Optimization of Road Tunnel Safety
Source abstract
Abstract
Probabilistic methods of risk optimization are applied to identify the most effective safety measures considered in design of road tunnels. The total consequences of alternative tunnel arrangements are assessed using Bayesian networks supplemented by decision and utility nodes. It is shown that the probabilistic optimization based on the comparison of societal and economic consequences may provide valuable information enabling a rational decision concerning effective safety measures. Thereby risk acceptability criteria are critically reviewed. A general procedure is illustrated by the optimization of a number of escape routes. It appears that the discount rate and specified life time of a tunnel affect the total consequences and the optimum arrangements of the tunnel more significantly than the number of escape routes. The optimum number of escape routes is also significantly dependent on the ratio of the cost of one escape route and acceptable expenses for averting a fatality based on the LQI. Further investigation of relevant input data including societal and economic consequences of various hazard scenarios as well as experience related to the effectiveness of safety systems are needed.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Geotechnical Engineering and Analysis · Geotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures · Tunneling and Rock Mechanics
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (24)
Show source-provided references
1. Directive 2004/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on minimum safety requirements for tunnels in the trans-European road network. Official Journal of the European Union L 201/56 of 7 June, 2004.
2. Melchers, R. E.: Structural reliability analysis and prediction, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 1999.
3. Stewart, M. S. and Melchers, R. E.: Probabilistic risk assessment of engineering system. London: Chapman & Hall, 1997.
4. Diamantidis, D.: Risk Analysis versus Risk Acceptability in Major European Tunnel Projects. In: Proceedings of 1st Asia Pacific Conference on Risk Management and Safety, Hong Kong, 2005.
5. NS 5814, Requirements for risk analysis, 1991.
6. CAN/CSA-Q634-91, Risk analysis requirements and guidelines, Ottawa, 1991.
7. ISO/IEC Guide 51, Safety aspects – Guidelines for their inclusion in standards, ISO/IEC, 1999.
8. ISO/IEC Guide 73, Risk management – Vocabulary – Guidelines for use in standards, 2002.
9. ISO 2394, General principles on reliability for structures, ISO, 1998.
10. ISO 9000, Quality management systems – Fundamentals and vocabulary, ISO, 2000.
11. Vrouwenvelder, A. C. W. M., Holický, M., Tanner, C. P., Lovegrove, D. R. and Canisius, E. G.: Risk assessment and risk communication in civil engineering, CIB Publication 259, 2001.
12. Worm, E. W.: Safety concept of Westershelde tunnel, manuscript provided by SATRA, Prague, 2002.
13. Brussaard, L. A., Kruiskamp, M. M. and Oude Essink, M. P.: The Dutch model for the quantitative risk analysis of road tunnels. In: Proc. of the ESREL conference, Berlin, 2004.
14. Vrouwenvelder, A. C. W. M. and Krom, A. H. M.: Hazard and the Consequences for Tunnels Structures and Human Life. In: Proc. of the 1st International Symposium Safe and Reliable Tunnels in Prague. The Netherlands: CUR, Gouda, 2004, pp. 23–32.
15. Kruiskamp, M. M., Weger, D. de and Hoeksma, J.: TUNprim – A Spreadsheet model for the calculating road tunnels risk. In: Tunnels Management International, Volume 5, Number 1, 2002, pp. 6–12.
16. Ruffin, E., Cassini, P. and Knoflacher, H.: Transport of hazardous goods. The Handbook of Tunnel Fire Safety. London: Thomas Telford Ltd, 2005, pp. 354–387.
17. Knoflacher, H. and Pfaffenbichler, P. C.: A comparative risk analysis for selected Austrian tunnels. In: Proc. of the 2nd International Conference Tunnel Safety and Ventilation. Graz, 2004.
18. Jensen, F. V.: Introduction to Bayesian networks, Aalborg University, Denmark, 1996.
19. Melchers, R. E.: On the ALARP approach to risk management. In: Reliability Engineering and System Safety, n.71, 2000, pp. 201–208.
20. Diamantidis, D., Zuccarelli, F. and Westhäuser, A.: Safety of long railway tunnels. In: Reliability Engineering and System Safety 67, 2000, pp. 135–145.
21. Rackwitz, R.: Optimization and risk acceptability criteria based on the life quality index. In: Structural Safety, n. 24, 2002, pp. 297–331.10.1016/S0167-4730(02)00029-2 ↗
22. Rackwitz, R.: The Philosophy behind the Life quality Index and Empirical Verification. Working material of JCSS, 2005.
23. Pandley, M. D. and Nathwani, J. S.: Life quality index for the estimation of societal willingness-to-pay for safety. In: Structural Safety, n. 26, 2004, pp. 181–199.
24. Bundesamt für Strassen, ASTRA Task Force, Schlussbericht, Bern, Switzerland, 2000.