SOFTWARE

Introduction to Consequence Modelling

Webinar February 2017

01 February 2017

Ungraded

1 DNV GL © 01 February 2017 SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER

Speakers

Kenny Shaba
Phast and Safeti Product Manager with extensive experience in
Technical Safety projects (especially QRA) for both onshore
and offshore assets

Mark Hunter
Chartered Engineer in DNV GL’s Advisory business
11 years’ experience of safety related studies in the oil & gas
sector

Ungraded

2 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

Agenda

 Why consequence modelling? E.g. societal and regulatory drivers

– What is consequence modelling etc?

 Key hazards types to consider (fires, explosions and toxic hazards) and how to evaluate their impact potential

 Operational and practical applications of consequence modelling

 Challenges to robust and rigorous consequence modelling

 Q&A

Ungraded

3 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

Why Consequence Modelling?

Ungraded

4 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

The Oil and Gas/Chemical/Process Industries

Ungraded

5 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

The Oil and Gas/Chemical/Process Industries

Ungraded

5 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

The Oil and Gas/Chemical/Process Industries

Ungraded

5 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

 The Oil and Gas/Chemical/Process Industries

Reference: Geoff Chamberlain and Bassam Burgan (2016) The Explosion at the Caribbean Petroleum Corporation (CAPECO) storage
facility at Bayamon, Puerto Rico. Proceedings of FABIG TM 86 “Lessons Learnt from Recent Accidents”.
Ungraded

5 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

Controlling the hazards is key…

 Robust and detailed evaluation of process hazards is key to developing an effective management
strategy. Why?
Control of Risks
 To control risks you have to manage processes to reduce them

Management
 To be able to manage risks you have to understand them.

 To be able to understand risks you have to analyse the risks. Understanding

 If you don’t do the analysis you might not fully understand the issues.
Analysis

 If you don’t fully understand, you might not be able to target your effort to reduce risks cost
effectively and it will be harder to justify your decisions.
Ungraded

6 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

IMPACTS and DRIVERS

IMPACTS DRIVERS

Ungraded

7 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

THE SAFETY PARADOX

 Most successful companies – good at managing risk

+ exploiting opportunity

 CM is a key element of risk management – “business

enabler”/ “adds value”

 “People react to what they see”

 Here comes the paradox – “Safety done well is

not visible”/”Safety done badly is highly
visible”

 Safety is the status quo – This is what is expected

Ungraded

8 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

 THE COST OF GETTING IT WRONG

“If you think safety is expensive, try having an accident” – Trevor Kletz

LITIGATION ASSET DAMAGE

BUSINESS DISRUPTION
LOST REVENUE
SHARE PRICE ECONOMIC COSTS

$1860
FINES

INSURANCE PAYOUTS
MILLION
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROPERTY LOSS
REMEDIATION COMPANY REPUTATION
Reference: Marsh (2016). “The 100 Largest Losses 1974-2015 Large property damage losses in the hydrocarbon industry” 24th
Edition. Available Online.
Ungraded

9 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

Key hazards types to consider (fires, explosions
and toxic hazards) and how to evaluate their
impact potential

Ungraded

10 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

Key hazards types to consider

 Flammable (Natural Gas etc.)

– Fires
– Jet, Pool, Flash, Fireball, BLEVE
– Explosions
– Confined VCE, Unconfined CVE

 Toxic (e.g. H2S, Ammonia)

 Cryogenic (e.g. LNG)

 Asphyxiation (Inert Gas e.g. CO2 and N2)

 Smoke

Ungraded

11 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

Consequence Modelling - Stages

 Stage 1: Physical Effects Modelling

– Key goal – understanding the physical
characteristics/make up of hazard in the
environment

 Stage 2: Impact modelling

– Key goal – translation of hazard ranges
to Tangible impacts: life, property,
environment
– Less tangible impacts

Ungraded

12 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

Evaluating Impact Potential

 Various methods exist

 Simple to Complex

 «Hand calculations» to «Look up tables» to «Excel»

to «Software applications»

 Key decision factors – validated models and

methodology, reflects latest science, transparent,
high quality trusted platform, widely accessible, user
friendly, long shelf life…

 Recommend a fully integrated package (effects

modelling and impact analysis) with detailed
modelling logic e.g Phast
Ungraded

13 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

Factors to consider for consequence modelling

 Scenario/Case information

 Environmental conditions

 Choice of scientific tool/model

Ungraded

14 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

Operational and practical applications of
consequence modelling

Ungraded

15 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

A few popular applications…

 As part of a (Quantitative Risk Analysis) QRA study

 Hazardous Area Classification
 Facility Siting
 Chimney Stack sizing
 Fugitive emissions
 Vent modelling
 Equipment Separation Distances
 Site Layout Optimization
 Flare height determination
 Emergency Response
 Etc.
Ungraded

16 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

Example - Flammable Gas

Unit-15
Unit-21

Unit-12

Unit-25
Unit-10

Control Room

Unit-30
Utilities
Warehouse

LFL
½ LFL

Ungraded

17 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

Example - Explosions – 100mbar

10-3 per year

10-4 per year
10-5 per year
10-6 per year
10-7 per year

Ungraded

18 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

Example - Risk - QRA

10-3 per year

10-4 per year
10-5 per year
10-6 per year
10-7 per year

Ungraded

19 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

Challenges to robust and rigorous consequence
modelling

Ungraded

20 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

Challenges to robust and rigorous consequence modelling

 Many challenges exist. Some key ones are as follows:

 Inadequate problem definition and understanding

 Analytical tools (Selection, Application, Analyst Expertise and Limits)
 Poorly defined background assumptions
 Lack of Quality Control/Assurance
 Results Interpretation
 Personnel Competency
 Silo’ed delivery. CM should be a team effort
 Reproducible (documentation problem)
Ungraded

21 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

Underlying Assumptions INFLUENCE Results

 Goes by various names:

– Assumptions Register
– Study Basis
– Calculation Basis

 Any result should always be considered in

tandem with the assumptions made

 A number of things are key:

– Sensitivity Analysis, Social consent,
Conservatism

 Finally – CM is always about numbers – need to

remember the context is largely about keeping
people safe
Ungraded

22 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

Background Assumptions: Approach to Modelling Two-phase releases

 Modelling single phase releases is

straightforward

 Two-phase is more involved

 Rationalising to a single phase can be

dangerous

 Need to model 2-phase as realistic as possible

 Phast has an excellent way of approaching

this…

Ungraded

23 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

Background Assumptions: Explosion modelling

 Science in this area has improved significantly in

recent years

 Congestion/confinement are needed for explosions

with appreciable overpressure

 Older models e.g. TNT do not account for

congested/confined area

 Nevertheless – still used. Possible reasons?

– Simple?
– Lack of awareness?

 Historical focus has been on the overpressure. Now

overpressure and pulse duration
Ungraded

24 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

Background Assumptions: Vulnerability Modelling

 All about converting hazard ranges into human/asset

impact

 Based on historical evidence, experience and

experimental science (some animal studies)

 Relatively straightforward for fires and explosions

 Toxics is based on animal data and extrapolated to

human beings – hence somewhat uncertain and thus
subject to change

 E.g. RIVM recently updated their probits for certain

chemicals. The UK HSE also update toxicity data for
use in risk assessments from time to time.
Ungraded

25 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

Background Assumptions: Mixtures

 Various boiling points

 Vapour phase will be richer in the more volatile

components; Liquid phase will be richer in the
heavier components

 Average compositions will not reflect the

characteristics of the real situation
– for e.g a pool fire from heavy hydrocarbons has
different characteristics from one with lighter
material (sootier flame, more smoke)
– Lighter gases will disperse differently

Ungraded

26 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

 Top tips for conducting Consequence Modelling

 Clear problem definition

 Clearly outlined and agreed assumptions and study basis

upfront

 Selection of a robust consequence analysis tool

 Sensitivity Analysis to key assumptions is key – need to

understand the associated uncertainty/influence on the
results

 Robust documentation convering all aspects

 Do not work in isolation – CM is a team effort that needs

input from various disciplines

 Perform Quality Assurance checks

Ungraded

27 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

Summary and Conclusions

 We have explored Consequence Modelling from a

broad perspective…

 Identified some applications and challenges…

 And concluded with some top tips for conducting

consequence modelling

 Key conclusions:
– Consequence modelling is a key pillar of risk
management
– Done right it can help achieve many RM objectives
– Need to be aware of the pitfalls to leverage it
successfully

Ungraded

28 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

Useful References

 “Reducing Risks, Protecting People" Health and Safety Executive (2001).

 TNO Yellow Book – CPR14E Methods for the Calculation of Physical Effects

 Chemical Process Safety: Fundamentals with Applications (2nd Edition), Daniel A. Crowl and Joseph F. Louvar,
2002 Edition, Publishers : Prentice Hall, Inc. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.

 Lees – Loss Prevention in the Process Industries

 CCPS Publications (Various) E.g. Guidelines for consequence analysis of chemical releases (1999)

 Kletz, T. What Went Wrong? Case Histories of Process Plant Disasters (1998) Gulf (and others)

 Trade industry Publications: OGP, Oil and Gas UK, CIA, API etc.
Ungraded

29 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

Notes

For further information about today’s webinar or Phast, please

contact us:
[email protected]

For more information about Phast, please see:

https://www.dnvgl.com/phast

For future events, please see:

https://www.dnvgl.com/software-events
Ungraded

30 DNV GL © 01 February 2017

www.dnvgl.com

SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER

Ungraded

31 DNV GL © 01 February 2017