Process hazard analysis, hazard identification and scenario definition: Are the conventional tools sufficient, or should and can we do much better?

Cameron, Ian; Mannan, Sam; Németh, Erzsébet; Park, Sunhwa; Pasman, Hans J.; Rogers, William J.; Seligmann, Benjamin J.

doi:10.1016/j.psep.2017.01.025

Cited by 89 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The STPA methodology by taking system-wide approach identifies hazards which not only includes operational failures, but also considers aspects such as design error, human errors, and component interactions (Cameron et al, 2017). There is no need for a completed design before using STPA, and the design process can be guided through the STPA outputs (Leveson, 2011).…”

Section: Stpa Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of STPA and Bow-tie Method Outcomes in the Development and Testing of an Automated Water Quality Management System

Merrett

Horng

Piggot³

et al. 2019

MATEC Web Conf.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The technology available to water quality management applications needs to be advanced due to greater use of automation to increase ease of operation, support remote operation and reduce risks due to operator error. In this case study, a comparison is made between System-Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) and the Bow-tie methodology for identifying process hazards and countermeasures which can be used to guide the design and testing of an automated water quality management system (AWQMS). For this study, the application considered is a small hydroponics installation where water quality management has been automated. The STPA methodology uses a system theory-based approach to identify hazards, which include operational failures, human errors, and component interactions. The Bow-tie diagram focuses on individual barriers for a given threat which can prevent the realisation of a hazardous event and unwanted consequences. Thus, the 22 preventative barriers and seven recovery barriers identified through the Bow-tie diagram provide the design process with broad requirements for reducing the risks of user error as well as the ones associated with ongoing operations. The STPA method identified many Causal Factors (CF) generated from the Unsafe Control Actions after considering all the feasible scenarios. For design input, the STPA provided the design process with 204 specific CFs which were used to create 94 countermeasures to be included in software and hardware design as well as user information material. Both methods identified useful measures to control the hazards associated with human interaction with the AWQMS. However, the measures differed in the level of detail and the involvement in the evolution in the final system losses. In this study, the STPA process was able to identify several hazards which did not visibly relate to the Bow-tie barriers. However, the Bow-tie diagram illustrates a distinction between preventative and recovery hazard controls.

show abstract

Section: Stpa Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of STPA and Bow-tie Method Outcomes in the Development and Testing of an Automated Water Quality Management System

Merrett

Horng

Piggot³

et al. 2019

MATEC Web Conf.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This study examines the process risks in the delivery of source protection programs for theoretical example of a typical surface water drinking water catchments using process hazard analysis. Process hazard analysis is common in many high-risk industries and is a fundamental step in risk assessment of any technical system and its processes [29]. Many of the conventional methods focus on equipment failure and fail to compressively identify hazards in complex sociotechnical systems [25], like those typically involved in source protection programs.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systems Analysis Approach to Identifying Critical Success Factors in Drinking Water Source Protection Programs

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The success of source protection in ensuring safe drinking water is centered around being able to understand the hazards present in the catchment then plan and implement control measures to manage water quality risk to levels which can be controlled through downstream barriers. The programs in place to manage source protection are complex sociotechnical systems involving policy, standards, regulators, technology, human factors and so on. This study uses System Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) to analyze the operational hazards of a typical drinking water source protection (DWSP) program and identify countermeasures to ensure safe operations. To validate the STPA results a questionnaire was developed based on selective grouping of the initial countermeasures identified and distributed to specialists in DWSP in Taiwan, Australia and Greece. Through statistical analysis using Principle Components Analysis (PCA), the study identified four critical success factors (CSFs) for DWSP based on the questionnaire responses. The four CSFs identified were “Policy and Government Agency Support of Source Protection”, “Catchment Risk Monitoring and Information”, “Support of Operational Field Activities” and “Response to Water Quality Threats”. The results of this study provide insight into the approach of grouping of source protection measures to identify a series of targeted CSF for operational source protection programs. Using CSF can aid catchment management agencies in ensuring that the risk level in the catchment is managed effectively and that threats to public health from drinking water are managed appropriately.

show abstract

“…This study examines the process risks in the delivery of source protection programs for theoretical example of a typical surface water drinking water catchments using process hazard analysis. Process hazard analysis is common in many high-risk industries and is a fundamental step in risk assessment of any technical system and its processes [26]. Many of the conventional methods focus on equipment failure and fail to compressively identify hazards in complex sociotechnical systems [24] like those typically involved in source protection programs.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systems Analysis Approach to Identifying Critical Success Factors in Drinking Water Source Protection Programs

Merrett¹,

Chen²,

Horng³

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The success of source protection in ensuring safe drinking water is centered around being able to understand the hazards present in the catchment then plan and implement control measures to manage water quality risk to levels which can be controlled through downstream barriers. The programs in place to manage source protection are complex sociotechnical systems involving policy, standards, regulators, technology, human factors and so on. This study uses System Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) to analyze the operational hazards of a typical drinking water source protection (DWSP) program and identify control measures to ensure safe operations. To validate the results a questionnaire was developed and distributed to specialists in DWSP in Taiwan, Australia and Greece. Using Principle Components Analysis (PCA) of the questionnaire responses, the study identified four critical success factors (CSFs) for DWSP. The four factors identified are ‘Policy and Government Agency Support of Source Protection’, ‘Catchment Risk Monitoring and Information’, ‘Support of Operational Field Activities’ and ‘Response to Water Quality Threats’. The results of this study provide insight into the approach of grouping of source protection measures to identify a series of targeted CSF for operational source protection programs. Using CSF can aide catchment management agencies in ensuring that the risk level in the catchment is managed effectively and that threats to public health from drinking water are managed appropriately.

show abstract

Process hazard analysis, hazard identification and scenario definition: Are the conventional tools sufficient, or should and can we do much better?

Cited by 89 publications

References 47 publications

Comparison of STPA and Bow-tie Method Outcomes in the Development and Testing of an Automated Water Quality Management System

Comparison of STPA and Bow-tie Method Outcomes in the Development and Testing of an Automated Water Quality Management System

A Systems Analysis Approach to Identifying Critical Success Factors in Drinking Water Source Protection Programs

A Systems Analysis Approach to Identifying Critical Success Factors in Drinking Water Source Protection Programs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About