Fire and Gas Hazard Mapping Continues to Require Engineering Judgment
Abstract
It is becoming increasingly common to use computer applications and software tools to aid engineers in designing fire and gas detector layouts. These tools help designers optimize layouts as well as verify, quantify and document the level of performance the system can be expected to achieve. The process of designing and assessing layouts in this way is called hazard mapping. In an age where “optimization” is increasingly becoming associated with computerized approaches that seek to minimize or maximize objective functions, many in the industry see these software tools and assume or wonder if the layout is generated automatically by the mapping software. Upon learning that a human engineer must still design the detector layout and place the detectors in the facility model, many ask why it hasn’t been automated and how the system can be considered optimized if it isn’t designed with the assistance of an algorithm. Fire and gas detector layout design requires the use of a great deal of engineering judgement which cannot currently be replicated or replaced by optimization algorithms. There are many practical concerns that must be addressed in the design of such systems that are difficult to model and automate. There are many rules of thumb, soft restrictions and best practices that are sometimes bent or broken to address the specific need of an application or facility. This paper reviews many of these issues in an attempt to make the case that the expert judgment of a human engineer is and will continue to be essential to the design of truly optimized fire and gas detection systems.
Description
PresentationSubject
Hazard MappingCollections
Citation
McNay, James; Pittman, William (2019). Fire and Gas Hazard Mapping Continues to Require Engineering Judgment. Mary Kay O'Connor Process Safety Center; Texas &M University. Libraries. Available electronically from https : / /hdl .handle .net /1969 .1 /193415.