Exercise 16 - Design and Analyze SIF The objective: to design and analyze a SIF (including field devices) and
determine the maximum test interval that will still comply with the SIL requirement. The assumptions: SIS may be done using relays, or a PLC that already exists (if SIL can be satisfied) and use the exercise # 1 process example. Problem: Assume the target SIL 1. Make whatever assumptions you feel are reasonable and model the performance of the proposed system. Determine the MTTFsp of the system, as well as the RRF and maximum manual test interval that can be used and still maintain the SIL rating. Based on the exercise #1, the selected SIL of a SIF using risk graph is SIL 1. It is safe to assume that the required PFD is 0.01 or RRF = 100 as highest value range at SIL 1. PFDavg RRF = = 0.01 1/PFDavg
100
The use of simplest instruments for sensor, logic and final element is assessed. The simplest configuration (1oo1) is selected (as shown in the Schematic 1). The technology candidates are switch for sensor, relays for logic solver and standard shutdown valve as final element.
Schematic 1. SIF 1oo1 configuration For test interval it is assumed to have test interval as much as 1 year. 1 year TIM = Sensor Technology D CA CM DD=D*CA DU=D*(1-CA)*CM PFDavg, sensor RRF SFF MTTFsp, sensor Logic Solver Technology D CA CM DD=D*CA DU=D*(1-CA)*CM PFDavg, logic solver RRF SFF MTTFsp, logic solver Final Element Technology D CA CM DD=D*CA DU=D*(1-CA)*CM PFDavg, final element RRF SFF
= Standard pressure switch = 0.0160 per year = 0% = 100% = 0% = 0.016 per year DU * TI/2 0.016 * 1 / 2 = = = 125 = 1/PFDavg = = S / (D + S) 1/S = =
S =
0.0270 per year
0.008
62.79% 37.04 years
= Relay = 0.0001 = 0% = 100% = 0% = 6.66667E-05 DU * TI/2 = = 1/PFDavg = = S / (D + S) 1/S
per year
I/O quantity = S =
2 0.000166 per year
per year = (0.0000667 * 2) * 1 / 2 = = = = 30,000 71.35% 6024.0964 years
3.33E-05
= Ball valve = 0.0263 = 0% = 100% = 0% = 0.02628 DU * TI/2 = = 1/PFDavg = S / (D + S)
per year
S =
0.0330 per year
per year 0.02628 * 1 / 2 = = = 76.10 55.67%
0.01314
The PFD or RRF for this SIF PFDavg = PFDavg, sensor + PFDavg, logic solver + PFDavg, final element = 0.008 + 0.00003 + 0.01314 = 0.021173333 RRF = 1/PFDavg = 47.22921914 SIL Category : SIL 1
This exercise is created by Nugroho Wibisono (weby98@[Link])
To achieve SIL1, it is important to note not only PFDavg to be achieved, but also architectural constraint to be satisfied. The architectural constraint can be evaluated through SFF and hardware fault tolerance as shown in below table. In this case, the SFF for final element is less than 60% which has made the SIF cannot achieve SIL1. It is obvious that the dominant factor of system's PFDavg value is the PFDavg of final element (0.01). The PFD can be further improved by introducing more frequent test interval (TI), say every 6 months, but it does not improve the hardware fault tolerance. From this point, two alternatives can be selected for final element: 1) procure other valve with better quality which has total lower failure rate and higher safe failure rate, 2) adding other valves with the same quality and install in series (1oo2 configuration). In this case, it is assumed that the procurement of better quality valve is far more expensive and longer delivery time than procuring standar shutdown valve. Therefore, it is decided to improve the system by adding 1 (one) more shutdown valve in series with the previous shutdown valve (see Schematic 2), while maintaining the usage of pressure switch and relays as sensor and logic solver respectively.
Schematic 2. 1oo2 configuration
1oo2 Final Element Configuration DU=D*(1-CA)*CM = 0.02628 per year = 10% Manual Term Redundancy Term PFDavg final element MTTFsp, final element = (DU)2*(TIM)2/3 = = = DU**TIM = 0.0015442 = 1/[ (2*S)+ *S) ] = 0.000230213 0.001314 14.43 years
Hence, we may calculate the PFDavg for the SIF in the following sub section. SIF PFDavg and RRF PFDavg, SIF = = = RRFSIF =
PFDavg, sensor + PFDavg, logic solver + PFDavg, final element 0.008 + 0.00003 + 0.0015442 0.00958 1/PFDavg, SIF = 104.4110175
As we may see, the RRF of the SIF is dramatically improved and eventhough the SFF is below 60% for final element, the hardware fault tolerance of 1 is now obtained by the SIF. However, this SIF is classified as SIL1 even though PFD avg meets with SIL2, but the SIF is limited by its hardware fault tolerance. For the MTTFsp of the SIF is calculated below.
MTTFsp, system
= 1 / ( 1/MTTFsp, sensor + 1/ MTTFsp, logic solver + 1/MTTFsp, final element ) = 1 / ( 1/37 + 1/6024.1 + 1/14.4 ) = 10.37 years
Conclusion SIF has been designed and analyzed to achieve SIL 1 (PFDavg = 0.01) with the following result * Sensor: it has been designed to use 1 (one) switch sensor with 1oo1 configuration. * Logic solver: it has been designed to use 2 (two) relays with 1oo1 configuration. * Final element: it has been designed to use 2 (two) valves with 1oo2 configuration. * The PFDavg of the SIF is 0.00958 (RRF = 104.41) and MTTFsp is 10.37 years
By: Nugroho Wibisono ConocoPhillips Indonesia [Link].
This exercise is created by Nugroho Wibisono (weby98@[Link])