A New Method for Determining Insurability of Risks in Gas Refineries Using the Failure Mode and Effect Analysis Method

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Abstract

Decision making about dealing with risks is one of the main activities in the insurance industry on one hand and in the process industry on the other one. To this end, both insurers and the insured (i.e. owners of process industries) use various scientific methods for risk assessment. In this paper, determining the insurability of risks in gas refineries is studied using the Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) method as a new approach. Appling the FMEA, an upper bound for insurability is determined by using the distribution of Risk Priority Number (RPN). The types of risks including uninsurable, insurable and safety risks are also identified by referring to the internal state of affairs of gas refineries. Property damages are of concern, but human injuries as well as natural and external risks are not accounted for in this study. Property risks are categorized into five groups comprising fire, explosion, error and omission, machinery breakdown and pressurized vessels defects as important risks in the refinery.
The empirical results indicate that various property risks in refineries, including fire, explosion, error and omission, and machinery breakdown, are insurable. However, the risks of error and omission and pressurized vessels defects can be taken into account in the safety category and tolerated by industry owners.

Keywords

References

  1. الف) منابع و مآخذ فارسی

    1. حبیبی، مجید (1388). "تنوع خطرات و ریسک‌های بیمه‌پذیر در صنایع نفت، گاز و پتروشیمی". دومین همایش بیمه و مدیریت ریسک در نفت، گاز و پتروشیمی تهران، 16-17 آذرماه 1388.
    2. درخشان، مسعود (1383). مشتقات و مدیریت ریسک در بازارهای نفت. تهران: مؤسسه مطالعات بین­المللی انرژی.
    3. سهرابی، مجتبی (1388). "روش‌های ارزیابی ریسک بررسی و تحلیل مدل‌های FMEA & FTA". دومین همایش بیمه و مدیریت ریسک در نفت، گاز و پتروشیمی تهران، 16-17 آذرماه 1388.
    4. نماگرهای اقتصادی (1390). بانک مرکزی جمهوری اسلامی ایران.

     

    ب) منابع و مآخذ لاتین

    1. AIRMIC, ALARM, IRM (2002). A Risk Management Standard is Extracts from the Document PD ISO/IEC Guide 73.
    2. Arunraj, N.S., Maiti, J. (2007). "Risk–based Maintenance- Techniques and Applications". Journal of Hazardous Materials 142: 653-661.
    3. Benk, k.k., Hamilton, A.J. (2008). "Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment: Uncertatinty and Measures of Central Tendency for Skewed Distributions". Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 22: 533.
    4. BP statistical Review of World Energy (2012) .BP P.L.C, London. Available in bp.com/statisticalreview.
    5. Chang, K. H., Cheng, C. H. (2010). "A Risk Assessment Methodology Using Intuitionistic Fuzzy Set in FMEA". International Journal of Systems Science 41: 1457–1471.
    6. Chang, K. H., Cheng, C. H. (2011). "Evaluating the Risk of Failure Using the Fuzzy OWA and DEMATEL Method". Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing 22: 113–129.
    7. Chelliah, S. (2008). Safety – Reliability – Risk Assessment: Preliminary Hazard Analysis. Available in http://www.pdhongineer .com.
    8. Cheng, Y., Hu, G., Wu, G.W. (2012). "Development of a Risk-based Maintenance Strategy Using FMEA for a Continuous Catalytic Reforming Plant". Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 25: 958-965.
    9. Chin, K. S., Wang, Y. M., Poon, G. K. K., & Yang, J. B. (2009). "Failure Mode and Effects Analysis Using a Group-based Evidential Reasoning Approach". Computers& Operations Research 36: 1768-1779.
    10. Cicek, K., Celik, M. (2013). "Application of Failure Modes and Effects Analysis to Main Engine Crankcase Explosion Failure on-board Ship". Safety Science 51: 6–10.
    11. Curtis, P., Carey, M. (2012). Risk Assessment in Practice, Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).
    12. Durga Rao, k. (2009). "Dynamic Fault Tree Analysis Using Monte Carlo Simulation in Probabilistic Safety Assessment". Reliability Engineering and System Safety 94: 872-883.
    13. Gargama, H., & Chaturvedi, S. K. (2011). "Criticality Assessment Models for Failur Mode Effects and Criticality Analysis Using Fuzzy Logic". IEEE Transactions on Reliability 60: 102–110
    14. Gold, J., Glossop, M., Loannides, A. (2000). Review of Hazard Identification Techniques. Health and Safety laboratory.
    15. Guimaraes, A. C. F., & Franklin Lapa, C. M. (2004). "Effects Analysis Fuzzy Inference System in Nuclear Problems Using Approximate Reasoning". Annals of Nuclear Energy 31: 107–115. http://www.shana.ir
    16. Kass, R. et al. (2001). Modern Actuarial Risk Theory, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
    17. Kerr, A. G., Skates, A. (2004). Hazop & Operability Study Procedure DRD Water Service,Document Reference 5009594/100/DG/01 FC: Ver 1.
    18. Klugman, A., Panjer, H., Willmot, E. (2004). Loss Model from Data to Decisions, Second Edition, John Willy & Sons, Inc.
    19. Liu, Hu-Chen., Lui, Long., Liu, Nan. (2013). "Risk Evaluation Approaches in Failure Mode and Effects Analysis: A Literature Review". Expert Systems with Applications 40: 828–838.
    20. Mahmoudvand, R., Hassani, H., (2009). "Two New Confidence Intervals for the Coefficient of Variation in a Normal Distribution". Journal of applied statistics 36(4): 429- 442.
    21. Marhavilas, P.K., Koulouriotis, D. Gemeni, V. (2011). "Risk Analysis and Assessment Methodologies in the Work Sites: On a Review, Classification and Comparative Study of the Scientific Literature of the Period 2000-2009". Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 24: 477-523
    22. Mcguinness, J. (1969). "Is probable Maximum Loss (PML) A Useful Concept? ". Proceedings of the Casualty Actuarial Society lv 1(105 &106): 31-40.
    23. Nazir, Muddassir (2007). Quantitative Risk Assessment of a Marine Riser: an Integrated Approach, Ph.D thesis, Memorial University of Newfoundland Occupational Health and Safety Assessment, Series BS OHSAS 18001:2007, BSI, British Standard.
    24. Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries – Offshore Production Installations Guidelines on Tools and Techniques for Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment, BE EN ISO 17776:2002.
    25. Promislow, s. David (2011). Fundamentals of Actuarial Mathematics, Second editions, John Wiley &Sons Ltd.
    26. Sharma, R. K., Kumar, D., & Kumar, P. (2005). "Systematic Failure Mode Effect Analysis (FMEA) Using Fuzzy Linguistic Modeling". International Journal of Quality Reliability Management 22: 986–1004.
    27. Stamatelatos, M. (2000). Probabilistic Risk Assessment: What Is It and Why Is It Worth Performing It? .NASA Office of Safety and Mission Assurance.
    28. Stamatis, D. H. (1995). Failure Mode and Effect Analysis: FMEA from Theory to Execution, New York: ASQC Press.
    29. Tixier, J., Dusserre, G., Salvi, O., Gaston, D. (2002). "Review of 62 Analysis Methodologies of Industrial Plants". Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 15: 291-303.
    30. Vose, D. (2008). Risk Analysis, Third Edition, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
    31. Yang, Z., Bonsall, S., & Wang, J. (2008). "Fuzzy Rule-based Bayesian Reasoning Approach for Prioritization of Failures in FMEA". IEEE Transactions on Reliability 57: 517–528.
    32. Yuge, T., Tagami, K., and Yanagi, S. (2006). "Calculating Top Event Probability of a Fault Tree with Many Repeated Events". Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering 12(4) 

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics