Verification reviews

The reworked items are issued after adequate verification review and approval. 

ISO 26262 requires to perform a verification review of the functional safety concept. This must be performed by a different person who knows the technology of the system-to-be. This is supported by some of the OCL validation constraints in Tab. 4 and the generation of a structured document from the model. 

In addition to the confirmation measures, verification reviews are performed. These reviews, which are required in other parts of ISO 26262, are intended to verify that the associated work products fulfil the project requirements, and the technical requirements with respect to use cases and failure modes... 

NOTE 3 Table 1 includes the confirmation measures. An overview of the verification reviews is given in Annex D. 

PRR - Production Readiness Review SFR - System Functional Review SRR - Systems Requirements Review SSR - Softw e Specification Review SVR - Systems Verification Review TRR - Test Readiness Review... 

A form of inspection is the focus review that is conducted in conjunction with a comprehensive or verification review. This type of review is usually as result of a significant risk or hazard finding, an insurance/risk management project or an enforcement action by a regulatory agency. 

Verification reviews shall identify the participants and their specific responsibilities during the review, preparation, and distribution of the review documentation. 

The results of corrosion surveys are received by the Surveyor in an agreed format using Forms TMl - TM8, preferably with the LR software freely issued to the approved firms. The report will highlight any areas where corrosion has gone beyond the permitted maximum diminution, which may be as low as 15% of the nominal thickness for a single item, and will also identify areas of "substantial corrosion T.e., any in excess of 75% of the permitted maximum. Corrosion in excess of that permitted means that the item has to be replaced. Any areas of corrosion deemed to be "substantial" are recorded for annual inspection. The Surveyor will review the completed report for verification and confirmation of the completeness of the thickness survey. 

While Eq. III-18 has been verified for small droplets, attempts to do so for liquids in capillaries (where Rm is negative and there should be a pressure reduction) have led to startling discrepancies. Potential problems include the presence of impurities leached from the capillary walls and allowance for the film of adsorbed vapor that should be present (see Chapter X). There is room for another real effect arising from structural peiturbations in the liquid induced by the vicinity of the solid capillary wall (see Chapter VI). Fisher and Israelachvili [19] review much of the literature on the verification of the Kelvin equation and report confirmatory measurements for liquid bridges between crossed mica cylinders. The situation is similar to that of the meniscus in a capillary since Rm is negative some of their results are shown in Fig. III-3. Studies in capillaries have been reviewed by Melrose [20] who concludes that the Kelvin equation is obeyed for radii at least down to 1 fim. 

The project review process involves multiple steps that should be definea in management gmdelines (CCPS, 1993, pp. 57-61). The steps include (1) review pohcy, (2) review scheduling, (3) reviewtech-nique, (4) review team representation, (5) review documentation, (6) review follow-up, (7) review follow-up verification, and (8) review procedures change management. These steps define how a review, whether it be a safety review, environmental review, pre-start-up review, or whatever, is conducted and how closure of review aclion items is achieved. 

Review Follow-up Verification In addition to someone tracking the follow-up through progress reports, responsibility should be assigned to verify that any process changes were ac tuaUy made in the field. This verification can be done by a review team as part of a process pre-start-up review. It could also be part of the project team management responsibihty or assigned to a particular functional (i.e., safety and loss prevention) representative. The closure of the review process is complete once implementation is verified. 

Construction and equipment meet the design specifications. Obtaining field verification or performing document review for the new or modified process can validate design specifications for construction and equipment. If a change is not physical (such as a setpoint for an interlock shutdown), the method for the change and its anticipated effects should be reviewed. 

It may be appropriate, based upon the hazards of the materials processed, for the client company to make a final site visit during the toll shutdown activities to review the toller s methods and completeness of process termination. This review could include termination status such as removal of all hazardous wastes and verification of associated documentation, and the adequate cleanup of equipment and the process area. 

Do the design controls ensure that design reviews and design verification and validation are recorded and demonstrate the product meets the design input and user requirements ... 

Performing product design verification and validation (clauses 4.4.7 and 4.4.8.1) Reviewing product design changes (clause 4.4.9.1)... 

You will need to review the requirements and the resultant design to identify any special equipment, tools, test software, and test or measuring equipment required. Once identified, plan for its design, manufacture, procurement, verification, and certification. One way of doing this is to produce a list that contains the following details ... 

By producing defining specifications that prescribe requirements for products or services and also the means by which these requirements are to be verified in-house in terms of the inspections, tests, analyses, audits, reviews, evaluations, and other means of verification... 

A schedule of design reviews should be established for each product/service being developed. In some cases there will need to be only one design review after completion of all design verification activities. However, depending on the complexity of the design... 

As part of the verification plan, you should include an activity plan that lists all the planned activities in the sequence they are to be conducted and use this plan to record completion and conformance progressively. The activity plan should make provision for planned and actual dates for each activity and for recording comments such as recovery plans when the program does not proceed exactly as planned. It is also good practice to conduct test reviews before and after each series of tests so that corrective measures can be taken before continuing with abortive tests (see also under Design validation). ... 

Test reviews to be held before tests commence to ensure that the product, facilities, tools, documentation, and personnel are in a state of operational readiness for verification... 

Management review records (clause 4.1.3) Process verification records (clause 4.2.4.9.4) Contract review records (clause 4.3.4)... 

Internal Verification Systems or procedures are in place for reviewing performance against standards and milestones and reporting departures from established (external or internal) standards. Exceptions and deficiencies are corrected in a timely manner. 

In this study detailed fault trees with probability and failure rate calculations were generated for the events (1) Fatality due to Explosion, Fire, Toxic Release or Asphyxiation at the Process Development Unit (PDU) Coal Gasification Process and (2) Loss of Availability of the PDU. The fault trees for the PDU were synthesized by Design Sciences, Inc., and then subjected to multiple reviews by Combustion Engineering. The steps involved in hazard identification and evaluation, fault tree generation, probability assessment, and design alteration are presented in the main body of this report. The fault trees, cut sets, failure rate data and unavailability calculations are included as attachments to this report. Although both safety and reliability trees have been constructed for the PDU, the verification and analysis of these trees were not completed as a result of the curtailment of the demonstration plant project. Certain items not completed for the PDU risk and reliability assessment are listed. 

Design and Development (Design Plans, Inputs, Outputs, Reviews, Verification, Validation and Change)... 

---