Scribd
Upload
71 views

Sil Proof Test Practices - 2

The document discusses various methods for proof testing safety instrumented systems (SIS) involving pressure measurements for hazardous and non-hazardous processes. It notes that direct pressure injection is only suitable for non-hazardous materials due to risks of injury or environmental damage from line breaks. For hazardous materials, risk assessments are required to avoid adverse effects during testing. Simulation or using smart instrument diagnostics may be used instead of direct testing where risks are unacceptable. The document also provides examples of methods used by different end-users for testing pressure instruments and lines in different process applications.

Uploaded by

renv
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
71 views

Sil Proof Test Practices - 2

The document discusses various methods for proof testing safety instrumented systems (SIS) involving pressure measurements for hazardous and non-hazardous processes. It notes that direct pressure injection is only suitable for non-hazardous materials due to risks of injury or environmental damage from line breaks. For hazardous materials, risk assessments are required to avoid adverse effects during testing. Simulation or using smart instrument diagnostics may be used instead of direct testing where risks are unacceptable. The document also provides examples of methods used by different end-users for testing pressure instruments and lines in different process applications.

Uploaded by

renv
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

SIL PROOF TEST PRACTICES -2

Pressure injection was deemed satisfactory for non-hazardous process materials but was not
recommended for those of a hazardous nature. To illustrate this point, an end-user cautioned
against considering "direct injection" at impulse lines as necessarily a first choice of test
method. "First line breaks" with hazardous materials that are flammable, toxic or irritant have
the potential to cause injury, damage plant or cause environmental incidents. There is always the
possibility of leaving valves shut or not refitting blanks. Therefore, this particular end-user
always considers the need for risk assessment when designing SIS hardware and writing proof
test methods in order to avoid testing the plant in such a way that there is the possibility of
adverse effects on persons, the environment or plant. Where the risk is deemed acceptable,
precautions such as the use of protective equipment are taken. Where risk is deemed to be
unacceptable, simulation techniques would be used [potentially inconsistent with principle 4.2.1
(a)].
A weakness of pressure injection was considered to be the inability to test the full extent of
impulse lines, however, some end-users depressurise transmitters under test via the impulse line
into the process, thus proving that the impulse line is clear [consistent with principle 4.2.1 (a)].
Two other options for dealing with hazardous process media were cited. If the measuring
element is SMART, then the functionality of the device can be used to drive the signal to the
trip value. If it is not, then a current signal must be injected into the loop at a suitable point to
simulate the output of the measuring instrument. Neither of these techniques proves that the
measuring instrument is working correctly [principle 4.2.1(b)], however, with a SMART
instrument some confidence in the on-line measurement may be provided by self-diagnostic
features. Where ‘non-SMART’ instruments are used the measurements should be corroborated
[principle 4.1.1(b)], firstly by comparison with duplicate instrumentation or other
instrumentation in the surrounding vicinity or by calibration and test under safe conditions.
Other examples of pressure SIS proof testing were cited as follows.
__ On a liquid process one end-user generally uses a direct mounting instrument. This is
difficult to test on-line, due to the way that the instrument would need to be tested so they
wait until the plant is shutdown and then inject a pressure, ‘in-situ’ at the instrument
[inconsistent with principle 4.4.1 (b)].
__ Testing of a pressure loop is usually done, by injecting a signal into the measuring
element, after isolating it from the process. However, this means that the impulse line and
tapping are not being proved. Where possible the signal is injected as close to the tapping
as possible to minimise this, but when the instrument is remote from the tapping, this
increases the difficulty of testing [lack of consideration of testing requirements at the
design phase leads to potential inconsistency with principle 4.2.1 (a)].
__ Another end-user's method is to isolate the pressure transmitter and zero it. They then
inject zero, full scale and ‘trip equivalent’ signals into signal lines and check any
receivers and trip devices. Where the process materials are non-hazardous they open the
vent and process tappings to check process flow through impulse lines before closing the
vent and re-commissioning [consistent with principle 4.2.1 (a)].
__ An end-user uses a "Beemax" pump to simulate a high pressure, however, on one of their
most critical trips the pressure needs raising to 21.5 bar. This particular installation is on
the roof of the plant and the method allows for a ‘real’ test of the system. To facilitate
this, they use a nitrogen cylinder with calibrated gauges, which is situated near to the
installation [consistent with principle 4.1.1 (a)]. Other pressure installations use either
close coupled cells, generally where toxic materials are in use, or remote transmitters with
impulse lines which are kept as short as possible. Where toxic materials are evident, the
input to the logic solver is tested either by injecting a current signal at a suitable point, or
by using the facilities of SMART transmitters to drive their outputs to trip points
[inconsistent with principle 4.2.1 (a)]. Transmitters with impulse lines on non-toxic
applications are tested by pressure signal injection.

You might also like