Where the explosion risk category for the installation is low, the low risk

methodology may be
used. This applies not only to the definition of the explosion hazard but also to
methodologies
in handling the response of structures, piping, and other SCEs.
A suitable low sophistication means of defining the explosion hazard is the use of
valid nominal
overpressures derived from previous assessments of similar structures. They may be
used as
the ductility level blast overpressures (DLB).
Another acceptable means of overpressure derivation for low risk installations is
comparison
with a specific past cases. Such comparisons should be supported by evidence that a
structured assessment has been undertaken to identify areas of difference and that
the original
means of calculation were sound. Extrapolation of data for the relevant parameters
is not
generally recommended but may be valid if a sound basis exists. The comparison
process
would incorporate consideration of the following factors:
the validity of the model used in the initial assessment;
the version of the explosion modelling software used;
the resolution and precision of the grids used in the calculation;
substantial physical differences between this and previous cases.
A comparative assessment method may be used drawing on experience from a
demonstrably
similar structure geometry and scenarios. The nomination of a typical installation
to represent a
family of platforms is acceptable.