Towards Process Safety 4.0 in the Factory of the Future

André Laurent is Emeritus Professor at École Nationale Supérieure des Industries Chimiques at the University of Lorraine, Nancy, France. He is also a member of the Réactions et génie des procédés laboratory at UMR CNRS, Nancy, France.

• Foreword ixPreface xiList of Notations xvChapter 1 The Industrial Revolution 4.0 11.1. A history of industrial revolutions 11.2. Defining the factory of the future 31.3. Technology used in Industry 4.0 31.3.1. Disruptive technology 41.3.2. Technologies used for communication and interconnection 51.3.3. Data management technology 71.4. Attempts at structuring technologies 111.5. Conclusion 14Chapter 2 The Concept of Safety 4.0 152.1. Context and definition 152.2. The history of the evolution of safety 162.3. Safety framework 18Chapter 3 Occupational Safety and Health 213.1. Impact of Industry 4.0 work conditions 213.2. Definitions 233.3. OSH versus process safety 233.4. OSH assessment of occupational hazards 243.4.1. Regulations, norms and unique document 243.4.2. Inventory of risk analysis techniques and methods 303.4.3. Applicability of risk analysis methods to OSH 32Chapter 4 Process Safety and Cybersecurity 394.1. Reviewing risk analysis methods in process safety: example of the bow-tie method 394.2. Risk-evaluation matrix in process safety 424.3. Risk analysis methods for industrial information systems: example of the EBIOS and attack tree method 454.4. Cybersecurity risk-assessment matrix 494.5. Coordinating risk analysis methods 514.6. Reconciling process safety and cybersecurity methods 534.6.1. Preliminary risk analysis and preliminary cyber-risk analysis 534.6.2. HAZOP, CHAZOP and Cyber HAZOP methods 544.6.3. Bow-tie graph and cyber bow-tie 584.6.4. LOPA and Cyber LOPA methods 584.6.5. The integrated, simultaneous ATBT method 624.7. Concatenation of matrices 644.8. Reasoned use of risk matrices 66Chapter 5 Examples: Safety 4.0 and Processes 715.1. Distillation column control 715.2. Attempt to classify the applications of a digital twin in the field of Safety 4.0 725.2.1. Potential of a digital twin for Safety 4.0 735.2.2. Proposal for a classification framework 735.3. Modernization of a pilot installation of an ejector pump 755.4. Model for developing a digital twin to prevent OSH in the process industry 775.4.1. Description of the model 795.4.2. Implementing the model 805.4.3. Conclusion 815.5. Custom manufacture of food product by project development 815.6. Impact of the design of a cyberphysical system on an industrial process 835.6.1. Choosing the problem to be studied 845.6.2. Design principle for the cyberphysical system 855.7. Principle for redesigning a process in a cyberphysical production system 875.8. Systematic integrated approach to improve the processing of contaminated sediments 915.8.1. The Novosol® process 915.8.2. The sociotechnical Novosol® system 925.8.3. Conclusion 925.9. Digitalization to benefit safety management 925.9.1. Improvement in the quality of technical risk assessment and modeling the impact of cumulative risks 955.9.2. Providing a real-time view of the actual state of critical equipment and their impact on the risks 965.10. Detection of deviations in the functioning of a heat exchanger through an artificial neural network 975.11. RFID applied to the prevention of occupational hazards 995.11.1. Fields of application of RFID technology 1005.11.2. RFID applied to occupational safety and health 1005.12. How RFID contributes to industrial engineering safety 1025.13. Exploring the idea of a socially safe and sustainable workplace for an Operator 4.0 1025.14. Industry 4.0 challenges related to safety and the environment in the leather industry 1055.15. Safety 4.0: metrics and performance indicators 1075.15.1. Impact or lagging indicator 1085.15.2. Activity or leading indicator 1095.15.3. Some recommended examples of performance indicators for process safety 1095.15.4. Examples of the application of safety performance indicators 112Chapter 6. Intensification and Inherent Safety: Myth or Reality? 1176.1. A review of essential elements in process intensification 1176.2. Some examples of process intensification 1196.2.1. The reduction principle in support of the risk management 1196.2.2. Areas of interest for using microstructured reactors 1226.2.3. Transposition of an exothermic reaction in an intensified, continuous heat exchanger 1246.2.4. Pilot demonstration of IMPULSE for the production of sulfur trioxide through the oxidation of sulfur dioxide by air 1266.2.5. Synthesis of ionic liquids by alkylation in a microstructured reactor 1286.2.6. Developing an intensified process for the industrial synthesis of methanol from carbon dioxide 1296.2.7. Feasibility of intensifying the production of vinyl acetate monomer 1316.2.8. The microstructured reactor with catalytic walls: accelerator of the performance of a conventional tubular reactor 1336.2.9. Generic example of direct gaseous fluorination of a liquid hydrocarbon 1356.3. An attempt to rationalize intensification equipment 1386.4. Concept and application of a general methodological framework for the synthesis and design of processes that integrate intensification 1416.5. Reality or myth? Safety 4.0 in intensification processes 1436.5.1. A few assessment tools 1446.5.2. Examples of safety versus intensification conflicts 1526.5.3. Vigilance when putting into practice the risk analysis methods based on the use of digital data 162Conclusion 165References 171Index 185