Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparative Study of STPA and Bowtie Methods: Case of Hazard Identification for Pipeline Transportation

  • Technical Article---Peer-Reviewed
  • Published:
Journal of Failure Analysis and Prevention Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this research, two methods, the STPA and Bowtie, were applied to realize a hazard identification on pipeline transportation, more precisely a condensate pipeline, in SKIKDA region. This identification was followed by a comparison of the results obtained previously, with respect to some aspects; we compared all hazards identified by both methods and classified them into categories, also comparing consequences and losses; we also compared the different steps of each method used. The study performed allows us to determine the main differences using the STPA and Bowtie methods for hazard identification on pipeline transport and highlights a complementary while using them in order to identify in a more exhaustive way the hazards associated with the system being studied. Their combination may be more useful for a thorough hazard identification.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. E.L.A.E.L. Safadi, Contribution to the risk assessment of transport of hazardous materials taking into account uncertainties. Automatic/Robotic. University Grenoble Alpes (2015)

  2. C. Bersani, L. Citro, R.V. Gagliardi, R. Sacile, A.M. Tomasoni, Accident occurence evaluation in the pipeline transport dangerous goods. Chem. Eng. Trans. 19, 249–254 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  3. A. Shahriar, R. Sadiq, S. Tesfamariam, Risk analysis for oil & gas pipelines: a sustainability assessment approach using fuzzy based Bowtie analysis. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 25(3), 505–523 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2011.12.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Z.Y. Han, W.G. Weng, Comparison study on qualitative and quantitative risk assessment methods for urban natural gas pipeline network. J. Hazard. Mater. 189(1–2), 509–518 (2011)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Y.-D. Jo, B.J. Ahn, A method of quantitative risk assessment for transmission pipeline carrying natural gas. J. Hazard. Mater. A123, 1–12 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. C. Vianello, G. Maschio, Quantitative risk assessment of the Italian gas distribution network. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 32, 5–17 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2014.07.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. M. Pontiggia, T. Vairo, B. Fabiano, Risk assessment of buried natural gas pipelines. Critical aspects of event tree analysis. Chem. Eng. Trans. 77, 613–618 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  8. N.G. Leveson, C.H. Fleming, M. Spencer, J. Thomas, C. Wilkinson, Safety assessment of complex, software-intensive systems. SAE Int. J. Aerosp. 5(1), 233–244 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. N. Leveson, C. Wilkinson, C. Fleming, J. Thomas, I. Tracy, A comparison of STPA and the ARP 4761 safety assessment process, MIT PSAS Technical Report Rev. 1, October 2014

  10. J. Zhang, H. Kim, Y. Liu, M.A. Lundteigen, Combining system-theoretic process analysis and availability assessment: a subsea case study. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part O J. Risk Reliab. (2019). https://doi.org/10.1177/1748006X18822224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. S.M. Sulaman, T. Abbas, K. Wnuk, M. Höst, Hazard analysis of collision avoidance system using STPA, in International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (ISCRAM) (2014), pp. 424–428

  12. S.M. Sulaman, A. Beer, M. Felderer et al., Comparison of the FMEA and STPA safety analysis methods—a case study. Softw. Qual. J. (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11219-017-9396-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. C. Schmittner, Z. Ma, P. Puschner, Limitation and improvement of STPA-Sec for safety and security co-analysis, in International Conference on Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security (Springer, Cham, September 2016), pp. 195–209

  14. Data Sheets: OK1/NK1/GK1/GK2/GK3, RTE-Skikda documents

  15. Hydrocarbons transport network map, TRC 2013, Sonatrach documents

  16. N. Leveson, J. Thomas, STPA Handbook (MIT, Cambridge, 2018)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Data sheets NK1, RTE Skikda documents, Sonatrach—Algeria

  18. Guideline for quantitative risk assessment ‘Purple book’, CPR 18E, The Netherlands Organisation of applied Scientific Research (2005)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. LGCES – Research Laboratory, Department of Petrochemistry and Process Engineering, University of 20 août 1955, Skikda, Algeria

    Wafia Benhamlaoui, Mounira Rouainia & Mohammed Salah Medjram

  2. Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway

    Yiliu Liu

Authors
  1. Wafia Benhamlaoui
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mounira Rouainia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yiliu Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mohammed Salah Medjram
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wafia Benhamlaoui.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Benhamlaoui, W., Rouainia, M., Liu, Y. et al. Comparative Study of STPA and Bowtie Methods: Case of Hazard Identification for Pipeline Transportation. J Fail. Anal. and Preven. 20, 2003–2016 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11668-020-01010-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11668-020-01010-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation