Are We Going Towards “No-Brainer” Safety Management?

Author:

Paltrinieri Nicola

Abstract

AbstractIndustry is stepping into its 4.0 phase by implementing and increasingly relying on cyber-technological systems. Wider networks of sensors may allow for continuous monitoring of industrial process conditions. Enhanced computational power provides the capability of processing the collected “big data”. Early warnings can then be picked and lead to suggestion for proactive safety strategies or directly initiate the action of autonomous actuators ensuring the required level of system safety. But have we reached these safety 4.0 promises yet, or will we ever reach them? A traditional view on safety defines it as the absence of accidents and incidents. A forward-looking perspective on safety affirms that it involves ensuring that “as many things as possible go right”. However, in both the views there is an element of uncertainty associated to the prediction of future risks and, more subtly, to the capability of possessing all the necessary information for such prediction. This uncertainty does not simply disappear once we apply advanced artificial intelligence (AI) techniques to the infinite series of possible accident scenarios, but it can be found behind modelling choices and parameters setting. In a nutshell, any model claiming superior flexibility usually introduces extra assumptions (“there ain’t no such thing as a free lunch”). This contribution will illustrate a series of examples where AI techniques are used to continuously update the evaluation of the safety level in an industrial system. This will allow us to affirm that we are not even close to a “no-brainer” condition in which the responsibility for human and system safety is entirely moved to the machine. However, this shows that such advanced techniques are progressively providing a reliable support for critical decision making and guiding industry towards more risk-informed and safety-responsible planning.

Publisher

Springer Nature Switzerland

Reference42 articles.

1. AEA technology—Major hazards assessment unit, in MHIDAS—Major Hazard Incident Data Service (UK, 2003)

2. K. Aika, L.J. Christiansen, I. Dybkjaer, J.B. Hansen, P.E.H. Nielsen, A. Nielsen, P. Stoltze, K. Tamaru, in Ammonia: Catalysis and Manufacture (Springer Science & Business Media, 2012)

3. ANSI/ISA, 2016. ANSI/ISA–18.2–2016 Management of Alarm Systems for the Process Industries. ANSI/ISA.

4. M. Bucelli, N. Paltrinieri, G. Landucci, Integrated risk assessment for oil and gas installations in sensitive areas. Ocean Eng. 150, 377–390 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.OCEANENG.2017.12.035

5. H. Chen, T. Moan, H. Verhoeven, Safety of dynamic positioning operations on mobile offshore drilling units. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 93, 1072–1090 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RESS.2007.04.003

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3