Activity
Mon
Wed
Fri
Sun
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
What is this?
Less
More
Functional Safety Play Book
304
Free
2 contributions to Functional Safety Play Book
15d •
Quick question for the group 👇
I’ve always been interested in the management side of functional safety rather than the calculations. If you’re currently managing functional safety on a project, what is the one thing that causes you the most frustration? Don’t give me the textbook answer — tell me what actually annoys you. What do you find yourself repeatedly chasing, checking, updating or worrying about? I’m looking at ways we could make the management of functional safety significantly easier, so I’d really value some real-world examples from the group. Even if it seems like a small problem, put it below. 👇
0 likes • 14d
Hitting the right level of detail in documentation for the SIL requirement. In the training I do, I always tell attendees that the higher the SIL level the more documentation overhead there is but in practice what does that mean? The fields available in SRS and options for SIL calculations in some functional safety management software has escalated to provide every possible bit of information you could want to hone a SIL 4 function. The challenge is then to know how to scale it back to what is appropriate for SIL 1. Unfortunately everyone expects you to have every field with information in and understand the impact of every check box in a SIL calculation, which means it is very easy to end up being asked to produce SIL 4 documentation for a SIL 1 function. And for every bit of information you put in the easier it is to have contradictory information and the more you can be called out on, making getting documents accepted a nightmare. Using the "80 / 20" rule. For SIL 1 it should be ok to do 20% effort to work with an 80% outcome. SIL 4 you do the additional 80% of the work to reach 100% accuracy and the other levels would fit in somewhere between. So a management tool that scales to the SIL requirment would be golden
0 likes • 11d
@Richard Kelly @Tomasz Barnert I have found the 1day basics course I have put together quite popular. I've had everyone from operators, technicians, to project managers and engineers all take away different things relevant to their areas. I feel the industry has got obsessed with "Certified" courses and exams when most just need an overview of the process, terminology and how they interface with it.
15d •
One SIF or two SIFs?
I would like to present a very common analytical scenario for discussion. It's related to a hazardous scenario which requires us to cut off the flow of the process medium to a some part of the installation. This is achieved by shutting down the pump. However, the system comprises two pumps (A and B) where one is in operation and the other in a standby mode. When verifying SIL, should we assume a single SIF with a 2oo2 configuration for the pump shutdown, or should we analyze two separate functions, each responsible for shutting down an individual pump?
0 likes • 14d
I would manage it by having the SIF as a single function to shut off the duty pump. The function only needs to shut down the operating pump so 2oo2 would be overly conservative for the SIL calculation. I would then document a secondary action of shutting off the stanby as well. You could put a comment in the SRS that either pump A or B can asssume the role of duty and you're equipment requirement would list both pumps.
1-2 of 2
@ross-benton-2383
10 Years in control systems, 12 years and counting as a Process Safety professional
Active 11d ago
Joined Mar 16, 2026