Essay Available:

You are here: Home → Math Problem → Literature & Language

Pages:

3 pages/≈825 words

Sources:

2 Sources

Level:

APA

Subject:

Literature & Language

Type:

Math Problem

Language:

English (U.S.)

Document:

MS Word

Date:

Total cost:

$ 10.8

Topic:

# AHP Analysis of Oil Refinery Safety Factors and Prevention Strategies: A Case Study of the 2005 BP Texas City Refinery Incident (Math Problem Sample)

Instructions:

The objective of this assignment was to :
1. TO APPLY THE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS (AHP) TO EVALUATE FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO OIL FIRES IN REFINERIES AND POTENTIAL PREVENTION STRATEGIES.
2. TO ANALYZE FOUR CRITERIA (HUMAN FACTORS, MANAGEMENT FACTORS, TECHNICAL FACTORS, AND SAFETY SYSTEMS) AND THREE ALTERNATIVES (IMPROVED TRAINING, STRICTER MANAGEMENT OF CHANGE PROCEDURES, AND ENHANCED SAFETY BARRIER SYSTEMS) USING PAIRWISE COMPARISONS.
3. TO CALCULATE PRIORITY VECTORS, WEIGHTED SUM VALUES, AND CONSISTENCY RATIOS TO PRIORITIZE SAFETY MEASURES.
4. TO ULTIMATELY RANK THE MOST EFFECTIVE PREVENTIVE MEASURE BY COMPARING THE WEIGHTS OF THE CRITERIA AGAINST THE SCORES OF THE ALTERNATIVES.
source..

Content:

Factors Table
Factors
Table
Pair-wise matrix comparison for the criteria
-6095-14181
Priority Vectors
-6095-14206
Weighted sum values These weighted ratings represent the overall importance or priority of each row (criteria) based on the pairwise comparisons and the calculated priority vector.
Student's Name:
Institution: Course:
I have read the article and also watched the video on the TB Texas Refinery incident in 2005. The catastrophic explosion resulted in resulted in 15 fatalities and 180 injuries. This tragic event highlighted the inherent risks associated with oil refineries and the importance of effective safety measures. In this assignment, I will apply the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to evaluate potential factors contributing to oil fires in refineries.
I will consider four criteria: human factors, management factors, technical factors, and safety systems. I will then attempt to analyze three possible alternatives, namely improved training programs, stricter management of change procedures, and enhanced safety barrier systems that can be employed to mitigate similar strategies in the future.
Fundamentally, I will adopt the pairwise comparisons technique to calculate priority vectors, weighted sum values, and consistency ratios. This structured decision-making process can provide valuable insights for prioritizing safety measures and preventing incidents like the BP Texas Refinery explosion.
The assignment is divided into three major parts. Part one dwells on the criteria, while the subsequent section analyzes the alternatives. The last part juxtaposes the weights of the criteria and the scores of the alternatives to rank the most effective preventive measure.
Part One: Criteria
72847236809
207873636809
Table 1 shows four criteria and three alternatives that I will use to analyze the key factors that contributed to the BP Texas Refinery incident.
Human Factors
Improve Training and Supervision
Management of Change (MOC)
Strengthen MOC Procedures
Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA)
Enhance PHA Implementation
Criteria Alternative
Safety Barriers
The matrix is a simple tool that offers me a framework for testing consistency, obtaining additional information through making all possible comparisons, and analyzing the sensitivity of overall priorities to changes in judgment. The next step after I form the matrices is to derive the relative weights for the various elements. My integration process involves the evaluation of the so-called vector priorities (VP or eigenvectors) that designate the relative ranking of the dependent decision attributes for the objective in scope.
Table 2 shows a pairwise comparison matrix of criteria using the importance level table
Human factors
1.000
0.333
0.200
0.143
Management of Change (MOC)
3.000
1.000
0.333
0.200
Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA)
5.000
3.000
1.000
0.333
Criteria Human factors Management of Change (MOC)Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA)Safety Barriers
Safety Barriers 7.0005.0003.0001.000
This section comprises the process of computing the priority vectors. The first step is to sum the values in each column of the matrix in Table 2. Subsequently, each element of the matrix is divided by its column’s total to obtain the normalized matrix. The final step involves finding the average of the elements per row of the results in step 2 above. The obtained values constitute the priority vectors. In other words, I need to normalize the columns so that the sum of all column values becomes 1. I do so by first calculating the sum of a column's cell values and then dividing each cell value of that column by that sum. The results of this division are
shown in Table 4.
Table 4. Normalized comparison matrix data
Table 3: Calculating the sum of the columns
Human factors
1.0000.333
0.200
0.143
Criteria
Management of Change (MOC)
3.0001.000
0.333
0.200
Human factors
0.063
0.036
0.044
0.085
Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA)
5.0003.000
1.000
0.333
Management of Change (MOC)
0.188
0.107
0.074
0.119
Safety Barriers
7.0005.000
3.000
1.000
Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA)
0.313
0.321
0.221
0.199
Criteria Human factors Management of Change (MOC)Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA)Safety Barriers Column1Column2Column3Column4Column5
Total 16.0009.3334.5331.676Safety Barriers 0.4380.5360.6620.597
144322834925
Table 5 summarizes the priority vectors obtained by averaging the values in the normalized matrix Table
Human factors
0.063
0.036
0.044
0.085
0.057 0.122 0.263
0.558
Management of Change (MOC)
0.188
0.107
0.074
0.119
Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA)
0.313
0.321
0.221
0.199
Safety Barriers
0.438
0.536
0.662
0.597
Criteria Human factors Management of Change (MOC)Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA)Safety Barriers Priority vectors
Total 1.000
125730034586
Table 6: This section covers the process of obtaining the weighted sum values. The priority vectors is multiplied by rows of the pairwise comparison matrix.
Criteria
Human factors
Human factors
Management of Change (MOC)
1.000
Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA)Safety Barriers
0.3330.200
0.14
0.230 0.492 1.099
2.356
Management of Change (MOC)
3.000
1.0000.333
0.200
Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA)
5.000
3.0001.000
0.333
Safety Barriers
7.000
5.0003.000
1.000
491032882529The weighted value are computed using the mmult excel function
The
weighted
value
are computed
...

Get the Whole Paper!

Not exactly what you need?

Do you need a custom essay? Order right now:

### Other Topics:

- MathematicsDescription: Mathematics Literature & Language Math Problem...1 page/≈275 words| 1 Source | APA | Literature & Language | Math Problem |
- Ordinary differential equation 2Description: Ordinary differential equation 2 Literature & Language Math Problem...1 page/≈275 words| 2 Sources | APA | Literature & Language | Math Problem |
- Danish EconomyDescription: Question 1 Fig 1 showed R2 is equal to 0.751. This means that there is a very strong relationship between the gross domestic product and the number of employed persons. Fig 1 Question 2 About the development of the Danish economy from 2012-2022, from Fig 2 we predict imports. Fig 2 showed an equation as...9 pages/≈2475 words| 1 Source | APA | Literature & Language | Math Problem |