System safety fault-tree analysis

To determine the reasonable monitoring point is the key to the successful monitoring system, all other work is for its services. Reasonable monitoring stations can be determined through shoe safety fault tree analysis and the point of geometric and physical relationship. Indirect monitoring points are derived from the direct transformation of monitoring data. 

Process Hazards Analysis. Analysis of processes for unrecogni2ed or inadequately controUed ha2ards (see Hazard analysis and risk assessment) is required by OSHA (36). The principal methods of analysis, in an approximate ascending order of intensity, are what-if checklist failure modes and effects ha2ard and operabiHty (HAZOP) and fault-tree analysis. Other complementary methods include human error prediction and cost/benefit analysis. The HAZOP method is the most popular as of 1995 because it can be used to identify ha2ards, pinpoint their causes and consequences, and disclose the need for protective systems. Fault-tree analysis is the method to be used if a quantitative evaluation of operational safety is needed to justify the implementation of process improvements. 

Topics Include methods lor calculating damage resulting from the physical effects of accidental releases, using risk assessment Information to specify safety control systems, fault tree analysis, hazards of trace substances, warehouse fires, human exposure to process systems, and solutions to human factor problems. 

Modeling of the fault tree analysis of braking safety system... 

Toward the end of the Second World War, systems techniques such as fault tree analysis were introduced in order to predict the reliability and performance of military airplanes and missiles. The use of such techniques led to the formalization of the concept of probabilistic risk assessment (PRA). The publication of the Reactor Safety Study (NRC, 1975)—often referred to as the Rasmussen Report after the name of principal author, or by its subtitle WASH 1400—demonstrated the use of such techniques in the fledgling nuclear power business. Although WASH 1400 has since been supplanted by more advanced analysis techniques, the report was groundbreaking in its approach to system safety. 

A Brief Overview of Selected System Safety Analytical Approaches Working with the Risk Assessment Matrix Preliminary Hazard Analysis Energy Flow/Barrier Analysis Failure Modes and Effects Analysis Fault Tree Analysis... 

Rauzy, A., 1993. New Algorithms for Fault Tree Analysis, Reliability Engineering and System Safety, vol. 40. 

It is necessary to add here that a remarkable freedom exists in the proportion in which event trees and fault trees can be used in a specific probabilistic analysis. Indeed, large event trees and small fault trees can be chosen (or vice versa) with all the intermediate grades. Here, reference has been made to the most common way, which uses event trees up to the primary safety systems, and fault trees for the determination of the failure probabilities of the primary systems, also on the basis of the failure probabilities of their support systems. 

Instrumentation and Control (I C) systems are very often subject of probabilistic examination either within separate structural reliability analysis or Probabilistic Safety Assessment of a whole technological complex (e.g. Nuclear Power Plant). Use of programmable components in the design of these systems represents a challenge and utilizes the methods, which have been developed for components with a different behaviour. The typical method used for above mentioned examination is Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) (Vesely et al., 1981). The way of software faults modelling within Fault Trees vary a lot between particular models and there is no generally accepted modelling technique. 

Besides the two methods mentioned in the previous section, also fault tree analysis (FTA) has since the time of the Wash-1400 Report (Rasmussen 1975) been extensively used for evaluating PFD of safety systems. For some more recent applications to SIS, see Paula et al. 1993, Pullum and Bechta Dunga 1996, Summers and Zachary 1999, and Dutuit et al. 2009. 

Huang, H. Z., Tong, X. Zuo M. (2004) Posbist fault tree analysis of coherent systems. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 84 153-16. 

Volkanovski, A., M. Cepin, and B. Mavko (2009). Application of the fault tree analysis for assessment of power system reliability. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 94, 1116-1127. 

Some of the hazard analysis (evaluation) techniques already used by the chemical industry include traditional system safety tools such as preliminary hazard analysis, failure modes and effects analysis, and fault tree analysis. 

Based on the results of the PHA, recommendations made by 30% review boards, and guidance provided in the system safety program plan, detailed hazard analyses are made of specified (critical) subsystems. The techniques for these SSHAs are as outlined in the system safety program plan or as selected by the SSWG. Failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) and/or fault tree analysis (FTA) are generally the techniques of choice. Software hazard analysis, common cause analysis, and/or sneak circuit analysis may also be appropriate. 

Analytical trees can be used in a variety of ways in the system safety effort. The most common application of analytical trees in current system safety programs is probably the use of fault trees for fault tree analysis (FTA). However, analytical trees can also be used as planning tools, project description documents, status charts, and feeder documents for several hazard analysis techniques (including fault tree analysis). Analytical trees can be multipurpose, life cycle documents and represent one of the most useful tools available to managers, engineers, and safety professionals. 

Fault tree analysis (FTA) was developed by Bell Telephone Laboratories for the U.S. Air Force in 1962 and has been used as one of the primary system safety techniques since the system safety effort began. The Boeing Company was also an early pioneer in the use of fault tree analysis. 

Fault tree analysis is one of the most meaningful system safety techniques available for systematically reducing the probability of an undesired event. It can also be one of the more expensive techniques because it requires a skilled and knowledgeable analyst and a considerable amount of time, especially if the project is complex and a quantitative approach is required. 

Fault tree analysis is a technique by which the system safety engineer can rigorously evaluate specific hazardous events. It is a type of logic tree that is developed by deductive logic from a top undesired event to all subevents that must occur to cause it. It is primarily used as a qualitative technique for studying hazardous events in systems, subsystems, components, or operations involving command paths. It can also be used for quantitatively evaluating the probability of the top event and all subevent occurrences when sufficient and accurate data are available. Quantitative analyses shall be performed only when it is reasonably certain that the data for part/component failures and human errors for the operational environment exist. 

---