h-index: 18     i10-index: 25

Risk Assessment in Petrochemical Units with PHAST

Document Type : Original Research Article

Authors

1 National Petrochemical Company, Petrochemical Research, and Technology Company, Mahshahr, Iran

2 Department of Chemical Engineering, Mahshahr Branch, Islamic Azad University, Mahshahr, Iran

Abstract
In this work, process events of a demo plant and an industrial plant were modeled, hazardous process areas were detected and alarm areas including site margin and boundaries affected by process incidents were determined. Accordingly, the site boundary should have a distance of 170 m and 339 m from the north, 185 m and 411 m from the south, 180 m and 426 m from the east, 172 m, and 453 m from the west from the equipment for the demo plant and industrial plant, respectively. Likewise, the effective boundary should be 211 m and 546 m from the north, 228 m and 553 m from the south, 223 m and 634 m from the south, and 215 m and 595 m from the west from equipment for the demo plant and industrial plant, respectively.

Keywords

Subjects


OPEN ACCESS

©2024 The author(s). This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

[1]. R.M. Darbra, A. Palacios, J. Casal, Domino effect in chemical accidents: Main features and accident sequences. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2010, 183, 565-573. [Crossref], [Google Scholar], [Publisher]
[2]. B. Abdolhamidzadeh, T. Abbasi, D. Rashtchian, S.A. Abbasi, Domino effect in process-industry accidents–An inventory of past events and identification of some patterns. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2011, 24, 575-593. [Crossref], [Google Scholar], [Publisher]
[3]. H. Haghnazarloo, M. Parvini, M.N. Lotfollahi, Consequence modeling of a real rupture of toluene storage tank. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2015, 37, 11-18. [Crossref], [Google Scholar], [Publisher]
[4]. M. Parvini, A. Kordrostami, Consequence modeling of explosion at Azad-Shahr CNG refueling station, Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2014, 30, 47-54. [Crossref], [Google Scholar], [Publisher]
[5]. P.O. Ochieng, J.N. Keraita, and P.N. Muchiri,  A Comprehensive Safety Strategy for Metalworking Industry: Integrating FRAM and PHA, Journal of Engineering in Industrial Resaerch, 2024, 5, 188-203. [Crossref], [Publisher]
[6]. Reniers, G. and Cozzani, V. eds., Domino Effects in the Process Industries: Modelling, Prevention and Managing, Newnes, 2013, [Google Scholar], [Publisher]
[7]. C.A.M.E.O. Chemicals, database of hazardous materials, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, editor, 2013. [Google Scholar], [Publisher]
[8]. J.M. Waweru, An evaluation of occupational safety and health hazard awareness in Steel rolling Mills in Nairobi Metropolis, (Doctoral dissertation). 2013. [Google Scholar], [Publisher].
[9]. Delvosalle, Christian. "Domino effects phenomena: definition, overview and classification." In First European Seminar on Domino Effects. 2016. [Google Scholar], [Publisher]
[10]. Witlox, H. W. M., M. Harper. "UDM theory manual." Environnement, Risques & Santé, 2021, 20(2), 126-133. [Google Scholar], [Publisher]
Volume 5, Issue 4
Autumn 2024
Pages 228-235

  • Receive Date 08 January 2025
  • Revise Date 04 February 2025
  • Accept Date 10 February 2025