Presentation of a method for consequence modeling and quantitative risk assessment of fire and explosion in process industry (Case study: Hydrogen Production Process)

Introduction: Process industries, often work with hazardous and operational chemical units with high temperature and pressure conditions, such as reactors and storage tanks. Thus, probabilities of incidence such as explosions, and fire are extremely high, The purpose of this study was to present a comprehensive and efficient method for the quantitative risk assessment of fire and explosion in the process units. .Material and Method: The proposed method in this study is known as the QRA and includes seven steps. After determination of study objectives and perfect identification of study process, first, qualitative methods are used to screen and identify hazard points and the possible scenarios appropriate are identified and prioritized. Then, estimation of frequency rate are done using past records and statistics or Fault Tree Analysis along whit Event Tree. PAHST professional software and probit equations are used in order to consequence modeling and consequence evaluation, respectively. In the last step by combination of consequence and frequency of each scenario, individual and social risk and overall risk of process or under study unit was calculated. .Result: Applying the proposed method showed that the jet fire, flash fire and explosion are most dangerous consequence of hydrogen generation unit. Results showed that social risk of the both fire and explosion caused by full bore rupture in Desulphrizing reactor (Scenari3), Reformer (scenario 9) and Hydrogen purification absorbers are unacceptable. All of the hydrogen generation unit fall in ARARP zone of fire individual risk (FIR) and FIR up to 160 m of boundary limit unit is unacceptable. This distance is not only beyond of hydrogen generation unit boundary limit, but also beyond of complex boundary limit. Desulphurization Reactor (75%) and Reformer (34%) had the highest role in explosion individual risk in the control room and their risks are unacceptable. .Conclusion: Since the proposed method is applicable in all phases of process or system design, and estimates the risk of fire and explosion by a quantitative, comprehensive and mathematical-based equations approach. It can be used as an alternative method instead of qualitative and semi quantitative methods