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
  • [41] Analysis of safety systems with on-demand and dynamic failure modes
    Meshkat, Leila
    Dugan, Joanne Bechta
    Andrews, John D.
    2000, IEEE, United States
  • [42] Automating the failure modes and effects analysis of safety critical systems
    Papadopoulos, Y
    Parker, D
    Grante, C
    EIGHTH IEEE INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON HIGH ASSURANCE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING, PROCEEDINGS, 2004, : 310 - 311
  • [43] Safety Integrity Level (SIL) Determination and Verification for Gas Turbine and Generator in a Combined Cycle Power Plant
    Gholami, Behzad
    Jabbari, Mousa
    Eskandari, Davood
    JOURNAL OF HEALTH AND SAFETY AT WORK, 2024, 14 (02) : 244 - 271
  • [44] Discrimination of low- and high-demand modes of safety-instrumented systems based on probability of failure on demand adaptability
    Liu, Yiliu
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE INSTITUTION OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS PART O-JOURNAL OF RISK AND RELIABILITY, 2014, 228 (04) : 409 - 418
  • [45] Effect of Truncated Input Parameter Distribution on the Integrity of Safety Instrumented Systems Under Epistemic Uncertainty
    Tang, Zhang-Chun
    Zuo, Ming Jian
    Xia, Yanjun
    IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON RELIABILITY, 2017, 66 (03) : 735 - 750
  • [46] Comprehensive Analysis on Safety and Reliability of Safety-Related Systems Considering Common Cause Failure
    Du, Siqi
    Ma, Lianchuan
    Cao, Yuan
    2018 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CONTROL, AUTOMATION AND INFORMATION SCIENCES (ICCAIS), 2018, : 531 - 535
  • [47] Toward an Application Guide for Safety Integrity Level Allocation in Railway Systems
    Ouedraogo, Kiswendsida Abel
    Beugin, Julie
    El-Koursi, El-Miloudi
    Clarhaut, Joffrey
    Renaux, Dominique
    Lisiecki, Frederic
    RISK ANALYSIS, 2018, 38 (08) : 1634 - 1655
  • [48] Assessment of Safety Integrity Level by simulation of Dynamic Bayesian Networks considering test duration
    Simon, Christophe
    Mechri, Walid
    Capizzi, Guillaume
    JOURNAL OF LOSS PREVENTION IN THE PROCESS INDUSTRIES, 2019, 57 : 101 - 113
  • [49] Estimating Technology of Safety Integrity Level of Safety-Related Systems in High-speed Train
    Zhang Wenjin
    Lan Nan
    Li Xinwei
    2012 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MECHANICAL, INDUSTRIAL, AND MANUFACTURING ENGINEERING, 2012, 1 : 172 - 177
  • [50] Not all safety integrity level 3 safety systems are the same - Most of the differences relate to online availability
    Gruhn, P
    HYDROCARBON PROCESSING, 2006, 85 (03): : 51 - 53