Safety Integrity Level (SIL) evaluation of safety instrumented systems considering competing failure modes and subsystem priorities

被引:0
|
作者
Cheraghi, Morteza [1 ]
Taghipour, Sharareh [1 ]
机构
[1] Toronto Metropolitan Univ, Dept Mech Ind & Mechatron Engn, Toronto, ON, Canada
基金
加拿大自然科学与工程研究理事会;
关键词
Safety Integrity Level (SIL); Safety Instrumented System (SIS); Safety Instrumented Function (SIF); Probability of Failure on Demand (PFD); Probability of Failing Safely (PFS); Competing failure modes; Subsystem priorities; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; RELIABILITY; SUBJECT;
D O I
10.1016/j.ress.2025.111025
中图分类号
T [工业技术];
学科分类号
08 ;
摘要
Safety Integrity Level (SIL) is a crucial measure of the safety performance of Safety Instrumented Systems (SISs), reflecting their ability to reduce risk. However, SIL analysis has often overlooked the impact of competing failure modes and subsystem priorities within SISs. This paper introduces a novel probabilistic model for evaluating the SIL of safety functions that incorporates these critical aspects. The model calculates the time-dependent Probability of (dangerous) Failure on Demand (PFD) and Probability of Failing Safely (PFS) at the component, subsystem, and system levels. The average PFD (PFDavg) and SIL are calculated considering both planned and unplanned proof tests. The proposed model is validated through Monte Carlo simulations and applied to a safety system designed to protect a process vessel from high-pressure hazards. A comparative analysis with existing models demonstrates that competing failure modes and subsystem priorities significantly influence PFD, PFS, PFDavg, and consequently SIL, especially in systems with longer proof test intervals and higher Safe Failure Fractions (SFFs).
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Modeling for evaluation of safety instrumented systems with heterogeneous components
    Cai, Baoping
    Li, Wenchao
    Liu, Yiliu
    Shao, Xiaoyan
    Zhang, Yanping
    Zhao, Yi
    Liu, Zengkai
    Ji, Renjie
    Liu, Yonghong
    RELIABILITY ENGINEERING & SYSTEM SAFETY, 2021, 215
  • [22] Research on Integrity Level of Safety Instrumented System Based on BN-LOPA
    Zhou, Long
    Wang, Sanming
    2018 IEEE 4TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CONTROL SCIENCE AND SYSTEMS ENGINEERING (ICCSSE 2018), 2018, : 246 - 251
  • [23] Reliability assessment of safety instrumented systems subject to different demand modes
    Liu, Yiliu
    Rausand, Marvin
    JOURNAL OF LOSS PREVENTION IN THE PROCESS INDUSTRIES, 2011, 24 (01) : 49 - 56
  • [24] Uncertainty analysis of common cause failure in safety instrumented systems
    Mechri, W.
    Simon, C.
    Ben Othman, K.
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE INSTITUTION OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS PART O-JOURNAL OF RISK AND RELIABILITY, 2011, 225 (O4) : 450 - 460
  • [25] Probability of breakdown evaluated. Flowmeters suitable for Safety Integrity Level (SIL) applications
    Pinz, Nicole
    CIT Plus, 2009, 12 (1-2)
  • [26] Avoid confusion when performing safety integrity levels Here's how to differentiate safety instrumented fuction demand modes
    Khalil, Y. A.
    Cheddie, H.
    HYDROCARBON PROCESSING, 2009, 88 (11): : 41 - +
  • [27] Hazop Evaluation and Safety Integrity Level (SIL) Analysis On Steam System In Ammonia Plant Petrokimia Gresik Ltd.
    Musyafa', Ali
    Nuzula, Zahrotul Fajri
    Asy'ari, Muhammad Khamim
    ADVANCED INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING PHYSICS, 2019, 2088
  • [28] DEPENDABILITY EVALUATION OF SAFETY INSTRUMENTED SYSTEMS INCORPORATING INTELLIGENT INSTRUMENTS
    Mkhida, A.
    Bououlid, B.
    Thiriet, J. M.
    4TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON INTEGRATED MODELING & ANALYSIS IN APPLIED CONTROL & AUTOMATION, IMAACA 2010, 2010, : 99 - 105
  • [29] The evaluation of safety instrumented systems - Tools to peer past the hype
    Gruhn, P
    ISA TRANSACTIONS, 1996, 35 (01) : 25 - 32
  • [30] Design and Evaluation of safety Instrumented Systems: A Simplified and Enhanced Approach
    Gabriel, Angelito
    IEEE ACCESS, 2017, 5 : 3813 - 3823