ppt课件-fireprotectionofparticledetectorsforexperimentalphysics.pptVIP

Protection against internal Hazards in the Review of Nuclear Physics Experiments Fabio Corsanego CERN SC/GS How can we make safety discussion more efficient? Milestones for the realization of an experiment Approval of the research board Appointment of GLIMOS (group leader in matter of safety= Mr. Safety) ISIEC (Initial Safety Information on Experiments at CERN) Safety talks Risk analyses Early safety inspections Safety Reception Exercise ..world wide collaborations.. (Example: list of Collaborators to (N-TOF 11)) Japan, Tsukuba (Ibaraki-Ken)High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK) Spain, BarcelonaUniversidad Politecnica de Catalu?a? Spain, SevillaUniversidad de Sevilla Dept. de Fisica Atómica Molecular y Nuclear? Switzerland, GeneveEuropean Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN)? United Kingdom, Didcot, OxonRutherford Appleton Laboratory? United States of America, Oak Ridge, TnOak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL)? United States of America, Princeton, Nj Princeton UniversityJoseph Henry Laboratories? United States of America, Upton, NyBrookhaven National Laboratory (BNL)? …Collaborators to CMS Detector Safety talks”…a discussion between the GLIMOS and the safety authorities about hazards, based on the information given on the ISIEC Form” too much focus on too few topics lack of perception of the accident interaction between different system lack of perception of the concurrent play of countermeasures What are the basic subsystems of an experiment? So what to make sure that all safety aspects are covered since first talks? Checklists interesting but one-dimensional and sequential: difficult to formalize concurrences and correlations between topics HAZOP, FMECA nice tools, but need to know already the design in details, and take months to give results Major Accident Scenarios Fire Explosion Chemical accident Cryogenic accident Nuclear accident Collapse …. Wrong operation Control system failure Electric failure Mechanical failure