About: Safety Integrity Level (SIL) versus Full Quantitative Risk Value     Goto   Sponge   NotDistinct   Permalink

An Entity of Type : http://linked.opendata.cz/ontology/domain/vavai/Vysledek, within Data Space : linked.opendata.cz associated with source document(s)

AttributesValues
rdf:type
Description
  • Safety management of technical equipment is not possible without risk assessment. Therefore, many standards are available for risk assessment, e.g. ISO 13824:2009 General principles on risk assessment of systems involving structures or ISO/IEC 31010:2009 Risk management – Risk Assessment Techniques. In different industrial sectors risk assessment is fundamental step to determine required safety integrity level (SIL), eventually performance level (PL), which guarantees risk linked to some equipment on acceptable level. Standards applied for risk management based on SIL in different industrial sectors differ in methods used for risk evaluation and SIL determination. IEC 61508-5 accepts the use of qualitative, semi-quantitative or quantitative approach for risk evaluation and SIL determination. The standard uses hazardous event severity matrix as an example of qualitative approach for SIL determination, the standard furthermore uses layer of protection analysis (LOPA) as an example of semi-quantitative approach. The standard also uses Risk graph method as an example of both qualitative and semi-quantitative approach. IEC 62061 only presents one semi-quantitative approach for risk evaluation and SIL determination based on combination of probability and severity of consequences. This approach is different from the approach presented in IEC 61508-5. Similarly ISO 13849-1 recommends the use of qualitative method combining probability and severity of consequences for risk evaluation and PL determination, however, distinctly from IEC 61508-5 as well as IEC 62061. All these standards evaluate risk in the first step and in the second step they set safety systems reliability requirements, which should lower risk onto an acceptable level. The elemental question is, how exactly these standards evaluate risk in their methods. Another question is what acceptable level of risk is implicitly hidden in their requirements for choice of SIL and PL. This paper addresses these questions.
  • Safety management of technical equipment is not possible without risk assessment. Therefore, many standards are available for risk assessment, e.g. ISO 13824:2009 General principles on risk assessment of systems involving structures or ISO/IEC 31010:2009 Risk management – Risk Assessment Techniques. In different industrial sectors risk assessment is fundamental step to determine required safety integrity level (SIL), eventually performance level (PL), which guarantees risk linked to some equipment on acceptable level. Standards applied for risk management based on SIL in different industrial sectors differ in methods used for risk evaluation and SIL determination. IEC 61508-5 accepts the use of qualitative, semi-quantitative or quantitative approach for risk evaluation and SIL determination. The standard uses hazardous event severity matrix as an example of qualitative approach for SIL determination, the standard furthermore uses layer of protection analysis (LOPA) as an example of semi-quantitative approach. The standard also uses Risk graph method as an example of both qualitative and semi-quantitative approach. IEC 62061 only presents one semi-quantitative approach for risk evaluation and SIL determination based on combination of probability and severity of consequences. This approach is different from the approach presented in IEC 61508-5. Similarly ISO 13849-1 recommends the use of qualitative method combining probability and severity of consequences for risk evaluation and PL determination, however, distinctly from IEC 61508-5 as well as IEC 62061. All these standards evaluate risk in the first step and in the second step they set safety systems reliability requirements, which should lower risk onto an acceptable level. The elemental question is, how exactly these standards evaluate risk in their methods. Another question is what acceptable level of risk is implicitly hidden in their requirements for choice of SIL and PL. This paper addresses these questions. (en)
Title
  • Safety Integrity Level (SIL) versus Full Quantitative Risk Value
  • Safety Integrity Level (SIL) versus Full Quantitative Risk Value (en)
skos:prefLabel
  • Safety Integrity Level (SIL) versus Full Quantitative Risk Value
  • Safety Integrity Level (SIL) versus Full Quantitative Risk Value (en)
skos:notation
  • RIV/61989100:27650/13:86086439!RIV14-MSM-27650___
http://linked.open...avai/predkladatel
http://linked.open...avai/riv/aktivita
http://linked.open...avai/riv/aktivity
  • P(EE2.3.30.0016)
http://linked.open...iv/cisloPeriodika
  • 15
http://linked.open...vai/riv/dodaniDat
http://linked.open...aciTvurceVysledku
http://linked.open.../riv/druhVysledku
http://linked.open...iv/duvernostUdaju
http://linked.open...titaPredkladatele
http://linked.open...dnocenehoVysledku
  • 103887
http://linked.open...ai/riv/idVysledku
  • RIV/61989100:27650/13:86086439
http://linked.open...riv/jazykVysledku
http://linked.open.../riv/klicovaSlova
  • tolerable level of risk; risk evaluation; SIL and PL determination; Safety (en)
http://linked.open.../riv/klicoveSlovo
http://linked.open...odStatuVydavatele
  • PL - Polská republika
http://linked.open...ontrolniKodProRIV
  • [4435DDABEC3F]
http://linked.open...i/riv/nazevZdroje
  • Eksploatacja i Niezawodnosc - Maintenance and Reliability
http://linked.open...in/vavai/riv/obor
http://linked.open...ichTvurcuVysledku
http://linked.open...cetTvurcuVysledku
http://linked.open...vavai/riv/projekt
http://linked.open...UplatneniVysledku
http://linked.open...v/svazekPeriodika
  • 2
http://linked.open...iv/tvurceVysledku
  • Fuchs, Pavel
  • Zajíček, Jaroslav
http://linked.open...ain/vavai/riv/wos
  • 000316194300002
issn
  • 1507-2711
number of pages
http://localhost/t...ganizacniJednotka
  • 27650
Faceted Search & Find service v1.16.118 as of Jun 21 2024


Alternative Linked Data Documents: ODE     Content Formats:   [cxml] [csv]     RDF   [text] [turtle] [ld+json] [rdf+json] [rdf+xml]     ODATA   [atom+xml] [odata+json]     Microdata   [microdata+json] [html]    About   
This material is Open Knowledge   W3C Semantic Web Technology [RDF Data] Valid XHTML + RDFa
OpenLink Virtuoso version 07.20.3240 as of Jun 21 2024, on Linux (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu), Single-Server Edition (126 GB total memory, 58 GB memory in use)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software