Farer i dagens samfunn kalt Bics
prosjekt «Katastrofe-Norge».
(Danger in todays society in Bics
project for Norway)
Her er utdrag fra Bics katastrofeforskning. I verden
setter noen i gang den ene forskningen etter den andre, men sjekker sjelden
først hvilke farer de representerer, hva vi kan vente og oppnå samt utvikler
risiko- og sikkerhetstenkingen. Bics jobber med slike modeller for beregning og
reduksjon av skader.
To hovedelementer i Bics forskning er omstrukturering
av begrepet risiko, andre typer databanker da man nå har banker styrt etter de
enkelte lands egne kulturelle verdier, utvikling av nye analysemetoder samt
kreativ vurdering av scenario, risiko og beskyttelse før man igangsetter store
prosjekt. Dagens metoder for konsekvensanalyse og standarder for risikoanalyse
er for dårlige.
Husk at skremsler kommer av uvitenhet eller manglende
offentlig vurdering, troverdighet og faktiske forsøk på beskyttelse.
Bics søker stadig assistanse og finansiering til denne
forskningen. Kontakt
sjefen@bics.no
eller skriv til Bics, postboks 41, 3901 Porsgrunn.
- Det ukjente. Ukjente trusler som aggressive romvesen, rombakterier eller
dyr/planter, og små mikrober som ikke hører hjemme på jorden og som
ødelegger oss. Her er det spekulert mye om det finnes farlig liv på andre
planeter som kan nå oss og utrydde menneskene. Det være seg alt fra romvesen
til bakterier eller virus. Det er funnet en planet 6816-581D – 20 lysår
borte som har det som trengs til å være bebodd. Eller den nye «Kepler»-planeten
funnet i 2011
.
Romprosjektiler som asteroider, eller solstormer og andre fenomen i
Verdensrommet. Solstormer som slår ut satellitter og anlegg på jorda. Man
tror at det kan være en asteroide som traff jorden og skapte forhold med
istid som drepte alle dinosaurer. Vi kan også medta kometer med høy
hastighet. De er færre enn asteroidene, men store (som Pluto) og kan flytte
på jordens bane og således ødelegge jorden. Typiske farlige år er 2019 og
2036 for observerte enheter som kan nå oss på slike tidspunkt. Mange enheter
har sola i ryggen og kan ikke uten videre oppdages i tide. Treffer en oss,
blir det en global katastrofe.
Klimakatastrofe. Temperaturen kan øke med 2-4 grader de neste hundre år.
Denne er vi midt i. man mener vannet kan stige 1-2 meter og det ville være
katastrofalt for mange land. Man har nye stormer, tsunami, og voldsomme
tornadoer. Golfstrømmen kan stanse. Mange mener dette er egenprodusert
grunnet stort utslipp av CO2. Tidligere var det Ozonklaget over polene som
ble diskutert, noen mener jorden er i en periode der den kan bytte polaritet
med åpninger i atmosfæren i hav mellom Afrika og Sør Amerika. Noen peker på
smelting i Sibir som løser masser av methangass til atmosfæren. Jordens
beskyttelse og oppvarming lager problemer for tusener av arter. Nå viser det
seg at Sydpolen, målt av Sjakelton i 1909, har vært en tropisk skog så det
har vært varmt før, for 55 millioner år siden ble det plutselig varmt. Men
nå er det oss, 270 ppm CO2 før den industrielle revolusjon, nå 390 ppm og
800-1000 ved slutten av dette århundrede om intet gjøres.
Vulkanutbrudd og naturulykker på jorda. På Sumatra for 75000 år siden og
senere har det vært store vulkanutbrudd som har påvirket temperaturen opp
til 5-10 år senere ved at det dannes et støvlokk somkjøler jorden med
nedfall. Det kalles vulkansk vinter. Det er et 10talls supervulkaner i
Verden, som Yellowstone park i USA, Toba på Sumatra m.m. som har gitt og kan
gi enorme konsekvenser ved store utbrudd. Man antar ett hver 600.000 år og
nå kan det komme et snart. I Norge har vi Storegga raset i Atlanterhavet som
laget en tsunami på 20 meter over Vestlandet og nylig var det Tsunami i Asia
med mange hundre drepte. Og i Norge har vi stormer som har drept flere
hundre mennesker i eks fiskebåter. Mens andre land har tornadoer,
storflommer, jordskjelv etc.
Industrielle katastrofer, som etter kjemiske utslipp, miljøutslipp etter
tankulykker eller offshore blowout, eksplosjoner og gift, områder lagt øde,
eller ødelagt regnskog. Her arbeider Bics med en databank Tao. Men her er
også bankenes og finansinstitusjonene elleville lek med penger og tall som
førte til finanskrisen i 2009 og hele nasjoner trues med konkurs og opprør.
Vi kar store skipsforlis, som Titanic, store utslipp som Seveso, eller
Bohpal, atomulykker i USA eller Japan samt terrorhandlinger som den i Oslo,
med katastrofale følger da man ikke har den riktige sikring av bygg, folk
eller industrisikring mot jordskjelv som i Japan eller den riktige
hierarkiske datastruktur der det tok ½ time ved et atomutslipp i USA før
feilen dukket opp grunnet mange strukturerte feilmeldinger. Altså feilaktig
datasystem som man ved overgangen til år 2000 var redd skulle ramme mange,
men ble avverget.
Det sosiologiske, manglende indre demokrati og orden, manglende indre
styring, kontroll og frihet der Bics har pekt på fire viktige elementer:
- ytringsfrihet og verdighet. Det å si frihet
til å si eller skrive noe og samtidig gi mottageren den verdighet han
eller hun fortjener. - rammene og vedtekter, lover og regler som man
skal følge, men også kjempe for å forbedre ved bruk at de riktige
metodene, her er også forskningsetikk,
-
ærlighet og redelighet i den man gjør som bidrar til å skape tiltro og
samhold, men også om den overdrives til splid og hat. Litt humor og
opprør trengs alltid. Her er det mest av alt å snakke åpnet og direkte,
se andre og ikke bak ryggen til hverandre i terrorstil.
- for den enkelte er det hardt arbeid,
målrettet arbeid, menneskelighet og redelighet som er i førersete samt
de moralske målsetninger, etiske regler og de metoder som ønskes brukt.
Når disse prinsippene faller og mistro,
grådighet, misunnelse, uvitenhet, fattigdom, ondskap og flytende normer
tar over
,
skjer det noe oppløsende i hele samfunnet
- Biologiske industri, våpen, krigføring, terror eller rett og slett
ulykke/feil ved utslipp av farlig stoff eller påvirkning av arvestoff som
syntetisk biologi. Det har vært eksperimentert i hemmelige
forskningsinstanser rundt om kring med biologiske våpen som sennepsgass
brukt under anen verdenskrig, napalm brukt i Vietnamkrigen, m.m. som antrax
(mildtbrann) i terrorsammenheng. Kommer disse på avveie er problemene store.
Sverdlowsk i Russland døde 80 offisielt og 300 uoffisielt (mars 79) ved et
laboratorie der man skulle skifte et filter, men glemte å si i loggboken at
det var fjernet og det ble et feilaktig utslipp av miltbrann bakterier.
Russerne har det hemmelige laboratorium «Vector» er ett eksempel der de
lekte med DNA og koppervirus som virus som ikke drepte våre «egen soldater»,
og Los Almos i USA et annet. Se også fysiske eksperiment
.
To forskere i USA brukte internett og lastet ned nok til å lage poliovirus
på et alminnelig universitetslaboratorie og viste hvor sårbare vi er (Zelde
og Wimmer).
Bakterier og Virus. Spanskesyken i 1918 slo ned blant de militære og
hevdes å komme fra eksperimenter i USA blant militære. Et virus slo ut
troppene på begge sider i krigen i Europa og var med å avslutte krigen. Men
mange millioner sivile liv gikk tapt (estimat er 80 millioner) grunnet
sykdommen. I de senere år har man hatt HIV-som fører til Aids,
Fugleinfluensa, og en serie andre epidemier eller pandemier som
svineinfluensaen, som truer store deler av befolkingen og har høye dødstall
eller er skremsler.
I dette bilde er bruken av medisiner og utstyr som er misbrukt eller satt i
virksomhet uten tilstrekkelig forskning og sikkerhet. Slike «medisiner»
eller medisinsk utstyr har drept eller skadet ti-tusener av mennesker.
Dommedagskrig eller storulykke med våpen. Vi har diskutert resultat av
atomkrig lenge. 1961 laget russerne Tsar-bomben den største bomben prøvet
til nå (50 megatonn, Tupoliv, 3x Hiroshimabomben der trykkbølgen ble følt
tre ganger rundt jorden.) . Vi hadde Hiroshima/Nagasaki bombene etter første
verdenskrig og masseødeleggelsesvåpen i den kalde krigen som kunne laget
store katastrofer og ødelegge verden ved krig. Alomvinteren. Nano-forskning
og krigføring/ulykker der man leker med de indre krefter i menneskets
molekylære struktur, nano tech. våpen, som mikroskopiske nano-bakterier.
Nano er de oppdelingene av atomenst indre struktur der man lærer å påvirke
disse for å forbedre planter og dyr, løse sykdommer og finne nye
sammensetninger. Men dette har den bakside at man ikke alltid vet hva den
kan føre til, som «kapsler» der men kan spore alle mennesker. Krigsscenario
er: 1. Tåregass, klorgass mv i første verdenskrig. 2. Atomvåpen som sluttet
andre verdenskrig, 3. Nano-våpen i tredje verdenskrig.
Gammastråler fra Supernova eller sorte hull. En supernova kollapset og
laget et sort hull 7.5 lysår borte i 2008 hevdes det, WR104. Her er
forskningen i gang og jorden har normalt et skjold, som noen steder brytes
opp. Hva som skjer i sorte hull og andre dimensjoner av energi er et stort
spørsmålstegn i dag. Eksplosjoner langt borte som sender kraftige
gammastråler. Men vi har også det vi kaller vandrende sorte hull som oppstår
(som det funnet i 2001), flytter seg og kan bevege seg meget langt. De
sluker masse og hvor blir denne massen av? Vi har antagelig flere
dimensjoner i verdensrommet.
Superintelligente maskiner tar over. Robotene tar over enten via egne
eller andre datamaskiner eller vie mer avanserte organiske eller datastyrte
roboter som kan forbedre og forsvare seg selv. I dag er det bankene og
finans-institutter,
kredittinstanser og andre som tar over mer og mer av din e penger,
betalinger, kontroll og internett tar over mer og mer av din kommunikasjon.
Samtidig så lages mer og mer av de industrielle varene av roboter og setter
menneskene ut av jobb mens robotene og Tv/mobil m.m. stadig styrer deg og
din virkelighet slik at du kan dulle deg inn og bli slave til teknikkens
fargede og smakfulle vidundre. I dag brukes droner, eller små fly, og
diskusjonen militært er om visse krigsroboter kan operere alene.1997: En
datamaskin slo verdens beste sjakkspiller i skakk (Kasparov). Kasparov
skulle lure maskinen (Deep Purpel 4) men ble selv kurt på lang sikt.
«Digital Brain» må lagres med etikk og kan bedre seg selv.
Fysiske eksperiment, industri og menneskets egen påvirkning av miljøet.
Et forsøk ved atomanlegget i Tsjernobyl (1986), kuttet strømmen i et forsøk,
og dette satte ut nødgeneratorer og det ble en atomnedsmelting. Antall døde
er fra 4.000 til 50.000 og hele byer ble lagt øde i mange hundre år. Det
foregår store forsøk gjennom mange år i USA (der man har masser av kjemiske
forsøk med dødelige bakterier og virus)og Russland (der man laget
livsfarlige koppersykdommer) , det foregikk i Nazi-Tyskland, og gjennom
mange forskningsinstitutter der mikroorganismer som feilaktig slippes ut kan
være dødelige i stort omfang. Noen mener at CERN leker med oss med en 27 km
lang tunell for å lage og studere atomenes indre. De vil lage anti-materie i
liten skala. Kan det lage små sorte hull som fortærer jorden, litt etter
litt deretter?(Otto Røsler hevder så). Dette liger på prøvesprengningen av
atomvåpen 16/7 1945 der de heller ikke kunne utelukke en katastrofe.
Støtt Bics forskning, send et bidrag til
Forskningsstiftelsen Bics kto 1620.15.48482.
Bics får ikke offentlig støtte og bidrag kan etter
gjeldene regelverk ikke trekkes fra på selvangivelsen. I dag er det kun
forskning til statens egne organisasjoner eller de staten mener de vil gi penger
til, som gir skattefradrag og dermed blokkeres fri og utviklende forskning i
Norge. Kun den som er tilsynelatende politisk styrt i sinnrike departementer
tillates fradrag.
Bics søknad til bl.a. Miljø 2015, det største slike
forskningsprosjekt vi har, ble avviste da det ikke var nødvendig i Norge. Senere
sa de de ville forske kun gjennom egne statlige eide og styrte enheter.
Det at vi ved bedre systemtenkning kunne utvikle
metoder for andre deler av verden, også for fred og miljøet, slo heller ikke an.
Frivillig og delvis gratis forskningsinnsats, ble avvist.
Derfor står vi på, og gir oss ikke så lett. For
forskningen, villigheten til å bruke frivillig innsats og vitenskapelig styring
er viktigere. Vi minne rom at da Bics var med NTNU og Statoil i Trondheim på 80
tallet fikk vi i stand forløperen som ble til «Sikkerhetsdagene», nye
organisasjoner for doktorgradsstudenter, doblet antallet, ny forskning og
vitenskapskurs ble startet for å lære folk å jobbe vitenskapelig. Ordnede
forskningsforhold i Norge hva gjelder vitenskap, er en ung tradisjon.
Note Bics new Book 2009/10 about risk analysis and
safety (environment) protection with TSF/NFSM/PF.
And earlier book on contingeny. Earlier book "Døden
skal du lide" (about all you can die from or of) is sold out.
This is a research Bulletin from Bics
focused on advances in risk analyses as of today, 20/11-2008.
We intend to publish more research as time go by, and
republish some of the older research done. The reason is that we in Norway has
some excellent researchers, but no place to publish the advances. This means
that most of the research go by unnoticed and thus there are few possibility for
others to take advantage of the research. Further more, research means that you
are referred, or at least can show that the work is done and published at that
day. Norwegian research is not always on top in Europe or are interested in
areas in research that combine different subjects. Thus is the research not
always suitable for specialized magazines in Europe. The problems in Spain or
Britain, may not be the problems in Norway.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Safety- and risk
analysis of complex design.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By
Egil Borse-Svensen, Researchfoundation Bics, Porsgrunn. Norway (bics.no)
Technology are becoming more complex. The meaning of design is changing.
Safety and risk evaluation consists in this research of two separate, but
consistent evaluations: one related to the design, and one related to
regulations. Together they form a complete risk evaluation of the design in
question. Problems occur due to the state regulations being basic, but the
engineering practices being the most important, design requirements. In
additions are requirements from the customer, either in terms of minimum
values, maximum values or based on evaluation and definition of
cost/effective designs.
Today we have
in addition new security requirements, danger of environmental changes and
corporate social responsibility as elements that requires new research into
new methods.
Time is
therefore mature to change somewhat the content of risk and thus update
methods for risk analyses. One such change is to include vulnerability as a
separate element to probability and consequence in concept of risk. A method
called Risk Analyses in Design(RAID) is discussed, and en method called
Function and Operability Study(FOS) is outlined.
Traditional concept of risk
The traditional concept of risk is ”risk
equal probability of occurrence and consequence”.
Now consider the Italian concept of risk;
Risk equal vulnerability,
probability and consequence
Vulnerability is in the research
here described related to the design that correspond to risk in the rules
and regulations. In regulations, or included other requirements, are from
historic data probabilities and consequences described in various forms
according to databanks and data-systems used. These often give data for
simpler designs and from earlier designs. Some of these data give a
fatalistic view, accident happens independent of what design you have.
Vulnerability, as a measure for the designs ability to withstand problems or
accidents, are excluded. In this paper it is proposed to include this
element of engineering capability.
Rules and
regulations are set according to the knowledge we have of the type og design
in question. These can be detailed for some parts that is well known, but
non-existent for other parts that is new and unknown. In many ways rules and
regulations is similar to mathematics, a safety language build upon some
basic elements or axioms, but tautological, or free from the actual design.
Rules and regulations are made for all designs, for all components and
systems set together, independent of the choices you make. A car can be
produced in many shapes and forms, but the car his produced to correspond to
rules and regulations. The car producer are free to chose requirements,
according to what he imagine the public will have. Some want a cheep car,
others a safe car and others again a luxury car.
Behind every regulation is an evaluation of safety, home safety is one
problem, hotel safety is another. Regulations have implicit other risk
levels for home design, construction and appliances than for hotel equipment
and design/construction.
This is here called the ”Italian concept” since they have a more positive
approach to risk than the traditional Norwegian, who consider the apparent
”risk free” and not ”risk taking” as the approach to design. And as we know,
nothing is ”risk free” and development and responsibility are to be found in
”risk taking”. The author has been working on this concept since attending a
seminar in Como, Italy over 25 years ago and experienced the Italian look at
risk, as something you could gain from. Lately the concept can be found in
Wikipedia as definition of risk in Italian.
Early risk analyses in Norwegian
oil and gas, petrochemical and offshore, design.
Borse et all (1) defines one of the first risk analyses in Norway, that lead
to the redesign of Statfjord B, from the concept of the platform Statfjord A
and laid the basics for nearly all the designs thereafter, the totally
integrated platform was considered as separate, main parts with separate
risk levels, according to design basis defined and a 10 (to -4) criteria,
and split in basic design elements as living-quarter, production, drilling,
storage and contingency(evacuation). This concept came partly from the
Norwegian Petroleum Directorate to the operator Mobile, who went to Veritas
in hope for a design evaluation of its old concept and the new requirements.
A new design was defined based on a series of new principles that lead to
the use of risk analysis as a popular tool.
The question is what next? There are two new elements in design, one related
to security and one related to changes in environmental conditions. This
requires new ways of considering the actual design and its vulnerability.
One such approach is to be found in Hogstad and Steiro(2) from the authority
point of view. However, this is not feasible for choice of design without
new methodologies.
The ”design base accident” concept are not unknown in design of nuclear
power-plants but are often confidential. The ”Accident analysis”- concept
(1) is thus more an analytical approach to the design in early design phases
used with different names frequently in design of petrochemical plants,
evaluation of platform design and subsea-installations.
Risk analysis in design(RAID).
The design establish one set of vulnerability, rules and regulations the
other. If we consider the complete project one method of representing the
risk level is related to:
P=
P(XF) where P(X) =Pf(X1,,,,Xn) and P(F) = Pf(F1......Fn)
or
risk is related to design and regulative and/or best practice, procedures.
This can be split as shown i figure 1 from the overall level and down to
simpler stages. Here we let the ”R” of risk be represented with ”P”
probability, to avoid the discussion of levels of risk to set of consequence
groups. ”X” define the design, which at this point is unknown, and ”F”
relates to functional design requirements. To what extent ”F” relates to the
companies requirements as they evaluate the customer, or the official state
regulations, is a choice of the analyst and the job-specification. For a
specific design or a governmental requirements, this is not, and can not be,
identical. Today, most of the design requirements in safety alone, is
related to industrial standards and ”best practices”, and not to regulations
(broadly speaking).
Fig 1: Risk Analyses in Design,
here represented with a Value-analyses primer to FOS and then in this final
diagram for end analysis. In a value analysis we can choose in this mode the
content of f(K.X) as safety, environmental values, CSR or only use one of
them.
Design elements
What
is design? Design consist of a series of decisions, choices and a series of
investigations into possible concepts and solutions to a defined problem in
a series of more and more detailed and producible product. VDI in Germany
used to define the product development in three stages:
-
concept
-
design
-
production
However in to days more complex designs, concept evaluation is an integrated
part of the design and design is defined in several overall stages, and
detailed stages. Production is not only production, but a lifespan design
with the destruction process included in design.
At
the same time, all of these stages can be divided in three lifelong
nerve-treads:
-
market requirements and state regulations
-
traditional design process and redesign
-
production, maintenance and destruction requirements
This is as far as Andreassen at NTNU in Trondheim and prof. K. Jacobsen
used to preach after 1982 (3).
Imagine we add two nerve-treads,
- one related
to administration, organization and logistics
- and one
related to decision variables.
And it is this last nerve-tread, decision variables, we find risk as one
decisive factor. This is the 90-s approach(4)
The problem is however the use of the variable concerned with risk. This is
our challenge today.
Fig 2. Load Response
Approach(LRA) included in RAID, explains how, in early design phases, you
can analyze expected load(As Design Basis Accidents(DBAs), or expected
terrorist attempts) and use this information to set requirements or define
design criteria. (figure not included in this version)
Above: Risk analyses in
design(RAID) set into a traditional framework for evaluation.
Quality Assurance
One basic problem is statistics related to the industrial revolution:
-
30- ties- from now on we sent products to the marked, got returns and
redesigned the product later years. The firm introduced the experience in
next year production. Once the product was off the conveyor-belt and sold,
the firms had more responsibility, but paid repairs.
- 60- ties-
now quality control stops the process when products fails, and off limit
parts are taken out of the production line and discarded. For major errors,
the production line stops and the work in the last phase is redone with the
corrected dimensions set. The QA-loop is born.
- 90- ties-
logistics require that designs are corrected in next product phase limiting
the failure to repair and adjustments with limited loss. The process always
goes forward, with corrections in next phase in the line production. Nor
more QA-loop backwards, always forward without pause.
- 2020- ties-
design and production, lifespan and destruction is one integrated
process, with complexity that separate mans involvements and leave the
company in charge of the product at all times.
Ethics
separate mans own procedural responsibilities and risks.
This requires separate methodology for risk analysis in the 30-ties, 60-ties
and 90-ties and now a completely new conceptual thinking in the years to
come.
Function and operability analyses.
For the analysis we need a method of qualitative analysis that can develop
as design develops and become some form of quantitative analysis.
There are therefore three requirements:
-
it must be developed in more details as the design
develop(always
forward)
-
it must have opening for a series of different
values according to the demand
-
it must be both quantitative and qualitative with defined
decision variables(numbers).
Fig. 3 shows an example from a 50 million NOK development project employing
this methodology with good results.
|
Specification
|
Function
|
Transfer
|
Results
|
|
|
Block
|
Req.
|
Solut.
|
Funct.
|
Partial.
|
From
|
To
|
Problem
|
Consq.
|
Prob
|
Action
|
Remarks
|
|
A1
A5
|
F5
F3
|
X1
X5
|
Pipe transfer
Valve function
|
Valve closure
Valve opening
Needle m. down
Needel
m, up
|
A1
A1
|
A5
A1
A1
|
Closure, some
debrit
Opening
oK
Needle movement partially
blocked
Needle movement, OK
closure
|
4
5
3
5
|
0.5
0.9
0.5
0.9
|
See A5
Test req.
|
QC.
Sub.
contractor
|
Fig 3. Function and Operability
Study(FOS) Example 1.
- first define part with
requirement and solution suggested,
-
then define functions and transfer
-
define function and problem,
-
suggest consequence and
probabilities
-
define actions for improvements .
The form gives
an estimated conceptual documentation. X is a function of the solutions with
numbers and actions. F is the requirement set by a group of specialists. The
total answer gives a qualitative response for a report with actions, and a
formula on a PC allows you to test dependencies, as a PC game your 14 year
old child can have fun with.
Fig 4. Evaluation of results
(Example 2, (3))
Conclusions
Bayes(4) came
to NTNU early 1980s when the author completed the doctoral educational
courses in two forms:
One was the
classic statistics relations to Bayes formulas and method of using
dependencies, and secondary was the subjective Bayes necessary to begin the
re evaluation of the concept of risk in Norway. This discussion lead the
author to believe that the theoretical accepted approach and the design
approach disagreed. With financing from Statoil the primary concept of this
paper was developed. Later BICS, Norway, financed the rest.
References:
1. E. Borse(Veritas/McGill
University Canada): ” Design Basis accident and accident analyses with
particular reference to offshore platforms), Journal of Occupational
Accidents 2,1979 page 227-243.
2. P. Hogstad
and T. Steiro: ”Overall strategy for risk evaluation and priority setting of
risk regulations”, Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 91, 2006.
3. Professor
K. Jacobsen, lecture notes 1984, ”Product development” and
Assistant. E.
Borse: NTNUs first ”Risk Analyses” notes, 1980ies
4. E. Borse,
”Risk Analyses in Design” Tapir/Bics: ISBN 82-595-4502-0, 1990,
5. Bayes (Rev
Bayes, F.R.S.): An essay towards solving a problem in the doctrine of
chances”, with foreword of G.A. Barnard, Biomtrica, vol,45 parts 3 and 4
page 296-315, 1959( reprint of the original contribution)
6. Bics
procedures for FOS (internal documents).
This is a research Bulletin from Bics
focused on advances in risk analyses as of today, 20/11-2008.
We intend to publish more research as time go by, and
republish some of the older research done. The reason is that we in Norway has
some excellent researchers, but no place to publish the advances. This means
that most of the research go by unnoticed and thus there are few possibility for
others to take advantage of the research. Further more, research means that you
are referred, or at least can show that the work is done and published at that
day. Norwegian research is not always on top in Europe or are interested in
areas in research that combine different subjects. Thus is the research not
always suitable for specialized magazines in Europe. The problems in Spain or
Britain, may not be the problems in Norway.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Safety-
and risk analysis of complex designs.
(see also Egil Borse-Svensen red. "Sikkerhet og Miljø i 30 år", Bics
2009 (in norwegian).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By
Egil Borse-Svensen, Researchfoundation Bics, Porsgrunn. Norway (bics.no)
Technology
are becoming more complex. The meaning of design is changing. Safety and
risk evaluation consists in this research of two separate, but consistent
evaluations: one related to the design, and one related to regulations.
Together they form a complete risk evaluation of the design in question.
Problems occur due to the state regulations being basic, but the engineering
practices being the most important, design requirements. In additions are
requirements from the customer,
either in terms of minimum values, maximum values or based on evaluation and
definition of cost/effective designs.
Today we have
in addition new security requirements, danger of environmental changes and
corporate social responsibility as elements that requires new research into
new methods.
Time is
therefore mature to change somewhat the content of risk and thus update
methods for risk analyses. One such change is to include vulnerability as a
separate element to probability and consequence in concept of risk. A method
called Risk Analyses in Design(RAID) is discussed, and en method called
Function and Operability Study(FOS) is outlined.
Traditional
concept of risk
The
traditional concept of risk is ”risk
equal probability of occurrence and consequence”.
Now consider the Italian concept of risk;
Risk
equal vulnerability, probability and consequence
Vulnerability
is in the research here described related to the design that correspond to
risk in the rules and regulations. In regulations, or included other
requirements, are from historic data probabilities and consequences
described in various forms according to databanks and data-systems used.
These often give data for simpler designs and from earlier designs. Some of
these data give a fatalistic view, accident happens independent of what
design you have. Vulnerability, as a measure for the designs ability to
withstand problems or accidents, are excluded. In this paper it is proposed
to include this element of engineering capability.
Rules and regulations are set
according to the knowledge we have of the type og design in question. These
can be detailed for some parts that is well known, but non-existent for
other parts that is new and unknown. In many ways rules and regulations is
similar to mathematics, a safety language build upon some basic elements or
axioms, but tautological, or free from the actual design. Rules and
regulations are made for all designs, for all components and systems set
together, independent of the choices you make. A car can be produced in many
shapes and forms, but the car his produced to correspond to rules and
regulations. The car producer are free to chose requirements, according to
what he imagine the public will have. Some want a cheep car, others a safe
car and others again a luxury car.
Behind
every regulation is an evaluation of safety, home safety is one problem,
hotel safety is another. Regulations have implicit other risk levels for
home design, construction and appliances than for hotel equipment and
design/construction.
This
is here called the ”Italian concept” since they have a more positive
approach to risk than the traditional Norwegian, who consider the apparent
”risk free” and not ”risk taking” as the approach to design. And as we know,
nothing is ”risk free” and development and responsibility are to be found in
”risk taking”. The author has been
working on this concept since attending a seminar in Como, Italy over 25
years ago and experienced the Italian look at risk, as something you could
gain from. Lately the concept can be found in Wikipedia as definition of
risk in Italian.
Early
risk analyses in Norwegian oil and gas, petrochemical and offshore, design.
Borse
et all (1) defines one of the first risk analyses in Norway, that lead to
the redesign of Statfjord B, from the concept of the platform Statfjord A
and laid the basics for nearly all the designs thereafter, the totally
integrated platform was considered as separate, main parts with separate
risk levels, according to design basis defined and a 10 (to -4) criteria,
and split in basic design elements as living-quarter, production, drilling,
storage and contingency(evacuation). This concept came partly from the
Norwegian Petroleum Directorate to the operator Mobile, who went to Veritas
in hope for a design evaluation of its old concept and the new requirements.
A new design was defined based on a series of new principles that lead to
the use of risk analysis as a popular tool.
The
question is what next? There are two new elements in design, one related to
security and one related to changes in environmental conditions. This
requires new ways of considering the actual design and its vulnerability.
One such approach is to be found in Hogstad and Steiro(2) from the authority
point of view. However, this is not feasible for choice of design without
new methodologies.
The
”design base accident” concept are not unknown in design of nuclear
power-plants but are often confidential. The ”Accident analysis”- concept
(1) is thus more an analytical approach to the design in early design phases
used with different names frequently in design of petrochemical plants,
evaluation of platform design and subsea-installations.
Risk
analysis in design(RAID).
The
design establish one set of vulnerability, rules and regulations the other.
If we consider the complete project one method of representing the risk
level is related to:
P=
P(XF) where P(X) =Pf(X1,,,,Xn) and P(F) = Pf(F1......Fn)
or
risk is related to design and regulative and/or best practice, procedures.
This can be split as shown i figure 1 from the overall level and down to
simpler stages. Here we let the ”R” of risk be represented with ”P”
probability, to avoid the discussion of levels of risk to set of consequence
groups. ”X” define the design, which at this point is unknown, and ”F”
relates to functional design requirements. To what extent ”F” relates to the
companies requirements as they evaluate the customer, or the official state
regulations, is a choice of the analyst and the job-specification. For a
specific design or a governmental requirements, this is not, and can not be,
identical. Today, most of the design requirements in safety alone, is
related to industrial standards and ”best practices”, and not to regulations
(broadly speaking).
Fig
1: Risk Analyses in Design, here represented with a Value-analyses primer to
FOS and then in this final diagram for end analysis. In a value analysis we
can choose in this mode the content of f(K.X) as safety, environmental
values, CSR or only use one of them.
Design elements
What
is design? Design consist of a series of decisions, choices and a series of
investigations into possible concepts and solutions to a defined problem in
a series of more and more detailed and producible product. VDI in Germany
used to define the product development in three stages:
-
concept
-
design
-
production
However
in to days more complex designs, concept evaluation is an integrated part of
the design and design is defined in several overall stages, and detailed
stages. Production is not only production, but a lifespan design with the
destruction process included in design.
At
the same time, all of these stages can be divided in three lifelong
nerve-treads:
-
market requirements and state regulations
-
traditional design process and redesign
-
production, maintenance and destruction requirements
This
is as far as Andreassen at NTNU in Trondheim and prof. K. Jacobsen
used to preach after 1982 (3).
Imagine
we add two nerve-treads,
- one related
to administration, organization and logistics
- and one
related to decision variables.
And
it is this last nerve-tread, decision variables, we find risk as one
decisive factor. This is the 90-s approach(4)
The
problem is however the use of the variable concerned with risk. This is our
challenge today.
Fig 2. Load Response
Approach(LRA) included in RAID, explains how, in early design phases, you
can analyze expected load(As Design Basis Accidents(DBAs), or expected
terrorist attempts) and use this information to set requirements or define
design criteria.
Quality Assurance
One
basic problem is statistics related to the industrial revolution:
-
30- ties- from now on we sent products to the marked, got returns and
redesigned the product later years. The firm introduced the experience in
next year production. Once the product was off the conveyor-belt and sold,
the firms had more responsibility, but paid repairs.
- 60- ties- now
quality control stops the process when products fails, and off limit parts
are taken out of the production line and discarded. For major errors, the
production line stops and the work in the last phase is redone with the
corrected dimensions set. The QA-loop is born.
- 90- ties-
logistics require that designs are corrected in next product phase limiting
the failure to repair and adjustments with limited loss. The process always
goes forward, with corrections in next phase in the line production. Nor
more QA-loop backwards, always forward without pause.
- 2020- ties-
design and production, lifespan and destruction is one integrated
process, with complexity that separate mans involvements and leave the
company in charge of the product at all times.
Ethics separate
mans own procedural responsibilities and risks.
This
requires separate methodology for risk analysis in the 30-ties, 60-ties and
90-ties and now a completely new conceptual thinking in the years to come.
Function
and operability analyses.
For
the analysis we need a method of qualitative analysis that can develop as
design develops and become some form of quantitative analysis.
There
are therefore three requirements:
-
it
must be developed in more details as the design develop(always
forward)
-
it
must have opening for a series of different
values according to the demand
-
it
must be both quantitative and qualitative with defined decision variables(numbers).
Fig.
3 shows an example from a 50 million NOK development project employing this
methodology with good results.
|
Specification
|
Function
|
Transfer
|
Results
|
|
|
Block
|
Req.
|
Solut.
|
Funct.
|
Partial.
|
From
|
To
|
Problem
|
Consq.
|
Prob
|
Action
|
Remarks
|
|
A1
A5
|
F5
F3
|
X1
X5
|
Pipe transfer
Valve function
|
Valve closure
Valve opening
Needle m. down
Needle
m, up
|
A1
A1
|
A5
A1
A1
|
Closure, some
debris
Opening OK
Needle movement partially
blocked
Needle movement, OK
closure
|
4
5
3
5
|
0.5
0.9
0.5
0.9
|
See A5
Test req.
|
QC.
Sub.
contractor
|
Fig 3. Function and Operability
Study(FOS) Example 1.
- first define part with requirement
and solution suggested,
-
then define functions and transfer
-
define function and problem,
-
suggest consequence and
probabilities
-
define actions for improvements .
The form gives
an estimated conceptual documentation. X is a function of the solutions with
numbers and actions. F is the requirement set by a group of specialists. The
total answer gives a qualitative response for a report with actions, and a
formula on a PC allows you to test dependencies, as a PC game your 14 year
old child can have fun with.
Fig 4. Evaluation of results
(Example 2, (3))
Conclusions
Bayes(4) came
to NTNU early 1980s when the author completed the doctoral educational
courses in two forms:
One was the
classic statistics relations to Bayes formulas and method of using
dependencies, and secondary was the subjective Bayes necessary to begin the
re evaluation of the concept of risk in Norway. This discussion lead the
author to believe that the theoretical accepted approach and the design
approach disagreed. With financing from Statoil the primary concept of this
paper was developed. Later BICS, Norway, financed the rest.
Fig 5: Risk analyses in design(RAID)
set into a traditional framework for evaluation.
References:
1. E. Borse(Veritas/McGill
University Canada): ” Design Basis accident and accident analyses with
particular reference to offshore platforms), Journal of Occupational
Accidents 2,1979 page 227-243. Fra
2002 se:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6X2X-469PPJS-K&_user=10&_coverDate=08%2F31%2F1979&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=cff71908847b1fde3add3c3d50a2c378
2. P. Hogstad
and T. Steiro: ”Overall strategy for risk evaluation and priority setting of
risk regulations”, Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 91, 2006.
3. Professor K.
Jacobsen, lecture notes 1984, ”Product development” and
Assistant. E.
Borse: NTNUs first ”Risk Analyses” notes, 1980ies
4. E. Borse,
”Risk Analyses in Design” Tapir/Bics: ISBN 82-595-4502-0, 1990,
5. Bayes (Rev
Bayes, F.R.S.): An essay towards solving a problem in the doctrine of
chances”, with foreword of G.A. Barnard, Biomtrica, vol,45 parts 3 and 4
page 296-315, 1959( reprint of the original contribution)
6. Bics
procedures for FOS (internal documents).
This paper is currently under consideration for
publication in an International magazine. Reference can be made to Bics and
VT research Bulletin.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Bics former reports
See also Bics "Books" and Bics order-form. Other reports and papers referred
can normally be made available in copy for an agreed prize.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Forskningsrapporter (Researchreports)
1978-2005
Bics:
"Elektromagnetiske Felt ved Høyspentledninger, målinger
ved Symrakleiva i Porsgrunn". Sakgerak Energi, Porsgrunn
Kommune, 2005(åpen)
Bics:
"Kvalitetssikring og internkontroll" og
"HMS", Kursmanus på norsk og en separat svensk rapport(93).
Mange av manusene gjennomgår kontinuerlig oppdatering og følger
oppdrag som "Internkntrollmanual for CCB-gruppen"
Bics:
"Teknologihistorie innen sikkerhet og miljø",
Forskningsparken i Oslo UiO(åpen)
Bics:"The
structure of Bayesian Risk Analysis in Design of Large Industrial
Plants and Offshore Platforms".(1990)
Research
report/project specification: "Planering for nordisk
forskarnettverk kring forskning for små och medelstora
företag" Forskningsstiftelsen Bics/Göteborg Universitet,
Centrum for bibliotek och informasjonsvetenskap i samarbeid med
Lars Høglund, Sundsvall og Göteborg.
Borse:
"Ship Impact Risk asessment, Frøy Jacket, detailed Design",
Aker Engineering, Oslo (93)(Restricted)
Berit
Czujko " Den tapte Barndom". Forsking om barn av
foreldre med rusmisbruk,(inkl.alkohol), psykiske lidelser, og
forslag til forskning som sikrer at vi hjelper utsatte barn.(1997),
utgitt.
Genealogy-reports
on family-names Borse, Sem, Svensen, Svensson (preliminary) og
egen utgivelse gjennom "Vetter og Troll om Telemarkingen
Stein Sem gravlagt ved Vikersund Hoppbakke der foreldrene bodde,
som ble skutt ned da flyet ente i kanalen på vei hjem, sterk
skadet, under annen verdenskrig og var med å lage det norske
flyvåpen som en av de tidlige instruktører, deri i Little
Norway i Canada. Han var antagelig den første i det som ble til
Norsk Flyvåpenet som skjøt mot fienden og traff, på et av de
første toktene over kanalen fra England der de hadde angrep mot
et tog, og senere i flykamp.
Mcgill
University Technical note 78-1, Mechanical physics:
"Detonation Initiation in a Hot Jet and by Colliding
Fragments". Dette var mens Norge sa gasseksplosjoner var
uinteressent og Egil reiset på eget initiativ uten penger til
canada og arbeidet for Universitetet, finansiert av AFSOR og ACL
etc. Deretter satset Norge over 50 milioner på CMI og Veritas
med dette miljøet i Canada sentralt, og der Egil senere var
faglig ansvarlig for oljeselskapenes store investeringer i
forskningen om skalering og modeller av plattformer, trykk
trykkredusksjonsmetoder samt modeller for spredning av gass.
Forskingsartikler
fra Canada tilrettelagt til Norsk om "besteforeldre og
samvær med barn etter skilsmisse" og "Fedre og barn
etter skilsmisse", særlig i konfliktsituasjoner. Disse
førte til kraftige TV-program for feil norsk lovgivning og
praksis i 1996.
Egil
Borse: "Gas and Dust measurement at Vestprosess, tunnel and
Caverns"", Lemminkäinen/Raytheon/Statoil(1999)
Pilgim
log/PO: "Høytrykkstørking av laftetømmer",
Fanbyn/Pilgrimstad, Sverige internordisk forskningsprosjekt med
EU-støtte
Egil
Borse, et 40talls rapporter for det Norske Veritas, Statoil eller
Norgas/Aga (ikke for salg).
Diverse
prosjekter utgitt som bl.a. bøker se dette, med Sønnøv Sem
Borse deri om andre verdenskrigen. Utgitt som roman, men med
faktiske rammer og faktiske historier som er bekreftet til slik
virkeligheten i Oslo var.
Genealogi/slektsoversikter
utgitt, deri se "Familien Bakken" (Ballestad),
KFUM-hefte Uthaugen Jubileum, til salgs fra forfatterne A. Søli
og Ballestad fra Telemark. For ønske om kopi sende ordre og vi
skal hjelpe om mulig. Se også egen side om genealogi.
Noen
ønsker om assistanse til utgivelser via oss?
bestilling@bics.no
http://www.bics.no
Copyright 2011, Forskningsstiftelsen Bics,
Revised: 12. November 2011