Understanding Human and Systematic Failures in Safety Instrumented Systems

In industrial safety, Safety Instrumented Systems (SIS) are crucial for protecting processes from hazards. However, one area that often causes confusion is how human and systematic failures are addressed in comparison to random hardware failures. The IEC 61511 standard provides valuable guidance on this distinction, helping organizations ensure compliance and maintain safety integrity.

Human vs. Hardware Failures

The IEC 61511 Approach While random hardware failures can be quantified using the Probability of Failure on Demand (PFD) metric, human and systematic failures are not captured by these calculations. Attempting to apply PFD calculations to human failures often leads to misguided solutions—such as increasing redundancy or testing—that may exacerbate the issue. This is where IEC 61511 takes a different approach. Human and systematic errors typically arise from flaws in processes, designs, or execution. Unlike hardware failures, which can be addressed through reliability data and redundancy, these errors require a more qualitative approach. IEC 61511 emphasizes that administrative controls—rather than hardware-based solutions—are key to managing these risks.

Administrative Controls and Functional Safety Planning

IEC 61511’s framework for addressing human and systematic failures focuses on functional safety planning throughout the lifecycle of the SIS, from design to decommissioning. Key activities such as verification, validation, functional safety assessments, and regular audits are essential components of this strategy. These measures are designed to ensure that potential human and systematic errors are identified and mitigated proactively.

Recorded Webinar

To explore these concepts in more detail, this webinar provides an in-depth discussion of how IEC 61511 addresses human and systematic failures, explaining why they are excluded from PFD calculations and how administrative controls play a vital role in reducing their impact. Best practices for implementing these controls will also be shared, helping you align your SIS with compliance requirements while meeting real-world safety demands. Whether you’re a process engineer, safety manager, or functional safety professional, this webinar will equip you with the knowledge and tools to navigate the complexities of human and systematic failures. Don’t miss out on this opportunity to enhance your safety management practices and ensure the effectiveness of your Safety Instrumented Systems.

Recorded webinar

Quantitative Bowtie Analysis

Bowtie diagrams are a valuable tool for understanding and visualizing risk management, but their traditional qualitative approach has its limits. While they effectively show how threats, barriers, and consequences are interrelated, they often fall short when it comes to providing the details needed for more informed decision-making. That’s where quantitative bowtie analysis comes in.

In this webinar, we explore how quantitative analysis enhances bowtie methodology by incorporating numerical values for the probabilities and frequencies of threats and consequences. This deeper layer of insight helps us move beyond general visualizations to a more precise, data-driven understanding of risk.

You’ll learn how to:

• Calculate the frequency of threats and assess their potential impact.
• Evaluate the likelihood of the top event occurring, helping prioritize risk management efforts.
• Quantify the frequency of consequences to better understand the full range of potential outcomes.

With quantitative bowtie analysis, you can approach risk management with greater confidence, applying a structured and analytical process to reduce uncertainty and improve decision-making.

Don’t miss this opportunity to learn how to take your risk management practices to the next level.

This webinar is part of Kenexis’ ongoing commitment to providing the industry with the tools and knowledge needed to ensure the highest standards of safety and compliance.

Recorded webinar

Development of General Failure Data for SIS Components

This insightful webinar on the calculation of the average Probability of Failure on Demand (PFD) for Safety Instrumented Functions (SIFs), a crucial step in the IEC 61511 safety lifecycle. This session will delve into how PFD depends on various factors, including component failure rates sourced from:

• Vendor data from Failure Modes Effects and Diagnostics Analysis
• Vendor data from field returns
• Field data from operating plants
• Industry data from groups of companies
• Generic data compiled from industry sources

Edward Marszal, President of Kenexis, highlights how Kenexis and other organizations analyze both publicly available and proprietary data to provide “generic” failure rates. Learn about the expert judgment involved in drawing from key sources like the ISA Technical Report, CCPS, OREDA, and NPRD.

The webinar also covers how Kenexis combines data from diverse sources and applies expert analysis to adjust failure rates based on industry relevance and specific failure modes. Discover how these rates are conservatively selected to meet IEC 61511 standards, ensuring a 70% confidence level that actual failure rates are likely lower than estimated.

This webinar is part of Kenexis’ ongoing commitment to providing the industry with the tools and knowledge needed to ensure the highest standards of safety and compliance.

Recorded webinar

Executing a Functional Safety Assessment in Compliance with IEC 61511 using Open Audit^™

In this webinar, we explore the critical topic of conducting a Functional Safety Assessment (FSA) in accordance with IEC 61511 using Kenexis’ innovative Open Audit™ software. This session is designed for safety professionals, engineers, and decision-makers who are looking to enhance their understanding of FSAs and improve the efficiency and accuracy of their safety processes.

What You’ll Learn:

1. Introduction to Functional Safety Assessments (FSA):
   • Understanding the role of FSAs in the lifecycle of a Safety Instrumented System (SIS).
   • Key requirements and steps as outlined in IEC 61511.
   • Common challenges and pitfalls in conducting FSAs.
2. Overview of IEC 61511 Compliance:
   • A deep dive into the IEC 61511 standard and its relevance in ensuring the safety of process industry operations.
   • Best practices for maintaining compliance throughout the safety lifecycle.
3. Demonstration of Open Audit Software:
   • An in-depth look at how Open Audit™ software by Kenexis simplifies the FSA process.
   • Features and tools that enhance audit efficiency, transparency, and accuracy.
   • Real-world examples of how Open Audit™ can be applied to assess safety functions.

Why Attend?

Conducting a Functional Safety Assessment is a vital part of ensuring that Safety Instrumented Systems (SIS) perform as required to mitigate risks effectively. Compliance with IEC 61511 is not just a regulatory requirement but a best practice for safeguarding lives, assets, and the environment.

By attending this webinar, you will gain valuable knowledge on how to execute FSAs efficiently using our Open Audit™ software, which is designed to streamline the assessment process and ensure that all safety-critical functions are thoroughly evaluated.

Whether you are new to FSAs or looking to refine your process, this webinar will provide you with the tools and knowledge to elevate your safety practices.

Who Should Attend?

• Functional Safety Engineers
• Process Safety Managers
• HSE Professionals
• Compliance Officers
• Anyone involved in the safety lifecycle of process operations

Recorded webinar

Maximize Safety and Efficiency with Vertigo™ – Your Ultimate SIS Lifecycle Management Software Solution!

Ensure your Safety Instrumented Systems (SIS) are developed, documented, tracked, and maintained with the highest level of precision throughout their entire lifecycle using Vertigo™. Whether you’re handling a single site or an entire enterprise, Vertigo™ has you covered.

With Vertigo™, seamlessly integrate your Instrumented Protective Functions (IPFs) directly from Open-PHA® Cloud or enter them manually. Leverage Kenexis’ extensive failure rate data or use your own to perform accurate SIL Verification Calculations. Vertigo™ empowers you to develop and track Safety Requirement Specifications (SRS) through customizable datasheets or clause-based general requirements.

In this webinar, Kenexis President Ed Marszal presents a comprehensive demonstration of all the features and benefits of Vertigo™.

Recorded webinar

Markov Modeling Overview

Markov modeling is a powerful tool in reliability engineering, known for its ability to model complex systems with unconventional repair schemes and multiple stages of degradation. Although Markov models may appear complex and intimidating, they are ultimately systematic and straightforward. While they are invaluable in certain specialized situations, they often unnecessarily complicate the analysis process and only approximate the accuracy of standard equations. For example, in a simple one-out-of-two voting arrangement, a Markov model merely approaches the accuracy of analytical solution equations but demands significantly more computational effort.

In this webinar, Kenexis President Ed Marszal presents a comprehensive tutorial on Markov models. The webinar aims to demystify Markov models, highlight the scenarios where they are most useful and effective, discuss their limitations and potential inaccuracies, and introduces the methods for their construction and solution.

Recorded webinar

SIF Definitions during the SIS Safety Lifecycle

Defining safety instrumented functions is a critical task that happens very early in the SIS safety lifecycle.  Mistakes during this phase can cascade into errors persisting throughout the entire SIS safety lifecycle.  Some common errors include associating every action for a sensor in a cause-and-effect diagram, ignoring multiple sensors that can detect a hazardous condition, and improperly voting a large number of sensors – many of which cannot detect a hazard simultaneously.

This webinar presents a series of rules that will allow SIS designers to properly define safety functions prior to SIL selection and SIL verification steps.

Recorded webinar

SIF Definitions during the SIS Safety Lifecycle

Defining safety instrumented functions is a critical task that happens very early in the SIS safety lifecycle.  Mistakes during this phase can cascade into errors persisting throughout the entire SIS safety lifecycle.  Some common errors include associating every action for a sensor in a cause-and-effect diagram, ignoring multiple sensors that can detect a hazardous condition, and improperly voting a large number of sensors – many of which cannot detect a hazard simultaneously.

This webinar presents a series of rules that will allow SIS designers to properly define safety functions prior to SIL selection and SIL verification steps.

Recorded webinar

Failure Rate Units, Format and Conversion

Failure data appears in various shapes, forms, and formats. Different units are often utilized, such as failures per hour, failures per million hours, and FITS. Further, data may be expressed as an overall failure rate, safe failure percentage fractions, and coverage factors. At times, it is separated into categories like dangerous detected, dangerous undetected, and dangerous never detected. Proficiency in comprehending and converting between these presentation types and units is a critical SIS engineering skill.

In this webinar, we cover all commonly used representations of failure rates, explore the various units in which these rates can be expressed, and provide guidance on converting between different formats.

Recorded webinar

Using Large Language Models AI for HAZOP Automation and Augmentation Tool

Hazards and operability studies (HAZOP) are a critical first step in ensuring safe chemical process facilities.  Unfortunately, they are time and resource intensive.  Even good HAZOP studies can miss many very significant scenarios or come to insufficient conclusions.

This problem is being exacerbated by the loss of corporate memory that results from experienced personnel leaving the workforce.  Research is currently being performed to employ artificial intelligence tools like Generative Pretrained Transformers (e.g., Chat GPT) to assist, or potentially complete automate the HAZOP process.  To be effective, the GPT will have to be applied to curated datasets that only contain trusted engineering knowledge that is strictly proprietary – removing the “junk” general knowledge that hampers their performance.

Join President of Kenexis, Edward Marszal, who elaborates on this subject during this webinar.  The webinar begins with a discussion of the fundamentals of AI from its inception, starting with expert systems that were abandoned for fuzzy logic and neural networks that underpin modern large language models such as GPT.  We then discusses how HAZOP data such as HAZOP and LOPA worksheets can be fed into a large language model and how a GPT will create a model for predicting information in a HAZOP based on training data.

Recorded webinar

Calibration and Analysis of Gas Detection of Multi-Component Releases

Detecting gases released from chemical processes poses an intricate engineering challenge. Determining the optimal number and placement of detectors is daunting even in ideal conditions. However, the complexity intensifies when a single detector must identify various chemicals or chemical mixtures. Gas detectors are typically calibrated to recognize specific chemicals, meaning exposure to different substances yields disparate measurements.

In this webinar, we delve into the intricacies of detecting multicomponent gas systems versus single-species detection. We’ll explore crucial factors in designing gas detection systems for scenarios involving multicomponent releases.

Recorded webinar

SIS Commissioning – Open-PHA™ Checklist

Join Kenexis President Ed Marszal in this webinar where he discusses IEC 61511 commissioning requirements, offering insights, examples, and showcasing the use of Open-PHA™ checklists and associated tools.

Recorded webinar

MSA & Kenexis co-webinar – the new MSA FL5000 Fire Detector and modeling in Effigy™ Fire & Gas Mapping software

This recorded, co-presented webinar begins with Kevin Killeen, Product Line Manager-Flame Detection of MSA, introducing and discussing the new FL5000 fire detector’s features and benefits. From there Edward Marszal, President of Kenexis, explains how to model this new detector’s performance in Effigy™ Fire and Gas Mapping software from Kenexis.

Recorded webinar

SIL Verification Calculation Terms

This webinar presents all the terms used in SIL verification calculations. The means to calculate and the physical meaning of all the terms are discussed along with their equations – as shown in the IEC EC50 training class on functional safety. The webinar also shows how these terms are treated and displayed in the best-in-class Kenexis Vertigo software for SIS safety lifecycle management.

Recorded webinar

Safety Requirements Specifications (SRS): Energize-to-Trip Requirements September 2023

One topic in the process industries is known by various names: Fail Safe, ETT, DTT, Deenergize-to-Trip, and Energize-to-Trip. These terms refer to different ways of physically moving a final element in a Safety Instrumented System (SIS) to its safe state. While Deenergized-to-Trip is the most common and preferred approach, it’s essential to consider other factors. Energized-to-Trip systems, where the SIS power drives the final element into the safe condition, can be suitable in certain situations. This webinar discussed the standards requirements for Energized versus Deenergized-to-trip, as well as a workflow to ensure you have adequately considered, designed, and documented the Energized-to-Trip in your SIS design.

Recorded webinar

Captive Key Interlocks – Description, Use, and LOPA Analysis

Captive key interlocks are one of the most powerful, yet underutilized, safeguards in the process industries.  Captive key systems function by preventing a physical action, such as opening a valve, unless an engineered key has been inserted into the valve’s topworks.  Once the valve is moved, the key cannot be removed until the valve has been completely cycled.  This physical interlocking enforces a specific sequence of operations and prevents valve misalignment, improper opening, and other potentially catastrophic operational errors. These interlocks are simple and effective.  Essentially, they can only fail if they are installed incorrectly or physically tampered with, making their PFD dramatically lower than other active safeguarding measures.

This webinar will begin with a description and explanation of operation using a typical application by Ginny Vance of Sofis.  Subsequently, Ed Marszal of Kenexis will demonstrate how to account for the use of captive key interlocks in LOPA by presenting a LOPA scenario for the typical oil and gas application of Pig Launcher valve sequencing.

Recorded webinar

Hydrogen Gas Detection For Electrolyzers

Engineers in the chemical process industries face the task of shifting society away from energy sources that emit carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases. While numerous methods of storing green energy are being considered, there is significant interest in converting green electricity into chemical energy that is easier to store and transport. The most common approach involves producing hydrogen from water through electrolysis and utilizing the hydrogen directly or converting it into ammonia or other chemicals for improved transportability and energy density.

Hydrogen is emerging as a prominent candidate for driving the transition to green energy. However, like any potential energy source, hydrogen can pose risks if mishandled, as hydrogen is highly flammable, oxygen acts as an oxidizer. Consequently, the release of hydrogen can create hazardous conditions with significant safety implications. To mitigate these risks, a widely used safety measure is the implementation of a gas detection system with automatic shutdown capabilities.

Webinar Registration

Fault Tree Analysis to Extend LOPA for Shared Components

The Layer of Protection Analysis (LOPA) is widely used in the process industries as a tool to assess hazards and risks. Typically, organizations in the chemical process industry employ a process hazards analysis (PHA) program, which begins with a facilitated workshop study, often using techniques like hazards and operability studies (HAZOP). This study triggers further analysis in certain situations, such as scenarios involving high consequences, complexity, quantitative performance targets for safeguards, very high-cost recommendations, or insufficient risk assessment. In such cases, additional analysis, often more comprehensive than the PHA, is necessary. LOPA is frequently chosen as the technique of choice, as it is more comprehensive than PHA but less resource-intensive than fully quantified risk analysis.

However, there are pitfalls that can make LOPA ineffective and lead to excessively pessimistic results, which may require costly safeguards. If LOPA presents inappropriate results, alternative quantitative tools should be considered to address its limitations. These tools need not be used to their fullest extent, but rather selectively applied to specific applications where LOPA is inadequate. Some of these quantitative tools include dispersion models, explosion models, consequence effects models, event tree analysis, quantitative bowtie analysis, and fault tree analysis.

Webinar Registration

Adding Gasses and Equipment to Buildings

Altering a building’s original purpose by adding process equipment and dangerous gases can have significant implications for the safety of the building and its occupants. Whether it is apparently minor or major, significant modifications to the building’s structure, electrical and plumbing systems, and ventilation, among other things may be required for safety purposes.

The addition of process equipment and dangerous gases introduces new hazards into the building, including the risk of fire, explosion, and toxic gas leaks. This requires careful planning and implementation to ensure that the building’s safety systems can effectively manage these hazards.

Moreover, regulatory compliance may be necessary to ensure that the building meets all applicable safety standards, such as building codes, environmental regulations, and occupational safety requirements. Failure to comply with these regulations can result in fines, legal liability, and potentially serious safety consequences.

In summary, altering a building’s original purpose by adding process equipment and dangerous gases requires careful planning, implementation, and regulatory compliance to ensure the safety of the building and its occupants.

Webinar Registration

How to Quickly Determine if Safety Functions are Vulnerable to a Cybersecurity Threat

In this webinar, we will briefly cover the good cybersecurity principles like backing up everything, restricting access, and the other top ten things everyone should already be doing at a minimum. Then we will dive into how to perform a Security PHA Review (SPR) of your HAZOPs. An SPR is designed to help you quickly determine if any of your safety functions are vulnerable to a cybersecurity threat.

Previously Recorded Webinar Registration 

Quantitative Bowtie

Research into Unified Hazard Assessment combining HAZOP, LOPA, and Quantitative Bowtie Analysis has yielded techniques that elegantly address the limitations of LOPA and provided a significantly improved graphical communications method. This recorded webinar provides background on how Unified Hazard Assessment yielded the techniques of Quantitative Bowtie analysis. The webinar will also describe in detail how to implement quantitative bowtie analysis along with the mathematical concepts used for quantification of risk for multiple causes and multiple consequences inside a single scenario. The concepts will be presented using example studies that include mitigative safeguards and multiple cause scenarios.

Previously Recorded Webinar Registration

Can I see your Functional Safety Management Program documentation?

Planning Functional Safety (with Template Procedure)

A part of the IEC 61511 standard that does not get the attention that it deserves is clause 5 – Management of Functional Safety.

While most engineers want to focus on detailed design, risk analysis and SIL verification calculations, it is the management aspect that addresses the human failure portion of the risk equation.

In clause 5 we define the need for a plan to be made for functional safety.  This plan needs to include the definition of tasks that occur during the SIS safety lifecycle along with assignments of who is responsible for these tasks.  This clause also addresses items like competency and the assignment of SIS tasks to external organizations.

In this webinar we will highlight some of the information that is contained in the Kenexis course – SIS Management responsibilities.  We will then move on to an explanation of the Kenexis Template SIS Safety Lifecycle Procedure along with recommendations on how to customize it for your organization.  If you do not already have a safety lifecycle management procedure, this webinar and the template are a great starting point that will honestly get you most of the way to where you need to be.

Previously Recorded Webinar Registration

Why is that Detector There

Have you ever wondered why a gas or fire detector is installed at a location. Maybe someone walking through your facility asked you why a detector was installed at a particular location. Scrambling to find an answer at that point is probably useless, you already revealed that you don’t know and maybe no one else onsite knows.

In this webinar we will quickly go through how we engineer where detectors are positioned and some of the science behind the engineering. We will discuss the process and even design a small system live and calculate coverage to see if it meets the requirements.

Previously Recorded Webinar Registration

SIS and BPCS Component Sharing

There is still some confusion about a key attribute of good Safety Instrumented Systems (SIS) design – specifically separation of Basic Process Control Systems (BPCS) and Safety Instrumented Systems (SIS). In this live webinar, we will cover Definitions and Standards Requirements, Assessment of Independence – Shared Valve System, Quantitative Justification of Shared Component, Additional Standards Requirements, Design of SIS Separation Workflow

Previously Recorded Webinar Registration

Risk Assessment and Safeguarding of Lithium Ion Battery Containing Facilities

Join us for a recorded webinar discussing the challenges associated with Risk Assessment and Safeguarding of Lithium Ion Battery Containing Facilities

Previously Recorded Webinar Registration

Determining and Documenting Appropriate Leak Tightness Requirements

This webinar goes into detail about the differences between tight shut off and leakage rate methods, the standards, and how to determine the correct leak requirements for your situation.

Previously Recorded Webinar Registration