Filtern
Dokumenttyp
- Vortrag (4)
- Zeitschriftenartikel (2)
- Dissertation (1)
Schlagworte
- Consequence (7) (entfernen)
Organisationseinheit der BAM
In this presentation safety aspects of hydrogen transportation are discussed. At first, the regulatory background and level of safety are presented. In the second part, the modelling of consequence due to sudden rupture of pressure receptacles is explained. Finally, the results are used to define a limit for consequence to enable an acceptable and safe transport of hydrogen.
The presentation reflects the questions that have been raised by member states and NGOs.
As background information details on the question how to choose a suitable salvage pressure receptacle (SPR) are provided. This leads to the need for deleting the volume limitation for SPRs and to the discussions in 2014 and 2016 on this issue.
As an adequate substitution for deleting the volume limit for SPRs it is proposed to limit the pressure receptacles to be stored in by a maximum pressure-volume-value of 1.5 Mio bar-litres.
After some explanations to standardisation projects currently also tackling this pV-limit, some risk-based safety criteria for a limitation are mentioned with the focus of the consequence level and the general avoidance of catastrophic worst case scenarios.
The risk analysis of road tunnels faces a growing complexity in fire scenarios, e.g. caused by new energy carriers. Essentially, such complex scenarios involve many interactions between the tunnel users, the fire source and the safety measures. One example is the alarm of tunnel users either initiated by the perception of smoke or by the fire alarm system. To consider these interactions for the quantification of consequences, e.g. fatalities, risk analysis requires a complex model. However, the complex model can compute in practice only few discrete scenarios due to its high computational cost, whereas risk analysis generally needs the consequences of a high number of random scenarios. Metamodels can solve this contradiction. They are able to approximate the consequences of many random scenarios with low computational cost based on the consequences of few discrete scenarios computed with the complex model. The efficiency of metamodels depends on the required number of these discrete scenarios. In this sense, this dissertation proposes an efficient metamodel within an innovative methodology for risk analysis of road tunnels to allow to consider an increased complexity of scenarios. This metamodel applies the following methods or models: the projection array-based design method specifies the experimental design for the discrete scenarios; the combination of the fire model FDS and the microscopic evacuation model FDS+Evac constitutes the complex model; and moving least squares produces the response surface model. The response surface model approximates the consequences of the random scenarios and therewith introduces an uncertainty, called metamodel uncertainty, which is quantified with the prediction interval method. Additionally, stochastic individual characteristics of tunnel users in discrete scenarios computed with FDS+Evac attribute evacuation uncertainties to the consequences. An original development in this dissertation, the ’direct approach’, directly transfers the evacuation uncertainties of the discrete scenarios to any random scenario. The evaluation of the metamodel in this dissertation shows following results. Firstly, the response surface model sufficiently represents the consequences of the complex model. Secondly, the metamodel uncertainty is also essential for this representation, but the prediction interval method reveals a drawback in the risk analysis. Potential approaches to deal with this drawback are discussed. Finally, the direct approach reproduces the evacuation uncertainty of the complex model which then clearly affects the consequences of random scenarios. Therefore, the consideration of the evacuation uncertainty plays an important role for the risk analysis. Furthermore, the projection array-based design method was adapted in this dissertation with two approaches, namely the combination of the experimental designs for FDS and FDS+Evac as well as their sequential refinement. Both approaches contribute to the efficiency of the metamodel. These results lead to following conclusions. Firstly, the metamodel efficiently integrates the consequences of discrete scenarios into risk analysis and thus allows to consider an increased complexity. Secondly, the metamodel is an advancement for risk analysis not only for road tunnelsbutalsomoregeneralinfiresafetyengineering. Forthesetworeasons,themetamodel might be interesting for other methodologies for risk analysis. In addition, the metamodel is generic and is therefore widely applicable on other issues beside from risk analysis, e.g. to assess the safety of structures related to time-consuming experiments depending on multiple variables.
This presentation provides an impression of the boundary condition of the work on composite cylinders on a competent authority. It shows the various kinds of usage, the different tasks and duties around this kind of storage units and the wide spread of technical competence necessary for the substantial research when addressing the legislation. Based on this it shows how we react on changes in the regulations by research and how this influences the regulations, again. As an example, our probabilistic approach is mentioned and drafted for getting mentioned several times during the ongoing set of presentations.
The increasing amount of composite transport systems for hydrogen leads to new and therefore unknown potential hazards for general public. Due to lack of experience, risks of new technologies tend to be rated higher than existing familiar applications. An approach for probabilistic safety assessment of technologies or products requires the definition of minimal acceptable reliability levels. This ensures that the probability of a critical failure with a certain consequence is limited to an acceptable risk. But what is the acceptable risk and which risk results from specific probabilities of occurrence and consequences? This is always a very complex question. The following example is based on a probabilistic approach for safety assessment of composite cylinders developed at the BAM (Federal Institute for Materials Research and Testing).
Ziel des vorliegenden Beitrages ist es, einen Überblick über die aktuellen Entwicklungen im Bereich der Bewertung und der Quantifizierung der Robustheit von Bauwerken zu geben. In diesem Sinne ist eine Zusammenstellung von Ansätzen und Ergebnissen aktueller Veröffentlichungen enthalten. Ein umfassender entscheidungstheoretischer Ansatz für die Berechnung und das Management der Robustheit wird vorgestellt. Dieser beinhaltet die Definition der Robustheit als eine Qualität eines Systems, welches das Bauwerk beinhaltet, d. h. eine Qualität, die auf der Grundlage einer Risikoanalyse bewertet werden kann. Um eine umfassende Risikoanalyse zu ermöglichen, wird ein szenarienbasierter Modellansatz eingeführt, welcher zwei Arten von Konsequenzen im System unterscheidet: direkte Konsequenzen (in Verbindung mit Schäden einzelner Komponenten des Systems) und indirekte Konsequenzen (in Verbindung mit einem Versagen des Systems). Die Definition des Systems spielt deshalb für die Risikoanalyse eine wichtige Rolle, und es wird diskutiert, wie die Robustheit für verschiedene Definitionen zu unterschiedlichen Ergebnissen und Erkenntnissen im Sinne des Managements der Integrität des Bauwerks im gesamten Lebenszyklus unter Berücksichtigung seiner Funktionalität führt. Weiterhin werden wichtige Aspekte der Standardisierung der Robustheitsanalyse, wie auch Anforderungen an die Robustheit, diskutiert und Vorschläge zum Umgang mit diesen Aspekten unterbreitet. Auf der Grundlage der vorgestellten Ansätze zur Berechnung der Robustheit eines Bauwerks wird beschrieben, wie Entscheidungen in Bezug auf den Entwurf, die Zustandsbewertung, auf Inspektionen und Wartung sowie in Bezug auf die Überwachung von Bauwerken, in Hinblick auf das Management der Risiken in allen Phasen des Lebenszyklus, optimiert werden können.