Bayesian Belief Network Used in the Chemical and Process Industry: A Review and Application
- 276 Downloads
With the increasing growth of the chemical and process industries, it is necessary to ensure the safe operation of their complex and often hazardous installations, given their proximity to residential areas. Several techniques, such as fault tree analysis (FTA), bow-tie analysis (BTA), and Bayesian belief networks (BBNs), have been developed for adequate probabilistic risk assessment and management. The current work is aimed at performing a brief statistical review of the use of Bayesian networks in the chemical and process industry within the last decade. The review reveals that Bayesian networks have been used extensively in various forms of safety and risk assessment. This trend is attributable to the complexity of the installations found in this industry and the ability of BBN to intuitively represent these complexities, handle uncertainties, and update event probabilities. The paper is concluded with an illustrative example of the use of BBN to investigate the effectiveness of the safety barriers of a gas facility.
KeywordsBayesian belief network Safety and risk analysis Chemical industries Risk acceptance criteria
The authors would like to thank anonymous reviewers for their comments that have allowed the improvement in this paper.
- 5.J. G. Torres-Toledano and L. Sucar, Bayesian Networks for Reliability Analysis of Complex Systems. Prog. Artif. Intell. - IBERAMIA 98, vol. 1484, p. 465, 1998Google Scholar
- 6.N. Khakzad, G. Reniers, Application of Bayesian network and multi-criteria decision analysis to risk-based design of chemical plants. Chem. Eng. Trans. 48(January), 223–225 (2016)Google Scholar
- 13.S. Rathnayaka, F. Khan, P. Amayotte, Accident modeling and risk assessment framework for safety critical decision-making: application to deepwater drilling operation. J. Risk Reliab. 227(1), 86–105 (2013)Google Scholar
- 14.A. Al-Shanini, A. Ahmad, F. Khan, M. Hassim, A. Al-Shatri, Modeling the impact of natural and security hazards in an LNG processing facilitity. J. Teknol. 75(6), 17–25 (2015)Google Scholar
- 20.H. Wang, F. Khan, S. Ahmed, and S. Imtiaz, Dynamic quantitative operational risk assessment of chemical processes. Chem. Eng. Sci., 142, 62–78 (2016)Google Scholar
- 23.J. Pearl, Probabilistic reasoning in intelligent systems: Networks of plausible inference (Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, INC., San Francisco, CA, 1988)Google Scholar
- 28.N. Khakzad G. Reniers, Protecting chemical plants against terrorist attacks: a review. J. Soc. 5, 142 (2015). doi: 10.4172/2167-0358.1000142
- 29.N. Khakzad, H. Yu, N. Paltrinieri, and F. Khan, in Dynamic Risk Analysis in the Chemical and Petroleum Industry. 1st ed. Reactive Approaches of Probability Update Based on Bayesian Methods. (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2016), pp. 51–61Google Scholar
- 32.J. Li, G. Reniers, V. Cozzani, F. Khan, A bibliometric analysis of peer-reviewed publications on domino effects in the process industry. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. (2016). doi: 10.1016/j.jlp.2016.06.003
- 36.HUGIN, HUGIN Expert software version 8.1. [Online]. Available: http://www.hugin.com (2015)
- 37.F. Lees, Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 3rd edn. (Butterworths, London, 2005)Google Scholar