IET
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: PFD/PFH Calculations (IEC61508/61511)
Topic Summary: How to determine Probability of Failure on Demand. Hour (PFD/PFH)
Created On: 08 November 2012 11:27 AM
Status: Read Only
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
Search Topic Search Topic
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View similar topics View similar topics
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 08 November 2012 11:27 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



HBarnum

Posts: 1
Joined: 08 November 2012

Hello,

How do you calculate PFD/PFH for safety instrumented functions?
The simplified calculations in IEC61508 are very basic and assume for voted sub systems (e.g. 1oo2, 2oo3 etc.) that the failure rates of the components are the same.

Is there an easy method to calculate PFD/PFH without using Markov, Monte Carlo, etc?

Thanks

H
 04 December 2012 09:57 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



HTDearden

Posts: 90
Joined: 26 February 2002

The basic equations are fine for most purposes. If there are different elements in redundant branches, a simple and conservative approach is to assume the least reliable element failure rate applies to all parallel branches.

If there are multiple serial elements in a branch, combine these first.

Any calculation purporting to offer accuracy better than the second significant figure is a bit of a joke anyway given the broad uncertainties in so much of functional safety assessment and design.

-------------------------
HTDearden CEng
Consulting Engineer
www.tdsl.org.uk
 03 January 2013 01:58 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



TomeIRL1

Posts: 1
Joined: 17 April 2012

This calculation is found in 61508. You can go simple using lamdda(DU)TI/2 or there are more detailed calculations using the effectiveness of proof test as well. In any case the information is fed from your functional safety assesment.
Regards,
Tom
 03 January 2013 02:13 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



StewartTaylor

Posts: 99
Joined: 18 January 2003

You can build it as a reliability block diagram and put you failure rates on each branch. You need to be a bit careful with this though, because it's not completely conservative - tends to lead to lambda^2*T^2/4 etc. rather than lambda^2*T^2/3. However if you have a few channels and testing is staggered then there's not much difference.

Alternatively you can expand all the power (^y) terms in the 61508 equations and put in the individual failure rates in each term, using either geometric mean or most pessimistic where a single value is needed.

BUT - HT Dearden's point about supposed accuracy is very important. Far too many people seem to think you can calculate PFD/PFH to any desired level of accuracy. It ain't so. In practice, if you look at the statistical bases of the figures, the first significant figure is often shaky. That's why SIL is based on orders of magnitude.

-------------------------
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.
 11 April 2013 10:03 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



417303

Posts: 1
Joined: 25 July 2008

For a simple SIS :
PFDavg = 0.5 ×λDU × TI
where
λDU = total dangerous failure rates of all components in the loop
TI = the test interval of the SIS (years)

Edited: 27 June 2013 at 03:08 PM by 417303
 12 April 2013 02:07 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



StewartTaylor

Posts: 99
Joined: 18 January 2003

417303

If lambdaDU is /hr then TI needs to be in hours.

If TI is in years then lambdaDU must be failures/year.

The difference is a factor of about 8760 (3 - 4 SIL levels)

-------------------------
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.
 24 June 2013 01:15 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



VINODPALSINGH

Posts: 15
Joined: 09 April 2011

Use IEC 6108-6 equations. The relation changes the way we handle detected failures. In conjunction with IEC 61508-6 one can also review ISA TR84.00.02, Part-2, -3 equations.

Try and get yourself David J Smith's text: Reliability Maintainability & Risk and check out how unavailability equations for the revealed and unrevealed failures are developed. But, dont jump directly to the later chapters before you go through the starting chapters that cover the very basics of reliability engineering.

ISA TR also explains the effect of averaging "after"/ "before" logic and this indirectly emphasize the careful handling of RBD and FTA techniques when used for such calculations.

-------------------------
Regards,
-VINOD PAL SINGH, Abu Dhabi,UAE.
Statistics

See Also:



FuseTalk Standard Edition v3.2 - © 1999-2014 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.