Abstract
Two major methods for achieving safety in engineering design are compared: safety engineering and probabilistic risk analysis. Safety engineering employs simple design principles or rules of thumb such as inherent safety, multiple barriers, and numerical safety margins to reduce the risk of accidents. Probabilistic risk analysis combines the probabilities of individual events in event chains leading to accidents in order to identify design elements in need of improvement and often also to optimize the use of resources. It is proposed that the two methodologies should be seen as complementary rather than as competitors. Probabilistic risk analysis is at its advantage when meaningful probability estimates are available for most of the major events that may contribute to an accident. Safety engineering principles are more suitable to deal with uncertainties that defy quantification. In many design tasks, the combined use of both methodologies is preferable.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
In this simplified example, it is assumed that in case of properly functioning signals, the driver will also stop at the halt line. Hence, for a collision to occur, it is both necessary that the signals fail and that the driver is not able to brake in time.
References
Abbas AM, Manohar CS (2002) Investigations into critical earthquake load models within deterministic and probabilistic frameworks. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 31(4):813–832
Ale B (2009) Risk: an introduction. Routledge, London
Aven T (2009) Perspectives on risk in a decision-making context – review and discussion. Saf Sci 47(6):798–806
Blockley DI, Godfrey PS (2000) Doing it differently. Thomas Telford, London
CalIe EOF, Dillingh D, Meermans M, Vrouwenvelder AWCM, Vrijling JK, De Quelerij L, Wubs AJ (1985) Interim rapport TAW 10: Probabilistisch Ontwerpen van Waterkeringen. Technische Adviescommissie voor de Waterkeringen (TAW), Delft
Caruso MA, Cheok MC, Cunningham MA, Holahan GM, King TL, Parry GW, Ramey-Smith AM, Rubin MP, Thadani AC (1999) An approach for using risk assessment in risk-informed decisions on plant-specific changes to the licensing basis. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 63(3):231–242
Chapman PM, Fairbrother A, Brown D (1998) A critical evaluation of safety (uncertainty) factors for ecological risk assessment. Environ Toxicol Chem 17(1):99–108
Clausen J, Hansson SO (2007) Eurocodes and REACH: differences and similarities. Risk Manage 9(1):19–35
Clausen J, Hansson SO, Nilsson F (2006) Generalizing the safety factor approach. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 91(8):964–973
Council NR (1983) Risk assessment in the federal government: managing the process. National Academy Press, Washington, DC
Davis M (2001) Three myths about codes of engineering ethics. IEEE Technol Soc 20(Fall):8–14
Dhillon BS (1997) Failure mode and effects analysis: bibliography. Microelectr Reliab 32(5):719–731
Ditlevsen O, Madsen HO (2007[1996]) Structural reliability methods (internet edition 2.3.7). Wiley, Chichester
Doorn N, Hansson SO (2011) Should probabilistic design replace safety factors? Philos Technol 24(2):151–168
Fairbrother A (2002) Risk assessment: lessons learned. Environ Toxicol Chem 21(11):2261–2263
Golany B, Kaplan EH, Marmur A, Rothblum UG (2009) Nature plays with dice – terrorists do not: allocating resources to counter strategic versus probabilistic risks. Eur J Oper Res 192(1):198–208
Graham J, Wiener J (1995) Risk versus risk. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
Guikema SD, Paté-Cornell ME (2002) Component choice for managing risk in engineered systems with generalized risk/cost functions. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 78(3):227–238
Hansson SO (1989) Dimensions of risk. Risk Anal 9(1):107–112
Hansson SO (1998) Setting the limit: occupational health standards and the limits of science. Oxford University Press, New York
Hansson SO (2009a) From the casino to the jungle. Synthese 168(3):423–432
Hansson SO (2009b) Risk and safety in technology. In: Meijers AWM (ed) Handbook of the philosophy of science. Philosophy of technology and engineering sciences, vol 9. Elsevier/North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 1069–1102
Hansson, SO (2010) Promoting inherent safety. Process Safety and Environmental Protection Vol. 88(3), pp. 168–172
JCSS (2001) Probabilistic model code. Part 1 – BASIS of design. Joint Committee on Structural Safety. ISBN:978-3-909386-79-6
Jongejan RB, Maaskant B (2013) Applications of VNK2: a fully probabilistic risk analysis for all major levee systems in The Netherlands. In: Klijn F, Schweckendiek T (eds) Comprehensive flood risk management: research for policy and practice. Taylor & Francis, London, pp 693–700
Kanning W, Van Gelder PHAJM (2008) Partial safety factors to deal with uncertainties in slope stability of river dykes. In: De Rocquigny E, Devictor N, Tarantola S (eds) Uncertainty in industrial practice: a guide to quantitative uncertainty management. Wiley, London
Kaplan S (1993) Formalism for handling phenomenological uncertainties. The concepts of probability, frequency, variability, and probability of frequency. Nucl Technol 102(1):137–142
Keynes JM (1921) A treatise on probability. Macmillan, London
Knight FH (1935[1921]) Risk, uncertainty and profit. Houghton Mifflin, Boston
Knoll F (1976) Commentary on the basic philosophy and recent development of safety margins. Can J Civil Eng 3(3):409–416
Kong JS, Frangopol DM (2005) Probabilistic optimization of aging structures considering maintenance and failure costs. J Struct Eng-Asce 131(4):600–616
Lee WS, Grosh DL, Tillman FA, Lie CH (1985) Fault tree analysis, methods, and applications – a review. IEEE Trans Reliab 34(3):194–203
Mak KK, Sicking DL, Zimmerman K (1998) Roadside safety analysis program – a cost-effectiveness analysis procedure. Gen Des Roadside Saf Features 1647:67–74
Melchers RE (2002) Probabilistic risk assessment for structures. Proc Inst Civil Eng-Struct Build 152(4):351–359
Melchers RE (2007) Structural reliability theory in the context of structural safety. Civil Eng Environ Syst 24(1):55–69
Michal R (2000) The nuclear news interview. Apostolakis: on PRA. Nucl News 43(3):27–31
Miller CO (1988) System safety. In: Wiener EL, Nagel DC (eds) Human factors in aviation (cognition and perception). Academic, San Diego, pp 53–80
Möller N, Hansson SO, Peterson M (2006) Safety is more than the antonym of risk. J Appl Philos 23(4):419–432
Moses F (1997) Problems and prospects of reliability-based optimization. Eng Struct 19(4):293–301
Overton T, King GM (2006) Inherently safer technology: an evolutionary approach. Process Saf Progr 25(2):116–119
Parnell GS, Borio LL, Brown GG, Banks D, Wilson AG (2008) Scientists urge DHS to improve bioterrorism risk assessment. Biosecur Bioterror 6(4):353–356
Paté-Cornell ME (1996) Uncertainties in risk analysis: six levels of treatment. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 54(2–3):95–111
Rackwitz R (2004) Optimal and acceptable technical facilities involving risks. Risk Anal 24(3):675–695
Randall FA (1976) The safety factor of structures in history. Prof Saf 12–28
Rasmussen NC (1975) Reactor safety study. An assessment of accident risks in U.S. commercial nuclear power plants (WASH-1400, NUREG 75/014). U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Santillo D, Stringer RL, Johnston PA, Tickner J (1998) The precautionary principle: protecting against failures of scientific method and risk assessment. Mar Pollut Bull 36(12):939–950
Sarewitz D, Pielke R, Keykhah M (2003) Vulnerability and risk: some thoughts from a political and policy perspective. Risk Anal 23(4):805–810
Schweckendiek T, Calle EOF, Vrouwenvelder AWCM (2013) Updating levee reliability with performance observations. In: Klijn F, Schweckendiek T (eds) Comprehensive flood risk management: research for policy and practice. Taylor & Francis, London, pp 359–368
Takewaki I (2005) A comprehensive review of seismic critical excitation methods for robust design. Adv Struct Eng 8(4):349–363
TAW (2001) Technisch Rapport Waterkerende grondconstructies: Geotechnische aspecten van dijken, dammen en boezemkaden. Technische Adviescommissie voor de Waterkeringen (TAW)/Expertise Netwerk Water (ENW), Delft
Tench WH (1985) Safety is no accident. Collins/Sheridan House, London
Terzaghi K, Peck RB, Mesri G (1996) Soil mechanics in engineering practice, 3rd edn. Wiley, London
Tsimopoulou V, Kanning W, Verhagen HJ, Vrijling JK (2011) Rationalization of safety factors for breakwater design in hurricane-prone areas. Coastal structures 2011: Proceedings of the 6th international conference on coastal structures, Yokohama. World Scientific
Van de Poel IR, Royakkers LMM (2011) Ethics, technology, and engineering: an introduction. Wiley-Blackwell, West-Sussex
Vesely WE, Belhadj M, Rezos JT (1994) PRA importance measures for maintenance prioritization applications. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 43(3):307–318
Vrijling JK (1990) Kansen in de Waterbouw (inaugural address). Technical University Delft, Delft
Vrijling JK, van Hengel W, Houben RJ (1998) Acceptable risk as a basis for design. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 59(1):141–150
Vrouwenvelder A (2002) Developments towards full probabilistic design codes. Struct Saf 24(2–4):417–432
Wang J, Yang JB, Sen P, Ruxton T (1996) Safety based design and maintenance optimisation of large marine engineering systems. Appl Ocean Res 18(1):13–27
Zegeer CV, Carter DL, Hunter WW, Stewart JR, Huang H, Do A, Sandt L (2006) Index for assessing pedestrian safety at intersections. Transportation Research Record, No. 1982: Pedestrians and Bicycles. Transportation Research Board. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC, pp 76–83
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this entry
Cite this entry
Doorn, N., Hansson, S.O. (2013). Design for the Value of Safety. In: van den Hoven, J., Vermaas, P., van de Poel, I. (eds) Handbook of Ethics, Values, and Technological Design. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6994-6_19-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6994-6_19-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-6994-6
eBook Packages: Springer Reference Religion and PhilosophyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Humanities