See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/325216401

Fire Safety Design System between Performance-Based vs Prescriptive Design-

Tools and Challenges

Research · April 2018

CITATIONS READS

2 5,789

1 author:

Moataz Nour
Texas A&M University
2 PUBLICATIONS   2 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Buncefield Fire: What We Have Learned View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Moataz Nour on 18 May 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Fire Safety Design System between Performance-Based vs Prescriptive Design –
Tools and Challenges

by

Moataz Nour

Texas A&M University

April 2018

Grad Study - Major Subject: Safety Engineering

1
TABLE OF CONTENT

1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 4

2 Between Prescriptive-Based Design and Performance-Based Design .................................................. 5

2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 5

2.2 Prescriptive-Based Design ............................................................................................................ 5

2.3 Performance-Based Design Methodology .................................................................................... 6

2.4 Industry and regulators response................................................................................................... 7

3 case study: Floating LNG - FLNG ........................................................................................................ 8

3.1 Novelty of the case........................................................................................................................ 8

3.2 Description of process and facility................................................................................................ 9

3.3 Challenges for fire safety engineers ............................................................................................ 11

3.4 Risk-based approach ................................................................................................................... 12

3.5 Hazard Identification and scenarios ............................................................................................ 12

3.6 Fire Protection Codes for FLNG ................................................................................................. 15

3.7 Example of results of Performance-Based Approach for Fire Asessment of FLNG .................. 16

4 Conclusions and Perspectives ............................................................................................................. 18

5 Refernces............................................................................................................................................. 20

2
Table of Figures
Figure 1Typical FLNG (courtesy Emerson Process Management) .............................................................. 9
Figure 2 Block diagram for the LNG process which is same for the FLNG .............................................. 10
Figure 3 Offshore configuration for FLNG (Source: Courtesy Shell International Ptd) ............................ 10
Figure 4 Typical arrangements for LNG process on FLNG (Source: Courtesy Höegh LNG) ................... 11
Figure 5 POSSIBLE FIRE SCENARIOS AS A CONSEQUENCE OF LNG LEAK ................................ 14

3
 1 INTRODUCTION

Fire engineers in oil and gas industry used to rely on the set codes of fire like NFPA and API and
other similar codes which are thought to be enough to ensure that required level of protection
is achieved. In the last two decades, extensive research has to be performed for the introduction
of the concept Performance-Based Design (PBD). Relying on codes and regulation solely should
provide the required solution for conventional problems if the level of uncertainty is low.
Following the codes set by the regulatory/authority will transfer part of the risk to the authority
as it means an acceptance of the given solution. However, how can you be sure that the condition
under which the prescriptive design is provided matching your current case?
Performance-based design on the other hand will provide a solution based on the assessed
scenarios and specific estimated outcome rather than 'fit for all' solution. However, relying on it
will add additional criticality and challenges for setting the right representing scenario(s) and
demonstrating the performance analysis.
Both directions have advantages and disadvantages, starting from meeting the tolerability
criteria of the organization all the way to selecting the cost-effective solution or rather say, best
money-value. This paper will discuss the challenges faced by the industry and the tools help to
identify the right way for moving forward. A case of innovative industrial Floating LNG FLNG is
used to support the discussion. This is where conventional Prescriptive Based Design cannot be
taken for granted. Some related codes could be over conservative and some other could be much
less conservative to be used.

4
2 BETWEEN PRESCRIPTIVE-BASED DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE-BASED
DESIGN

2.1 INTRODUCTION
One of the clear definitions suggests that " The main objective of fire safety engineering is to develop and
validate a fire safety strategy that protects people, property and the environment from fire effects" (Borg,
Njå, & Torero, 2015) Fire Safety Engineers will assess and validate fire scenarios, strategies and design
for potential events. The assessment will consider the consequences – as credible and matching the strategy
being set with the achieving the objectives. The validation will have number of elements beyond the
engineering consideration of the fire events. It is expected to consider the stakeholders and social
interaction. Over the years, this profession is getting more matured and sophisticated as well. The greater
understanding of fire safety and cost-effective solutions, where cost element in design, installation,
operation and maintenance play a role, in hand with the improvement and availability of new tools for
calculating and interpreting the risks had promoted the ability to evaluate and verify the design against
existing codes and look at the higher level of verification against the expected performance and precise
understanding of risks.(Puchovsky, n.d.)

2.2 PRESCRIPTIVE-BASED DESIGN

For long time, the regulations used to be the main driver for fire protection supported by well recognized
codes for the minimum requirement for designing fire protection system. The codes for design requirements
provide a standard guidance for what can be considered as "Safe" design to provide the acceptable level of
protection. An example of this approach is using NFPA 13 to design fire suppression system, which provide
a 'Prescriptive' rule to design and install a fire suppression system in a facility or to cover part of it.
According to Milosh, the roots for this approach can be traced back to the 19th century when codes where
put together to provide specific provision for buildings. (Puchovsky, n.d.) This approach is tailored to fit
all purpose which makes it easier to demonstrate compliance with regulations and provides a proof that
required effort was made by the organization to meet what can be perceived as the right level of protection.
Prescriptive-Based design provides easy accessible approach for fire engineers to follow and defend their
selection and design principles. Choosing the prescriptive approach defined by regulators will elevate the
legal liability to some extent from the organization, whenever an incident with bad consequences takes
place, as it is seen in full compliance with all legal requirements. Typically, prescriptive regulations and
5
codes are developed in a response to major fire incidents with applying common sense to take the accepted
level of protection to the next stage in addition to known established practices and number of valid
assumptions, which can be obsolete over the time – in some cases, as new equipment and materials are
evolved.(Engineers, 2005) (Technology, 2002) The changes and updates to these codes would be
potentially based on empiricism and experience. (Puchovsky, n.d.)Because it is tailored to fit all, it does not
favor new technology and novel processes and it does not recognize lower risk profile at certain cases. This
can end up with being much less conservative or over conservative in some cases. For an organization,
blindly applying the prescriptive approach could mean that they are not actually providing the right level
of protection if their process poses higher risk that what was considered by the regulation and codes when
they were adopted. The over conservative protection on the other side will be reflected in additional capital
cost for the protection system and higher working cost to run and maintain, as prescriptive codes will not
recognize going below the prescribed requirements. Still have to mention that when most of the incidents
occur, the investigations show that main contributor would be whether lack of compliance with prescriptive
codes or human error, rather than a weakness of the code itself.(Puchovsky, n.d.) As a conclusion, the
prescriptive approach can provide a good level of protection and satisfying the regulator and insurance
requirements, but it can also provide more expensive or ineffective system of protection, however, it still
the good choice for most of the projects due to the simplicity and easiness to enforce and apply specially
when the case is believed to be conventional as per the book..(Spinardi, 2016)

2.3 PERFORMANCE-BASED DESIGN METHODOLOGY

In the performance-based, the approach is based on meeting the objective to provide the required protection
through using number of tools and techniques to provide more specific prediction and assessment of
potential fire scenarios for a specific system or process. The provided solutions here are based on expected
performance to meet the objectives, rather than prescriptive requirements. More work and assessments are
required to provide enough confidence that set objectives are achieved and tailored based on required
performance agreed. (Engineers, 2005) Performance – based approach with provide higher flexibility which
can result in high cost-effective solutions or better coverage for the identified hazards and fire scenarios.
The advantage of implementing the performance-based is gathered from that the scope of the analysis and
assessment of the consequence for given scenario, is based and just limited to this scenario, which make
the analyses explicit.

The approach of performance-based would typically consider the following (Puchovsky, n.d.):

6
1- Set clear fire safety goals, performance objectives and criteria.
2- People and property identification and evaluation will have an impact on the needs. Life safety is the
goal, so type of occupancy has a role to play.
3- Hazard identification and drawing the applicable scenarios and consequences.
4- Further assessment using assessment tools. This include modelling and calculation methods based on
available data and reasonable assumptions. The results need to be clearly interpreted.
5- The offered solution is based on the results of the assessment to achieve the goals. This should be
verified back.

2.4 INDUSTRY AND REGULATORS RESPONSE

Over the last two decades, industry codes and regulators demonstrated more acceptance to the performance-
based design considering 'equivalency' as incorporated in the code, or what is known as (AMM) 'Alternate
Material and Method' clauses which give more flexibility to the engineers for considering alternatives with
more flexibility.(Hocquet, n.d.)

As an example of recognizing Performance-based approach in the codes, International Fire Code; 2003
edition, Section 104.9 “Alternate Materials and Methods”: “The provisions of this code are not intended to
prevent the installation of any material or to prevent any method of construction not specifically prescribed
by this code, provided that any such alternative has been approved. The fire code official is authorized to
approve an alternative material or method of construction where the fire code official finds that the proposed
design is satisfactory and complies with the intent of the provisions of this code, and that the material,
method, or work offered is, for the purpose intended, at least the equivalent of that prescribed in this code
in quality, strength, effectiveness, fire resistance, durability, and safety.”(Council, 2003)

It is suggested, as best approach, to combine the efforts to use the performance-based approach to develop
and update codes based on more science and technology. Whenever the prescriptive code does not recognize
the novelty of the case, it is a MUST to examine the performance-based approach to provide the right level
of protection and use the lessons learned to update the codes to be more able to recognize performance-
based approach.

7
 3 CASE STUDY: FLOATING LNG - FLNG

3.1 NOVELTY OF THE CASE

This concept of processing LNG offshore on a marine ship is utilizing the advantage of moving to gas
locations in deep water, saving the cost of additional project of pipelines to transfer the gas onshore. On the
other side, the LNG carriers will just go to connect and transfer the LNG for shipping. Also, the cost of
building onshore LNG and a terminal for the carriers is supposed to be covered by natural reserves over
certain number of years, but for some of the reservoirs, the potential reserves are not expected to cover long
term of high cost investments with all required infra structure. This is also where FLNG comes as a brilliant
solution.(Miller, n.d.)

The Floating Liquefied Natural Gas FLNG is basically a Liquified Natural Gas LNG production train
constructed over a smaller area which requires the process equipment to be placed in closer distances with
more use of the vertical expansion Figure 1 (Miller, n.d.). This process is built on a deck of marine vessel
which will be exposed to all related marine risks including the LNG carriers which will be connected and
tied -off for the LNG transfer. LNG tanks are built inside the marine vessel, under the production area. The
process is connected to the reservoir of the gas for raw gas production and further processing. The personnel
who operate the process are living in close proximity. The limited area will mean some certain consideration
when it comes to mustering and evacuation. Mutual fire protection and rescue is not close and accessible
compared to the land LNG. However, it has no neighbor, so no public hazard. (Johnson, 2013)

As this novel concept is a mix of LNG industry, offshore industry and marine transport industry, typical
regulations and rules for each industry separately is difficult to be applied on this novel mix. The direct
application can result in high conservative protection or probably under-protection solutions.(Aronsson,
2012)

Additional challenge here, that limited escape options are available if things went wrong and much less
chances for mutual aids. It is more critical to ensure high reliability of the safety systems – compared to
onshore facility.

8
 Figure 1Typical FLNG (courtesy Emerson Process Management)

3.2 DESCRIPTION OF PROCESS AND FACILITY

The process on FLNG is very similar to the process of LNG onshore. It consists of(Songhurst, 2016):

1- Gas inlet treatment and condensate removal;

2- Inlet gas treatment through Acid gas (CO2 and H2S removal), Dehydration (water removal) and
Mercury removal;
3- LPG extraction;
4- Gas liquefaction to produce LNG.

The gas and fluids from the subsea wells are transported via risers to the treatment facilities Figure
3(Songhurst, 2016). The well fluids are separated into gas and condensate. Stabilization of condensate is
carried out before storing the gas. Gas sweetening and dehydration is carried to remove sour components
CO2 and H2S, and water. They can freeze during the liquefaction process. Same is considered for mercury.
Sweetening process uses amine solution which is regenerated by heating under lower pressure (for lower
solubility) and the acid gas is vented. Dehydration process uses adsorption through molecular sieve beds.
Mercury is also adsorbed over a guard bed.

Following to the gas treatment, the stream is cooled to extract LPG (propane & butane) which is sent to
storage in the hull. It is transferred to another ship for export through loading arms or other facility. It is a
valuable by-product. Process flow chart is illustrated in Figure 2(Aronsson, 2012)

9
 Figure 2 Block diagram for the LNG process which is same for the FLNG

Living accommodation is provided on-board for personnel in addition to medical facilities and control
room. It is sensible to keep as far as possible from the process area.

The gas stream now comprising mainly methane and ethane and the liquefaction process starts. The gas is
cooled to -1620 C in the cryogenic heat exchanger. To remove excess Nitrogen, the LNG is flashed.
Following that, the LNG is stored in the hull prior and then exported to LNG carrier via offloading arms.
Figure 4(Songhurst, 2016)

In the FLNG, the LNG process plant is expected to be compacted due to the limited space, nearly to 60 %,
but the weight is also expected to be lighter.

Figure 3 Offshore configuration for FLNG (Source: Courtesy Shell International Ptd)

10
 Figure 4 Typical arrangements for LNG process on FLNG (Source: Courtesy Höegh LNG)

3.3 CHALLENGES FOR FIRE SAFETY ENGINEERS

In addition to the complex mix of the novel industry of FLNG, industry legacy has no recorded experience
on managing safety challenges including fire safety protection. Reliance on conventional prescriptive
approach for such a process under high hazards profile, constraints of space and harsh environment would
require innovative solutions. LNG process have the potential for toxic gas release, gas explosions (Vapor
Cloud Explosion VCE), jet fires and cryogenic spillage. More robust tailored barriers are required to be
installed – compared to typical offshore installation. (Hocquet, n.d.) An example was mentioned by Jérôme
Hocquet(Hocquet, n.d.) that use of Passive Fire Protection PFP as a barrier against the jet fire – as no active
fire protection is effective – can have an advantage of extra capital cost and extra running maintenance cost
if the designer just followed the prescriptive codes. Part of this cost increase is represented by additional
weight. A risk and performance-based approaches had to be implemented to optimize the cost and
protection. Whenever the performance-based approach is used, or performance-based codes which yet to
be acknowledged as a recognized standard practice e.g. ISO and NORSOK, additional effort is expected to
reach authorities and stakeholders to explain and persuade the methodology and achieved results.

11
3.4 RISK-BASED APPROACH
The fire protection strategy is developed to set the basis for the approach and further work on managing the
risks. As defined "A fire protection strategy is a systematic approach to identifying, reducing, and managing
hazards. A fire protection strategy is concise and should document the company's approach on how it plans
to meet the overall risk management philosophy of the company"(Engineers, 2005).

The objective of fire protection (including prevention also) is to set to primary protect personnel as an
ultimate objective. The strategy will aim to prevent escalation through combination of fire prevention and
fire protection measures, by:

- Prevent or limit hydrocarbon release.

- Confine or divert spills.
- Means for high reliable emergency shutdown and depressurization systems.
- Minimize the probability of ignitions sources.
- Various detection system for correct coverage based on the identified hazards and right mapping
of the area in accordance to the release.
- Monitoring system
- Exposure protection.

The strategy is based on risk scenario basis combined with analysis of gaps with current codes. The
optimum combination of prevention and protection should be based on Hazard Identification and quantified
consequence modelling for the selected incident scenarios which are based on the systematic identification
of the hazards. It is required to have more emphasis on the fire prevention rather than the protection. All
effort must be done to ensure strong and reliable detection system and robust evacuation plan. Although
active system is part of the fire protection philosophy by using water monitors and/ or deluge, the prime
protection is more on the passive protection side to prevent the escalation and fire spread.

3.5 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND SCENARIOS

Hazard identification is a brain storming event conducted through different disciplines and aim to identify
the hazards related to the process and operation. (Aronsson, 2012) Although it is expected to identify all
the hazards, whether fire related or non-fire related, we will keep the identification here to fire related
hazards in the process.

12
Table 1 Simple hazard Identification
Area Hazard
Gas Inlet Facility - Raw natural gas.
Condensate stabilization Unit - Natural gas.
- Condensate.
Sweetening Unit - Natural gas
- Amine solution.
- Acid gas
Dehydration Unit - Natural gas.
Mercury Removal - Natural gas
LPG Extraction - Natural gas.
- LPG
Liquefaction Unit - Propane and Butane for
refrigeration.
- Cryogenic LNG
LNG Loading - Cryogenic LNG
General - Process - Lube oils
- Hydraulic oils
General - Accommodation - Class A fire
- Class C fire
- Class K fire
Process information is the first step for any fire risk assessment process to collect and hazards information
from the design. Based on this list of hazards, the potential fire scenarios can be evaluated followed by risk
calculation. (Engineers, 2005)
13
Comment
- Under pressure from the
subsea reservoir. Toxic
components are
included.
- Including toxic acid gas
- Under pressure
- Water is removed.
- Molecular sieve is not
flammable.
- Guard bed material is
not flammable.
- Possible spills on deck
- Possible spills on sea
- Different locations in
process area
- Accommodation,
kitchen and medical
location.
As more detailed information would typically require proceeding further to with Fire Hazard Analysis,
which are not available for this current paper, the author will look at number of fire scenarios based on the
identified hazards.

Cryogenic LNG spills will have two effects:

- The rapid vaporization due to sudden decrease of the temprature from -162 to ambient. This rapid
vaporization means a dense cloud of methane which forms an explosive/ flammable mixture if
mixed with at the right ratio. There is a difference between the LNG spill on deck and in sea. On
deck (or on ground or floor), the rapid vaporization will decay because the part of the floor which
is in contact with the spill is getting colder and with lower differential temprature, the vaporization
rate decrease. The LNG spill in sea will continue in constant rate till the end, as the sea acts as a
huge heat sink that will not change its temprature.
- The cryogenic LNG leak of low temprature as low as -162 will decrease the strength of beams and
structure if it came into contact with metal. This effect is extended also to the equipment and control
system which in turn poses the risk of further escalation. Worth to mention that in LNG plants on
shore, cryogenic LNG pool will not have a significant effect on the concrete floor but in case of
FLNG, the deck surface is metal in the LNG pool will have a significant effect due to the very low
temprature. More discussion as per IMO will come later.

Figure 5 POSSIBLE FIRE SCENARIOS AS A CONSEQUENCE OF LNG LEAK

14
The expansion of LNG is high, and in addition to various fire scenarios which can be developed as a result
of vaporization of liquid LNG(Johnson, 2013) Figure 5, the expansion can lead to over pressure for the unit
is not well ventilated.(Lee, Ha, Kim, & Shin, 2014)

A standby safety boat/ tug boat with firefighting capabilities would be required to be standby all the time
to provide a coverage for the critical areas of FLNG and the tied-in vessels. Additional facilities like and
fire safety, rescue and spill control could be also defined, as a result of detailed fire safety assessment.

As defined by the hazard identification, most of the topside of the FLNG is gas or liquified gases. It is
critical to reduce the escalation of any fire events. Depressurization systems and passive fire protection will
have a major in controlling the fire rather than typical firefighting system by water. Water curtains (as active
system) can be used also to control the fire spread from one area/unit to the other or to disperse a gas cloud
before it travels further.

3.6 FIRE PROTECTION CODES FOR FLNG

Following codes and standards are applicable to the design of firefighting systems, however, not all of them
are compatible with the proposed FLNG. The combination between the codes and the performance-based
approach was considered for the design:

 API RP 14 G “Fire prevention and Control on open type of offshore production platforms”
 IMO SOLAS 2001 + amendments - FSA - Liquefied Natural gas (LNG) carriers. IMO, MSC
83/21/1, Denmark, 2007.
 Applicable NFPA codes for the different systems
 ISO 13702: 1999 Petroleum and natural gas industries – Control and mitigation of fires and
explosions on offshore production installations – Requirements and guidelines
 ISO 22899-1: Jet Fire Resistance of Passive Fire Protection Materials.
 CAP 437 “Offshore helicopter landing areas – guidance on standards”, Civil Aviation Authority,
ISBN 0 11790 439 2, (2005)
 DNV-OS-D301/E201

By taking one of the codes, IMO, MSC 83/21/1, Denmark, 2007 for formal Fire Safety Assessment, it
provides a frame work as risk-based document for risk analysis of LNG tankers.(Aronsson, 2012) While
number of the aspects related to FLNG and processes are different compared to the LNG carriers, it still
provides valuable input to the assessment of main hazards of LNG as:

15
 - Pool fire: as the spill will be in the form of liquid and can ignite as the evaporated gas and air will
continue burn on the surface of the pool.
- Vapor cloud: where the cloud can travel further down and ignites when it faces a source of ignition.
- Cryogenic temprature: causes cold burns and embrittlement to steel elements.
- Asphyxiation: by displacing air
- Rollover: when the carrier is loaded with different compositions, the different density can make
layers which will rollover to stabilize the liquid.
- Rapid phase transition (RPT): the spill on water can cause rapid transition between liquid to vapor
which can be rapid enough in terms of expansion to cause explosion.
- Explosion: explosive gas phase. Flammability 5-15 % in mixture with air, same flammability limits.

The full assessment in this case must be extended further to the specific threats and consequences. Some of
the aspects might not be applicable.

Another example is DNV-OS-D301 OFFSHORE STANDARDS – Fire Protection(Safety, 1996), the scope
of it is projected to mobile units and offshore installations and it covers passive and active fire protection,
fire-fighting systems, fire/ gas detection and alarms and additional coverage for drilling and wells. It is a
prescriptive code provides a provision for the clear criteria of performance. While it says that it is written
for general worldwide purpose and it has additional supplementary requirements for LNG import and export
terminals, it does not cover the specific aspects related to FLNG. In 1.1.4 of the code: " This standard has
been based on internationally accepted principal requirements, defined in the normative references as listed
in Sec.2. In cases where these a) contain only functional requirements, b) allow alternative solutions to
prescriptive requirements or c) are generally or vaguely worded, a DNV GL interpretation has been added."
This allow alternative solutions to be considered, as it states in SEC 9 " 1.1.2 Design of the fire protection
system shall be based on a fire and explosion analysis. The analysis shall consider the credible identified
hazards. It shall determine aspects such as type and capacity of fire-fighting systems, number, and location
and rating of passive fire protection". This code sets the requirements for performance and risk-based
approach while it still provides prescriptive information.

3.7 EXAMPLE OF RESULTS OF PERFORMANCE-BASED APPROACH FOR FIRE ASESSMENT

OF FLNG
As the Performance-based methodology would rely on the identification of the credible scenarios and right
assessment, number of tools were proposed to consider the complexity of the FLNG with its specific
aspects.

16
Very recently in 2017, Fire Safety Journal has published a paper for Til Baalisampang et.al for the use of
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) for the fire impact assessment.(Baalisampang, Abbassi, Garaniya,
Khan, & Dadashzadeh, 2017) The team was looking to more reliable simulation to the fire impact. The use
of typical analytical models was not considered close enough to model the real conditions. Although the
use of the CFD models is not new, the use of it as a time-dependent model for the fire scenarios still in
progress. It is useful for the FLNG geometry because of its complexity. The study proposed a methodology
which starts with identifying the credible scenarios. The set scenarios are based on detailed analysis of the
hazards and possible escalation. On the second step, further analysis based on the identified scenarios in
the first step was done to identify more credible scenarios. This step used hazard index calculation, followed
by Most Credible Accident Scenario (MCAS) to assess the credibility of the scenarios. This method
considers the probability of the occurrence and the probability of the damage. Some scenarios would
happen on frequent basis with known limited potential damage. Some other scenarios could rarely happen
but if they happen, the damage could be catastrophic. So, combining both factors mean that higher
credibility will go to the one with higher probability to occur with higher potential damage. In the last step,
a CFD simulation is performed for those most credible scenarios identified in step two. The study
considered also the effect of thermal flux and rise of the temprature. In the fourth step, the model resulted
in real assessment of fire events and thermal sequences which can be assessed now against set criteria of
human impact and/ or asset impact. Potential effect at estimated distances is calculated based on set criteria.
In the fifth step, the probability of different effects on the human body (probability of first degree or second
degree or death) is combined with risk scores which give a risk profile on the contour. The study started
with identified 32 scenarios where 3 scenarios were found as most credible scenarios. They were modelled
and simulated. A higher risk was found due to the potential effect of the high temprature on the steel
structure at certain location where the support will fail causing further escalation and catastrophic
consequences. Out of the three scenarios, it was found that the scenario of fire in liquefaction unit will have
the higher risk profile with radius of 37 m to cause death or major injury.(Baalisampang et al., 2017)

This risk-based approach will help to identify and rank the real risk as a consequence of most credible fire
scenarios and have this a s a basis for the required protection. Even though, the required fire proof can now
be calculated based on real credible scenarios, and with setting Fire Proofing Zone FPZ rather than covering
in all places with full rating required by the prescriptive codes. Fire Proofing Zone will define where and
up to which extent fire proofing of structure and critical equipment shall be applied. This will result in cost
effective solutions. On the other hand, it is clear now where is the highest risk profile where further
mitigations need to be set. Actually, more conservative controls are expected to be placed, even if they are
not required by the prescriptive codes.
17
In a similar approach, Cryogenic Proofing Zone CPZ (Package & Protection, n.d.) to define where and to
which extent cryogenic protection shall be applied. This is for the areas where cold liquid hydrocarbon
(cryogenic) will give bring the temprature very low to cause embrittlement of carbon steel. For the
equipment and structures fall in both areas at the same time, a combined material shall be used which cover
both properties.

While separation by distance is one of the simplest methods as a passive protection and easy prescriptive-
based design, it is not practical on the FLNG as the area and spaces are constrained. The alternative which
could work better is installing separators to segregate process units on the deck.

Lessons learnt after completing number of formal safety assessments for LNG facilities by Christopher
Jones (Jones, Safety, & Consultant, n.d.), were brought together. The main challenges were in the process
layout considering limited spaces and constrained area, and the variations of release consequences
compared to FLNG, although same hazards exist for both. The approval from different authorities would
require robust detailed risk assessment. There still a need for the regulators to set Tolerable and ALARP
level for the FLNG risk for consistency on the criteria.

4 CONCLUSIONS AND PERSPECTIVES

Regulations and prescriptive-based codes used to be the driver for the fire protection design for long time.
While they provide many advantages, some shortage was seen, whether in terms of the cost-effective
solutions which still can meet the intention of the code, or in terms of efficiency of the code to provide
acceptable level of protection when some of the aspects and assumptions will not match the real case
specially for novel technology. Regulators with the prescriptive codes cannot always provide the best
oversight of the fire protection engineering.(Spinardi, 2016)

Performance-based design concept strongly coming to the seen. More provision in the codes to accept
different methods or materials or accepting the criteria based on performance or risk-based assessments. As
new technologies in industry and novel process made additional need to performance-based, the advances
in assessment methodology, analysis models and computation means have contributed strongly to accurate
and satisfactory assessment to identified scenarios and further consequences. As the technology possessed

18
new challenges to the fire protection engineers, it also provides good tools to use towards the best solution.
Peer review could be a good addition to the assurance process of modelling and calculation.

FLNG is an example where the prescriptive -based codes cannot provide what the designers are looking for
as the aspects of FLNG still different and they are just a mix of number of industries. The combination of
prescriptive codes and detailed assessment of scenarios and consequences using new methodologies and
computational methods have helped to big extent to provide clearer understanding of risks and worst
credible consequences, which in turn used to provide fit for purpose fire protection design.

19
 5 REFERNCES

Aronsson, E. (2012). FLNG compared to LNG carriers Requirements and recommendations for LNG
production facilities and, (X). Retrieved from
http://publications.lib.chalmers.se/records/fulltext/162630.pdf

Baalisampang, T., Abbassi, R., Garaniya, V., Khan, F., & Dadashzadeh, M. (2017). Fire impact
assessment in FLNG processing facilities using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD). Fire Safety
Journal, 92(May), 42–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.firesaf.2017.05.012

Borg, A., Njå, O., & Torero, J. L. (2015). A Framework for Selecting Design Fires in Performance Based
Fire Safety Engineering. Fire Technology, 51(4), 995–1017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-014-
0454-x

Council, I. C. (2003). International Fire Code ® 2003.

Engineers, A. I. of C. (2005). Guidelines for Fire Protection in Chemical, Petrochemical, and

Hydrocarbon Processing Facilities. Hoboken: Wiley-AIChE. Retrieved from http://lib-
ezproxy.tamu.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&A
N=517556&site=eds-live

Hocquet, J. (n.d.). Challenges in using risk and performance-based design methods for FLNG safety
engineering, 1–11. Retrieved from http://www.gastechnology.org/Training/Documents/LNG17-
proceedings/12-7-Jerome_Hocquet.pdf

Johnson, M. (2013). Safety Aspects of Floating LNG Facilities, (April).

Jones, C., Safety, T., & Consultant, R. (n.d.). Lessons learnt from completing formal safety assessments
for FLNG facilities, (159), 1–7.

Lee, D.-H., Ha, M.-K., Kim, S.-Y., & Shin, S.-C. (2014). Research of design challenges and new
technologies for floating LNG. International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering,
6(2), 307–322. https://doi.org/10.2478/IJNAOE-2013-0181

Miller, C. (n.d.). New FLNG vessels present challenges in building , automation.

Package, B. D., & Protection, C. (n.d.). Generic Floating LNG Passive Fire and Cryogenic Protection
20
 Shell Global Solution International.

Puchovsky, M. (n.d.). NFPA â€TM s Perspectives on Performance- Based Codes and Standards.

Safety, O. (1996). Fire Protection, (23). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-420112-5.00006-3

Songhurst, B. (2016). Floating Liquefaction (FLNG): Potential for Wider Deployment.

Spinardi, G. (2016). Fire safety regulation: Prescription, performance, and professionalism. Fire Safety
Journal, 80, 83–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.firesaf.2015.11.012

Technology, N. (2002). THE BENEFIT OF PERFORMANCE- BASED FIRE.

21
View publication stats

22