Fire Probabilistic Risk Assessment and its Applications in the Nuclear Power Industry

Worrell, Clarence L.; Rochon, Christopher

doi:10.1007/s10694-015-0493-y

Cited by 15 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A performance-based building regulatory system puts added responsibility on fire protection engineers, as they are generally expected to demonstrate that the proposed fire safety design solution satisfies the performance objectives [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24]. There is another aspect, and that is the cost-benefit assessment of the impact and quantitative comparison of fire protection system designs systems [25,26]. This is a factor that should be considered in all fire strategies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An Alternative Evaluation and Indicating Methodology for Sustainable Fire Safety in the Process Industry

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a mismatch between the desire to introduce greater levels of sustainability in engineering design and in the need to provide effective engineering solutions, particularly where issues of human safety and asset protection are involved. Sustainability engineering typically incorporates economic, environmental, and social factors, all of which are highly relevant and applicable to fire safety and the design of fire protection systems. The term fire strategy denotes a documented methodology to encapsulate a full range of such systems, within a single framework, for more complex risks such as those found in the process industry. The subject of fire safety is emotive and its application within building design may not change unless we refocus on a holistic and strategic approach, especially for complex building profiles. Fire is a recognized critical safety issue for most types of industrial plants. Due to the complexity of the processes, even a relatively small fire accident can lead to a chain of events that could be devastating, resulting in huge asset and continuity losses, damage to the local environment, and of course, the threat to life. More complex processes require a more flexible and relevant approach. The use of fire safety engineering and performance-based evaluation techniques, instead of prescriptive rules, continues to grow in prominence because of this. This is the case when specifying fire protection and safety for modern power generating plants. However, when it comes to critical infrastructure, such as is the case with power plants, it is sometimes not clear whether optimum fire safety engineering solutions have been applied. One of the ideas specifically developed for evaluating the most appropriate fire safety strategies and systems, especially for such infrastructure examples, is a method based upon the British Standard Specification PAS 911. This method is captured in a diagram and identifies eight main elements for fire safety and protection. The idea presented in this article is to allow assessment of a submitted actual fire strategy for a building or other form of infrastructure, against what has been predetermined as a standard baseline fire strategy for, in this case, a power plant building. The assessment makes use of a multi-level questionnaire, in this case specifically formulated for power plant fire safety needs. By comparing the actual fire strategy diagram against a baseline fire strategy, enforcement agencies, or other interested stakeholders, can recognize which fire safety factors play the most important part in the fire strategy, and determine whether proper levels of fire safety and protection have been applied. The fire strategy evaluation is realized by a team of engineers, which consists of independent fire strategist from a consultant office, internal fire and technical experts from the industrial plant, such as the person responsible for fire safety, person responsible for explosion safety, person responsible for housekeeping, and building manager. Additionally, there should be representatives of insurance companies and independent fire experts. Typically, the group consists of 7 to 12 people.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many others may not state this, but it will be implicit in the strategy's formulation. In fact, many fire standards have historically been written on the basis that only one distinct part of a building will succumb to a fire at any one time [26]. This may be the case for the vast majority of fires around the world.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Alternative Evaluation and Indicating Methodology for Sustainable Fire Safety in the Process Industry

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Gas storage cylinders and the thermal behavior of their lining is the focus of the papers of Dao et al [11] and Bustamante et al [12]. Finally, Worrell and Rochon [13], Beji and Merci [14], and Pretrel et al [15] quantify risk and model fire scenarios of interest in Nuclear Plant safety.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Special Issue in Fire Hazards in Energy Systems

Boustras

Rein

2016

Fire Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Statistical Characterization of Cable Electrical Failure Temperatures Due to Fire for Nuclear Power Plant Risk Applications

Gallucci

2016

Fire Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fire Probabilistic Risk Assessment and its Applications in the Nuclear Power Industry

Cited by 15 publications

References 16 publications

An Alternative Evaluation and Indicating Methodology for Sustainable Fire Safety in the Process Industry

An Alternative Evaluation and Indicating Methodology for Sustainable Fire Safety in the Process Industry

Special Issue in Fire Hazards in Energy Systems

Statistical Characterization of Cable Electrical Failure Temperatures Due to Fire for Nuclear Power Plant Risk Applications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About