that is why the integration of the consequence modelling into the engineering process is wanted to illustrate with a visual model.
Consequence modelling is a part of the consequence analysis. The scenario defined in the consequence analysis is consequence modelled via modelling software, such as Phast 8.2. Modelling software gives the distances of the impact of the hazardous event. The impact can be heat radiation, overpressure or dispersion, depending on the substances and the circumstances in the scenario. Based on these distances, the necessary protective measures to prevent or mitigate the impact and the safe limits are defined in the consequence analysis.
The study has been limited into three research questions. The first research question was, what are consequence analysis and consequence modelling and how they are used. The question was answered by legislation and partly with qualitative interviews. In the interviews it turned out, that the client companies utilised consequence models also in layout planning and rescue practice. Consequence models were significant for clients and used also in other purposes than legislative.
The second research question examined, how to emphasize better to a client the consequence modelling and its impacts as a part of an engineering process. The used methods for this were Bowtie diagram and 3D models created by Phast 8.2 for two different scenarios. The chosen scenarios were diesel leakage from a storage tank which turn into a pool fire outside and propylene leakage in a compressor which turns into an explosion in a process unit. After producing the visual models, qualitative interviews were conducted with three client companies and two consults from the company (AFRY). Bowtie diagram and 3D model were valued as methods. The main benefit of the presented Bowtie diagram was the illustration of protective measures. The biggest disadvantage of the presented model was the missing risk categories compared to HAZOP table. 3D models were seen as a useful, but the versions in this study without the 3D structure of a plant were not able to displace the 2D models on a map. At this moment, the 3D models could work beside 2D models.
The third research question investigated, what is the optimal moment in the engineering process for modelling. The answer for the question was pursued with the interviews of consultants and the parameters defined while modelling in the experimental part. A clear answer could not be found because all the projects are different. Some necessary information and parameters for modelling were able to be defined.
Based on this study, visuality is found important and clients found both presented methods interesting. In the future, the purpose of use of Bowtie diagram should be defined more precisely and 3D models should be present in the 3D structural of a plant to get the full benefit of these models. As a part of future research, a 3D model of the propylene explosion was drawn in cooperation with a design engineer in AFRY.
Consequence modelling is a part of the consequence analysis. The scenario defined in the consequence analysis is consequence modelled via modelling software, such as Phast 8.2. Modelling software gives the distances of the impact of the hazardous event. The impact can be heat radiation, overpressure or dispersion, depending on the substances and the circumstances in the scenario. Based on these distances, the necessary protective measures to prevent or mitigate the impact and the safe limits are defined in the consequence analysis.
The study has been limited into three research questions. The first research question was, what are consequence analysis and consequence modelling and how they are used. The question was answered by legislation and partly with qualitative interviews. In the interviews it turned out, that the client companies utilised consequence models also in layout planning and rescue practice. Consequence models were significant for clients and used also in other purposes than legislative.
The second research question examined, how to emphasize better to a client the consequence modelling and its impacts as a part of an engineering process. The used methods for this were Bowtie diagram and 3D models created by Phast 8.2 for two different scenarios. The chosen scenarios were diesel leakage from a storage tank which turn into a pool fire outside and propylene leakage in a compressor which turns into an explosion in a process unit. After producing the visual models, qualitative interviews were conducted with three client companies and two consults from the company (AFRY). Bowtie diagram and 3D model were valued as methods. The main benefit of the presented Bowtie diagram was the illustration of protective measures. The biggest disadvantage of the presented model was the missing risk categories compared to HAZOP table. 3D models were seen as a useful, but the versions in this study without the 3D structure of a plant were not able to displace the 2D models on a map. At this moment, the 3D models could work beside 2D models.
The third research question investigated, what is the optimal moment in the engineering process for modelling. The answer for the question was pursued with the interviews of consultants and the parameters defined while modelling in the experimental part. A clear answer could not be found because all the projects are different. Some necessary information and parameters for modelling were able to be defined.
Based on this study, visuality is found important and clients found both presented methods interesting. In the future, the purpose of use of Bowtie diagram should be defined more precisely and 3D models should be present in the 3D structural of a plant to get the full benefit of these models. As a part of future research, a 3D model of the propylene explosion was drawn in cooperation with a design engineer in AFRY.