Safety requirements, overall

The long-term widespread use of DDT over a number of years demonstrates one typical Soviet trick - abusing loopholes in the rules. DDT was actively used for decades, while not being on lists of permitted substances, a situation condoned by the Health and Epidemiological Services and their on-site agencies. Pesticide use systematically was not in accordance with the permissible standards in the USSR. In 1976 the USSR introduced a System of Labor Safety Standards Harmful Substances, Classification and Overall Safety Requirements, according to which all harmful substances were broken down into four risk classes, taking into account several different indices (table 1.5). 

The standard gives guidance on E/E/PE Systems. The goal may be achieved by more than one safety-related system and by a bundle of measures, but always based on hazard and risk analysis, on getting the overall safety requirements right, and by developing a concept for proper safety requirements allocation. 

Safety requirements specifications for individual subsystems may also be derived from this overall specification. 

The control system is anticipated to be of typical high standard industrial type. Redundancy will be provided where required. Overall classification of the control system is anticipated to be non-safety graded. 

According to lEC 61508 and lEC 61511 the safety validation should be performed in terms of the overall safety functions requirements and the overall safety integrity requirements, taking into account the safety requirements allocation for the E/E/PE safety-related system in designing. In particular PFDavg value has to be verified in the probabilistic modeling process for the architectures considered of the E/E/PE safety-related systems taking into accoimt the probabihstic interval criterion for selected SIL. 

Before starting the SIS realisation phase, the overall safety requirements have been previously developed, as well as the SR allocation and specification. The following inputs are then available ... 

Thus the specific feature of this certification Ues in the application of ATEX standards to ensure overall safety of the system whereas generally speaking these harmonized standards are used to prove conformity with ATEX directive 94/9/CE. There are therefore no differences concerning the ATEX evaluation hut at regulatory level, EC conformity will certify that Daisy Bell meets the essential safety requirements of the Machinery directive. 

It is likely that solvent-based processing of recovered plastics will grow in the future as part of the overall global infrastructure for plastics recovery. Economies of scale will help to cover the overhead costs required to meet demanding environmental and safety requirements for chemical processing. Some advantages and disadvantages of solvent-based separation processed are summarized here ... 

We learned that safety requires leadership and the belief that harm-free performance is possible. This kind of leadership, and this imflinching belief, requires study and analysis of all levels of the system s architecture, including the overall system design, the midlevel design, and the level of the microsystem. 

After a reminder of safety requirements, the field trip can start with an introduction of the technical st, followed by a brief presentation of the overall projeet and of its more important aspects. Poster-type panels ean be helpful for that (see Fig. 3), but other technologies sueh as eomputer-based presentations or paper handouts ean also be employed. Depending... 

Development of the overall safety requirements (concept, scope definition, hazard and risk assessment)... 

Abstract. Component-based architectures are widely used in embedded systems. For managing complexity and improving quality separation of concerns is one of the most important principles. For one component, separation of concerns is realized by defining the overall component functionality by separated protocol behaviors. One of the main challenges of applying separation of concerns is the later automatic composition of the separated, maybe interdependent concerns which is not supported by current component-based approaches. Moreover, the complexity of real-time distributed embedded systems requires to consider safety requirements for the composition of the separated concerns. We present an approach which addresses these problems by a well-defined automatic composition of protocol behaviors with respect to interdependent concerns. The composition is performed by taking a proper refinement relation into accoimt so that the analysis results of the separated concerns are preserved which is essential for safety critical systems. 

The primary aim of safety analysis is the optimal overall solution based on the principle of plant concept by operationally safe design. The interaction of all steps is shown in Figure 4.1. The optimal solution will have been attained when the degree of safety is sufficient to cover externally specified requirements (for example, risk boundary values) and when the economic costs of safety requirements remain as low as possible. In the event that the plant design is such that adequate safety is not possible at economically justifiable costs, changes in the design concept must be considered. 

There is little guidance available on how safety requirements of SRS applications can be used to derive a required AEL for a given OS function. Appendix A of SWOl prowdes some initial discussion however further work will be required. In particular, it wouM be important to understand the connection between safety arguments of OS functions (derived from the overall system safety requirements) and the AEL assigned to those functions through this assessment process. 

General requirements Development of overall safety requirements concepts, scope definitions (7.1—75) (clause numbers—Typ.) allocation of safety related requirements to E/E/PEs (7.6) specification of safety requirements (7.10) installation commissioning, safety validation, operation and maintenance, modification and retrofit, decommissioning or disposal of E/E/PEs (7.13 and 7.14). Operation, maintenance modification (7.15—7.17) Yes Yes Yes ... 

The overall life cycle discussions in the standard mainly covered in this main Clause 7, having 17 major sub-clauses. Now coming back to main life cycle phases in Fig. VI/4.0.2-1, it is seen that the first part of the safety life cycle is basically the analysis part comprising concept, scope for the system/EUC, hazard/risk analysis, creation of overall safety requirements, and identification of specific safety functions to prevent the identified hazards safety requirements allocation. The middle part is realization activities (Clause 7.10) as detailed in Figs. Vl/4.1.4-1 and Vl/4.1.4-2, are dealt with in Parts 2 and 3 discussions. The next part of the life cycle is related to installation and commissioning (Clause 7.13). Then comes the validation (Clause 7.14), operation and maintenance (Clause 7.15), modification, retrofit (Clause 7.16), and finally, decommissioning (Clause 7.17). 

Software validation, which involves overall checks for software safety requirements with appropriate documentation, may be done separately or with system validation. Approved quality validation plan shall be in place and all must be documented properly. For separate validation, major issues are ... 

Functional safety below specification Systematic fault experience Change in safety legislation Modifications to the EUC and use Modification to the overall safety requirements Analysis of operations and maintenance performance below target Routine functional safety audits... 

Requirements for partial proof testing As discussed earlier, for partial testing of SIS, the impact on process operation, functional safety, and overall test coverage must be established with the help of proper assessment and as necessary additional controls need to be deployed without disturbing SIS installation. 

With initial assessment, all risks are listed and suitable IPLs are deployed. After this the entire system is reassessed. Because we are interested in SIS, in the final assessment only SIS is shown. After each assessment the IPLs and SIS are validated. After final assessment of overall safety requirements it is ensured that the risk level is at an acceptable level, as shown in the figure. This shall be a level equal to or below the ALARP level. In principle, what has been discussed here is more or less the same as discussed earlier, the only difference is that here the basic implementation process is shown. Similarly, SIS in the design phase is shown in Fig. XII/1.0-3. The reason for showing the figure is to recapitulate further details about SIS design. 

Functional safety is the part of the overall safety arrangements that depends on a system or equipment operating correctly in response to its inputs (BS EN 61508)." Procedures for functional safety assessment and auditing should be in place. A functional safety assessment is an independent assessment and audit of the functional safety requirements and the safety integrity level achieved by the SIS. 

Mflitary Standards are issued in two forms MIL-STD-XXXX, which are general in nature and presented in book format and those listed as MS-XXXX, which are specific to end items or parts and are presented in sheet format. The book format standards are comprehensive presentations of engineering practices (including test methods), procedures, processes, codes, safety requirements, symbols, abbreviations, nomenclature, type designations, and characteristics for standard equipments, either singly or in families. Mflitary Standards in the book format are also used to cover overall characteristics of a family of end items or major components. They are listed in Part II of the DODISS. 

---