PEOPLE’S DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF ALGERIA

MINISTRY OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND SCIENTIFIC

RESEARCH

UNIVERSITY OF KASDI MERBAH OUARGLA

Institute of applied sciences and techniques

Applied engineering department

Thesis of PROFESSIONAL MASTER

Present in the applied engineering department

Domain: Science and Technology

Specialty: Quality Health, Safety & Environment

Realised by :
 Djedri Akram
 Ladouani Housseyn
 Ramdane Fouad

Theme:

Application of the Fire and Explosion Risk Assessment study on drilling

rig.

Supported on … /06/2024 before the examination committee composed of:

M Abbes Abd El Bari at the University of Ouargla. President
M. Touahar Bachir at the University of Ouargla. Dissertation Director
M Rouabh boubeker at the University of Ouargla. Examiner

University Year: 2023/2024

 DEDICATIONS

I dedicate this work to my family especially

my father and my mother
hey sacrificed a lot and did all they can in order to
make me the person that I have been and reach where
I am now I want to thank them from all of my heart ,
and I thank God for making me their son.
I would like to dedicate this work to my teachers and
schoolmates since the beginning of my school life
until now

Akram Djedri

II
 DEDICATIONS

I dedicate this work to my family especially

my father and my mother
They sacrificed a lot and did all they can in order to
make me the person that I have been and reach where I
am now I want to thank them from all of my heart, and
I thank God for making me their son.
I want to thank my brothers El Hassan Mouhammad
Ali and Youssef for their continued support of me, and
without forgetting my dear friends Ibrahim,
Mouhammad Amin, Zakaria, Reda.
I would like to dedicate this work to my teachers and
schoolmates since the beginning of my school life
until now

Ladouani Housseyn
III
 DEDICATIONS

I thank my God, whose guidance and blessings have been my constant support.

I dedicate this work to my parents, whose sacrifices and unwavering love have shaped me into the
person I am today. Their relentless support has been the cornerstone of my achievements. I am
deeply grateful for everything they have done for me. Thank you from the bottom of my heart.

To my beloved wife and children, Yacine, Lina, and Amena. Your love and encouragement have
been my greatest motivation.

To my brothers and sisters, whose support and camaraderie have always been a source of strength
for me.

To my friends, especially Sayah, for your unwavering support and friendship.

To my ex-training manager, Aouf, for your invaluable guidance and mentorship.

And to Abdenour Hamdi, for your support and encouragement.

Lastly, I extend my gratitude to my teachers and schoolmates who have been part of my educational
journey from the very beginning. Your influence and support have been instrumental in my
academic growth.

Thank you all.

Ramdane Fouad

IV
 We would like to thank God for giving us the courage to carry out this modest work.

We would like to express our gratitude and sincere thanks to ENAFOR Company and
Mr. DJEGHOUBI Hamza for this opportunity that helped us a lot in our research,
and for acquiring skills in our field.

We would like also to HSE supervisor for his presence always for help us and all his
sacrificing of his time for us.

Thanks, are also due to the members of the jury for having accepted to examine our
final project.

We would like also to sincerely thank our family, friends and colleagues for their
moral support during our process.

Our thanks are also expressed to all the staff of the company ENAFOR starting with
the director to last staff in company.

Also, we would like to be thankful to our university mentor Mr. TOUAHAR Bachir
for the inspiration, the help and the advice.

Finally, we thank all the people who helped us and who contributed to the elaboration
of this thesis.

V
Abstract:
The objective of our research fire and explosion risk assessment is to understand the principles,
methodologies, and tools used to assess and manage the risks associated with fires and explosions. This
includes learning how to identify potential hazards, evaluate their likelihood and consequences, and develop
strategies to mitigate these risks effectively. Such studies help us in various industries to create safer
environments and prevent accidents. First, in the first chapter, we talked about fires and explosions, their
definition, Classification of Fires and Extinguishing methods for each class and types of explosion and its
effects and its conditions and prevention and protection measures.

In the second chapter, we talked about the FERA method, its definition, objectives, methodology, and some
methods similar to it, QRA and Hazop. In the third chapter, we talked about the ENAFOR Company. We
applied the FERA method on an oil drilling rig and performed fire simulations using software Aloha.

:‫الملخص‬

‫الهدف من بحثنا لتقييم مخاطر الحرائق واالنفجارات هو فهم المبادئ والمنهجيات واألدوات المستخدمة لتقييم وإدارة المخاطر‬
‫ ووضع استراتيجيات‬،‫ وتقييم احتماالتها وعواقبها‬،‫ يتضمن ذلك تعلم كيفية تحديد المخاطر المحتملة‬. ‫المرتبطة بالحرائق واالنفجارات‬
‫تساعدنا مثل هذه الدراسات في مختلف الصناعات على خلق بيئات أكثر أمانًا ومنع وقوع‬. ‫للتخفيف من هذه المخاطر بشكل فعال‬
‫ أوال تحدثنا في الفصل األول عن الحرائق واالنفجارات وتعريفها وتصنيف الحرائق وطرق اإلطفاء لكل صنف وأنواع‬. ‫الحوادث‬
‫ تعريفها وأهدافها‬FERA ‫ وفي الفصل الثاني تحدثنا عن طريقة‬،‫االنفجارات وآثارها وشروطها وإجراءات الوقاية والحماية‬
‫ قمنا بتطبيق طريقة‬ENAFOR. ‫ وفي الفصل الثالث تحدثنا عن شركة‬Hazop. ‫ و‬QRA ‫ومنهجيتها وبعض الطرق المشابهة لها‬
. Aloha‫على منصة حفر النفط وقمنا بإجراء عمليات محاكاة للحريق باستخدام برنامج‬FERA

Résumé:

L'objectif de nos recherches sur l'évaluation des risques d'incendie et d'explosion est de comprendre les
principes, les méthodologies et les outils utilisés pour évaluer et gérer les risques associés aux incendies et
aux explosions. Cela implique d'apprendre à identifier les dangers potentiels, à évaluer leur probabilité et
leurs conséquences, et à élaborer des stratégies pour atténuer efficacement ces risques. De telles études nous
aident dans diverses industries à créer des environnements plus sûrs et à prévenir les accidents. Tout d'abord,
dans le premier chapitre, nous avons parlé des incendies et des explosions, de leur définition, de la
classification des incendies et des méthodes d'extinction pour chaque classe et des types d'explosion et de ses
effets et de ses conditions et des mesures de prévention et de protection. Dans le deuxième chapitre, nous
avons parlé de la FERA méthode, sa définition, ses objectifs, sa méthodologie et quelques méthodes
similaires, QRA et Hazop. Dans le troisième chapitre, nous avons parlé de la société ENAFOR. Nous avons
appliqué la méthode FERA sur une plate-forme de forage pétrolier et réalisé des simulations d'incendie à
l'aide du logiciel Aloha,

VI
 TABLE OF COTENTS
DEDICATIONS .........................................................................................................................................II
DEDICATIONS ........................................................................................................................................ III
DEDICATIONS ........................................................................................................................................ IV
......................................................................................................................... V
Abstract: ................................................................................................................................................... VI
LISTE OF FIGURES................................................................................................................................. X
LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................................................... X
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS & ACRONYMS ....................................................................................... XI
CHAPTER I:............................................................................................................................................... 1
Fire and Explosion Risk .............................................................................................................................. 1
INTRODUCTION: ...................................................................................................................................... 3
SECTION I: Overview on Fire Safety........................................................................................................ 4
1. Fire definition: ................................................................................................................................. 4
2. Classification of Fires: ..................................................................................................................... 5
3. Extinguishing methods for each class: [4]....................................................................................... 7
3. 1 Principles extinguishing agents: .............................................................................................. 7
3. 2 Extinguishing methods: ........................................................................................................... 8
4. Definition of firefighting systems: ................................................................................................. 10
4.1 Types of firefighting systems: there are two types: ................................................................ 11
4.2 Types of fire protection: There are two different types of fire protection ................................ 11
5. Importance of fire safety: .............................................................................................................. 11
SECTION II: Overview of Explosions ..................................................................................................... 12
1. Definition of an explosion: ............................................................................................................ 12
2. Types of explosions:....................................................................................................................... 12
3. Definition of ATEX: ...................................................................................................................... 13
4. The effects of the explosion: .......................................................................................................... 14
5. Explosion conditions: .................................................................................................................... 15
6. Dangerous phenomena: ................................................................................................................. 15
7. Explosion prevention and protection measures: .......................................................................... 18
Conclusion: ............................................................................................................................................... 20
CHAPTER II: ............................................................................................................................................. 3
Overview of Risk Assessment Methods ......................................................................................................... 3
Introduction: ............................................................................................................................................. 22
SECTION I: Overview of Fire and Explosion Risk Assessment (FERA). .............................................. 23
VII
 1. Definition of Fire and Explosion Risk Assessment (FERA): ........................................................ 23
2. Key Objectives of FERA: .............................................................................................................. 23
3. General Requirements: ................................................................................................................. 23
4. Brownfield: .................................................................................................................................... 23
4.1 For Existing Facilities Where FERA is not Available: ......................................................... 24
4.2 For Existing Facilities and a New Expansion to be Established: .......................................... 24
4.3 For Existing Facilities Where FERA is Available: ............................................................... 24
5. FERA Methodology: ..................................................................................................................... 24
5.1 FERA Study Scope of Work : ................................................................................................ 26
5.2 The Assumption Register: ..................................................................................................... 27
5.3 Hazard Identification: ........................................................................................................... 27
5.4 Consequence Assessment:...................................................................................................... 27
5.5 Frequency Assessment: .......................................................................................................... 28
5.6 Other Data for Risk Calculation: .......................................................................................... 29
5.7 Risk Analysis & Evaluation:.................................................................................................. 29
5.8 Assess the FERA Study Results and Set the Recommendations: ......................................... 29
5.9 FERA Reporting: ................................................................................................................... 29
SECTION II: Overview of Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) Method ............................................. 30
1. History of QRA method: ............................................................................................................... 30
2. What is QRA? : ............................................................................................................................. 30
3. The Key Components of QRA: ..................................................................................................... 30
4. Objectives of QRA :....................................................................................................................... 33
5. Advantages of Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA): ................................................................. 33
6. Disadvantages of Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA): ............................................................. 34
SECTION III: Overview of Hazards and Operability Study (HAZOP) ................................................. 35
1. History of HAZOP: ....................................................................................................................... 36
2. Definition of HAZOP: ................................................................................................................... 36
3. Characteristics of the HAZOP study: ........................................................................................... 36
4. Objectives of the HAZOP: ............................................................................................................ 37
5. Procedure of HAZOP:................................................................................................................... 37
5.1 Explanation of the table: ....................................................................................................... 38
6. Advantages and Disadvantages of HAZOP: ................................................................................. 40
6.1 The benefits:........................................................................................................................... 40
6.2 The inconvenients : ................................................................................................................ 41
7. HAZOP Study Applications:......................................................................................................... 41
8. Relationship with other analysis tools: ......................................................................................... 42
VIII
 9. Limitations of the HAZOP study: ................................................................................................. 42
Conclusion: ............................................................................................................................................... 44
CHAPTER III:.......................................................................................................................................... 22
Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk Assessment for drilling rig
and simulation by aloha software............................................................................................................... 22
Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 46
SECTION I: Presentation of ENAFOR Company. ................................................................................... 47
1. General presentation of ENAFOR:............................................................................................... 47
1.1 History of the company: ........................................................................................................ 47
1.2 Equipment Park: ................................................................................................................... 49
1.3 Company logo: ....................................................................................................................... 50
2. presentation of Rig sit ENF51: ..................................................................................................... 50
2.1 technical sheet of the device ENF 51: .................................................................................... 51
2.2 Rig layout: .............................................................................................................................. 52
3. Organization of ENAFOR: ........................................................................................................... 53
SECTION II: Application of Fire and Explosion Risk Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by
aloha software. .......................................................................................................................................... 54
1. Application of Fire and Explosion Risk Assessment for drilling rig ENF 51: ............................. 54
1.1 Context: .................................................................................................................................. 54
1.2 Presentation of the MD 743 well: .......................................................................................... 54
1.3 List the team of the ENF 51 device WORK OVER: ............................................................. 55
I. Identification of Potential Ignition Sources: ............................................................................. 55
II. Photos-Sources of inflammation: .......................................................................................... 57
1.5 Scenarios: ............................................................................................................................... 58
1.6 SUBSTANCES STUDIED:.................................................................................................... 58
1.7 Accident scenario: .................................................................................................................. 59
2. Simulation by aloha software:....................................................................................................... 65
3. RECOMMENDATIONS: ............................................................................................................. 68
3. 1 Arrangement of fire-fighting resources on site: .................................................................... 70
CONCLUSION: .................................................................................................................................... 71
General Conclusion................................................................................................................................... 72

IX
 LISTE OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Fire triangle [2, p. 4] ................................................................................................................... 5
Figure 2: Fire classifications [3] ................................................................................................................... 6
Figure 3: Fire extinguisher types [6] ........................................................................................................... 10
Figure 4: Explosion conditions [13, p. 4] .................................................................................................... 15
Figure 5: The different development phases of BLEVE [14] ...................................................................... 15
Figure 6: The different phases of development of a UVCE [14].................................................................. 16
Figure 7: The different phases of fire development in a product stock [14] ................................................. 16
Figure 8: The different phases of development of the emission and dispersion of chemical products [14] ... 17
Figure 9: The different phases of development of a pool fire [14] ............................................................... 17
Figure 10: The different phases of development of a BOIL-OVER [14]...................................................... 18
Figure 11: The FERA study methodology flowchart. [15, p. 10] ................................................................. 25
Figure 12: The QRA study methodology flowchart. [17] ............................................................................. 32
Figure 13: Types of ENAFOR Rigs [23, p. 4]............................................................................................. 49
Figure 14: ENAFOR logo [23] ................................................................................................................... 50
Figure 15: The location of the Rig sit ENF51.............................................................................................. 50
Figure 16: Technical sheet of the device ENF 51 [24] ................................................................................ 51
Figure 17: Rig layout of site ENF 51. [24].................................................................................................. 52
Figure 18: Organization of ENAFOR [23, p. 31] ........................................................................................ 53
Figure 19: Photos-Sources of inflammation. ............................................................................................... 57
Figure 20: presentation of the results. ........................................................................................................ 67
Figure 21: presentation of the results in google earth .................................................................................. 68
Figure 22: Arrangement of fire-fighting resources on site ........................................................................... 70

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Possible outcomes for each failure case category (typical industry practice). [15].......................... 28
Table 2: Facilities risk tolerability criteria. [15, p. 27]................................................................................. 29
Table 3: HAZOP template [22] ................................................................................................................. 38
Table 4: Guide Word of HAZOP [22] ........................................................................................................ 39
Table 5: List of Rigs types [23, p. 4]........................................................................................................... 49
Table 6: Sources of inflammation. .............................................................................................................. 55
Table 7: CHARACTERISTICS OF PRODUCTS USED ON SITE............................................................ 58
Table 8: Components of natural gas............................................................................................................ 59
Table 9: Hazard categories modeled in ALOHA ......................................................................................... 66

X
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS & ACRONYMS

AFP. Active Fire Protection

ATEX. Atmospheres Explosibles
BLEVE. Boiling liquid expanding vapor explosion
BOP. Blow Out Preventer
CIA. Chemical Industries Association
EN. European Standard
ENAFOR. Entreprise nationale algérienne du forage
ESD. Emergency shutdown valves
FERA. Fire and Explosion Risk Assessment
FMEA. Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
FMECA. failure mode, effects and criticality analysis
HACCP. Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point
HAZOP. Hazards and Operability Study
ICI. Imperial Chemical Industries
L.I.E. lower flammability limit
L.S.E. upper flammability limit
MAH. Major Accident Hazard
NFPA. National Fire Protection Association.
P&IDs. Piping and Instrument Diagram
PFD. Process Flow Diagram
PFE. Projet de Fin d'Études
PFP. II. Passive fire protection
PRA. Probabilistic Risk Analysis
QRA. Quantitative Risk Assessment
UVCE. Unconfined Vapor Cloud Explosion
VCE. Vapor Cloud Explosion

XI
 GENERAL INTRODUCTION

The oil and gas industry is inherently associated with fire and explosion hazards. Drilling rigs, in
particular, concentrate a multitude of risk factors due to the presence of flammable hydrocarbons,
high-pressure equipment, and electrical systems. These potential hazards necessitate a proactive
approach to ensure the safety of personnel, minimize environmental damage, and protect valuable
assets.
Fire and explosion incidents on drilling rigs can have catastrophic consequences. These events can
result in:
-Loss of life and serious injuries
-Environmental pollution from spilled oil and toxic fumes
-Significant financial losses due to rig damage, production downtime, and liability claims
Therefore, there is a critical need to effectively assess and mitigate fire and explosion risks on
drilling rigs. This PFE (Projet de Fin d'Études) focuses on the application of a Fire and Explosion
Risk Assessment (FERA) study specifically tailored to drilling rig operations.
Where is the problem in how to conduct a Fire and Explosion Risk Assessment (FERA) study and
simulate the damage resulting from a possible combustion or explosion accident?
In order to solve the previous problematic we should answer the next sub-questions:
-What do fire and explosion mean and what are the conditions for their occurrence?
-What are the methods of analysing fire and explosion risk?
-Which software we use to applicate this simulation?
We have the following hypotheses that may be considered as answers:
-Software ALOHA can model various fire and explosion scenarios the threat zone estimates from
ALOHA can be used for emergency planning purposes. Understanding potential reach of a fire or
explosion helps determine evacuation zones, resource allocation, and response strategies.
Our thesis is divided into three chapters:
In the first chapter we started by Overview on Fire and Explosion Risk.
In the second chapter we present the methods of analysing fire and explosion risk.
In the third and final chapter, we present ENAFOR Company and the application of the Fire and
Explosion Risk Assessment study and simulation on drilling rig.

1
 CHAPTER I:
Fire and Explosion Risk
CHAPITRE I: Fire and Explosion Risk

INTRODUCTION:
Fire risk refers to the likelihood that a fire will occur in a specific place. It's important to consider
fire risk because fires can be devastating, causing loss of life, property damage, and environmental
harm.

The professional service technician, should have a basic knowledge of fire chemistry, theory of
extinguishment, classification of fires and properties of different fuels. So, we started by breve
description on how the fire occur and spread. This base knowledge will allow the professional
technician to better understand the fire hazards that they may encounter, how various fire
extinguishing agents, in theory, suppress fire and therefore have a better understanding of the
equipment.

3
CHAPITRE I: Fire and Explosion Risk
SECTION I: Overview on Fire Safety

1. Fire definition:
Fire is the visible effect of combustion, a continuous chemical reaction involving rapid oxidation at
high temperature followed by heated gaseous and visible plus invisible radiation.

According to NFPA: “An oxidation process, which is a chemical reaction resulting in the evolution
of light, heat, and combustion products”. [1]

Fire Triangle:

Fires, even the biggest ones, always start from a simple chemical reaction, combustion. Live
combustion compared to the slow combustion that is oxidation, can only arise in the presence of
three elements.

These three elements are necessary for a fire to develop, this is called the fire triangle:

• The fuel: (wood, paper, cardboard, textile, plastic material, etc.).

• The oxidizer: (oxygen).

• The heat source: (candle or match flame, light bulb, iron, spark, etc.).

Putting out a fire means acting on one of the three elements (fuel, oxidizer, heat source). If the
action is easy when you put out a wastepaper basket with a glass of water, a flaming gas leak by
closing the tap, a fryer fire by covering the latter with a lid, the problem becomes more complicated.
Whether it is a drilling rig, a warehouse, a fuel tank or a forest.

However, it is by applying these simple principles, but with powerful means and a rigorous strategy
that the firefighters will control the fire. If one of these three elements is not present or disappears
during combustion, fire does not exist.

4
CHAPITRE I: Fire and Explosion Risk

Figure 1: Fire Triangle [2, p. 4]

2. Classification of Fires:
- Classe A: solid-state fires in which the combustion is normally accompanied by the formation
of embers and leaves an ash. Common examples of class “A” fires would be paper, wood. The
preferred method for extinguishing class “A” fires is to remove the heat. Water is the most
common agent, but others such as dry chemical, halon, halogenated agents and foam can be used
effectively.
- Classe B: fire includes combustible liquid or gas (gasoline, oil, propane, and natural gas,
etc.).These products can be found in ateliers.
- Classe C: fires involve live electrical equipment and require the use of an extinguishing agent
and/or extinguisher that will not conduct electricity back to the fire fighter(s). Electricity is an
energy source and an ignition source, but by itself will not burn. Instead, the live electrical
equipment may serve as a source of ignition for a class “A “fire such as insulation or packing, or
a class “B” fire.
- Classe D: metal fires (aluminum, titanium, magnesium, sodium, etc.). These very particular
fires can occur in laboratories. These fires require special agents such as dry powders and special
application techniques. Many common agents like water will actually react to burning metals
and increase the intensity of the fire in a violent manner.

5
CHAPITRE I: Fire and Explosion Risk
- Classe k: fires involve cooking media. These can be any animal or vegetable based fats or oils.
These fires require special agents such as wet chemical extinguishers and systems that are
alkaline in nature and have superior cooling capabilities. Prior to the 1998 edition of NFPA 10
these fires were considered to be Class “B” fires. After extensive testing it was decided that they
are unique in nature and are totally different than Class “B” fires. [2, p. 6]

Figure 2: Fire classifications [3]

6
CHAPITRE I: Fire and Explosion Risk
3. Extinguishing methods for each class: [4]
3. 1 Principles extinguishing agents:
Water fire extinguishers:

The most common type, effective against ordinary combustibles (paper, wood, cloth) classified as
Class A fires. They function by cooling the burning material and reducing its temperature below the
point of ignition. However, they have limitations:

 Freezing temperatures: Pure water extinguishers freeze and become unusable in cold
environments. Some types contain antifreeze for such conditions.
 Electrical hazards: Water conducts electricity, making them unsuitable for electrical fires
(Class C). Using them on electrical fires can endanger the user.
 Water damage: While effective, water extinguishers can cause water damage to surroundings.
Consider this potential consequence before using.

Dry powder fire extinguishers :

Dry powder fire extinguishers are versatile and can be used on Class A, B, C, D, E fires. The
powder smothers the fire by creating a barrier between the fuel and the oxygen.

Foam fire extinguishers:

Foam fire extinguishers are used to put out Class B fires that involve flammable liquids such as
(oil, gasoline, solvents). The foam creates a layer over the burning liquid, this foam layer
suffocates the fire by:

- Separating oxygen: The foam physically blocks oxygen from reaching the burning liquid,
interrupting the fire triangle.
- Cooling effect: The foam also has a cooling effect, helping to lower the fuel temperature
below its ignition point.
CO2 fire extinguishers:

Carbon Dioxide (CO2) fire extinguishers have the distinct benefit of not leaving a residue after
use. When it comes to protecting fragile and expensive electronic equipment, this might be a big
concern. Food preparation spaces, labs, and printing or duplicating operations are all common
examples. Extinguishers containing carbon dioxide are approved for use on Class B and Class C

7
CHAPITRE I: Fire and Explosion Risk
fires. Because the agent is released in the form of a gas/snow cloud, its range is limited to 1m to
2.4m. Because the agent can rapidly evaporate, this type of fire extinguisher is not suggested for
outdoor use in windy situations or interior usage in regions prone to strong air currents .When
used in restricted places, the concentration required for fire extinguishment limits the amount of
oxygen in the area of the fire and should be handled with caution.

Wet chemical fire extinguishers:

Wet chemical fire extinguishers are used to put out on only Class F fires that involve cooking
oils and fats, such as in a commercial kitchen. The wet chemical creates a barrier over the
burning oil, which prevents oxygen from reaching it and extinguishes the fire.

3. 2 Extinguishing methods:

Remember that each class of fire corresponds to one or more types of extinguishing agents and
processes that can be found, for example, on the information labels of extinguishers or in the name
of certain products.

To control a fire, it is necessary to break the association of the three elements of the fire triangle;
this rupture can be carried out according to three modes:

Cooling: Eliminating the heat is one of the best methods for putting out a fire. Water cooling
is therefore one of the most often used techniques. The water absorbs the heat produced by
the fire. As long as the water is still able to absorb heat, this works.
It's crucial to remember, though, that water should never be utilized in flames caused by
electrical currents, grease, cooking oils, or other flammable substances.
Smothering: removes the oxygen content around the fire in order to make the atmosphere
incombustible. An example of this is covering the candle with a cup. The fire burns out all
the oxygen inside the glass creating a vacuum.
Starving: Starving the fire from its fuel source is a different approach. When fire runs out of
flammable materials, it will eventually burn out itself. For example, a bonfire in the open
when it is not in contact with any other wood or dry grass will ultimately lose its blaze. In a
gas fire, it will immediately extinguish if the gas supply is cut off. The same method is
applied to your gas stove or drilling rig fire.

8
CHAPITRE I: Fire and Explosion Risk
Good control of these processes makes it possible to determine the most appropriate
extinguishing agent according to the risk to be protected, the environment and the means of
implementation.

Apart from these three classic extinguishing modes, there is also a technique which consists in
passing the fire from one class to another to allow its extinction. Thus, for certain type D fires
(metal fires), the metal is immersed in a flammable liquid. The fire then becomes class B and is
easier to extinguish.

 CLASS "A”:

Water is the most used agent in class "A", it removes the heat. However, we could also use other
agents such as foam, dry chemical (Powder ABC), and foam.

 CLASS "B”:

The best agent for this class depends on the situation and circumstances because flammable
liquids do not burn in their liquid phase; instead, the vapors created by these liquids inflame.
Therefore, we can use a diversity of fire extinguishing agents; Powder ABC/BC, CO2, and
Foam.

 CLASS "C”:

For class "C", we use most of the time the CO2 agent because it includes electricity &
electronics equipment, so we cannot use any wet substances like water or foam. We can also use
Powder ABC/BC.

We consider electricity as an energy source, but it will not burn by itself.

 CLASS "D”:

This type of fire needs special agents like dry chemical because it contains metals such as
sodium, magnesium, zirconium and titanium.

The agents that we used before in other classes will not work in this class. For example, water
will react to flammable metals and increase the intensity of the fire.

9
CHAPITRE I: Fire and Explosion Risk
 CLASS "K”:

These fires necessitate wet chemical agent because they can be any fats or oils of an animal or
vegetable.

Before, this type was considered as a fire in class "B". However, after a while, they decided on a
different type of fire classified individually, considering the diversity of extinguishing type
between them. [5]

Figure 3: Fire extinguisher types [6]

4. Definition of firefighting systems:

Fire-fighting systems placed in places where there is a high fire risk .For extinguishing, each fire
class have a specific agent. The firefighting system is a mean of protection against fire and its
consequences, and it aims to safeguard human lives and property (buildings, facilities industrial,
machinery, equipment…).A Firefighting equipment is equipment designed to extinguish fires or

10
CHAPITRE I: Fire and Explosion Risk
protect the user from fire. It may be used by trained fire fighters, untrained users at the scene of a
fire, or built into a building's infrastructure (such as a sprinkler system). [7]

4.1 Types of firefighting systems: there are two types:

I. The automatic fire extinguishing system: Is a fixed system that is installed in the sites to
be protected according to it nature of on-site work and fire independent of the site and
these systems are: Sprinkler systems, carbon dioxide systems, Simple systems, alternatives
and foam, HALON Systems
II. Manual extinguishing system: Is the systems that are installed in the places to protect fire
risks these systems are operated by a person or persons and through these systems .Rubber
pipe systems or fire network, fire booths and manual fire extinguisher.
4.2 Types of fire protection: There are two different types of fire protection
I. Active Fire Protection (AFP): is a group of systems that require some amount of action
or motion in order to work efficiently in the event of a fire. Actions may be manually
operated, like a fire extinguisher or automatic, like a sprinkler, but either way they require
some amount of action.
II. Passive fire protection (PFP): is an integral component of a fire safety strategy. It forms
an essential element of the structural fire protection and fire safety in a building through,
containing fires (known as “compartmentation, slowing the spread of fire with fire-
resistant walls, floors and doors (protecting escape routes). [8]

5. Importance of fire safety:

Fire safety is important and necessary in the workplace in order to prevent and protect against the
destruction caused by fire. Fire safety reduces the risk of injury and building damage that fires can
cause. Fire safety is important in order to:

 Reduce the risk of injury to employees and customers.

 Reduce damage to facility/building.
 Protect against possible fines.
 Protect against losing customers trust.
 Protect employee jobs that would be lost due to extensive building damage.
11
CHAPITRE I: Fire and Explosion Risk
SECTION II: Overview of Explosions

1. Definition of an explosion:
Concretely, and in everyday language, the word “explosion” represents a large number of
phenomena. For our study, we present the definition given by Baker "In an open field, an explosion
occurs if a sufficiently large quantity of energy is released, for a short enough time to generate a
blast wave which propagates in the environment from of the emission source called the source of the
explosion.

The definition given by the Groupement Français de Combustion is as follows: “An explosion is a
sudden release of energy more or less confined, more or less controlled, with or without external
consequences, the explosion can give rise to a pressure wave (blast wave), to a ball of fire. In the
case of chemical explosion, the energy release process can be deflagration or detonation.

The explosion is therefore associated with a release of energy capable of generating violent, even
destructive, mechanical and thermal effects. [9]

2. Types of explosions:
I. Physical explosion:
A physical explosion occurs when mechanical energy is suddenly released, such as the release of
compressed gas. These types of physical explosions include rupture of a container and an explosion
due to a rapid transition phase.

Container rupture occurs when a process vessel containing a material under pressure (such as air)
suddenly fails. Tire explosion is a type of explosion due to the rupture of a container.

A rapid phase transition explosion occurs when a material is exposed to a heat source, causing the
phase to change (from liquid to vapor, for example) and changing the volume of the material. .

II. Chemical explosion:

A chemical explosion requires a chemical reaction, which could be a combustion reaction (rapid
exothermic reaction or rapid release of heat). A chemical explosion can occur in the vapor, liquid or
solid phase.

The release of high volume propane gas is an example of an explosion due to a combustion reaction.
The ignited gas can cause the vapors of a boiling liquid to explode explosively (BLEVE
phenomenon).

A chemical reaction explosion can be an uncontrolled chemical process that results in rapid release
of heat and chemicals.

12
CHAPITRE I: Fire and Explosion Risk
III. Electric explosion:

An arc flash is an example of an electrical explosion. The Canadian Standards Association defines
an arc flash hazard as a “dangerous situation characterized by the possibility of the release of energy
caused by an electrical arc.” It also specifies that there “may be a danger of arc flashes when
conductors or other live circuit elements are exposed or are inside the equipment in a protected or
enclosed state, if a person interacts with the equipment in a manner likely to cause an electric arc.
Under normal service conditions, enclosed live equipment that has been installed and maintained
correctly is not likely to present a danger of arc flashes. »

Fire, equipment damage, serious injury or death can occur near an arc flash.

Many factors can cause arcing, such as dust, dropped tools, accidental contact, condensation,
equipment failure, corrosion and improper installation. [10]

3. Definition of ATEX:

On industrial sites and construction sites, the safety of personnel and equipment is a priority. Precise
measures are put in place to prevent possible dangers. Among them, the ATEX indication.

ATEX is the abbreviation for “Explosive Atmosphere”. An ATEX is an environment in which the
risk of explosion is high due to the presence of combustibles, visible or not to the naked eye.
According to standard EN 1127-1, an explosion is “a sudden reaction of oxidation or decomposition
involving an increase in temperature or pressure or both simultaneously”. The spread of combustion
is almost immediate, accompanied by flames and heat waves. An ATEX can form under normal
operating conditions or accidentally by the leak of one or more fuels.

In an ATEX, the air mixes with flammable materials. The explosion occurs when six simultaneous
conditions are met:

- The presence of an oxidant (generally oxygen in the air)

- The presence of a fuel (propane, hydrogen, coal, wheat flour, etc.)

- The presence of an ignition source (spark, static electricity, heat, etc.)

- The particular state of the fuel (gas, dust, fog, etc.)

13
CHAPITRE I: Fire and Explosion Risk
- obtaining an explosive range: the mixture is neither too lean nor too rich in fuel

- A confined space [11]

4. The effects of the explosion:

The explosion essentially produces overpressure and thermal effects as well as projection effects.

The overpressure effects generated by an explosion due to the production of combustion gases are
relatively limited in a free field. Depending on the degree of confinement and congestion of the
place where the explosion occurs, the effects of overpressure can become significant. In cases of
strong confinement, it can reach around ten bars. Almost all gas or dust explosions have flame
speeds of less than 100 meters per second and excess pressures of less than 10 bar: these are
deflagrations. Under certain conditions (notably in product confinement conditions), transitions
from deflagration to detonation are possible.

The effects of a tank burst are on the one hand effects of overpressure, due to the sudden expansion
of the compressed gases and the instantaneous vaporization of part of the liquid phase, and on the
other hand projections fragments of the tank.

The regulatory threshold values for evaluating the effects of overpressure on humans or structures
are as follows:

 20 mbar corresponding to the effects of broken windows

 50 mbar corresponding to irreversible effects and slight damage to structures
 140 mbar corresponding to the first lethal effects and serious damage to structures
 200 mbar corresponding to significant lethal effects and serious damage to structures
 300 mbar corresponding to very serious damage to structures

The thermal effects of an explosion are due to the radiation of the flame and hot combustion gases.
Their range and severity vary depending on the extent of the explosion's propagation and its speed.
The more an explosion is confined or in a crowded environment, the greater the flame speed and
overpressure will be; the thermal effects will then be less marked, the flame "passing too quickly",
and the overpressure effects will be clearly preponderant. Furthermore, the more the explosive
conditions of the mixture are met over a large area, the more distant targets will be affected by the
cumulative effects of radiation. [12]

14
CHAPITRE I: Fire and Explosion Risk
5. Explosion conditions:
 Presence of fuel.
 Particular state of the fuel, which must be in the form of gas, mist or dust suspended in the air.
 Presence of an oxidant (generally oxygen in the air)
 Presence of an ignition source.
 Obtaining an explosive range (range of fuel concentrations in the air within which explosions are
possible)
 Sufficient confinement (in the absence of confinement, a rapid combustion phenomenon is
obtained with significant flames but, generally, without significant pressure effect).
Containment is not an essential condition but represents an aggravating factor in the explosion phenomenon
and the associated risks. [13]

Figure 4: Explosion conditions [13, p. 4]

6. Dangerous phenomena:
BLEVE: “Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapor Explosion”, the explosion of expanding gas coming
from a boiling liquid (case of the Feyzin accident in 1966, 18 deaths).

Figure 5: The different development phases of BLEVE [14]

15
CHAPITRE I: Fire and Explosion Risk
Pressurized liquefied gas storages are likely to be the site of a BLEVE. This is a violent vaporization
of an explosive nature following the rupture of a tank containing a liquid at a temperature much
higher than its boiling point at atmospheric pressure. One of the causes may be the heating of a
storage sphere caught in a fire. This can burst under the effect of internal pressure: fragments are
then projected and liquefied gas is released, instantly vaporized. If the gas in question is flammable,
a fireball is formed with intense thermal radiation.

UVCE: “Unconfined Vapor Cloud Explosion”, explosion of a gas cloud in an unconfined

environment (case of the Flixborough accident in 1974, 28 deaths).

Following a flammable gas leak, the mixture of gas and air forms a cloud which, upon encountering
an ignition source, can explode. The effects are essentially pressure effects and thermal effects.

Figure 6: The different phases of development of a UVCE [14]

The fire of a stock of products: in warehouses for example: to the thermal effects of the fire itself
can be added, depending on the nature of the products stored, risks of explosion and toxic risks.

Figure 7: The different phases of fire development in a product stock [14]

16
CHAPITRE I: Fire and Explosion Risk
The emission and dispersion of toxic products: during a major accident, following an explosion,
fire or major leak, leading to pollution of the air, water and soil, leading to fatal consequences.
(Bhopal accident in 1984) or lasting soil contamination and possible health consequences (Seveso
accident in 1976).

Figure 8: The different phases of development of the emission and dispersion of chemical products
[14]

A pool fire: when a pool of flammable liquid, produced following the loss of containment of a
tank, catches fire. This can generate significant thermal effects.

Figure 9: The different phases of development of a pool fire [14]

17
CHAPITRE I: Fire and Explosion Risk
Boil-over : classic or in a thin layer, a phenomenon that can be encountered in the event of a fire in
tanks of relatively viscous hydrocarbons (heavy fuel oil, diesel, domestic fuel oil) when water is
present at the bottom of the tank.

Figure 10: The different phases of development of a BOIL-OVER [14]

7. Explosion prevention and protection measures:

Explosion prevention is crucial for ensuring the safety of people and property in many
environments, including industrial workplaces, refineries, grain silos, and chemical storage facilities.
Hierarchy of protective measures In accordance with the ATEX Directive 1999/92/EC, explosion
prevention should follow a hierarchy aimed at eliminating hazards at the source:

 Prevent the formation of explosive atmospheres: This is the most effective and preferred
measure. This involves:
- Substituting non-flammable or less flammable products for hazardous substances.
- Designing processes and equipment that prevent the release of flammable substances.
- Implementing effective ventilation and aspiration systems to remove flammable
gases and dusts.
 Eliminate ignition sources: If the formation of an explosive atmosphere cannot be
completely prevented, it is crucial to eliminate potential ignition sources, such as:
- Open flames, sparks, and hot surfaces.
- Static electricity.
- Tools and equipment not suitable for explosive atmospheres.
 Implement explosion protection measures: When it is impossible to completely prevent the
formation of explosive atmospheres and ignition sources, protection measures must be put in
place to limit the consequences of a potential explosion. This may include:

18
CHAPITRE I: Fire and Explosion Risk
- Explosion containment: This involves constructing strong enclosures or barriers to
contain the explosion and minimize damage to the surroundings.
- Explosion venting: Explosion venting systems can be installed to quickly evacuate
flammable gases and dusts in the event of an explosion, thus reducing the pressure
and impact of the explosion.
- Explosion mitigation: Mitigation systems, such as explosion suppressors or blast
panels, can be used to absorb the energy of the explosion and reduce its destructive
effects.
 Organizational measures and training In addition to the technical measures mentioned above,
it is essential to implement appropriate organizational and training measures to ensure
explosion prevention:
- Develop and implement an explosion risk assessment procedure to identify and
analyze the specific risks for each worksite.
- Implement training and awareness programs to inform employees about explosion
hazards, safety procedures, and protective measures to be taken.
- Establish clear emergency response procedures in the event of an explosion,
including evacuation, alerting emergency services, and firefighting.
- Carry out regular inspections and maintenance of installations and equipment to
ensure their proper functioning and prevent failures that could lead to explosions.

19
CHAPITRE I: Fire and Explosion Risk
Conclusion:
In this chapter, we discussed the fire and explosion safety in general covering all the basics sides.
Fire and explosion safety is paramount for preventing devastating consequences. By implementing
the strategies discussed, we can significantly reduce the risk of these events.

20
 CHAPTER II:
Overview of Risk Assessment Methods
CHAPTER II: Overview of Risk Assessment Methods
Introduction:
Risk assessment is an essential component of risk management, which aims to identify, analyze and
prioritize potential risks that a business, project or system may face. The goal is to make informed
decisions to mitigate these risks and minimize their negative impact.
In this chapter, we presented certain risk assessment methods: Fire and explosion risk assessment,
HAZOP, QRA.

22
CHAPTER II: Overview of Risk Assessment Methods
SECTION I: Overview of Fire and Explosion Risk Assessment (FERA).

1. Definition of Fire and Explosion Risk Assessment (FERA):

A Fire and Explosion Risk Assessment (FERA) is a systematic process used to identify and evaluate the
potential for fires and explosions within a facility or during an activity. It's a crucial component of ensuring
safety and preventing catastrophic events.

2. Key Objectives of FERA:

 Identify fire and explosion hazards: This involves pinpointing materials, processes, and
equipment that could pose a risk of fire or explosion.
 Analyze likelihood and impact: FERA assesses the probability of a fire or explosion
occurring and the potential consequences, considering factors like damage to property,
injuries, and business disruptions.
 Develop mitigation strategies: Based on the risk assessment, FERA recommends actions
to minimize the likelihood and severity of fire and explosion events. This could involve
implementing control measures like improved ventilation, proper storage of flammable
materials, and robust safety procedures. [15, p. 5]
3. General Requirements:
 The FERA study should be done at least for the Upper Tier Major Hazard Facilities and as
required for the Lower Tier Major Hazard Facilities. These facilities include process units,
equipment, piping, and buildings.
 The FERA study shall be conducted by competent personnel.
 The FERA study shall not be conducted in isolation. It shall consider all other engineering
issues and related studies.
 The FERA study shall use appropriate data and the correct level of detail.
 The FERA study shall use appropriate software/models.
 The FERA study shall represent the reality, and the objectives shall be to reduce risk rather
than prove acceptability. [15, p. 8]
4. Brownfield:
Fore Existing operating facilities and under development or new expansion projects, the following
should be considered:

23
CHAPTER II: Overview of Risk Assessment Methods
4.1 For Existing Facilities Where FERA is not Available:
The FERA study shall be carried out at the first available opportunity (earliest).

4.2 For Existing Facilities and a New Expansion to be Established:

An integrated FERA study for the existing and planned facilities shall be carried out.

4.3 For Existing Facilities Where FERA is Available:

The FERA study shall be reviewed and revalidated or updated, if required, based on the following:
 If significant changes happened to the facilities (e.g., modification in process, feed changes,
new technology, barriers changes, manning level, fire protection measures, building
functionality or building occupancy, etc.) are observed or carried out.
 Every five years to ensure integrated Risk from all existing facilities, including modification
and brownfield projects, is considered.
 During developing and updating the COMPANY Safety Case study, if the FERA study is
required in the Safety Case.
Suppose no significant changes have been identified over five years, and the outcomes of previous
FERA studies are still valid and technically robust. In that case, no update is required for the FERA.
The COMPANIES shall develop a technical justifying note for revalidation of the study with
relevant supporting documents. [15, p. 9]
5. FERA Methodology:
The basis of the FERA study methodology is to identify incident scenarios and evaluate the risk by defining
the frequency of failure, the probability of various consequences, and the potential impact of those
consequences on different facilities. The Methodology of the FERA study could be summarized in the
following main tasks:
1. Set the FERA scope and define the assumption register contents.
2. Hazard identification, including defining the potential event sequences and potential incidents.
3. Evaluate the incident outcomes (consequences) using typical tools, including vapor cloud dispersion
modeling and fire and explosion effect modeling.
4. Identify different receptors to be evaluated (e.g., hydrocarbon handling equipment, critical structures,
buildings, etc.).
5. Estimate the incident impacts (consequences) on different receptors against the plant/structure vulnerability
criteria.
6. Estimate the failure case frequencies.
7. Combining the potential consequence for each event with the event frequency over all events.
8. Estimate the risk for each of the different receptors against the risk tolerability criteria.
9. Identify and prioritize potential Risk Reduction Measures if required.
The FERA study methodology flowchart is illustrated in Figure 11. [15, pp. 9,10]

24
CHAPTER II: Overview of Risk Assessment Methods

Figure 11: The FERA study methodology flowchart. [15, p. 10]

25
CHAPTER II: Overview of Risk Assessment Methods
5.1 FERA Study Scope of Work :
The COMPANY is responsible for identifying the FERA study scope of work and submitting
it to the FERA consultant/executor to prepare the assumption register to start the execution of the
study. The scope of the study shall be submitted to or prepared in co-operation with the
COMPANY’ Process Safety internal concerned department. The scope of work of a FERA study
includes the necessary details to define the FERA as a single document and includes:
 The Objective of the FERA Study
 The Facility Description
 Different Receptors to be evaluated
 Types of Risks to be evaluated:
The FERA study identifies the Major Hazards, evaluates the associated likelihood and
consequences to the different facilities, and calculates the risk levels of facilities in a numerical
way for comparing with the:
 The vulnerability criteria (consequence approach).
 The risk tolerability criteria (risk-based approach).

 FERA Deliverables:
The scope of work must define the FERA study Report main deliverables, which shall include:

 Hazard identification (potential hazardous events).

 The incident scenarios include the causes and the consequences/impact analysis.
 Estimate the likelihood of events.
 Risk estimation and evaluation for all receptors.
 Input for assessing the requirements of passive and active fire protection (PFP & AFP).
 Input for the evaluation of the requirements of blast protection for the buildings.
 Input for the EER Assessment.
 Providing inputs for developing the fire zones.
 Proposal for Risk-reduction measures.
 Re-evaluation of the Risk considering the study recommended risk reduction measures.

 Boundaries of the FERA study:

The boundaries of the FERA study should clearly define which facilities’ hazards (including
neighboring facilities) are to be included, or excluded, from the study.
 The Software Requirements and the Study Copies:
The software to be used for the FERA study should be valid, internationally recognized, and
licensed. The consultant should provide the software name, version, license number, and
validation certificate.
 Identification of Resources
 Kick-Off Meeting
 Finalize the Scope of Work [15, p. 11.12.13.14]

26
CHAPTER II: Overview of Risk Assessment Methods
5.2 The Assumption Register:
After the kick-off meeting and finalize the scope of work between the COMPANY and the
consultant, the consultant shall establish the study Assumption Register to show:
 The study has different assumptions.
 The available data to be used.
 The alternatives and assumptions for the missing data (if any).
 The references to be used. [15, p. 14]

5.3 Hazard Identification:

All potential Major Accident Hazards associated with the facility or operation shall be taken forward
for FERA assessment. The potential hazardous event is usually called the 'top event’.
Hazard Identification techniques (e.g., QRA, HAZOP) along with the COMPANY Major Accident
Hazard (MAH) list and the accidents that have occurred in the oil and gas industry and are relevant
to the COMPANY operations are used to identify the Major Hazards associated with project. [15, p.
16]
5.4 Consequence Assessment:
The FERA study uses Event Trees to model the chronological series of events. The Event Tree
provides a systematic method to ensure all potential outcomes because of a specified top event are
identified. The most common possible outcomes from different hydrocarbons releases are:

 Jet Fire: A jet fire is a turbulent diffusion flame resulting from the combustion of a high
velocity, usually from a pressurized source of fuel continuously released with significant
momentum in a particular direction. The flame can emit high levels of radiant heat into the
surrounding area. Jet fire events are considered to occur following the immediate ignition of
a continuous release involving flammable fuel.
 Pool Fire: A pool fire is a type of diffusion flame that occurs when a flammable liquid fuel
spills or leaks onto a horizontal surface and ignites. The fuel vaporizes and burns above the
liquid pool, creating a radiant heat source.
 Flash fire: A flash fire is a rapid, short-lived combustion event that happens when a
flammable vapor-air mixture encounters an ignition source. The vaporized fuel rapidly
ignites, creating a sudden surge of heat and radiation. Flash fires are often characterized by
their intense radiant heat, which can cause severe burns and even ignite clothing over long
distances.
 Explosion (VCE - Vapor Cloud Explosion): A VCE occurs when a flammable vapor cloud
formed from a leaked or spilled hydrocarbon ignites and undergoes a rapid, violent
combustion. This rapid combustion creates a pressure wave that can cause significant
structural damage, injuries, and even fatalities.
 Fireball / BLEVE (Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapor Explosion): A fireball is a burning
fuel-air cloud whose energy is emitted primarily from radiant heat. Fireballs were considered
to occur following the immediate ignition of large vapor releases. They were also possible

27
CHAPTER II: Overview of Risk Assessment Methods
following the immediate ignition of a large release of liquefied gas. Fireball durations are
typically 5–20 seconds; thus, the heat loads are unlikely to damage any equipment
 Flammable Gas Dispersion: flammable gas dispersion is a critical aspect to consider. It
refers to the process by which a released flammable gas spreads and mixes with the
surrounding air. Understanding dispersion patterns is essential for evaluating the potential
for fire and explosion hazards.

The possible outcomes (consequences) of various failure cases (accident scenarios) for a given
release profile for each scenario under consideration are shown as a guide in Table 1. [15, pp.
16-20]

Table 1: Possible outcomes for each failure case category (typical industry practice). [15]

Possible Outcomes (Consequences)

Explosions
Flash fires
BLEVEs
Pool fires

Fireballs
Jet fires
Failure Case Category

1. Pipework, risers, valves, flanges, fittings,

Y Y N N Y Y
and associated equipment
2. Pressure vessels/tanks Y Y Y Y Y Y
3. Atmospheric storage tanks N Y N N Y Y
4. Intermediate bulk containers N Y N N N N
5. Pipelines Y Y N N Y Y
6. Flexible hoses Y Y N N Y Y

5.5 Frequency Assessment:

 Hazardous Events Likelihood:
There are two basic forms that the likelihood of an event may be expressed:
 Frequency: number of events or outcomes per defined unit of time (e.g., a 6-inch ESD valve
has a failure frequency of 10-4 times per year).
 Probability: the measure of the chance of occurrence expressed as a number between 0 and
1, where 0 is an impossibility and 1 is an absolute certainty.
 Frequency Estimation:
The failure frequency for each failure case for each isolatable section needs to be represented by
one frequency value. The failure frequency for the failure case is the sum of the failure
frequencies of the base elements multiplied by the number of base elements. In general, the
failure case frequency is given by this simple equation:

28
CHAPTER II: Overview of Risk Assessment Methods
n

F = ∑ 𝑛𝑖𝑓𝑖
i=i

Where:
F: is the frequency of incidents.
𝑛𝑖: is the number of base elements i.
𝑓𝑖: is the frequency of failure for base elements i. [15, p. 25]
5.6 Other Data for Risk Calculation:
To complete the Risk Calculation, some other data should be collected, calculated, and
considered (e.g., Process and Plant Data, Chemical Data, Environmental Data). Hereafters are
some of the most important required data:
5.7 Risk Analysis & Evaluation:
The outputs from the previous sections are combined in the risk model (the software) to create the
risk values for each different failure scenarios category (i.e., jet fire, pool fire, and explosion) which
are used for assessing the risk at different receptors.
Once risks are identified and analyzed for different failure scenarios categories, the risks should be
evaluated against set Criteria.
Table 2: Facilities risk tolerability criteria. [15, p. 27]

Onshore and offshore receptors/components

Unacceptable Risk
(Exceeding the Upper ≥10-3 (0ccurance per Year)
Tolerability
Limit)
ALAR < 10-3 & >10-5 (0ccurance per Year)
P
Broadly Acceptable Risk
(Under the Lower ≤10-5 per year (0ccurance per Year)
Tolerability Limit)

5.8 Assess the FERA Study Results and Set the Recommendations:
Once you've completed the FERA (Fire and Explosion Risk Assessment) study, it's crucial to
analyze the results and translate them into actionable recommendations for improving safety.
5.9 FERA Reporting:
FERA (Fire and Explosion Risk Assessment) reporting is a crucial step in effectively
communicating the findings and recommendations of a FERA study to relevant stakeholders. A
well-structured FERA report ensures that the identified hazards, potential risks, and mitigation
strategies are clearly understood and actionable steps can be taken to improve safety. [15, p. 34]
29
CHAPTER II: Overview of Risk Assessment Methods
SECTION II: Overview of Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) Method
1. History of QRA method:
The terms QRA (Quantitative Risk Assessment), PSA (Probabilistic Safety Assessment) and PRA
(Probabilistic Risk Analysis) are used synonymously in different industries to describe various
techniques for evaluating risk. Whilst quantification of risk for specific issues has been around for a
long time, the grandfather of modern probabilistic assessment of the overall risk for an entire major
hazard facility.
Is generally accepted to be WASH- 1400, commissioned by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission
in 1975. This quantified the safety risks associated with the operation of all electricity generating
nuclear power plants in the US. The nuclear industry led the way, motivated by a desire to demonstrate
that the actual risk was less than other industrial facilities and counter the public’s perception that
nuclear stations are very risky because the worst case consequences are potentially so catastrophic. It
is not surprising that the petro- chemical industry followed suit shortly after, since the toxic effects of
large chemical releases can disperse many miles and affect large numbers of people in local towns
and cities. Explosion effects can also be devastating. For example, an explosion in 1974 at the
Flixborough chemical plant in the UK killed 28 people. One of the first major QRAs for petrochemical
installations was of the highly industrial area of Canvey Island near London, in 1978. [16]

2. What is QRA? :
Is a systematic approach used to evaluate risks associated with a process, activity, or system. It involves the
quantitative estimation of the probability of occurrence of adverse events and the magnitude of their
consequences, and the frequency at which a release of the hazard may be expected to occur. These aspects are
then combined in order to obtain numerical values for risk – usually risk of fatality. QRA includes
consideration of all identified hazardous events in order to quantify the overall risk levels. QRA is commonly
used in various industries, including chemical, nuclear, aerospace, and finance, to ensure safety, reliability,
and regulatory compliance.
QRA is probably the most sophisticated technique available to engineers to predict the risks of accidents and
give guidance on appropriate means of minimising them. Nevertheless, while it uses scientific methods and
verifiable data, QRA is a rather immature and highly judgemental technique, and its results have a large
degree of uncertainty. Despite this, many branches of engineering have found that QRA can give useful
guidance. However, QRA should not be the only input to decision-making about safety, as other techniques
based on experience and judgement may be appropriate as well. [17]

3. The Key Components of QRA:

Figure 12 illustrates the classical structure of a risk assessment. It is a very flexible structure, and
has been used to guide the application of risk assessment to many different hazardous activities.
With minor changes to the wording, the structure can be used for qualitative risk assessment as well
as for QRA.
The first stage is system definition, defining the installation or the activity whose risks are to be
analysed. The scope of work for the QRA should define the boundaries for the study, identifying
which activities are included and which are excluded, and which phases of the installation's life are
to be addressed.

30
CHAPTER II: Overview of Risk Assessment Methods
Then hazard identification consists of a qualitative review of possible accidents that may occur,
based on previous accident experience or judgement where necessary. There are several formal
techniques for this, which are useful in their own right to give a qualitative appreciation of the range
and magnitude of hazards and indicate appropriate mitigation measures. This qualitative evaluation
is described in this guide as ‘hazard assessment’. In a QRA, hazard identification uses similar
techniques, but has a more precise purpose - selecting a list of possible failure cases that are suitable
for quantitative modelling.
Once the hazards have been identified, frequency analysis estimates how likely it is for the accidents
to occur. The frequencies are usually obtained from analysis of previous accident experience, or by
some form of theoretical modelling.
In parallel with the frequency analysis, consequence modelling evaluates the resulting effects if the
accidents occur, and their impact on personnel, equipment and structures, the environment or
business. Estimation of the consequences of each possible event often requires some form of
computer modelling, but may be based on accident experience or judgements if appropriate.
When the frequencies and consequences of each modelled event have been estimated, they can be
combined to form measures of overall risk. Various forms of risk presentation may be used. Risk to
life is often expressed in two complementary forms:
 Individual risk - the risk experienced by an individual person.
 Group (or societal) risk - the risk experienced by the whole group of people exposed to the
hazard.
Up to this point, the process has been purely technical, and is known as risk analysis. The next stage
is to introduce criteria, which are yardsticks to indicate whether the risks are acceptable, or to make
some other judgement about their significance. This step begins to introduce non-technical issues of
risk acceptability and decision-making, and the process is then known as risk assessment.
In order to make the risks acceptable, risk reduction measures may be necessary. The benefits from
these measures can be evaluated by repeating the QRA with them in place, thus introducing an
iterative loop into the process. The economic costs of the measures can be compared with their risk
benefits using cost-benefit analysis.
The result of a QRA is some form of input to the design or on-going safety management of the
installation, depending on the objectives of the study. [17]

31
CHAPTER II: Overview of Risk Assessment Methods

Figure 12: The QRA study methodology flowchart. [17]

32
CHAPTER II: Overview of Risk Assessment Methods
4. Objectives of QRA :
The risk management approach planned as part of the study of dangers and environmental impacts
of industrial processes provides for the quantitative analysis of risks and the identification of
measures to prevent major technological accidents. Its objectives are:
 Identify the different sources of potential dangers and nuisances generated by the classified
establishment.
 Reduce risks at source: better knowledge of risks makes it possible to make modifications to
the process under study (reduction in the quantity of dangerous materials, modification of the
location of equipment, etc.).
 Inform public authorities: knowledge of risks allows responsible authorities to judge the
environmental acceptability of the project and/or process under study by considering safety
and the proposed management measures.
 Inform the public: public participation is an essential dimension of the procedure for
studying environmental hazards and impacts; risk analysis is a public information tool which
must be easily accessible.
 Plan emergency measures taking into account major risks: the project owner must, in
consultation with public authorities, develop intervention plans for accidents with major
consequences in order to adequately prepare those involved. [18]

5. Advantages of Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA):

 Precision and Objectivity:
 Advantage: Utilizes numerical data to provide precise and objective risk estimates.
 Impact: Facilitates informed decision-making based on concrete evidence.
 Early Risk Identification:
 Advantage: Enables early identification of potential hazards and risk scenarios.
 Impact: Allows for preventive measures to be implemented before incidents occur.
 Resource Optimization:
 Advantage: Helps allocate resources effectively by focusing on the highest risks.
 Impact: Enhances the efficiency of investments in safety and risk management.
 Regulatory Compliance:
 Advantage: Assists in meeting safety and environmental regulations and standards.
 Impact: Reduces the risk of legal penalties and improves the organization's
reputation.
 Continuous Improvement:
 Advantage: Provides a basis for continuous improvement in safety and risk
management practices.

33
CHAPTER II: Overview of Risk Assessment Methods
 Impact: Enables learning from previous analyses and optimizing processes
accordingly.
 Decision Support:
 Advantage: Supplies detailed information to support strategic and operational
decision-making.
 Impact: Improves decision quality through a deep understanding of risks.
 Effective Risk Communication:
 Advantage: Facilitates the communication of risks and management measures to
stakeholders.
 Impact: Increases transparency and builds stakeholder trust.

6. Disadvantages of Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA):

 Complexity and Cost:
 Disadvantage: QRAs can be complex and expensive to conduct, requiring
specialized skills.
 Impact: May represent a financial and resource burden for small organizations.
 Data Availability and Quality:
 Disadvantage: The accuracy of QRA depends on the availability and quality of data.
 Impact: Incomplete or poor-quality data can lead to inaccurate risk estimates.
 Assumptions and Uncertainties:
 Disadvantage: QRAs often rely on assumptions and models that can introduce
uncertainties.
 Impact: Results can be sensitive to variations in the assumptions and parameters
used.
 Time-Consuming:
 Disadvantage: QRAs can be time-consuming, especially for complex systems.
 Impact: May delay decision-making and the implementation of risk management
measures.
 Resistance to Change:
 Disadvantage: Recommendations based on QRAs may sometimes face
organizational resistance.
 Impact: Can limit the effectiveness of proposed risk reduction actions.
34
CHAPTER II: Overview of Risk Assessment Methods
 Over-Reliance on Models:
 Disadvantage: There is a risk of over-reliance on models and quantitative results.
 Impact: May lead to underestimation of unmodeled risks or important qualitative
aspects.
 Technological Dependence:
 Disadvantage: QRAs often depend on advanced software and technological tools.
 Impact: Requires additional investments in technology and training.

SECTION III: Overview of Hazards and Operability Study (HAZOP)

35
CHAPTER II: Overview of Risk Assessment Methods
Among the most important elements and methods of risk analysis is HAZOP, as it is
considered to be the basis for industrial safety and security systems and policies of several
companies, whether in Algeria or worldwide. Given the great importance of the HAZOP risk
analysis method, we provide some basic information and concepts related to this efficient and
reliable method in the field of industrial safety and security. And a Hazards and Operability Study
(HAZOP), conducted by a team, is a detailed process for identifying hazards and operational
problems. The HAZOP study focuses on identifying potential deviations from design intent,
examining their probabilities of occurrence and possible causes, and assessing their consequences.

1. History of HAZOP:

The HAZOP study method was developed by Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI) in the 1960s and
its use and development was encouraged by the Chemical Industries Association (CIA) Guide
published in 1977. Since then it has been become the technique of choice for many people involved
in designing new processes and operations. [19]

2. Definition of HAZOP:

HAZOP study is a process hazard analysis procedure originally developed by ICI in the 1970s. The
method is highly structured and divides the process into different operational nodes and studies the
behavior of different parts of each node over the basis of a set of possible deviation conditions or
guide words. [20, p. 21]

3. Characteristics of the HAZOP study:

The main characteristics of a HAZOP study include:

 Study is a creative process. It involves using a series of guide words to identify potential
deviations from the design intent and using these deviations as “triggers” to stimulate the
imagination of team members in investigating the causes of the deviation and in the
evaluation of the consequences that they may generate.
 The study takes place under the direction of a qualified and experienced study leader. This
ensures that an exhaustive examination of the system is carried out using logical and
analytical thinking. Preferably, the study leader is assisted by a scribe who notes the dangers
and/or disturbances identified with a view to their evaluation and the search for solutions.

36
CHAPTER II: Overview of Risk Assessment Methods
 The quality of the study is based on the qualifications and experience of the specialists
forming the team. These specialists from various disciplines must demonstrate intuition and
insight.
 The examination should be carried out in a climate of positive thinking and frank
discussion. When a phenomenon is identified, it is noted for later evaluation and resolution.
 Problem solutions are not the primary focus of the HAZOP study, but may, if appropriate,
be noted and passed on to the design team. [21]
4. Objectives of the HAZOP:
 HAZOP identifies potential hazards, failures and operability problems.
 For identifying cause and the consequences of perceived mal-operations of equipment
and associated operator interfaces in the context of the complete system.
 Analyze deviations from the intended design or operational intent that could lead to
hazardous situations.
 To check adequacy of existing safeguards and propose new safeguards to reduce risk.
 Structured & Systematic Qualitative approach to identify:
 Risk to personnel
 Risk to environment,
 Risk to equipment,
 Operability issues.
 Its use results in fewer commissioning and operational problems and better informed
personnel, thus confirming overall cost effectiveness improvements. [21]
5. Procedure of HAZOP:

A study can only be carried out when a detailed description of the process and a complete
design are available. Study boundaries must be defined covering the items of equipment to
be examined and the modes of operation that must be examined. The study itself is carried
out by a team of experienced personnel, mainly from the factory itself, chosen for their
knowledge of the factory, the process and the site, the operating and control systems, the
potential hazards and other problems.

Important elements of a HAZOP study include its specification, team composition, study
preparation, detailed analysis in team meetings, and report preparation. [19]

To carry out a HAZOP analysis, this method must be structured in a table:

37
CHAPTER II: Overview of Risk Assessment Methods
Table 3: HAZOP template [22]

5.1 Explanation of the table:

1) Study Node:
The first step in HAZOP is breaking down the overall process into a number of simpler elements
that are called nodes. Nodes could be the item in the Process Flow Diagram (PFD) or the Piping and
Instrument Diagram (P&IDs).
2) Parameter:
Lists all related process parameters for an individual node. The parameters are physical or chemical
characteristics of the machine, equipment that is used in the node.
3) Guide Word:
The guide words are adjectives or adverbs used with the parameters to direct the deviation. Below is
a list of guide-words, that include but not limited to the following list:

38
CHAPTER II: Overview of Risk Assessment Methods
Table 4: Guide Word of HAZOP [22]

Guide Word Meaning

NO None of the designed parameter

MORE Quantitative increase of the parameter

LESS Quantitative decrease of the parameter

AS WELL AS Additional activities

PART OF Part of the designed intent is achieved

REVERSE Opposite of the design intention

OTHER THAN Another activity takes place

EARLY Earlier than a design intention

LATE Later than a design intention

BEFORE Relating to the sequence in the process

AFTER Relating to the sequence in the process

FASTER Happen but in a less time

SLOWER Happen but in a longer time

4) Deviation:
The team determines the deviation by combine guide-words and process parameters. Not all
combinations exist in an actual process. Process deviation is a combination of process parameters
and guide-words.

Combine a guide-word with a parameter to identify the deviations of the process parameter form the
design intent.

Example: The process parameter is Air Flow Rate, Guide word is Low -> Deviation (potential) is
Low Air Flow Rate.

39
CHAPTER II: Overview of Risk Assessment Methods
5) Possible Cause:

“Cause” is always the hard part of HAZOP. Finding the cause of a potential failure mode requires
experience and a deep understanding of the process being analyzed. This is also where the team
knowledge is needed the most.

6) Possible Consequence:

The consequence of the deviation is defined to determine the severity of the risk if the deviation
happens.

7) Action Required:

If there is no existing control for the deviation or existing controls is not enough to prevent or detect
the deviation. The action is required to reduce the chance of deviation occur or consequence of the
deviation.

8) Responsibility:

A person who has the responsibility for the required actions. The team should clarify the name of
the person to prevent a vague understand of responsibility.

9) Target Finished Date:

The date that the responsible person plans to finish the action.

10) Actual Finished Date:

The date that the responsible person finishes the action. [22]

6. Advantages and Disadvantages of HAZOP:

6.1 The benefits:
 Useful in dealing with hazards that are difficult to quantify:
o Hazards rooted in human performance and behaviour.
o Hazards that are difficult to detect, analyze, isolate, count, predict, etc.
o The methodology does not require you to assess or measure the probability of
occurrence of the deviation, the severity of the impact or the ability to detect
 Integrated brainstorming methodology
 Systematic and comprehensive methodology
 Simpler and more intuitive than other commonly used risk management tools. [19]
40
CHAPTER II: Overview of Risk Assessment Methods
6.2 The inconvenients :
 No way to assess hazards involving interactions between different parts of a system or
process
 No ability to rank or prioritize risks; Teams can optionally integrate the required capacity
 No way to assess the effectiveness of existing or proposed controls (safeguards)
 May need to interface HAZOP with other risk management tools (e.g. HACCP) for this
purpose. [19]
7. HAZOP Study Applications:

Originally, the HAZOP study was a technique developed for systems involving the treatment of a
fluid medium or other material flows in processing industries, particularly the chemical and
petroleum process industries. However, its field of application has continued to expand in recent
years, and the HAZOP technique is applied today, for example:

 Software applications, including programmable electronic systems.

 Systems ensuring the movement of people by different modes, such as road transport and
rail transport.
 Examining different manufacturing sequences and operating procedures.
 The evaluation of administrative procedures in different industries.
 The evaluation of specific systems, such as medical devices.

The HAZOP study is particularly useful in identifying weaknesses in systems requiring the
movement of materials, people or data, requiring a certain number of events or activities in a
planned sequence or procedures controlling this sequence. The HAZOP study is not only a
valuable tool for the design and development of new systems. It can be used profitably to
examine potential hazards and problems associated with different operating states of a given
system (starting, waiting, normal operation, normal shutdown, emergency shutdown, etc.). It
can also be used in batch and steady state manufacturing processes and sequences, as well as
continuous sequences. The HAZOP study can be considered as an integral part of the overall
process of good engineering and risk management. [21]

41
CHAPTER II: Overview of Risk Assessment Methods
8. Relationship with other analysis tools:

The HAZOP study can be used in combination with other operational safety analysis methods,
such as failure modes, effects and criticality analysis (FMECA) and fault tree analysis (AAP).
Such combinations can be used in the situations set out below:

 The HAZOP study clearly indicates that the operating qualities of a specific entity of
the equipment are critical and must be examined in depth. In this case, it is
advantageous to complete the HAZOP study with an FMEA from the same entity.
 Following the HAZOP study of deviations by element or characteristic, it is possible to
analyze the effect of multiple deviations or to quantify the possibility of failures using
an AAP.

The HAZOP study is an approach centered essentially on the system, unlike the FMEA which
is centered on the component. Indeed, FMEA starts from a possible failure of a component, to
then study the consequences of this failure on the entire system. The study is therefore only in
the direction of cause and effect. This concept differs from that of a HAZOP study which
begins by identifying possible deviations from the design intent and, from there, proceeds in
two directions, one to look for possible causes of the deviation and l 'other to deduce the
consequences. [21]

9. Limitations of the HAZOP study:

 Although HAZOP studies have demonstrated extreme utility in different environments,
the technique has limitations that must be taken into account when choosing its
application:
 The HAZOP study is a hazard identification technique that methodically examines the
effects of deviations on each party. Sometimes a danger comes from an interaction
between a numbers of parts of the system. This requires a more detailed study of the
danger, using techniques such as event tree analysis or fault tree analysis.
 As with any technique for identifying hazards or operational problems, there is no
guarantee that the HAZOP study will identify all hazards or all operational problems.
Therefore, it is preferable that the study of a complex system does not rely solely on a
HAZOP study. In general, this technique is used in combination with other techniques
appropriate to the system studied. It is essential to integrate other relevant studies to
obtain an effective risk management system.
42
CHAPTER II: Overview of Risk Assessment Methods
 A large number of systems are closely interrelated and a deviation in one of them can
have a cause elsewhere. Appropriate local intervention may not target the actual cause
and may not prevent an accident from occurring later. Many accidents have occurred
following minor local modifications whose knock-on effects elsewhere had not been
anticipated. Although this problem can be remedied by shifting the implications of
deviations from one party to another, this is often not achieved in practice.
 The success of a HAZOP study depends largely on the ability and experience of the
study leader, the knowledge of the team members and their interactions.
 The HAZOP study only considers the parts that appear on the design plans. Activities
and operations that do not appear there or are not mentioned by team members are not
taken into account. [21]

43
CHAPTER II: Overview of Risk Assessment Methods
Conclusion:

In this chapter, we explored some of the different methodologies and tools for conducting
risk assessments, with an emphasis on Fire and Explosion Risk Assessment method.

The insights gained from this chapter underscore the importance of a structured and
systematic approach to managing risk, which is vital for ensuring safety, compliance, and
operational efficiency.

44
 CHAPTER III:
Presentation of ENAFOR Company,
Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by
aloha software.

22
CHAPTER III: Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by aloha software.
Introduction
In this chapter we covered all the information about the ENAFOR Company and rig site ENF51,
starting with its history, Missions, then we finished this Section 1 with Organizational Structure of
ENAFOR and in section 2 we made example for application of the Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment study on drilling rig ENF51.
We finished this chapter by explain the Software programme and simulation results.

46
CHAPTER III: Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by aloha software.
SECTION I: Presentation of ENAFOR Company.

1. General presentation of ENAFOR:

o Entreprise nationale algérienne du forage (ENAFOR) in French.
o Algerian National Drilling Company (ENAFOR) In English.

The National Drilling Company ENAFOR is a responsible actor committed to the path of
economic, social, and sustainable development progress. Its main mission is to carry out
drilling and workover services to actively contribute to the development and replenishment of
energy reserves for current and future generations. These missions must always remain present
in the management's mind so that all actions are undertaken in line with the overall strategy
outlined by SONATRACH. [23, p. 2]

1.1 History of the company:

 On April 28, 1966, ALFOR, a joint venture between SONATRACH and SEDCO, was
established. The company's capital was owned 51% by SONATRACH and 49% by SEDCO.

 The National Drilling Company (ENAFOR), resulting from the restructuring of

SONATRACH, was created by decree No. 81.170 on August 1, 1981, and was established
on January 1, 1982, by ministerial decree of December 31, 1981, with the effective date of
substitution of the ENAFOR Company for SONATRACH in some of its competencies:
ENAFOR thus took over all human, material, and infrastructural resources of the ALFOR
Company (a subsidiary of SONATRACH and SEDCO).

 On November 26, 1989, ENAFOR became an autonomous company in the form of a joint-
stock company (SPA), with a capital of 20,000,000 Algerian dinars, owned by the Mines
Fund at 40%, the Chemical/Petrochemical/Pharmaceutical Fund at 30%, and the Agri-food
Fund at 30%.

 In 1995, as part of the company's restructuring measures, ENAFOR's share capital was
increased to 400 million Algerian dinars. At the same time, the Chemical-Petrochemical and
Pharmaceutical and Agri-food Funds, which were the primary shareholders of the company,
were replaced by the Mines Fund, which became the sole shareholder.

 In 1996, the Holding Company "Realizations and Major Works (R.G.T.)" replaced the Mines
Fund to become the main and sole shareholder of ENAFOR.
47
CHAPTER III: Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by aloha software.
 On March 30, 1998, SONATRACH (Holding SSP) became the majority shareholder with
51% of the shares. The remaining 49% of shares were held by the Holding Company
"R.G.T.", then by the Holding Company "R.M.C." during the year 2000.

 On July 3, 2001, An Extraordinary General Meeting of the company's shareholders held,

decided to increase the share capital to 660 million Algerian dinars, by incorporating legal
and optional reserves.

 On June 17, 2002, an Extraordinary General Meeting of Shareholders decided on:

 Bringing ENAFOR's statutes into compliance by the effective transfer of shares from
the holding company S.S.P. to the holding company S.P.P. attached to
SONATRACH and from the Holding R.M.C. to the holding S.G.P.-Traven,
following a redeployment.

 Increasing the company's share capital from 660 million Algerian dinars to billions of
Algerian dinars. Shares held by each of the two Holding Companies were maintained
in proportions of 51% and 49%, respectively, for SONATRACH S.P and S.G.P.
Traven.

 In 2005, the 49% of shares held by S.G.P. Traven were transferred to the Holding Company
"INDJAB".

 In 2006, the holding company SONATRACH S.P.P. became the main and sole shareholder
by acquiring the 49% shares held by S.P.P. "INDJAB".

 On December 31, 2007, the General Assembly of Shareholders decided on the revaluation
surpluses of tangible assets within the framework of executive decree No. 07/210 of
07/04/2007 and the increase of the share capital from 4 to 14.8 billion Algerian dinars. Since
October 16, 2019, the company's share capital has increased from 14.8 billion to 50 billion
Algerian dinars. [23, p. 2]

48
 CHAPTER III: Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by aloha software.
1.2 Equipment Park:
ENAFOR has a fleet of 52 heavy, medium, and light-duty equipment, their types are listed in the
following table:

Figure 13: Types of ENAFOR Rigs [23, p. 4]

Table 5: List of Rigs types [23, p. 4]

3000 2000 1500 1000 900 800

ype d’appareil Total
HP HP HP HP HP HP
DRILLMEC MAS 8000 GD 1 1
NAT OIL WELL D-2000E 5 5
OIL WELL E-2000 5 5
NATIONAL 1320 UE 3 3
BENTEC DW E 2000 2 2
DRILLMEC MAS 7000 GD 5 5
OIL WELL 840-SE 1 1
OIL WELL 840- E 10 10
NATIONAL OIL WELL D-1500 UE 3 3
BENTEC E-1500 DC 4 4
BENTEC E-1500 AC 5 5
CARDWELL K 1000 E 1 1
NATIONAL OILWELL 760E 2 2
IDECO 900 E 4 4
OILWELL 660 E 1 1
Total 1 20 23 3 4 1 52

49
CHAPTER III: Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by aloha software.
1.3 Company logo:

Figure 14: ENAFOR logo [23]

2. presentation of Rig sit ENF51:

The site is approximately 27 km northwest of the town of Hassi Messaoud.
Between Hassi Messaoud and Ouragla.
Latitude: 31°46'44.16"N
Longitude: 5°50'15.72"E

Figure 15: The location of the Rig sit ENF51

50
CHAPTER III: Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by aloha software.
2.1 technical sheet of the device ENF 51:

Figure 16: Technical sheet of the device ENF 51 [24]

51
CHAPTER III: Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by aloha software.
2.2 Rig layout:

Figure 17: Rig layout of site ENF 51. [24]

52
CHAPTER III: Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by aloha software.
3. Organization of ENAFOR:

Figure 18: Organization of ENAFOR [23, p. 31]

53
CHAPTER III: Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by aloha software.
SECTION II: Application of Fire and Explosion Risk Assessment for drilling
rig and simulation by aloha software.
1. Application of Fire and Explosion Risk Assessment for drilling rig ENF 51:
1.1 Context:
The site is approximately 27 km northwest of the town of Hassi Messaoud.
The objective of the Project for a resumption of the MD 743 well in Side Track with the aim of
recovering its potential oil flow rate of 6.7 m3/h illustrated during the DST test during drilling
before deepening, while eradicating production of reservoir water.
As part of the project, application of a fire and explosion risk assessment, to take into account the
impacts of potential major explosions and fire dangers.

1.2 Presentation of the MD 743 well:

The MD743 oil producing well was drilled on 10/27/2019, the DST test carried out at 3494m/TR
before deepening gave an oil flow of 6.7m3/h. Then it was deepened to 3624m/TR where the body
of water is seen (The oil/water contact at 3550m), hence the need to isolate the aquifer with a
cement plug up to the coast. 3526m after covering the reservoir with a 4"½ perforated cement liner.
The start of production of the well turned out to be negative following a return of 90% of reservoir
water observed during the nitrogen start-up attempts. A fracturing operation was canceled on
05/24/2024 following frank communication in both directions between the 4'"½ and the 4"½ * 9"5/8
ring finger.
The goal of this Workover program is to take over the well in Side Track in order to recover its
potential illustrated during the DST test by eradicating the production of reservoir water.

Well parameters according to the last gauging (DST) on 21-10-2019

Flow rate 6.7m3/h Head pressure 56.2 bars
GOR 120 Reservoir pressure 356.66 bars

54
CHAPTER III: Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by aloha software.
1.3 List the team of the ENF 51 device WORK OVER:
 Senior Tool Pusher
 Junior Tool Pusher
 HSE Supervisor
 Medic
 Chief mechanic
 Chief Electrician
 Driller
 Assistant Driller
 Derrick man
 Floor man
 Rest-bout
 Mechanic
 Electrician.
 Crane operator
 Fork lift operator

1.4 IDENTIFICATION OF RISKS:

The potential for intrinsic dangers was identified before the risk analysis sessions. Their
identification is based on initial work which will firstly focus on the analysis of past
accidents and incidents carried out on accidentology, the dangers linked to dangerous
products used within the installation under study and the reactions dangerous chemicals, the
dangers associated with the storage installation of dangerous products in high temperature
conditions.
I. Identification of Potential Ignition Sources:

Table 6: Sources of inflammation.

Sources of Description Comment

inflammation

Hot surfaces Electric motors, Lightning, electromagnetic waves and

power supply box, electric current can create hot surfaces
the electric cables, when passing through conductors
machine bearing,
heat engines
Flames and hot Welding or cutting The hot gases obtained, the incandescent solid parts
gases beads,cigarettes and the soot can ignite an ATEX

Sparks of Friction, shock and These sparks can ignite the gases
mechanical origin abrasion

55
CHAPTER III: Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by aloha software.
Electrical equipment Electrical circuits These electrical sparks are likely to ignite
Loose connections the ATEX
Stray current
Stray Short circuit May create sparks, electric arcs
electric Grounding
currents damaged
Magnetic induction
Return current
Static Egret discharge From an insulating surface to a conductor;
electricity Cone discharge When filling silos Between two conductors,
Spark discharge one of which is insulated
Surface sliding Which occurs on the surface of thin insulating
discharge material
Lightning Electric shock following
lightning strike

Waves Mobile phones, Power of electromagnetic field may ignite

electromagnetic radio transmitters
radio frequency
104-3.1012HZ
Waves Lamps, electric arcs,
electromagnetic lasers
3. 1011-3.1015HZ
Ionizing radiation Radioactive source Can heat an environment by internal absorption of
energy until a flame appears
Ultrasound Electroacoustic
transmitter

56
CHAPTER III: Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by aloha software.
II. Photos-Sources of inflammation:

#1 #2 #3

#4 #5 #6

#7 #8 #9
Figure 19: Photos-Sources of inflammation.

57
CHAPTER III: Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by aloha software.
1.5 Scenarios:
From the analysis of risk factors, five (04) reference scenarios are identified as well as their causes. It also led
to the identification of dangerous phenomena; each dangerous phenomenon was assigned a probability,
intensity, severity and kinetics. Modeling with ALOHA software made it possible to evaluate the distance of
effec To study in detail the conditions of occurrence and the possible effects of dangerous phenomena as to
provide a more precise demonstration of the mastery of the scenarios leading to it, it may be necessary to
develop a complementary approach to the method used in the preliminary risk analysis and in particular to
visualize possible accidental sequences using a representation of the "bow tie"« nœud papillon ».

The use of such a tool based on tree-based methods such as the failure tree and/or the event tree (l’arbre des
défaillances et/ou l'arbre d'événements) makes it possible to better describe the scenarios but also to provide
valuable evidence concerning the mastery of each of these scenarios.

From the analysis of risk factors, five (04) reference scenarios are identified as well as their causes. It also led
to the identification of dangerous phenomena; each dangerous phenomenon was assigned a probability,
intensity, severity and kinetics. Modeling with ALOHA software made it possible to evaluate the distance of
effect.

1.6 SUBSTANCES STUDIED:

Table 7: CHARACTERISTICS OF PRODUCTS USED ON SITE

Crude oil is a flammable product at ambient temperature and pressure; it emits flammable vapors
under certain conditions of temperature, pressure and concentration. The density of these vapors is
greater than that of the air: they therefore tend to accumulate in the lower parts.
Natural gas is extremely flammable; it can ignite under certain conditions in the presence of air and
a heat source. Its lower flammability limit (L.I.E) is 5% and its upper flammability limit (L.S.E) is
15%.

58
CHAPTER III: Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by aloha software.
Diesel is a combustible product at a temperature above its flash point (55°C), the same goes for
lubricating and control oils which only ignite from 190°C.
All of the products used are stable at usual storage, handling and use temperatures. Furthermore,
their incomplete combustion and their thermolysis produce more or less toxic gases such as CO,
CO2, various hydrocarbons and soot.
 Components of natural gas:
Table 8: Components of natural gas.
Component unit Percent
Azote % Molar 2.103
Dioxyde de carbone % Molar 1.126
Méthane % Molar 63.626
Ethane % Molar 21.071
Propane % Molar 8.788
i-Butane % Molar 0.713
n-Butane % Molar 1.856
Neo-Pentane % Molar 0.003
i-Pentane % Molar 0.233
n-Pentane % Molar 0.323
n-Hexane % Molar 0.116
Benzène % Molar 0.005
n-Heptane % Molar 0.028
Toluène % Molar <0.001
n-Octane % Molar 0.005
E-Benzène % Molar <0.001
m- et p-Xylène % Molar 0.001
o-Xylène % Molar <0.001
n-Nonane % Molar 0.002
n-Decane % Molar 0.001
C11 % Molar 0.000
C12 + % Molar 0.000
Total % Molar 100.000

1.7 Accident scenario:

59
Equipment failures 1

Leak of flammable
product or Biel gas
Or
Mechanical attack 2 source

Deterioration of air quality

Human error during
use
1
Economic loss
And
Cigarette 3
Explosion Fire
Open flame 1

Material damage and injuries

and/or human losses
1
Short circuit
Or Fire spread to
Energy source neighboring workshops
4
Lightning

FAULT TREE EVENT TREE

Scenario n1: Drilling rig explosion

60
 Mechanical
aggression

Gaz fleet

Human error during Material damage and human

use losses or injuries

Explosion of propane bottles

High pressure Fire

Open flame Source of ignition

Deterioration of air quality

Increased heat

FAULT TREE EVENT TREE

Scenario n2: Fire at 61

the gas cylinders industrial
 Mechanical
aggression
OrDiesel leak

Human error when And Material damage and

filling human losses or injuries

Failure to follow Fire

instructions

Or Source of ignition
Open flame

Deterioration of air quality

Increased heat

FAULT TREE EVENT TREE

Scenario n3: Fire at the diesel tanks

62
Short circuit 1

Economic loss

Stripped electrical 1
wires

Material damage and injuries and/or human

Or Fire losses
Heating of electrical 1
cables

Disrupts the production chain

Dust 2

FAULT TREE EVENT TREE

Scenario n4: Fire in electrical equipment Electrical cabinet

or transformer

63
CHAPTER III: Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by aloha software.

1.8 The consequences:

The accident scenarios likely to be retained involve the following physical effects:

 Toxicity: release of toxic components by atmospheric dispersion with consequences.

 Overpressure wave (mass explosion), confined explosions: this scenario will be used for
mass explosions of explosive substances.
 Thermal flows or for widespread fire in a storage of flammable products (examples, pool
fires generated by an accident in storage)
 Missile effect (fragments or projections): no threshold can be set for this particular effect.
These physical effects can cause damage to potential targets such as: human beings, buildings,
property, and the environment. This damage is classified into 6 families:
 Direct lethal risk for humans:
 Pulmonary blast by overpressure wave
 Toxic dose
 3rd degree burns
 Indirect lethal risk for humans:
 Receiving an object on the head, object detached by overpressure wave.
 Speeding up of the human body leading to collision with structures or objects.
 Risk of injury to humans:
 Non-lethal burns following exposure to thermal flow,
 Rupture of the eardrum by overpressure wave.
 Destruction of buildings, property or equipment:
 Destruction by explosion wave of premises, etc.
 Destruction of installations or property by explosion effect.
 Repairable damage to property or equipment:
 By explosion wave: broken windows, frames, frames or roofs damaged; instrumentation,
electrical boxes, etc.
 Reversible or non-reversible effects on the environment.
1.9 Analysis of potential impacts in the event of fire or explosion:
 Impacts on the population:
The platform is 20KM in the northeast of the Hassi Messaoud desert outside the residential areas.
The impact on the population in the event of an accident is moderate.
 Impacts on staff:
After analyzing the risks, the potential impacts in the event of accidents on the personnel of the
establishment, Potential impacts in the event of fire or explosion:
Burns, asphyxia, death

64
CHAPTER III: Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by aloha software.
 Environmental impacts:
The platform is located in vacant land not occupied by industrial activities. Generally speaking, the
project will have a significant impact on the environment (emissions of gases, smoke, waste and
risks, etc.).
 Predictable economic and financial impacts in the event of an accident:
An accidental event would produce more or less significant financial and economic impacts
depending on the number of workers affected, the nature of the affected areas, the equipment and
systems damaged.
The establishment must be insured against such losses. The insurance premium will be used for the
renewal of damaged equipment in the event of an accident, however the impact of the disaster
depending on its severity and extent would result in work stoppages for staff.

2. Simulation by aloha software:

2.1 Presentation of ALOHA simulation software:
ALOHA is a stand-alone software application developed for the Windows and Macintosh operating
systems. It was developed and is supported by the Emergency Response Division1 (ERD), a
division within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in collaboration
with the Office of Emergency Management of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Its
primary purpose is to provide emergency response personnel estimates of the spatial extent of some
common hazards associated with chemical spills. The ALOHA development team also recognizes
that ALOHA can be an appropriate tool for training and contingency planning, but users should
remain aware of its primary purpose in spill response. ALOHA provides estimates of the spatial
extent of some of the hazards associated with the short-term accidental release of volatile and
flammable chemicals. ALOHA deals specifically with human health hazards associated with
inhalation of toxic chemical vapors, thermal radiation from chemical fires, and the effects of the
pressure wave from vapor-cloud explosions.

Since ALOHA is limited to chemicals that become airborne, it includes models to assess the rate at
which a chemical is released from containment and vaporizes. These “source strength” models can
be critical components in the process of assessing hazards. ALOHA links source strength models to
a dispersion model to estimate the spatial extent of toxic clouds, flammable vapors, and explosive
vapor clouds. However, ALOHA does not model all combinations of source strength, scenario, and
hazard category for combustion scenarios. The user must choose a specific combination from a
limited selection. Table 9 shows the combination of source strength models, scenarios, and hazard
categories allowed in ALOHA.
65
CHAPTER III: Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by aloha software.
ALOHA uses a graphical interface for data entry and display of results. The area where there is a
possibility of exposure to toxic vapors, a flammable atmosphere, overpressure from a vapor cloud
explosion, or thermal radiation from a fire are represented graphically as threat zones. Threat zones
represent the area within which the ground-level exposure exceeds the user-specified level of
concern at some time after the beginning of a release. All points within the threat zone experience a
transient exposure exceeding the level of concern at some time following the release; it is a record of
the predicted peak exposure over time. In some scenarios, the user can also view the time
dependence of the exposure at specified points. [25, p. 2]

Table 9: Hazard categories modeled in ALOHA [25, p. 3]

66
CHAPTER III: Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by aloha software.
2.2 Calculations:
All the characteristics necessary for ALOHA are then provided. The user can then decide to apply a
Gaussian model, a heavy gas model or let ALOHA decide.
Subsequently, he can then ask ALOHA to plot 3 types of threats: the toxic zone, the potential
flammability zone or the explosion zone according to the characteristics of the pollutant and we
obtain the following type of graph:

Figure 20: presentation of the results.

67
CHAPTER III: Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by aloha software.

Figure 21: presentation of the results in google earth

3. RECOMMENDATIONS:
 Comprehensive Data Collection:
 Historical Data: Gather and analyze historical data on equipment performance, failures,
and maintenance records.
 Real-Time Monitoring: Implement real-time monitoring systems to collect data on critical
parameters such as pressure, temperature, and vibration.
 Detailed Failure Mode Analysis:
 Identify Potential Failures: Use techniques such as Failure Modes and Effects Analysis
(FMEA) to identify potential failure modes in the drilling rig components.

68
CHAPTER III: Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by aloha software.
 Criticality Assessment: Assess the criticality of each failure mode based on its impact on
safety, environment, and operational efficiency.
 Risk Assessment and Mitigation:
 Probability and Consequence: Evaluate the probability and consequences of identified
failure modes to prioritize risks.
 Mitigation Strategies: Develop and implement mitigation strategies for high-risk failure
modes, such as redundancy, preventive maintenance, and design improvements.
 Stakeholder Involvement:
 Interdisciplinary Team: Form an interdisciplinary team including engineers, operators,
safety experts, and maintenance personnel to contribute diverse perspectives.
 Training and Awareness: Provide training to all stakeholders on the importance of FERA
and their roles in mitigating risks.
 Regular Review and Updates:
 Periodic Reviews: Conduct regular reviews of the FERA study to incorporate new data,
technology advancements, and changes in operational conditions.
 Continuous Improvement: Foster a culture of continuous improvement by regularly
updating risk assessments and mitigation plans based on feedback and new information.
 Technology Integration:
 Advanced Analytics: Utilize advanced analytics and machine learning techniques to
predict potential failures and optimize maintenance schedules.
 Automation and Remote Monitoring: Implement automation and remote monitoring
systems to enhance real-time detection and response to potential issues.
 Regulatory and Compliance Considerations:
 Compliance with Standards: Ensure that the FERA study complies with relevant industry
standards and regulatory requirements.
 Documentation and Reporting: Maintain comprehensive documentation and reporting of
all FERA activities and findings for regulatory audits and internal reviews.
 Emergency Response Planning:
 Contingency Plans: Develop and regularly update emergency response plans to address
potential high-risk failure scenarios.

69
CHAPTER III: Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by aloha software.
 Drills and Simulations: Conduct regular drills and simulations to ensure preparedness and
effective response to emergencies.
 Collaboration with Equipment Manufacturers:
 Manufacturer Insights: Collaborate with equipment manufacturers to gain insights into
common failure modes and recommended maintenance practices.
 Upgrades and Modifications: Discuss potential equipment upgrades or modifications to
enhance reliability and reduce the risk of failures.
 Environmental and Safety Considerations:
 Environmental Impact Assessment: Evaluate the potential environmental impacts of
drilling operations and implement measures to minimize adverse effects.
 Safety Protocols: Establish and enforce stringent safety protocols to protect personnel and
equipment during drilling operations.
3. 1 Arrangement of fire-fighting resources on site:

Figure 22: Arrangement of fire-fighting resources on site

70
CHAPTER III: Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by aloha software.

CONCLUSION:
The application of Fire and Explosion Risk Assessment (FERA) in drilling rig operations, coupled
with simulations using ALOHA software, has proven to be an invaluable approach for enhancing
safety and mitigating risks. This chapter has explored the critical aspects of integrating FERA
methodologies and advanced simulation tools to effectively identify, assess, and manage potential
fire and explosion hazards in drilling environments.

71
CHAPTER III: Presentation of ENAFOR Company, Application of Fire and Explosion Risk
Assessment for drilling rig and simulation by aloha software.

General Conclusion
The study on the Application of Fire and Explosion Risk Assessment (FERA) on a drilling rig has
provided comprehensive insights into the identification, evaluation, and mitigation of hazards
associated with fire and explosion in drilling operations. Throughout this dissertation, we have
systematically explored the methodologies and tools essential for enhancing safety and minimizing
risks in such high-stakes environments. , Summary of Findings:
Systematic Risk Identification:
The study utilized FERA to systematically identify potential fire and explosion hazards inherent in
drilling operations. By examining historical data, operational processes, and equipment
specifications, we have been able to map out the main risk scenario that could potentially occur.
Detailed Risk Analysis:
A thorough analysis of identified risks was conducted to understand their causes, consequences, and
probabilities. This analysis was crucial in prioritizing risks and developing targeted mitigation
strategies. The use of risk matrices and other analytical tools helped in visualizing and managing the
risks effectively.
Simulation with ALOHA Software:
The integration of ALOHA software for simulating fire and explosion scenarios proved to be highly
beneficial. The simulations provided a visual representation of potential incidents, allowing for a
better understanding of their impact. This facilitated the development of more robust emergency
response plans and mitigation measures.
This dissertation underscores the critical role of proactive risk management in mitigating hazards
and protecting both personnel and assets in the challenging environment of drilling operations.

72
 Bibliography

[1] "Reporters Guide: All About Fire," [Online]. Available: https://www.nfpa.org/about-nfpa/press-

room/reporters-guide-to-fire/all-about-fire.

[2] FIRE AND FIRE EXTINGUISHMENT, J. CRAIG VOELKERT, 2009 – Revised 2015 .

[3] "ABCs of Fire Extinguishers," 2024. [Online]. Available: https://fireprevention.utexas.edu/fire-

safety/fire-extinguishers-campus/abcs-fire-extinguishers.

[4] "Classes Of Fires And Extinguishers," 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.safetynotes.net/classes-

of-fires-and-extinguishers/.

[5] "Fire Extinguishing Methods and Approach," 2024. [Online]. Available:

https://www.fcfnational.com.au/blog/extinguishing-fires.

[6] "What Are Types of Fire Extinguishers, Colours and Codes?," Human Focus, 04 January 2024.
[Online]. Available: https://humanfocus.co.uk/blog/what-are-types-of-fire-extinguishers-colours-and-
codes/.

[7] "Fire fithing system," Mahmoud Mandow, PHILADELPHIA UNIVERCITY, 2016.

[8] "What are the Two Types of Fire Protection?," Fire Systems, 2024. [Online]. Available:
https://firesystems.net/2022/09/30/what-are-the-two-types-of-fire-protection/.

[9] D. Djurdjura, Artist, mémoire fin d’etude : Maîtrise des risques d'explosion d'une atmosphère explosive
(ATEX) chez Danone Djurdjura Blida Spa. [Art]. Blida Spa.

[10] "Définitions d’explosion," Travail Securitaire NB, 29 août 2016. [Online]. Available:
https://www.travailsecuritairenb.ca/politiques-et-lois/lois/interpretations/definitions-dexplosion.

[11] "Les zones ATEX : définitions, zonage, solutions," A2S, 28 04 2024. [Online]. Available: https://a2s-
atex.com/fr/content/8-les-zones-atex-definitions-zonage-solutions.

[12] "Risque explosion," Aida Ineris FR, 28 04 2024. [Online]. Available: https://aida.ineris.fr/inspection-
icpe/risques-accidentels/risque-explosion/risque-explosion.

[13] "Explosion sue le lieu de travail," INRS FR, 28 04 2024. [Online]. Available:
https://www.inrs.fr/risques/explosion/conditions-survenue-consequences.html.

[14] "Risque industriel," Mémento du maire et des élus locaux, 28 04 2024. [Online]. Available:
https://www.mementodumaire.net/risques-technologiques/rt-1-risque-industriel/. [Accessed 05 2020].

[15] FIRE AND EXPLOSION RISK ASSESSMENT (FERA) GUIDELINE EGPC-PSM-GL-009, Egypt:
The Egyptian Process Safety Management Steering Committee (PSMSC Egypt), February 2020.

[16] RISKTEC ESSENTIALS / QUANTITATIVE RISK ASSESSMENT (QRA), TÜV Rheinland Group,
2018.

[17] GuideTo Quantitati Risk Assessment for Offshore Installations, John Spouge DNV Technica , 1 Jan.
1999.

73
 Bibliography
[18] "MEMOIRE MAGISTER ANALYSE QUANTITATIVE DES RISQUES INDUSTRIELS : APPORT
DES TECHNIQUES FLOUES ET POSSIBILISTES," Ilyas SELLAMI, BATNA, 27/01/2013.

[19] HAZOP: Guide to Best Practice, Frank Crawley, Brian Tyler, 2015.

[20] PROCESS SAFEBOOK 1.Functional Safety in the Process Industry .Principles, standards and
implementation, plant PAX.

[21] "Hazards and Operability Study (HAZOP)," Guide de pratique professionnelle, mai 2011. [Online].
Available: https://gpp.oiq.qc.ca/Start.htm#t=Hazards_and_Operability_Study_(HAZOP).htm.
[Accessed décembre 2014].

[22] J. Hartwell, Artist, HAZOP – Hazard and Operability Study. [Art]. FMEA Studio, November 21, 2019.

[23] "Manuel Qualitè, Santè, Sècuritè et Environnement ENAFOR," ENAFOR, Hassi Messaoud, Ouargla.

[24] " Algerian National Drilling Company (ENAFOR) ENF#51 -Private document.," ENAFOR, Hassi
Messaoud, Ouagla, 2024.

[25] ALOHA® (AREAL LOCATIONS OF HAZARDOUS ATMOSPHERES) 5.4.4, Seattle, Washington:

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
2013.

74