23.01.2015 Views

RealityCharting e-book .pdf - SERC Home Page

RealityCharting e-book .pdf - SERC Home Page

RealityCharting e-book .pdf - SERC Home Page

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Paradigm Shift<br />

In addition to using causal factors analysis, the Deepwater Horizon<br />

Accident Investigation Report presented by British Petroleum uses<br />

storytelling, barrier analysis, and a crude form of fault tree analysis to<br />

understand the event. The following is an example of how they used<br />

storytelling to analyze one of the reasons why the blowout preventer did<br />

not seal the well and oil was released.<br />

“Solenoid Valve 103 Condition: During the yellow pod test<br />

performed by Transocean and Cameron after the accident,<br />

both coils on solenoid valve 103 failed to energize, suggesting<br />

electrical faults. The investigation team found no evidence<br />

that this failure occurred after the accident; rather, the team<br />

concluded that this failure condition very likely existed prior<br />

to the accident. (Refer to 5.1 Maintenance of this analysis) A<br />

faulty solenoid valve 103 would mean that the yellow pod<br />

could not have performed the Automatic Mode Function (to<br />

isolate the well), as no pilot signal could have been sent to the<br />

pilot-operated control valve to activate the high-pressure Blind<br />

Shear Ram close function. As described in 5.5 Monitoring and<br />

Diagnostic Capability of this analysis, the rig’s Blowout Preventer<br />

control diagnostic system should have been capable of remotely<br />

detecting the faulty solenoid valve and recording it on the system<br />

event logger.”<br />

Furthermore, Section 5.1 Maintenance of this analysis provides the<br />

following story:<br />

“In September 2009, A BP rig audit team conducted an audit<br />

of Deepwater Horizon. This audit included the maintenance<br />

management system for the Blowout Preventer. One<br />

finding was, “Overdue maintenance in excess of 30 days was<br />

considered excessive, totaling 390 jobs and 3,545 man hours.<br />

Many of the overdue routines were high priority.” This audit,<br />

which the team performed at the end of the rig out-of-service<br />

period for ten-year maintenance and inspection, identified<br />

thirty-one findings that were related to the well control<br />

system maintenance. Of these, six findings related to Blowout<br />

Preventer maintenance; all findings were outstanding as of<br />

December 2009.<br />

22

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!