Safety Education For Chemical Engineering Students in Hong
Safety Education For Chemical Engineering Students in Hong
Safety Education For Chemical Engineering Students in Hong
a b s t r a c t
An animated software teaching module was developed to teach a process safety technique to chemical engineer-
ing students in Hong Kong. In order to stimulate students’ interest, the module was designed to actively engage
them through decision making based on a visualized process. The development consisted of three phases, with
each phase extending the module based on evaluations by local and international peers and student users through
iterative action research cycles. The process involved close collaboration between an academic department and a
central educational development unit. Several evaluations were carried out including a software usability test, peer
evaluation using both academic and industrialist feedback, a number of student evaluations from around the world,
including Hong Kong, Australia, France and Northern Ireland. Results of these evaluations suggested that the module
could be used as an effective learning tool in different contexts.
© 2010 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of The Institution of Chemical Engineers.
Keywords: Animated safety teaching module; Hazards and operability (HAZOP); International evaluations
∗
Corresponding author.
Received 28 April 2010; Received in revised form 8 November 2010; Accepted 10 November 2010
1749-7728/$ – see front matter © 2010 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of The Institution of Chemical Engineers.
doi:10.1016/j.ece.2010.11.001
e32 education for chemical engineers 6 ( 2 0 1 1 ) e31–e55
This creativity results from the interaction of a team with were the traditional design courses for their career. However,
diverse backgrounds. Consequently, the success of the study the design courses were going to be reduced and modified in
requires that all participants freely express their views and the Department of Chemical Engineering as fewer students
good supportive teamwork practices are adopted. This cre- were going into traditional design. Nevertheless, the safety
ative approach combined with the use of a systematic protocol courses were still very relevant and needed to be integrated
for examining hazardous situations helps to improve the thor- into a new course, called Process Safety, much earlier in the
oughness of the study. Furthermore, the opportunities for undergraduate program.
students to practice and develop communication, problem- This new course commenced in late 2004–2005 and pro-
solving, and teamwork skills are embedded in this approach. vided the opportunity to try out and develop a new HAZOP
Despite these potential advantages and its real-world rel- Study unit. The problems the students had (and the faculty)
evance, most chemical engineering programmes merely give with the previous course were:
HAZOP Study a passing introduction due to its complexity and
time-consuming nature. Common challenges in incorporating
(i) To do a HAZOP Study analysis, the students needed to
HAZOP Study exercises in a course are:
utilize all the existing course materials they had already
studied – they found this difficult.
• student difficulties in using all the information they have (ii) Much of the existing theoretical part of the HAZOP Study
acquired and adapting to this qualitative assessment, lectures was a bit heavy and dry. The students listened to
• somewhat heavy and dry theory within the HAZOP lectures, the lecturer telling them about how to apply a whole series
• time-consuming study, of process GUIDEWORDS and what the consequences
• the absence of an absolute answer to a HAZOP Study, which were.
results in difficulties and time spent by faculty developing (iii) The results of the HAZOP Study are primarily qualitative,
numerous alternatives, and the students did not have answers to 3 decimal points and
• there is often no absolutely correct answer to a HAZOP Study were not too familiar with this type of assessment.
– there are a number of potentially correct solutions as well (iv) Due to the length of time involved in the HAZOP Study
as many incorrect ones (a concept that students often have practical session, some students missed sessions because
difficulty with). they had job interviews, etc.
(v) There is often no absolutely correct answer to a HAZOP
This paper discusses the development of an animated Study – there are a number of correct solutions as well
teaching module to teach process safety through decision as many incorrect ones. Because the Design Project has 3
making based on a visualized process (Oblinger and Oblinger, processes each year and then the process changes every
2005). It is used in conjunction with a set of course notes, to year, it is very difficult and time consuming for the faculty
enhance the quality of the students’ teaching and learning to develop all the alternative solutions.
experience. The process safety technique to be developed into
the teaching module is called a HAZOP Study and is a key To overcome these challenges, we decided to develop a
safety analysis technique used by practicing chemical engi- new teaching module which had, as its core an-animated
neers and other engineering disciplines worldwide (Mushtaq HAZOP Study software kit using dynamic simulation and com-
and Chung, 2000; Ruiz et al., 2001; Khan and Amyotte, 2002). puter graphics to engage undergraduate students in a visual,
The module was developed in three phases. At the end sequential decision-making process. The main idea is to allow
of each phase extensive testing and evaluation of the model students to work in a multi-disciplinary team in a simulated
was carried out and feedback information incorporated into work context. The project was carried out in three phases:
the next phase of development. Evaluations were under-
taken locally as well as in Australia, France, and the U.K.
(i) Phase 1 – Development of HAZOP Study Teaching Module
with support from the central educational development unit
(12 months).
on campus. This collaboration represented an action based
(ii) Phase 2 – Extension of the HAZOP Study Teaching Module
research approach to teaching development, involving itera-
(9 months).
tive cycles of reflection, planning, implementing, evaluating
(iii) Phase 3 – Adaptation of the HAZOP Study Module to
and further reflection for improvement (CELT, 2003).
include New Case Studies (7 months).
In this paper we discuss the background of the HAZOP
Study analysis method and the development of the teach-
ing module, its use in a chemical engineering course on Plant The key objectives to be addressed and incorporated in the
Design and Economics and the relevant evaluation results. project were:
Fig. 1 – Project flow chart. Key: (a) Design and development of study kit: design the HAZOP study kit by defining the study
method schematics, storyboard and interface; selecting demo cases. (b) Design of instruction: design how the kit to be
implemented in class.
A plan of actions was developed in order to address how 8. Evaluation and reflection assessment processes
these teaching and learning issues would be incorporated into were carried out by holding a series of meetings
the teaching module and then implemented. with students taking the HAZOP Study Teaching
Module.
1. Guidelines on role tasks are included. This teaching module was developed jointly by two teams
2. Guidelines on “performing well in meetings” are included from the Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineer-
on: ing (CBME) and Center for Enhanced Learning and Teaching
Planning and chairing. (CELT, a central educational development unit). It was impor-
Preparing for meetings. tant that members of the two teams developed a detailed list
How to perform well. of assigned tasks and a schedule at the project planning stage.
Types of meetings. This was carried out and the programme of activities to deliver
Decision making in meetings. the full HAZOP Study module was established, with regu-
3. Team selection and good team characteristics are pre- lar scheduled progress review meetings. A linear approach
sented in the course module. was introduced so that students were guided step by step.
Managing a team. Different roles were introduced to let students have differ-
Selecting and shaping your team. ent learning experience and development of their problem
Barriers to effective teamwork. solving skills in a versatile learning environment. These activ-
Choosing the right team. ities enrich the old teaching method and /or how students
Developing your team. can benefit. Particular emphasis was placed on the activi-
Supportive team practices. ties which interfaced between the two teams. This particular
Good communication and motivation. area involved the development of the key animated case stud-
Handling trouble. ies. The main steps in the project management timeline are
When is a team really a team? shown in Fig. 1 to illustrate the project workflow in three
4. Participants from other subject disciplines are invited to phases.
HAZOP Study meetings to make them multi-disciplinary.
5. Time schedules and constraints are re-imposed to achieve 3. Results
targets and deadlines typical of Design Office pressure.
6. Examples are provided in the module to direct students to The implementation methodology was carried out in accor-
think independently, systematically, and to solve problems. dance with the project timeline shown in Fig. 1 and the results
7. Development of a specialist animated graphics unit for each phase will be discussed in sequence. The class imple-
within the teaching module to provide case study mentation was based on a 2 h introduction to the HAZOP Study
examples. This integrated the many course facets the through the course materials and this was followed by a one
students need to apply to appreciate HAZOP Study and a half hour computer barn interactive session using the
Analysis. animated HAZOP Study module. Details of the module can be
e34 education for chemical engineers 6 ( 2 0 1 1 ) e31–e55
Fig. 2 – A bad guy in the HAZOP Study teaching module – Scenario CV-102 Closed.
found at the following website: group. After extensive discussion, it was decided to base
http://celtweb.ust.hk/web/hazop/ the module design on:
• Phase 1: To Develop a HAZOP Study Teaching Module
This first phase focused on the content and development (i) a “good guy” versus “bad guy concept” (Figs. 2 and 3).
of the HAZOP Safety Study module. What would make (ii) a series of questions and answer prompts for the students
it different from a “stand-up, front of class” delivery and to make a selection; and
what could be done to engage student to use the module? (iii) incorporation of some humour.
In this phase coordinating, planning and exchanging ideas
between the CBME team and the CELT team were important A number of links were developed in the module, including
in order to identify the strengths and problems of each ways:
(i) to access the process flow diagrams. After the student inputs a solution, followed by clicking the
(ii) to offer technical assistance on guidewords. answer comes up:
(iii) to produce a self-generating Technical HAZOP Study Set the low-level alarm at a sufficient hold-up level (volume
report. of hydrocarbon feed) that there is adequate time to undertake
controlled shutdown of the column and preheaters so there
The process section under study in the module is the entire will be no damage to these units if CV-102 fails closed.
line from tank T-101 to tank T-102 in Fig. 2. The module initi- Ensure to minimise the chances of CV-102 failure the con-
ates the student to propose the scenarios for NO FLOW. The trol valve CV-102 is to appropriate standards, with inspection
first scenario results in the installation of LI-101 as shown in and calibration in-line with the desired integrity.
Fig. 2. Also the pump P-101 may overheat due to increased pres-
We will look at the example using the second Case Study sure on dead heading. We have used this solution later – see
2. scenario (3) to install kick-back/spill back line.
[Note: In a chemical engineering HAZOP Study we often
3.1. Case study scenario 2 have to look for and consider effects further downstream, e.g.
if the scenario “no feed to distillation column” causes a major
The prompt question is asked: disruption, damages heaters, high costs, etc., then much more
stringent modifications might be required.]
“What if the control valve CV-102 fails to close?”
Our “bad guy” comes along and closes CV-102 as in Fig. 2. E.g. a by-pass line round CV-102 with a duplicate control
What happens? The students are provided with an input valve CV-102B
box to suggest the answer and subsequent clicking provides E.g. would the distillation column preheaters need a no-
the answer: flow or a high temperature interlock
Our “good guy” then appears and makes the modification and
CV-102 Closed → T-102 Runs Dry →
the animated flows start again, as shown in Fig. 3.
No Flow to Distillation Stage → Process Stops For every scenario there is a prompt at the bottom of the
screen “P&ID” enabling the student to see the P&ID form of the
schematic for every scenario. Fig. 4 shows the current status
This first consequence is shown visually on the schematic of the P&ID after scenarios 1 and 2 have been implemented.
as the fluid in the buffer tank, T-102, and the lines after CV-102, In addition to P&ID, a HAZOP minutes report is automati-
are empty. cally generated and completed for each HAZOP scenario. The
The question is asked – with a prompt box: “what actions status of the report is shown in Table 1.
are possible”?
Consider whether the existing safeguards in the plant
design are adequate as you develop and propose a list of rec- • Phase 2: Extension of HAZOP Study Animated Module to
ommended actions. Incorporate Prioritisation of HAZOP Study Actions.
e36 education for chemical engineers 6 ( 2 0 1 1 ) e31–e55
After completion of Phase 1, a number of evaluations were resulted in our proposal for an extension award of the original
carried out and feedback was obtained from student users project to incorporate a methodology for prioritizing the
and at peer level from teachers and industrialists. Details of HAZOP Actions, as shown in Table 2 (Vaidhyanathan and
this will be discussed later. The results of the evaluations Venkatasubramanian, 1996; Bartolozzi et al., 2000).
The student now has to think about the actions and conse- • Small Student Group for initial appraisal (5–8 students).
quences in more detail and then has to catalogue each activity • Final Year Design Course in Chemical Engineering,
into a priority order/list based on the severity–frequency rela- HKUST (60 students).
tionship of the potential accident. • Final Year Design Groups in Department of Chemical
In order to do this, users need additional information. Engineering, University of Sydney (9 students).
Firstly, we defined ‘risk’ R, as: • Final Year Design Groups in Department of Chemical
Engineering, Queen’s University of Belfast, Ireland (12
R=H×F students).
• MSc in Project Management, Multi-Disciplinary, Ecoles
where H is the hazard severity, and F is the fre-
des Mines de Nantes, France (12–18 students).
quency/probability of the event occurring.
(iii) Survey Questionnaire for Industrialists to Complete (6
Tables were developed for students using a numerical
industrialists).
scale for both hazard severity, Table 2, and frequency priority,
(iv) Survey Questionnaire for Peers to Complete (4 peers) (2
Table 3.
HKUST, 1 University of Sydney, 1 Queen’s University of
The simulation package contains a facility to use data from
Belfast).
the HAZOP Study minutes report and from the risk analysis
(v) Feedback from Hong Kong Institution of Engineers Profes-
results to generate a Risk Prioritisation table. A section for Case
sional Accreditation Body.
Study scenario 3 is shown in Table 4.
were needed. Extension of the study kit with more scenarios to in the Phase 2 development. An additional demo case study
cover all the guidewords was also suggested. The detailed find- was added in the Phase 3 development.
ings of the Student Satisfaction Surveys from different student
groups are shown in Appendix A. 4.2.2. Evaluation of the study kit (Phase 2 development)
The reviewer’s and students’ suggestions led to the imple- After the new feature of prioritization assessment was built in
mentation of Phases 2 and 3 of the project. The feature of the Phase 2 development, the modified study kit was evaluated
prioritization assessment was incorporated into the study kit in seven areas, namely, “learning goal achievement”, “content
essary information for the development of Phase 2 and Phase Edmond Ko (HKUST), Barry Li (Air Products Asia), Brian Gilon
3. Establishing trust and communication protocol among team (Leighton Asia) and Andy Rayner (Project Management Group
members at the initial stage of the project was essential in Limited, Ireland).
ensuring its smooth operation and management. Also thanks to other university departments for testing
the software with their classes; Professor Stephen J. Allen,
Acknowledgements Department of Chemical and Food Engineering the Queen’s
University of Belfast, Northern Ireland; Professor Marjorie
This work was supported by several Continuous Learning Valix, School of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Uni-
and Improvement (CLI) grants, provided by the Center for versity of Sydney, Australia; Professor Pierre Le Cloirec and
Enhanced Learning and Teaching (CELT) of the Hong Kong Professor Laurence le Coq, Department of Energy and Envi-
University of Science and Technology. ronmental Systems, Ecoles de Mines de Nantes, France.
Extensive thanks are due to CELT project team members at
HKUST, and the Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering team Appendix A. Quantitative and qualitative
of Prof C.K. Chan, Prof D.C.W. Hui, Prof J.F. Porter, Dr K.K.H. student feedback
Choi, Dr V.K.C. Lee, Dr E.L.K. Mui and Dr M.F.F. Sze.
In addition, the external and internal reviewers Stephen 1. Please indicate the number of times you have visited the
Tam (Hong Kong and China Gas Company Limited), Professor HAZOP Study kit.
Final year process Sydney (May 05) France (Summer 05) Final year process MSc students from
design class Hong (N = 9) (N = 2) design class, Hong France (Summer 06)
Kong (January 05) Kong (Spring 06) (N = 5)
(N = 20) (N = 50)
3. Does the kit help you to identify potential hazards and operability problems in a chemical plant?
4. Does the kit help you to understand how an effective safety system works in a chemical plant?
Final Year Process Design Class, HK, January 05 18 3 (16.7) 11 (61.1) 3 (16.7) 1 (5.6) 0 (0.0)
Sydney (May 05) 9 3 (33.3) 5 (55.6) 1 (11.1) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
France (Summer 05) 2 1 (50.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (50.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
Final Year Process Design Class, HK, January 06 50 10 (20.0) 23 (46.0) 13 (26.0) 3 (6.0) 1 (2.0)
MSc students from France (Summer 06) 5 2 (40.0) 2 (40.0) 1 (20.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
All of them About 90% About 75% About 50% Less than 25%
7. Which scenario(s) do you have difficulty to follow? You may choose more than one answer.
Final Year Process Sydney (May 05) France Final Year Process MSc students from
Design Class Hong Kong Design Class France
(January 05) Hong Kong
11. Will you study more about HAZOP in addition to that covered in the study kit?
Yes No
13. The kit helps me relate to the actual operation of safety in a chemical plant.
14. Tables, such as HAZOP Priority Table, Frequency Priority Table and Risk Priority Table, help me prioritise the importance of
risk.
15. The three tables mentioned in Q14 help me to take appropriate actions accordingly.
17. The kit provides me with more enjoyable learning experience than that in the lecture.
21. Does the organisation of text help you to understand the content?
22. What other problems did you encounter in browsing the study kit?
Time consuming as users need to follow all the steps in sequence 9 64.28
in order to view all the scenarios/results
The minutes reports cannot be saved for future review 2 14.29
Time consuming to produce summarized table of actions and 2 14.29
minutes
Too difficult 1 7.14
Total 14 100.00
- I think the kit could be improved by adding more bigger plants with more systems.
- To include real video clips.
- To include more materials and examples.
- To include more scenarios and pictures of actual equipment in additional to more symbols.
- To include more cases and solutions to solve them.
Total 30 100.00
- As I told you I really liked it, Congratulations Professor is great!!!, and I don’t know if the little engineer has a name if not I
propose one: “Hazzopy the engineer.
- It is good study kit that I will encourage anyone who wants to learn about hazops to go though for it will be a great help to the
person!!!!
- Quite good.
- Overall it is interesting and practical! Thanks.
- The web is well-designed and clear.
- The kit is very nice.
- More examples should be provided for further studies.
1 academic staff member and 4 industrialists commented and rated the HAZOP learning package according to the following
criteria on a 5-point scale: 5 – very much, 4 – quite, 3 – to some extent, 2 – a little, 1 – not at all in January 2006.
- The software was designed with specific learning outcomes in mind (e.g. the ability to write a report), but these outcomes are
not explicitly stated. It also assumes that users have the same prior knowledge and thus does not cater to different learner
characteristics.
- A good and interesting way to learn HAZOP.
- It would have been good to recognise that there is more than one right answer in some instances, and also, to identify that
key words are different for batch plants than for continuous plants in the introduction.
education for chemical engineers 6 ( 2 0 1 1 ) e31–e55 e49
Content quality:
- The content is well thought out and logically presented. Perhaps a more complicated example (e.g. one involving multiple
solutions) can be added to stimulate students’ thinking.
- Content is displayed in a very logical manner.
Presentation design:
- Visuals in the demo cases are useful in showing what the physical processes are.
- Interesting graphics. Good design and user friendly.
- it may be my computer but there was no sound effect.
- Sometimes it is not entirely clear what to click next to move to the next screen, also sometimes the colours of the text boxes
are difficult to see (at least on a laptop).
Adaptability:
- HAZOP is a specific topic, one that is not covered in too many courses.
- I could see that a similar approach could be used to help students understand how ISO metric drawings and test packs for
piping could be developed.
Other comments:
- Professor McKay is to be commended for developing this software, which covers an important concept in plant design that is
often overlooked.
- An interesting and interactive way to learn HAZOP.
- I found the programme enjoyable to use and the descriptions clear however I have some experience in HAZOP studies so the
content was not new.
- “Overall comment is that obviously a lot of work went into this to make a relatively boring but important topic entertaining
and therefore interesting, a good starter for the user. This is an excellent piece of work.
- Overall the package works very well to demonstrate the principles, a good piece of work which I am sure the students will
enjoy.
Recommendation:
- State learning outcomes explicitly up front and show how various activities would lead to the attainment of such outcomes.
- Give the cartoon character a name or ask the students to input their own names for the character in the program to keep them
interested.
- The introduction did not explain exactly what I supposed to do, so like many programmes I just started down the menu.
- Although thorough on the basics very quickly the user will have understood the principles involved and will quickly want to
move onto other guidewords. Also again perhaps a link to a PDF file of a completed report both after the HAZOP and then
also after Closeout would be good that the user can print and keep as an example. Identification of differences between batch
processes and continuous processes would be good. Some colours could be improved.
e50 education for chemical engineers 6 ( 2 0 1 1 ) e31–e55
1. Please indicate the number of times you have visited the HAZOP study kit.
3. Does the kit help you to identify potential hazards and operability problems in a chemical
plant?
a. Very much
b. Quite
c. To some extent
d. A little
e. Not at all
4. Does the kit help you to understand how an effective safety system works in a chemical
plant?
a. Very much
b. Quite
c. To some extent
d. A little
e. Not at all
7. Which scenario(s) do you have difficulty to follow? You may choose more than one
answer.
a. Scenario 1
b. Scenario 2
c. Scenario 3
d. Scenario 4
e. Scenario 5
f. Scenario 6
g. None of the above (go to Q9)
11. Will you study more about HAZOP in addition to that covered in the study kit?
a. Yes
b. No
13. The kit helps me relate to the actual operation of safety in a chemical plant.
a. Very much
b. Quite
c. To some extent
d. A little
e. Not at all
14. Tables, such as HAZOP Priority Table, Frequency Priority Table and Risk Priority Table,
help me prioritise the importance of risk. (New Question for CENG303 – Spring 2006 &
France – Summer 06)
e52 education for chemical engineers 6 ( 2 0 1 1 ) e31–e55
a. Very much
b. Quite
c. To some extent
d. A little
e. Not at all
15. The three tables mentioned in Q14 help me to take appropriate actions accordingly. (New
Question for CENG303 – Spring 2006 & France – Summer 06)
a. Very much
b. Quite
c. To some extent
d. A little
e. Not at all
17. The kit provides me with more enjoyable learning experience than that in the lecture.
a. Strongly agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly disagree
e. No opinion
21. Does the organisation of text help you to understand the content?
38
education for chemical engineers 6 ( 2 0 1 1 ) e31–e55 e53
a. Very much
b. Quite
c. To some extent
d. A little
e. Not at all
22. What other problems did you encounter in browsing the study kit?
Software Evaluation
Please comment and rate the learning package according to the following criteria on a 5-point scale: 5 – very much, 4 – quite,
3 – to some extent, 2 – a little, 1 – not at all, N/A – not applicable.
Criteria Rating
Usability
Other comments:
Suggestions for improvement:
education for chemical engineers 6 ( 2 0 1 1 ) e31–e55 e55