Search

Selecting fires safety measures for road tunnels relies mainly on strict regulatory requirements. However, the choice should also be based on many different criteria and ranking of alternatives should take place. Existing methods exhibit lack in dealing rigorously with measures' selection amongst different alternatives. This paper contributes to the body of knowledge by proposing a novel method, named EVADE, which aims to incorporate diverse stakeholders' views and provide a meaningful ranking of alternatives. To do so, it estimates the tunnel level of safety taking into account only any standard measures existing. Subsequently, the performance of additional measures is examined. Then, a list of the most significant criteria that are valuable to judge the appropriateness of selected measures is introduced. The relative importance amongst the decision criteria is calculated through the Analytic Hierarchy Process, based on the expert opinion. Sensitivity analysis through Monte Carlo simulation is embedded to allow for a meaningful prioritization of the decision criteria. Thus, the alternatives’ ranking comes as a distribution instead of a single number, providing the decision-maker richer information for selecting the most suitable measure(s) according to the specific tunnel situation. At last, a typical tunnel is examined to showcase the utilization of the method.

Selecting fires safety measures for road tunnels relies mainly on strict regulatory requirements. However, the choice should also be based on many different criteria and ranking of alternatives should take place. Existing methods exhibit lack in dealing rigorously with measures' selection amongst different alternatives. This paper contributes to the body of knowledge by proposing a novel method, named EVADE, which aims to incorporate diverse stakeholders' views and provide a meaningful ranking of alternatives. To do so, it estimates the tunnel level of safety taking into account only any standard measures existing. Subsequently, the performance of additional measures is examined. Then, a list of the most significant criteria that are valuable to judge the appropriateness of selected measures is introduced. The relative importance amongst the decision criteria is calculated through the Analytic Hierarchy Process, based on the expert opinion. Sensitivity analysis through Monte Carlo simulation is embedded to allow for a meaningful prioritization of the decision criteria. Thus, the alternatives’ ranking comes as a distribution instead of a single number, providing the decision-maker richer information for selecting the most suitable measure(s) according to the specific tunnel situation. At last, a typical tunnel is examined to showcase the utilization of the method. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Fire safety is an important aspect of underground road tunnels’ operation. Undertaking high traffic volumes, they are one of the most critical infrastructure for the daily operation of modern urban networks. Aiming to guarantee their safety, risk assessment has been established as a valuable tool. However, the deterministic approach of existing methods has weaknesses in addressing the embedded uncertainty included in important parameters of the system. This paper, applying a stochastic-based approach, proposes a novel quantitative risk assessment method, named SIREN. Initially, the system’s parameters are investigated and the ones which should be treated as stochastic are identified. Subsequently, the method considers both tunnel airflows and trapped-users’ evacuation in order to estimate their potential losses. Finally, the system’s level of safety is provided through the distribution of the trapped-users losses, which occurred by accumulating the results that derived from the Monte Carlo Simulation. The proposed method is illustrated through the case of an urban underground road tunnel during rush hour. The outcome highlights a significant proportion of scenarios that exceed the number of losses estimated by the traditional methods. Meanwhile, the method examines the parameters’ criticality supporting, thus, safety analysts in selecting additional to standard safety measures, if needed. Furthermore, the proposed method aids analysts to act consistently with the as low as reasonable practicable principle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Use of quantitative risk assessment (QRA) for assessing the skin sensitization potential of chemicals present in consumer products requires an understanding of hazard and product exposure. In the absence of data, consumer exposure is based on relevant habits and practices and assumes 100% skin uptake of the applied dose. To confirm and refine the exposure, a novel design for in vitro skin exposure measurements was conducted with the preservative, methylisothiazolinone (MI), in beauty care (BC) and household care (HHC) products using realistic consumer exposure conditions. A difference between measured exposure levels (MELs) for MI in leave-on versus rinse-off BC products, and lower MELs for MI in HHC rinse-off compared to BC products was demonstrated. For repeated product applications, the measured exposure was lower than estimations based on summation of applied amounts. Compared to rinse-off products, leave-on applications resulted in higher MELs, correlating with the higher incidences of allergic contact dermatitis associated with those product types. Lower MELs for MI in rinse-off products indicate a lower likelihood to induce skin sensitization, also after multiple daily applications. These in vitro skin exposure measurements indicate conservatism of default exposure estimates applied in skin sensitization QRA and might be helpful in future risk assessments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]