Safety Instrumented Systems Analysis

  • Alina-Simona BăieșuEmail author
Part of the Studies in Systems, Decision and Control book series (SSDC, volume 255)


Operating most industrial processes, especially those in the oil and gas industry, involves an inherent risk due to the presence of dangerous/flammable substances. Therefore, using Safety Instrumented Systems (SIS) is mandatory. These systems are especially designed to protect personnel, equipment and environment by reducing the likelihood of an unwanted event to appear by reducing the severity of its impact. This chapter presents a comprehensive Introduction in the field of Safety Instrumented Systems, then the most important feature of a SIS is presented, Safety Integrity Level of a Safety Instrumented System and some Practical Aspects Regarding Safety Instrumented Systems are outlined. The chapter ends with some considerations regarding IT Enabled Safety Systems.


Safety instrumented systems Risk analysis IT enabled safety systems 


  1. 1.
    USPAS: Controlling Risks Safety Instrumented Systems. (2012). Accessed 25 June 2019
  2. 2.
    Honeywell Industrial Measurement and Control: Safety Instrumented Systems (SIS), Safety Integrity Levels (SIL), IEC61508, and Honeywell Field Instruments. Phoenix, AZ (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Emerson Process Management—Fisher Controls International LLC: DVC6000 SIS Training Course 1—Basic Fundamentals of Safety Instrumented Systems. Marshalltown, Iowa. (2005), Accessed 15 May 2019
  4. 4.
    Macdonald, D.: Practical Industrial Safety—Risk Assessment and Shutdown Systems. Newnes, Boston (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Technologies, I.D.C.: Overview of Safety Instrumented Systems. IDC TECHNOLOGIES, West Perth, Australia (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Instrument Society of America: ANSI/ISA-5.1-2009 Instrumentation Symbols and Identification. Research Triangle Park, North Carolina (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    International Electrotechnical Commission: IEC 61508—Functional Safety of Electrical/Electronic/Programmable Electronic Safety-Related Systems, 2nd edn. Geneva, Switzerland (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    International Electrotechnical Commission: IEC 61511—Functional Safety—Safety Instrumented Systems for the Process Industry Sector. Switzerland, Geneva (2018)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Instrument Society of America: ANSI/ISA 84.01—Application of Safety Instrumented Systems for the Process Industries. Research Triangle Park, North Carolina (1997)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Center of Chemical Process Safety: Guidelines for Chemical Process Quantitative Risk Analysis. American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE), New York (1989)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Torres-Echeverria A.C: On the use of LOPA and risk graphs for SIL determination. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 41, 333–343 (2016)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gulland, W.G.: Methods of determining safety integrity level (SIL) requirements—pros and cons. In: Redmill, F., Anderson, T. (eds.) Practical Elements of Safety, pp. 105–122. Springer, London (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lassen, C.A.: Layer of Protection Analysis (LOPA) for Determination of Safety Integrity Level (SIL). The Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Department of Production and Quality Engineering (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Marszal, E., Scharpf, E.: Safety Integrity Level Selection—Systematic Methods Including Layer of Protection Analysis. The Instrumentation, Systems and Automation Society (ISA), Research Triangle Park, NC (2002)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Baybutt, P.: An improved risk graph approach for determination of safety integrity levels (SILs). Process Saf. Prog. 26, 66–76 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    ABB Safety Lead Competency Centre: A Methodology for the Achievement of Target SIL. Cambridgeshire, UK (2013)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gruhn, P., Cheddie, H.: Safety Instrumented Systems—Design, Analysis and Justification, 2nd edn. The Instrumentation, Systems and Automation Society (ISA), Research Triangle Park, NC (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nikolić, B., Ružić-Dimitrijević, L.: Risk Assessment of information technology systems. Issues Inf. Sci. Inf. Technol. 6, 595–615 (2009)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mirosław, J.: Information technology applications in construction safety assurance. J. Civ. Eng. Manage. 20(6), 778–794 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    International Organization of Standards: ISO/IEC 13335-2—Information Technology—Guidelines for the Management of IT Security—Part 2: Managing and Planning IT Security. Switzerland, Geneva (1997)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Automatic Control, Computers and Electronics DepartmentPetroleum-Gas University of PloiestiPloiestiRomania

Personalised recommendations