IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/risrel/v222y2008i3p371-379.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A snapshot of methods and tools to assess safety integrity levels of high-integrity protection systems

Author

Listed:
  • Y Dutuit
  • A B Rauzy
  • J-P Signoret

Abstract

In the oil industry, high-integrity protection systems tend to replace traditional safety systems. In this paper, a snapshot is provided of the methods and tools designed by the authors to evaluate efficiently safety integrity levels of high-integrity protection systems, as required by IEC 61508 and 61511 standards. These standards provide rigorous processes to build the safety of safety-instrumented systems. They are very efficient from an organizational point of view. However, difficulties arise with definitions and probabilistic calculations. To overcome these difficulties, the existing methods and tools were extended. These extensions are presented by means of simple examples. The focus is on the treatment of high-integrity protection systems working in low-demand mode (that is, with less than one demand per year according to the standards), e.g. systems such as high-integrity pressure protection systems. Some indications for safety systems working in continuous mode are given. Some practical conclusions are drawn from the various experiments performed. First, fault trees, when properly used, are very efficient for low-demand safety systems. Second, multi-phase Markov processes provide accurate results, even if only very small systems are tractable with this approach. Finally, behavioural modelling coupled with Monte Carlo simulation on Petri nets is both efficient and accurate. From the authors’ point of view, these approaches are simpler to handle than the informative formulae proposed in the present issue of IEC 61508 and 61511 standards.

Suggested Citation

  • Y Dutuit & A B Rauzy & J-P Signoret, 2008. "A snapshot of methods and tools to assess safety integrity levels of high-integrity protection systems," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 222(3), pages 371-379, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:risrel:v:222:y:2008:i:3:p:371-379
    DOI: 10.1243/1748006XJRR147
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1243/1748006XJRR147
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1243/1748006XJRR147?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Estecahandy, M. & Bordes, L. & Collas, S. & Paroissin, C., 2015. "Some acceleration methods for Monte Carlo simulation of rare events," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 296-310.
    2. Liu, Yiliu & Rausand, Marvin, 2013. "Reliability effects of test strategies on safety-instrumented systems in different demand modes," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 235-243.
    3. Innal, Fares & Dutuit, Yves & Chebila, Mourad, 2015. "Safety and operational integrity evaluation and design optimization of safety instrumented systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 32-50.
    4. Innal, Fares & Lundteigen, Mary Ann & Liu, Yiliu & Barros, Anne, 2016. "PFDavg generalized formulas for SIS subject to partial and full periodic tests based on multi-phase Markov models," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 160-170.
    5. Cacheux, Pierre-Joseph & Collas, Stéphane & Dutuit, Yves & Folleau, Cyrille & Signoret, Jean-Pierre & Thomas, Philippe, 2013. "Assessment of the expected number and frequency of failures of periodically tested systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 61-70.
    6. Meng, Huixing & Kloul, Leïla & Rauzy, Antoine, 2018. "Modeling patterns for reliability assessment of safety instrumented systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 111-123.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:risrel:v:222:y:2008:i:3:p:371-379. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.