Skip to the content

Blog Postings

Let’s face facts – in the real world not all instrumentation in a Safety Instrumented Function (SIF) gets tested at the assumed test interval per the Safety Integrity Level (SIL) Calculations. Why is this? Well, a variety of reasons are typically tossed about.

Your company has started the journey for compliance to the IEC 61511 safety lifecycle.  But, it’s a long and arduous path to get organizational alignment around the benefits of the safety lifecycle.  So what’s a relatively quick win you could get that will help demonstrate to management some of the end game benefits of the safety lifecycle?

So your company has decided to follow ISA S84 / IEC 61511 and you find yourself trying to decide if your current test plans are “good enough” as-is.  So this raises the question of what makes a functional test plan “good”? While some of the answers are things one would definitely want their test plans to address, some of the requirements conflict with one another. The primary purpose of a functional test plan is to “detect dangerous undetected failures”.  Keeping this concept in mind, it becomes much easier to answer the question of what makes a functional test plan “good”.

In a previous white paper authored by my colleague, Mike Scott focused on five key tenants to achieve sustainable, cost effective compliance with IEC 61511/ ISA-84. The purpose of this blog is to focus on testing and how to leverage aeShield for maximum value add regarding test procedure development, monitoring testing intervals, and collecting failure data for future analysis. In future blogs, I will explore the other four...

[read more]