[go: up one dir, main page]

WO2013053037A1 - Système de surveillance de protocoles de sécurité - Google Patents

Système de surveillance de protocoles de sécurité Download PDF

Info

Publication number
WO2013053037A1
WO2013053037A1 PCT/CA2011/050638 CA2011050638W WO2013053037A1 WO 2013053037 A1 WO2013053037 A1 WO 2013053037A1 CA 2011050638 W CA2011050638 W CA 2011050638W WO 2013053037 A1 WO2013053037 A1 WO 2013053037A1
Authority
WO
WIPO (PCT)
Prior art keywords
safety
user interface
operator
potentially unsafe
components
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Ceased
Application number
PCT/CA2011/050638
Other languages
English (en)
Inventor
Ken BINGHAM
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
ACM AUTOMATION Inc
Original Assignee
ACM AUTOMATION Inc
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by ACM AUTOMATION Inc filed Critical ACM AUTOMATION Inc
Priority to CA2851172A priority Critical patent/CA2851172C/fr
Priority to PCT/CA2011/050638 priority patent/WO2013053037A1/fr
Publication of WO2013053037A1 publication Critical patent/WO2013053037A1/fr
Anticipated expiration legal-status Critical
Ceased legal-status Critical Current

Links

Classifications

    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING OR CALCULATING; COUNTING
    • G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q10/00—Administration; Management

Definitions

  • the present invention relates to industrial equipment safety. More specifically, the present invention relates to systems and methods for determining if safety
  • the present invention relates to systems and methods for monitoring safety procedures for an industrial facility.
  • the user interface also interfaces with a safety calculation module that calculates the risk level for specific potential consequences if specific safety procedures are not implemented. Whenever a potentially unsafe situation occurs, the risk levels associated with the potential consequences of the unsafe situation are presented to the safety operator along with contingencies which may be implemented to alleviate the risks. Past potentially unsafe situations are also presented to the safety operator by way of a time line such that a
  • the present invention provides a system for monitoring safety related procedures relating to specific components in a facility, the system
  • a safety operator user interface for providing a safety operator with alerts and information relating to a plurality of components in said facility
  • a safety calculation module for calculating risk levels if said safety procedures for said plurality of components are not implemented, said risk levels being presented to said safety operator through said user interface, said risk levels being related to at least one consequence if said safety procedures are not implemented.
  • the present invention provides a system for monitoring safety related procedures relating to specific components in a facility, the system
  • a safety calculation module for calculating risk levels relating to potential consequences if said safety procedures for said specific
  • FIGURE 1 is a block diagram of a system according to one aspect of the invention
  • FIGURE 2 is a screen shot of a dashboard screen of a user interface according to one aspect of the invention
  • FIGURE 3 is a screen shot of a situational analysis screen of the user interface
  • FIGURE 4 is a screen shot of an alarm notes view of the situational analysis screen
  • FIGURE 5 is a screen shot of a contingencies view of the situational analysis screen
  • FIGURE 6 is a screen shot of an observation view of the situational analysis screen
  • FIGURE 7 is a screen shot of a history view of the situational analysis screen
  • FIGURE 8 is a screen shot of another contingencies view of the situational analysis screen; and FIGURE 9 is a screen shot showing a popup window that occurs when a component fails.
  • the system 10 comprises a user interface 20, a database 30, and a calculation module 40.
  • the database 30 contains safety documents 35 for the components being used in a specific facility.
  • the safety documents are preferably documents prepared by design engineers while designing and constructing the facility or its related systems. Also preferably, each component and subcomponent of the facility is provided with a
  • SRS documents for each component in the facility. These SRS documents ideally detail potential consequences if a specific component fails or performs in a manner less than what is expected from the component.
  • the SRS document may also contain rules and information relating to the calculation of risk levels for each of the potential consequences if the specific component fails.
  • the calculation module 40 calculates the various risk levels associated with each of the potential consequences if the specific component fails or functions in a less than expected manner. These risk levels are calculated using data derived from the safety documents in the
  • risk levels are accessible to the user interface 20. As will be seen below, risk levels can be presented to the safety operator using various user
  • calculation module may make is the PFD or the probability of failure on demand for each component.
  • the PFD of a safety instrumented function (SIF) loop can be calculated using :
  • PFD IEC is the probability of failure of
  • a D is the dangerous failure rate of the
  • the component Ti is the proof test interval for the
  • MTTR is the mean time to restore a component from failed to working state. To avoid probabilities greater than 1, the equation below may be used by the calculation module 40:
  • the PFD can be calculated using: j + t xPFD where ⁇ is the common cause factor between
  • the user interface 20 presents data to a safety
  • the user interface 20 has a number of screens from which the safety operator can see various data relating to
  • FIG 2 shows a dashboard screen of the user interface 20.
  • a history section 50 details a history of previous alarms or potentially unsafe situations.
  • the history section 50 details the element or component to which the alarm relates as well as the date and time of the alarm.
  • the history section details observations made by the safety operator regarding each of the alarms. This history section can be scrolled down to show more entries of previous alarms.
  • suspected failures 60 as well as confirmed equipment or component failures 70.
  • contingencies section 80 This section shows any contingencies that are currently implemented due to safety concerns. As can be seen, no contingencies are in effect.
  • Figure 2 also shows a quick reference timeline 90 at the bottom of the user interface screen.
  • the timeline shows the various alarms or potentially unsafe situations that have occurred or could have occurred.
  • New color coded icons or bars representing potentially unsafe situations enter from the right of the user interface along with a changing time bar detailing how much time has elapsed since the potentially unsafe situation was detected.
  • the potentially unsafe situation represented by the red bar occurred 3 minutes before and has not been addressed.
  • the color coding used in this implementation uses a red color to detail a potentially serious situation with dire
  • the situation analysis screen provides the safety operator with data relating to the potential consequences of an unsafe situation.
  • a safeguard status section 100 shows the current status of a potentially unsafe situation currently being viewed on the situation analysis screen.
  • the safety operator can select NORMAL to change the status of the potentially unsafe situation to normal, representing that the situation is no longer unsafe. Selecting the
  • CONTINGENCY category in the status section 100 will prompt the safety operator to select an appropriate contingency (Figure 5) to mitigate the unsafe situation.
  • a risk bar section 110 presents the safety operator with a visual indication as to the risk being run if the potentially unsafe situation is allowed to continue.
  • the color on the risk bar shows how much risk is being taken. In this implementation, green indicates minimal risk, yellow indicates more risk and red indicates high risk.
  • the situation indicated by the gray box to the left of the risk bar is one where the risk is minimal while the situation
  • a consequence section 120 details the consequences if the potentially unsafe situation is allowed to continue. As can be seen from Figure 3, this section details not just the event, but also a detailed description of the consequence, the category of the consequence (i.e. what it affects), the severity of the consequence, and the risk as to whether the consequence will occur if the component fails. Finally, the consequence section also shows whether the design or use of the component was intended to engender any risks (i.e. are risks expected with this component) .
  • the number of categories are determined by the implementation of the system. While other categories are possible some examples of such categories are:
  • the risk levels shown in the consequences section may be categorized into multiple levels.
  • the risk levels were categorized into ACCEPTABLE, MODERATE, or SERIOUS. These levels were, in this implementation, also color coded with ACCEPTABLE being shown by a green field,
  • MODERATE being shown by a yellow field
  • SERIOUS being denoted by a red field.
  • the situational analysis screen in Figure 3 has multiple views.
  • Figure 3 shows the exposure view where the safety operator can view the risk exposure for the various potentially unsafe situations
  • the component relating to each potentially unsafe situation is identified in each section in which the potentially unsafe situation is being examined.
  • the component name is not limited to part numbers but can be quite descriptive.
  • one element is named as "IHS - Upstream of ESDV-440 designed for MOP (9930KPa) of pipeline within the plant" and, from Figure 2, the failure of this component has been confirmed by the safety operator .
  • a quick reference timeline 90 similar to the timeline found in Figure 2.
  • FIG. 4 provides the safety operator with alarm notes regarding one of the potentially unsafe situations. From Figure 4, the notes relate to the alarm generated for the IHS component whose failure has been confirmed by the safety operator. To compensate for the issues caused by an unsafe situation (perhaps caused by a failure of a component) , contingencies for each unsafe situation are provided for in the situational analysis screen. Referring to Figure 5, the contingencies view is shown. This view provides the safety operator with the contingency for each unsafe situation.
  • a contingency section 130 displays not just the potential consequence (see
  • the contingency section also identifies the contingency for a component failure (contingency portion 170) and the risk of the consequence if the contingency is implemented (modified risk portion 180) .
  • the consequences are quite dire as a fire is possible with its attendant dangers to personnel and the risk of the consequence occurring is moderate. With the contingency in place, the risk of the consequence has been eliminated.
  • FIG. 6 shown is the observation view of the situational analysis screen. This view allows the safety operator to add his or her observations regarding the potentially unsafe situation. These observations then become part of the permanent record for that component.
  • the observations are added to the safety document for the particular component, with the safety document being uploaded to the database. Any future access to the safety record for that component will then be able to retrieve the observations for this potentially unsafe situation for this component.
  • the safety operator can review the history of the particular component through the situational analysis screen.
  • This historical view available through the situational analysis screen provides the safety operator with a complete history of any anomalies, problems, alarms, and potential issues with the particular component.
  • the alarm view also provides any alarm tags associated with each event concerning the particular component, the date and time of each event, as well as any observations made regarding the event by the safety operator at the time.
  • a previous issue with the particular component was resolved while the current issue was first suspected and then confirmed by the safety operator.
  • Figure 8 is a screen shot of the situational screen using the contingency view detailing normal safeguard status.
  • the safeguard status section is color coded. If there are suspected alarms, confirmed failures, or contingencies in effect, these will be indicated by a non-grey color. This use of a non-grey color to indicate suspected alerts, failures, etc. can be seen in the safeguard status in Figures 3,5, and 5 as well.
  • Figure 9 details a popup window when a failure of a component is suspected. As can be seen, the safety operator is prompted for details, such as date and time, regarding the suspected component failure.
  • the system 10 operates with the user interface retrieving relevant safety documents from the database.
  • each component in the facility has at least one safety document in the database.
  • component's safety data including contingencies, schedules, safety history, and notes and observations on relevant safety alarms concerning the component, are detailed in the safety documents.
  • a safety operator accesses data regarding a component, this causes the safety documents relating to that component to be
  • This relevant data may, depending on the screen on the user interface, include the contingencies for component failure, the component's history (including false alarms, suspected failures, confirmed failures, etc., etc.), maintenance schedules, safety operator notes and observations, as well as other safety related data.
  • the safety document (s) for each component may be added to by the safety operator if alerts, potentially unsafe situations, or failures occur.
  • the data regarding such events are then entered into the relevant safety documents for the affected/relevant components.
  • the amended safety documents are then uploaded to the
  • the risk data (i.e. the data relating to the risk of the consequences occurring) are retrieved by the user interface from the calculation module.
  • the calculation module calculates this risk data based on safety data retrieved from the relevant safety documents from the database .
  • the safety documents or the data contained in these documents may be pre-retrieved by the user interface or by the calculation module prior to being needed by either of these.
  • the user interface may retrieve all the safety documents from the database for all the components when the user interface is initialized. These safety documents can then be cached until needed by the user interface.
  • the risk data for various contingencies and components may be pre- calculated by the calculation module and cached by the user interface until needed or the risk data may be saved in the relevant safety documents for use by the user interface when needed.
  • the present invention is
  • the user interface module implemented as a software system having multiple modules .
  • the user interface module the database, and the
  • calculation module may be implemented on a single
  • each module may be resident on a separate server with each server being in networked communication with every other server.
  • some of the modules may be resident on the same server while others may be on another server.
  • the calculation module may be the SilCoreTM tool marketed by ACM Facility Safety of Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
  • the embodiments of the invention may be executed by a computer processor or similar device programmed in the manner of method steps, or may be executed by an
  • an electronic system which is provided with means for executing these steps .
  • an electronic memory means such as computer diskettes, CD-ROMs, Random Access Memory (RAM) , Read Only Memory (ROM) or similar computer software storage media known in the art, may be programmed to execute such method steps.
  • electronic signals representing these method steps may also be transmitted via a communication network.
  • Embodiments of the invention may be implemented in any conventional computer programming language.
  • preferred embodiments may be implemented in a procedural programming language (e.g.C") or an object- oriented language (e.g. "C++", “java", or "C#”) .
  • Embodiments can be implemented as a computer program product for use with a computer system.
  • implementations may include a series of computer
  • a tangible medium such as a computer readable medium (e.g., a diskette, CD-ROM, ROM, or fixed disk) or transmittable to a computer system, via a modem or other interface device, such as a
  • the medium may be either a tangible medium (e.g., optical or electrical communications lines) or a medium implemented with wireless techniques (e.g., microwave, infrared or other transmission techniques) .
  • the series of computer instructions embodies all or part of the
  • instructions can be written in a number of programming languages for use with many computer architectures or operating systems. Furthermore, such instructions may be stored in any memory device, such as semiconductor, magnetic, optical or other memory devices, and may be transmitted using any communications technology, such as optical, infrared, microwave, or other transmission technologies. It is expected that such a computer program product may be distributed as a removable medium with accompanying printed or electronic documentation (e.g., shrink-wrapped software) , preloaded with a computer system (e.g., on system ROM or fixed disk), or distributed from a server over a network (e.g., the Internet or World Wide Web) . Of course, some embodiments of the invention may be implemented as a combination of both software (e.g., a computer program product) and hardware. Still other embodiments of the invention may be implemented as entirely hardware, or entirely software (e.g., a computer program product) .

Landscapes

  • Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
  • Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • Economics (AREA)
  • Entrepreneurship & Innovation (AREA)
  • Human Resources & Organizations (AREA)
  • Marketing (AREA)
  • Operations Research (AREA)
  • Quality & Reliability (AREA)
  • Strategic Management (AREA)
  • Tourism & Hospitality (AREA)
  • Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • General Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
  • General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
  • Alarm Systems (AREA)

Abstract

L'invention concerne des systèmes et des procédés de surveillance de procédures de sécurité pour une installation industrielle. Une interface utilisateur pour un opérateur de sécurité interface avec une base de données contenant des documents de sécurité pour des composants installés et en utilisation dans l'installation industrielle. L'interface utilisateur interface également avec un module de calcul de sécurité qui calcule le niveau de risque pour des conséquences potentielles spécifiques si des procédures de sécurité spécifiques ne sont pas mises en œuvre. A chaque fois qu'une situation potentiellement dangereuse se produit, les niveaux de risque associés aux conséquences potentielles de la situation dangereuse sont présentés à l'opérateur de sécurité conjointement avec des évènements imprévus qui peuvent être mis en œuvre pour réduire les risques. Des situations potentiellement dangereuses passées sont également présentées à l'opérateur de sécurité au moyen d'une ligne de temps de telle sorte qu'un enregistrement historique de la sécurité de l'installation peut être pris d'un coup d'œil.
PCT/CA2011/050638 2011-10-12 2011-10-12 Système de surveillance de protocoles de sécurité Ceased WO2013053037A1 (fr)

Priority Applications (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
CA2851172A CA2851172C (fr) 2011-10-12 2011-10-12 Systeme de surveillance de protocoles de securite
PCT/CA2011/050638 WO2013053037A1 (fr) 2011-10-12 2011-10-12 Système de surveillance de protocoles de sécurité

Applications Claiming Priority (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
PCT/CA2011/050638 WO2013053037A1 (fr) 2011-10-12 2011-10-12 Système de surveillance de protocoles de sécurité

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
WO2013053037A1 true WO2013053037A1 (fr) 2013-04-18

Family

ID=48081293

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
PCT/CA2011/050638 Ceased WO2013053037A1 (fr) 2011-10-12 2011-10-12 Système de surveillance de protocoles de sécurité

Country Status (2)

Country Link
CA (1) CA2851172C (fr)
WO (1) WO2013053037A1 (fr)

Citations (4)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US5617311A (en) * 1995-02-06 1997-04-01 Westinghouse Electric Corporation Information system for operating complex plant
US20060020604A1 (en) * 2004-07-20 2006-01-26 Justin Murez Apparatus and method for performing process hazard analysis
US20080126150A1 (en) * 2006-09-21 2008-05-29 General Electric Method for assessing reliability requirements of a safety instrumented control function
US20090012631A1 (en) * 2007-07-03 2009-01-08 Dale Fuller Automation safety life cycle

Patent Citations (4)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US5617311A (en) * 1995-02-06 1997-04-01 Westinghouse Electric Corporation Information system for operating complex plant
US20060020604A1 (en) * 2004-07-20 2006-01-26 Justin Murez Apparatus and method for performing process hazard analysis
US20080126150A1 (en) * 2006-09-21 2008-05-29 General Electric Method for assessing reliability requirements of a safety instrumented control function
US20090012631A1 (en) * 2007-07-03 2009-01-08 Dale Fuller Automation safety life cycle

Non-Patent Citations (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Title
ARTHUR D.LITTLE LIMITED: "HAZOP Training - Presentation to NPC Iran", June 2005 (2005-06-01), Retrieved from the Internet <URL:url:<http://www.npchse.net/education/pdf/adl/Mod4_140_Hazop_SlideshoyFina1%20[Read-Only].pdf> [retrieved on 20120502] *

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
CA2851172A1 (fr) 2013-04-18
CA2851172C (fr) 2022-09-13

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
CN110023862B (zh) 诊断装置、诊断方法及计算机可读取的记录介质
US8825276B2 (en) Maintenance systems and methods for use in analyzing maintenance data
AU2015204064B2 (en) Systems and methods to visualize component health and preventive maintenance needs for subsea control subsystem components
NO337835B1 (no) Fremgangsmåte og system for sanntidsoperasjoner og vedlikehold
CN107408225A (zh) 操作数据的自适应处置
EP3104317A1 (fr) Classement par ordre de priorité de remplacement d&#39;au moins une partie d&#39;analyse de défaillance de véhicule
GB2476145A (en) Managing process control status rollups
WO2012058336A1 (fr) Système permettant d&#39;accélérer la conformité avec l&#39;osha (administration de la santé et de la sécurité au travail) pour la gestion de la sécurité des processus dans une installation de fabrication
CN107316444B (zh) 化学品生产装置实时安全预警方法
Kim et al. Reduction of test and maintenance human errors by analyzing task characteristics and work conditions
US20150081379A1 (en) System for monitoring safety protocols
US20130096979A1 (en) System for monitoring safety protocols
KR20140045367A (ko) 헬리콥터 엔진의 정비 추천 시스템
Li et al. Study on operator's SA reliability in digital NPPs. Part 2: Data-driven causality model of SA
JPWO2021048956A1 (ja) プラントの保全管理方法及び保全管理システム
Park et al. A systematic framework to investigate the coverage of abnormal operating procedures in nuclear power plants
KR20160072812A (ko) 업데이트들, 증거 및 트리거들의 케이스 관리 링키지
CA2851172C (fr) Systeme de surveillance de protocoles de securite
Vaurio Safety-related decision making at a nuclear power plant
US20140160152A1 (en) Methods and systems for integrated plot training
US20250006041A1 (en) Fire events pattern analysis and cross-building data analytics
KR20140051568A (ko) 산업 시설의 안전 관리 방법 및 그 시스템, 및 기록매체
JP2017076165A (ja) 機器監視装置およびアラート情報管理方法
KR20130106050A (ko) 스마트 안전 통합 관리 방법 및 그 시스템, 및 기록매체
US20240339024A1 (en) Predictive analytics of fire systems to reduce unplanned site visits and efficient maintenance planning

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
121 Ep: the epo has been informed by wipo that ep was designated in this application

Ref document number: 11874072

Country of ref document: EP

Kind code of ref document: A1

ENP Entry into the national phase

Ref document number: 2851172

Country of ref document: CA

NENP Non-entry into the national phase

Ref country code: DE

122 Ep: pct application non-entry in european phase

Ref document number: 11874072

Country of ref document: EP

Kind code of ref document: A1