banner ad
banner ad

Recent Posts and Articles

Learn the basics of Functional Safety and Safety Integrity Level

| December 14, 2011 | 0 Comments

Mumbai, Dec 12, 2011- Abhisam Software informs us that they have arranged a training workshop on Basics of Functional Safety and Safety Integrity Level, in Mumbai, India on 6th Feb 2012. The last such workshop that took place in Sep 2011 was very popular and hence this second workshop has been planned.

There is a lot of curiosity in India about Safety Integrity Level (SIL), Functional Safety and related topics but very little information is available for say, a design engineer who wishes to understand the concept of SIL or for an Instrument vendor who would like to certify his transmitter as “SIL 3″ compliant. There are also a lot of misconceptions and myths surrounding SIL which is tragic. There is confusion amongst some engineers for example between verification and validation, about what constitutes a Safety Function and whether it is the same thing as an interlock, whether redundancy and voting are the same thing, whether 2003 is better or worse than 1002 and so on….

Local manufacturers are not clear how to get their products certified to SIL and they hence lose out to products of a similar quality, but which have the SIL tag on them.

All these problems and questions will be answered in this information packed one day workshop. Educating participants and fielding various questions will be Dr. Michel Houtermans,  the world’s leading authority on Functional Safety, Safety Instrumented Systems and SIL. Dr. Houtermans will be present in India to carry out a series of workshops and training programs in February and this a good opportunity to meet and understand the following:

  • Introduction to Functional Safety and SIL
  • History of functional safety
  • Industries applying Functional Safety- Case Studies
  • How does SIL affect me, my products and my company?
  • How to determine the SIL level?
  • How to design for SIL?
  • What role does certification play?
  • What is a “SIL study”?
  • Is SIL 3 better than SIL 1? …… and much more.

Interested participants may contact Abhisam Software India office to get the details.

Functional Safety Training

 

Du Pont fined $750,000 by the NJ Department of Environmental Protection

| December 13, 2011 | 0 Comments

Dec 12, 2011, Washington DC- It appears that DuPont may be fined $750,000 by the The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, says a report published by WDEL. The fine is for more than 60 violations of safety and environmental standards at a facility near the Delaware Memorial Bridge.

Apparently some hazardous substances were improperly handled and discharged at its Chambers Works facility in Salem County.

In 2006, DuPont was fined $105,000 after the department investigated more than 220 chemical spills at the site. In addition to the fine, the company must also furnish a plan to improve chemical handling procedures at the facility.

It was not clear how the quantum of the fine was decided.

Learn about Functional Safety, Safety Integrity Level (SIL), SIL Certification and more!

| November 28, 2011 | 0 Comments

Mumbai, Nov 28th, 2011- Abhisam Software informs us that they have arranged an introductory course in Functional Safety on 6th Feb 2012 in Mumbai, at Hotel Kohinoor Continental, Andheri near the airport. The last such program was held on 26th Sep 2011 in Mumbai, which was attended by several engineers, managers and professionals from several sectors such as Automation & Control, Oil & Gas, Engineering Consulting and others.

Basics of Functional Safety and SIL training

The course will cover everything related to Functional Safety at an introductory level. It will answer key questions that are asked by many engineers and safety professionals, in relation to Safety Integrity Level (SIL) and Functional Safety.

These are:

  • What is Hazard and Risk?
  • What is Functional Safety?
  • What does SIL mean?
  • What are the IEC 61508 and IEC 61511 standards?
  • What SIL applies to my plant, instrument or location?
  • How can I get my products “SIL compliant?
  • What are Safety Instrumented Systems?
  • What do you mean by a “SIL Study”?
  • How do I get a SIL Certificate for my transmitter, valve or other device?

These and many other questions will be answered by Dr. Michel Houtermans, Managing Partner, Risknowlogy , who is considered to be the world’s leading expert on Functional Safety and SIL.

This training program is something that is useful to Instrumentation & Control System manufacturers, system integrators, engineering consultants, electrical and instrument contractors as well as users in the process industries such as Oil & Gas, Petroleum, Chemicals, Fertilizers, Power and similar industries that utilize complex safety and emergency shutdown systems to keep their plants, people and the environment safe. It will also be of interest to regulatory authorities who supervise these industries.

For more details please contact Abhisam Software . Seats are limited and will be allotted on a first come first serve basis.

Introduction to Functional Safety and Safety Integrity Level (SIL)

| September 3, 2011 | 1 Comment

UPDATE: The upcoming next batch is on 6th Feb 2012 in Mumbai, at Hotel Kohinoor Continental. Contact Abhisam Software to enroll.

Mumbai, Sep 01, 2011- Abhisam Software informs us that they have arranged an introductory course in Functional Safety on 26th Sep 2011 in Mumbai at Hotel Kohinoor Continental, Andheri near the airport. The course will cover everything related to Functional Safety at an introductory level. It will answer key questions that are asked by many engineers and safety professionals in relation to Safety Integrity Level (SIL) and Functional Safety.

These are:

  • What is Hazard and Risk?
  • What is Functional Safety?
  • What does SIL mean?
  • Is SIL 3 better than SIL 2?
  • What are the IEC 61508 and IEC 61511 standards?
  • What SIL applies to my plant, instrument or location?
  • How can I get my products “SIL compliant?
  • What are Safety Instrumented Systems?
  • What do you mean by a “SIL Study”?

These and many other questions will be answered by Dr. Michel Houtermans, the world’s leading expert on Functional Safety and SIL.

This training program is something that is useful to Instrumentation & Control System manufacturers, system integrators, engineering consultants, electrical and instrument contractors as well as users in the process industries such as Oil & Gas, Petroleum, Chemicals, Fertilizers, Power and similar industries that utilize complex safety and emergency shutdown systems to keep their plants, people and the environment safe. It will also be of interest to regulatory authorities who supervise these industries.

For more details please contact Abhisam Software .

Du Pont accidents in Belle West Virginia- CSB releases report

| July 14, 2011 | 0 Comments

July 07, 2011 Charleston,W.Va- The US Chemical Safety Board has released a report on the recent spate of accidents at the Du Pont facility in Belle, W.Va that says that  these accidents resulted from numerous safety deficiencies including lack of safe equipment design, ineffective mechanical integrity programs, and incomplete investigations of previous near misses.

A series of preventable safety shortcomings — including failure to maintain the mechanical integrity of a critical phosgene hose — led to a string of three serious accidents that occurred over a 33-hour period on January 22 and 23, 2010, at the DuPont Corporation’s Belle, West Virginia, chemical manufacturing plant, according to the draft report of the U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB) which was issued today. In one of the accidents, a worker died following exposure to phosgene, a gas used as a chemical weapon in World War I.

The report makes numerous safety recommendations. Among them, DuPont is urged to enclose all of its phosgene production and storage areas so that any releases of phosgene will be contained. The CSB recommends that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) update its compressed gas safety standard to include secondary enclosures for toxic gases such as phosgene.

 The draft report and recommendations remain subject to change and final approval by a vote of the presidentially-appointed board of the CSB.  That vote is expected to occur following a 45-day comment period which closes on August 22.

DuPont’s Belle facility occupies more than 700 acres along the Kanawha River, eight miles east of Charleston, the state capital.  The plant produces a variety of specialty chemicals.

The series of accidents began on January 22, 2010, when an alarm sounded leading operators to discover that 2,000 pounds of methyl chloride, a flammable gas, had been leaking unnoticed into the atmosphere for five days.  The next morning, workers discovered a leak in a pipe carrying oleum, producing a fuming cloud of the sulfur trioxide.  The phosgene release occurred later that day, and the exposed worker died the next day in a hospital.  
CSB Chairman Rafael Moure-Eraso said the three accidents particularly concerned CSB personnel given DuPont’s longstanding reputation for a commitment to safety.  Noting the company started as a gunpowder manufacturer in 1802, and became a major chemical producer within 100 years, Dr. Moure-Eraso said, “DuPont has had a stated focus on accident prevention since its early days. Over the years, DuPont management worked to drive the injury rate down to zero through improved safety practices.”

Dr. Moure-Eraso continued, “DuPont became recognized across industry as a safety innovator and leader. We at the CSB were therefore quite surprised and alarmed to learn that DuPont had not just one but three accidents that occurred over a 33-hour period in January 2010. 

CSB board member and former chairman John Bresland also spoke at the news conference:  “These kinds of findings would cause us great concern in any chemical plant – but particularly in DuPont with its historically strong work and safety culture. In light of this, I would hope that DuPont officials are examining the safety culture company-wide.”   

Member Bresland noted the CSB finding that the phosgene hose that burst in front of a worker was supposed to be changed out at least once a month.  But the hose that failed had been in service for seven months. Furthermore, the CSB found the type of hose involved in the accident was susceptible to corrosion from phosgene.

Team Lead Johnnie Banks said, “Documents obtained during the CSB investigation showed that as far back as 1987 DuPont officials realized the hazards of using the braided stainless steel hoses lined with Teflon, or PTFE. An expert employed at DuPont recommended the use of hoses lined with Monel, a strong metal alloy used in highly corrosive conditions.  The DuPont official stated: ‘Admittedly, the Monel hose will cost more than its stainless counterpart. However, with proper construction and design so that stresses are minimized…useful life should be much greater than 3 months. Costs will be less in the long run and safety will also be improved.’”

In fact, the Monel hose was never used.

Internal DuPont documents released with the CSB draft report indicate that in the 1980’s, company officials  considered increasing the safety of the area of the plant where phosgene is handled by enclosing the area and venting the enclosure through  a scrubber system to destroy any toxic phosgene gas before it entered the atmosphere. However, the documents show the company calculated the benefit ratio of potential lives saved compared to the cost and decided not to make the safety improvements. A DuPont employee  wrote in 1988,  “It may be that in the present circumstances the business can afford $2 million for an enclosure; however, in the long run can we afford to take such action which has such a small impact on safety and yet sets a precedent for all highly toxic material activities?”

The need for an enclosure was reiterated in a 2004 process hazard analysis conducted by DuPont, but four extensions were granted by DuPont management between 2004 and 2009, and at the time of the January 2010 release, no safety enclosure or scrubber system had been constructed.   CSB investigators concluded that an enclosure, scrubber system, and routine requirement for protective breathing equipment before personnel entered the enclosure would have prevented any personnel exposures or injuries.

The CSB investigation found common deficiencies in DuPont Belle plant management systems springing from all three accidents:  Maintenance and inspections, alarm recognition and management, accident investigation, emergency response and communications, and hazard recognition.

CSB Team Lead Banks said, “The CSB found that each incident was preceded by an event or multiple events that triggered internal incident investigations by DuPont, which then issued recommendations and corrective actions. But this activity was not sufficient to prevent the accidents from recurring.”

The CSB draft report recommends that the DuPont Belle facility revise its near-miss reporting and investigation policy to emphasize anonymous participation by all employees so that minor problems can be addressed before they become serious. The CSB report also recommends the Belle plant ensure that its computer systems will provide effective scheduling of preventive maintenance to require, for example, that phosgene hoses get replaced on time.
 
The CSB draft recommends that the DuPont Corporation require all phosgene production and storage areas company-wide have secondary enclosures, mechanical ventilation systems, emergency phosgene scrubbers, and automated audible alarms, which are at a minimum consistent with the standards of the National Fire Protection Code 55 for highly toxic gases.

 Industry groups have established various good practices for the safe handling of phosgene and other highly toxic materials in compressed gas cylinders.  The draft report concluded that the most comprehensive guidelines are those set forth by the National Fire Protection Association, or NFPA. 
 
The draft report recommends that industry-organizations such as the Compressed Gas Association (CGA) and the American Chemistry Council (ACC) adopt the more stringent guidelines of the NFPA for the safe handling of phosgene and other highly toxic gases.  

The report recommends the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) update its compressed gas safety standard to include modern safeguards for toxic gases such as phosgene.  These improved safeguards include: Secondary enclosures for units using phosgene, mechanical ventilation systems, emergency phosgene scrubbers, and automated audible alarms. 

Chairman Moure-Eraso said, “Adoption of the CSB recommendations by OSHA,  the Compressed Gas Association and the American Chemistry Council and, would greatly increase the safe handling of toxic gases  nationally, and will protect  workers from the deadly exposures.” 
 
     Dr. Moure-Eraso noted that he welcomes today’s release of the draft report and invites public comment on it.  “Comments concerning the draft report will be carefully considered following the public comment period, after which Board Members will vote on the findings and recommendations.  The report is not final until the vote is taken.”

Rss Feed Tweeter button Facebook button Technorati button Reddit button Linkedin button Webonews button Delicious button Digg button Stumbleupon button Youtube button