PowerPoint Presentation · FIRE. detection and mitigation systems- NFPA 72 / EN 54 • Provide...

2019

EMEA HUG

INTRODUCTION TO ISA TR 84.00.07,PERFORMANCE BASED FIRE & GAS STANDARDPrasad Goteti

Sept 2019

© 2019 by Honeywell International Inc. All rights reserved.

Topics Of Discussion1

Why Fire and Gas Systems?

Performance based Fire and Gas concepts

Process FGS Hazard Assessment and Detector mapping

Process FGS Loop Effectiveness

Why Honeywell?


Fire & Gas Systems (FGS) – Purpose• Provide fast and reliable detection of :

– Gas accumulations before they reach concentrations and size that pose a risk to people and facilities

– Fire before it spreads and reaches a size that pose a risk to people and facilities


The Bow Tie Representation3

Prevention(reduces frequency)

Hazardous event(Loss of Containment)

Mitigation(reduces severity)

BPCS

ESD (SIS)

PSV

Operator procedure

Fire and Gas

Fire suppression systems

Emergency Procedures


Safety challenges

Need for Fire & Gas System

Fire & Gas is a Mitigation System installed to Reduce consequences of a hazardous event after it has occurred. Main Objective is to protect Personnel, Environment, and Plant (Assets)achieved by:

DetectionFire (Smoke, Heat, Flame)

Gas (Toxic, Flame)

Alert Alarms

Evacuation

Mitigate Incident Impacts SuppressionShutdown

Reliable Fire & Gas System

Improve Plant Safety•Full Coverage and Early Detection •Accurate locations and Type•Automated Mitigation Actions

Improve Plant Reliability•Reduce Down Time•No False Alarms


• Many FGS applications are adequately addressed by prescriptive standards

• Many FGS applications (although addressed by prescriptive standards) can be better designed using performance-based methods

• Some FGS applications typically found in processing facilities are not adequately covered by prescriptive standards

Performance-Based or Prescriptive standards ?

A combination of both prescriptive and performance-based methods in best


6

‘Basis of Safety’ for Protective Instrumentation

• All critical instrumentation / control systems require a ‘basis of safety’– specify adequate equipment selection and design

– specify functional testing requirements

• For fire and gas systems ‘basis of safety’ are developed in two ways:– Prescriptive ‘Basis of Safety’,

NFPA/EN standards, etc.

– Performance Basis / Risk Assessment


Prescriptive Standards in FGS Design

• Well-established guidance for design of FIRE detection and mitigation systems- NFPA 72 / EN 54

• Provide detailed requirements for basis ofsafety for most types of fire detection and alarming function

• Allow for performance based alternatives to be used (where appropriate)• Generally not specific to chemical processing• Very little guidance on gas detection


FGS – Historical Challenges

• Widely Used, Difficult to Design Safeguards• Originally Implemented using Rule of Thumb (Heuristics) or Prescriptive

– One EPC supplies 100 and the next 1,000; which one is right ?

• Grid based solutions– Very high detector counts

– Purdue (P2SAC) research shows coverage is worse than random detector placement

• Common Historical Problems – Often unable to detect hazards due to an insufficient number of, or poorly located detectors – various

reports show detection of <60% of major releases

– Relatively high frequency of spurious activation and associated effects

• Desire for technical basis results in development of ISA TR 84.00.07


Fire and Gas Systems For Process Industry

A combination of both prescriptive and performance-based methods

9

F&G components for the process area (1, 2, 3)- ISA TR 84.00.07

Detect Control Respond

• Gas detectors• Flame detectors• Pull stations/

Call points

• Example -Safety Manager,

• Suppression & Releasing

• Dry Powder• Expansion foam• Water Curtains• Annunciation

Devices

F&G components for the process area 4 Control room and Admin building – NFPA 72

Detect Control Respond

• Smoke detectors• Aspiration

detectors• Pull stations/

Call points

• Example – XLS / Notifier

• Suppression & Releasing

• Speakers Beacons & Horns,

• ESD• LED Signs• Graphic Package


Performance-Based Detector Placement

• ISA-TR84.00.07-2010 Technical Report – Step 1 - Identify Areas of Concern

– Step 2 - Identify Risk Scenarios

– Step 3 – Analyze Consequences

– Step 4 – Analyze Hazard Frequency

– Step 5 – Perform Unmitigated Risk Assessment

– Step 6 – Identify FGS Risk Reduction Requirements

– Step 7 – Develop Initial FGS Design

– Step 8 – Assess Detector Coverage

– Step 9 – Assess FGS Safety Availability

– Step 10 - Perform Mitigated Risk Assessment

– Step 11 – Modify FGS Design

Consistent with the underlying principles of IEC/ISA 61511


Process Fire and Gas

Process unit in a refinery

Fire

Toxic Gas Release

Flammable Gas Release

Area of Concern Assessment

11


Ineffective Gas detection due to inappropriate detector placement 12


Fire and Gas Detection Philosophy13

• Ideally detect Fire or Gas leak at an incipient stage. By taking action based on early detection, the mitigation effectiveness of a F&G function also increases. Early detection is possible if :

• Leak sources are identified by a good PHA / QRA study

• Gas detectors are installed at locations close to the leak sources

• If a Fire or Gas leak develops into a major hazardous event, then the FGS mitigation system plays an important factor to reduce the severity of the harm.


Detector Coverage Assessment – Semi-Quantitative Method 14

Scoring/Ranking System

• Process Equipment

• Consequences

• Likelihood

• Occupancy

• Ignition Probability

• Pressure

• Congestion and Confinement

Risk Grade Exposure Definition Hazard

Rank

Gas Coverage Targets

A Hydrocarbon processing, with high exposure 5 to <7 90%

B Hydrocarbon processing, with moderate exposure 2 to < 5 80%

C Hydrocarbon processing, with low or very low exposure 0.5 to 2 60%

No FGS Risk is tolerable w/o benefits of FGS <0.5 No Target

Coverage


Semi-Quantitative Method – Geographic Requirements15

Methodology similar for gas and flame detection


Geographic Coverage Verification – Results 16

After placement of detectors in Appropriate locations


Detector Coverage Assessment – Scenario Based, Fully Quantitative Method17

Wind blowing towards facility

Gas ignited

Gas Release

Undetected hazard frequency – Fire –0.00054/year

Undetected hazard frequency – Gas –0.00126/year

Residual Risk-0.012 /year

IE - .003/year

S1=0.6

F1=0.4

S2=0.3

F2=0.7

Gas Detection Fire Detection

Compare with Company’s Tolerable Frequency

Identify Areas of Concern

Determine Extent of Hazards

Determine Undetected Hazard Frequency

Identify Hazard Escalation Reduction Requirements

1 2 3 4

5

Undetected Fire Hazard Frequency (HF) = 0.00054

End user Tolerable Frequency (TF) = 0.00001

Hazard Escalation Reduction Factor (HF/TF) = 54


Fully Quantitative Method – Requirements 18

• Company’s tolerable frequency – 1x10-5

• Fire and Gas mapping needs to be done to reduce undetected frequency less than the Tolerable frequency

• Methodology similar for gas and flame detection


Scenario Coverage Verification – Results19

• Company’s tolerable frequency – 1x10-5

• Hazard Frequency comparable to tolerable frequency after placement of detectors in appropriate locations


Optimal detectors and appropriate placement based on mapping20


FGS Instrumented Function (FIF) Effectiveness21

Mitigation action effectivenessDetector coverage

Detectors Controller Final Elements

FGS Loop availability

FIF Detection Effectiveness = Detector coverage x FGS loop availability

FIF Loop Effectiveness = FIF Detection Effectiveness x Mitigation action effectiveness

Detectors

• Gas• Fire• Flame• Smoke• ……

Controller

• SIL3 PLC for F&G• DCS• Fire Alarm Panel for

Buildings• …..

Final Elements

• Dry Powder• Expansion foam• Water Curtains• Annunciation Systems• Shutdown systems• …..


Fire and Gas Loop Availability Analysis22

Availability = 1-PFDavg = 1-8.09E-03 = 0.99Which is 99%


FGS Instrumented Function Detection Effectiveness23

FIF Detection Effectiveness = 0.9 x 0.99 = 0.89 ( 89%)

Detector Coverage

Say 90%FGS loop Availability

Say 99%

With 89% Detection Effectiveness, we can be assured that approx. 90% of the Gas leaks will be detected and action (manual or automatic) can be taken at the incipient stages before this

escalates into a major leak / hazardous event


Mitigation Action Effectiveness24

Water Curtain Effectiveness Foam Effectiveness Dry Powder system Effectiveness

Valve Trip EffectivenessEvacuation EffectivenessAlarm Effectiveness


FGS Instrumented Function (FIF) Effectiveness25

FIF Effectiveness = 0.9 x 0.99 x 0.9 = 0.80 ( 80%)

Detector Coverage

Say 90%FGS loop Availability

Say 99%Mitigation Effectiveness

90%

With 80% Effectiveness, not a good idea to assign a SIL value to a FGS Instrumented Function


Summary26

Risk Assessment Report (PHA, QRA etc.)

No, Stop

# of FGS detectors

Geographic Coverage?

FGS detectors mappingto meet target risk

Final elements for Mitigation Total FGS IO count

ScenarioCoverage?

FGS detectors mapping to meet geographic coverage

# of FGS detectors

YesFGS

Function Required?


Segregated Topology – Experion27


Human Interface• Experion Orion• Experion industrial security• Digital video manager• Other advance applications like Alarm manager, PHD,

eServer, Experion collaboration station• First responder interface

Field Equipment• Gas & Flame Detectors• Addressable Fire Sensors & Devices• Notification Devices• HSSD point type or Aspirating early fire detection• Process monitoring video systems• Suppression Systems

Services• Safety consulting services including Safety

audits, Hazop and SIL verification & Validation• Fire system design services including

detector mapping• Project services including Design,

Engineering & Commissioning• Project management• Lifecycle support services & training

Logic Solver &Networking Technologies• SIL-3 solutions: Honeywell safety systems• Fire alarm panels• Public address/voice alarm systems• Fire Networks, Bus & Ring Topologies• OneWirelessTM Infrastructure

Honeywell One-Stop Shop In F&G28

HoneywellOne-Stop

F&G Supplier


Future Development• Rigorous Optimization • Ultrasonic Leak Detection Scenario

Coverage• Integration of Computation Fluid

Dynamics Dispersion Models

Process Safety and Assurance CenterP2SAC


Need more information? We are available at the Demo center30


Questions ? 31

PowerPoint Presentation · FIRE. detection and mitigation systems- NFPA 72 / EN 54 • Provide...

Documents

Transcript of PowerPoint Presentation · FIRE. detection and mitigation systems- NFPA 72 / EN 54 • Provide...