| PDF Pages<\/th>\n | PDF Title<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2<\/td>\n | undefined <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 4<\/td>\n | CONTENTS <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 7<\/td>\n | FOREWORD <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 9<\/td>\n | 1 Scope <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 10<\/td>\n | 2 Normative references 3 Terms, definitions and symbols 3.1 Terms and definitions <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 14<\/td>\n | 3.2 Symbols used in this document <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 15<\/td>\n | 3.3 Abbreviated terms 4 Risk assessment process 4.1 Overview Figures Figure 1 \u2013 Flow chart of the risk assessment process(Modified from ISO\/IEC Guide 51 [3]) <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 16<\/td>\n | 4.2 Documentation requirements in the risk assessment process 4.3 Involvement of stakeholders Figure 2 \u2013 The risk assessment process <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 17<\/td>\n | 5 Risk management throughout service life 5.1 Overview 5.2 Reviewing, documenting and reporting of the risk management process <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 18<\/td>\n | 6 Harm to people 6.1 Overview 6.2 Direct harm 6.3 Indirect harm <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 19<\/td>\n | 6.4 Domino effect 6.5 Consequences of impacts of objects 7 Risk assessment approaches and associated acceptance criteria 7.1 Risk assessment approaches <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 21<\/td>\n | 7.2 Risk acceptance criteria Figure 3 \u2013 Flow chart of the selection of risk assessmentmethods with different levels of fidelity <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 22<\/td>\n | 7.3 Risk regions Figure 4 \u2013 Risk regions <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 23<\/td>\n | 7.4 Types of risk criteria 7.5 Prescriptive risk acceptance criteria Tables Table 1 \u2013 Examples of risk acceptance criteria for different risk assessment approaches <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 24<\/td>\n | 7.6 Qualitative risk acceptance criteria 7.7 Semi-quantitative risk acceptance criteria <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 25<\/td>\n | 7.8 Quantitative risk acceptance criteria 7.8.1 General Figure 5 \u2013 Example tables for a semi-quantitative risk assessment <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 26<\/td>\n | 7.8.2 Quantitative risk criteria for individuals <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 28<\/td>\n | 7.8.3 Quantitative societal risk criteria Table 2 \u2013 Policy factor according to [11] <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 29<\/td>\n | Figure 6 \u2013 Combination of hazards and impacted persons. <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 30<\/td>\n | Figure 7 \u2013 Example of an f-N plot <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 31<\/td>\n | Figure 8 \u2013 Example of societal risk criteria <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 32<\/td>\n | 8 Hazard identification 8.1 General 8.2 General principles of hazard identification 8.3 Wind turbine failure modes 8.3.1 General 8.3.2 Tower collapse 8.3.3 Shedding of hub or nacelle <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 33<\/td>\n | 8.3.4 Rotor blade failure 8.4 Ice fall and ice throw <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 34<\/td>\n | 8.5 Fire 8.6 Occupancy <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 35<\/td>\n | 8.7 Project relevant hazards 9 Estimation of the risk 9.1 General 9.2 Wind turbine failures \u2013 tower collapse, shedding of hub or nacelle and rotor blade failure 9.2.1 General <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 36<\/td>\n | 9.2.2 Input information 9.2.3 Additional assumptions\/models <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 37<\/td>\n | 9.2.4 Tower collapse 9.2.5 Shedding of hub or nacelle 9.2.6 Blade breakage <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 38<\/td>\n | 9.2.7 Summation of impact probabilities and risks 9.3 Ice fall and ice throw 9.3.1 Input information <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 39<\/td>\n | 9.3.2 Additional assumptions\/models 9.3.3 Calculation of trajectories of ice pieces <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 40<\/td>\n | 9.4 Wind turbine fire 9.5 Calculation of the risk 9.5.1 General <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 41<\/td>\n | 9.5.2 Effective cross-section for people and cars 9.6 Analysis of domino effects Table 3 \u2013 Examples for hazardous installations that could be affected by domino effects triggered by wind turbine failures <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 42<\/td>\n | 10 Risk evaluation 11 Risk treatment 11.1 General 11.2 Selection of risk reduction measures 11.3 Examples of risk reduction measures <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 43<\/td>\n | 11.4 Ice detection systems and rotor blade heating systems <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 44<\/td>\n | 12 Uncertainties in risk assessments <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 46<\/td>\n | Annex A (informative)Summary of failure frequencies published by the Dutch RIVM Table A.1 \u2013 Failure frequencies from [13] in units of failures per turbine and year. <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 47<\/td>\n | Annex B (informative)Overview of used risk criteria in different countries Table B.1 \u2013 Overview of used risk criteria in different countries <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 51<\/td>\n | Annex C (informative)Introduction to trajectory models for blades and blade fragments <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 52<\/td>\n | Figure C.1 \u2013 Blade-fixed and inertial reference frames. <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 56<\/td>\n | Bibliography <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Wind energy generation systems – Siting risk assessment<\/b><\/p>\n |