Showing posts with label Safety. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Safety. Show all posts

Refinery Explosion Case Study


A case study of the 2005 BP refinery explosion in Texas City, TX. This animated video illustrates the events and circumstances leading up to a catastrophic explosion. Contributing factors included inadequate level and safety instrumentation, as well as breakdowns in safety monitoring and standard operating procedures. This video, courtesy of the Chemical Safety Board (csv.gov), is an excellent educational reference, and should be viewed by engineering, maintenance, and plant management personnel everywhere.

Power Specialties, Inc.
https://powerspecialties.com
(800) 432-6550

US Power Grids, Oil and Gas Industries, and Risk of Hacking


A report released in June, from the security firm Dragos, describes a worrisome development by a hacker group named, “Xenotime” and at least two dangerous oil and gas intrusions and ongoing reconnaissance on United States power grids.

Multiple ICS (Industrial Control Sectors) sectors now face the XENOTIME threat; this means individual verticals – such as oil and gas, manufacturing, or electric – cannot ignore threats to other ICS entities because they are not specifically targeted.

The Dragos researchers have termed this threat proliferation as the world’s most dangerous cyberthreat since an event in 2017 where Xenotime had caused a serious operational outage at a crucial site in the Middle East. 

The fact that concerns cybersecurity experts the most is that this hacking attack was a malware that chose to target the facility safety processes (SIS – safety instrumentation system).

For example, when temperatures in a reactor increase to an unsafe level, an SIS will automatically start a cooling process or immediately close a valve to prevent a safety accident. The SIS safety stems are both hardware and software that combine to protect facilities from life threatening accidents.

At this point, no one is sure who is behind Xenotime. Russia has been connected to one of the critical infrastructure attacks in the Ukraine.  That attack was viewed to be the first hacker related power grid outage.

This is a “Cause for Concern” post that was published by Dragos on June 14, 2019. 

“While none of the electric utility targeting events has resulted in a known, successful intrusion into victim organizations to date, the persistent attempts, and expansion in scope is cause for definite concern. XENOTIME has successfully compromised several oil and gas environments which demonstrates its ability to do so in other verticals. Specifically, XENOTIME remains one of only four threats (along with ELECTRUM, Sandworm, and the entities responsible for Stuxnet) to execute a deliberate disruptive or destructive attack.

XENOTIME is the only known entity to specifically target safety instrumented systems (SIS) for disruptive or destructive purposes. Electric utility environments are significantly different from oil and gas operations in several aspects, but electric operations still have safety and protection equipment that could be targeted with similar tradecraft. XENOTIME expressing consistent, direct interest in electric utility operations is a cause for deep concern given this adversary’s willingness to compromise process safety – and thus integrity – to fulfill its mission.

XENOTIME’s expansion to another industry vertical is emblematic of an increasingly hostile industrial threat landscape. Most observed XENOTIME activity focuses on initial information gathering and access operations necessary for follow-on ICS intrusion operations. As seen in long-running state-sponsored intrusions into US, UK, and other electric infrastructure, entities are increasingly interested in the fundamentals of ICS operations and displaying all the hallmarks associated with information and access acquisition necessary to conduct future attacks. While Dragos sees no evidence at this time indicating that XENOTIME (or any other activity group, such as ELECTRUM or ALLANITE) is capable of executing a prolonged disruptive or destructive event on electric utility operations, observed activity strongly signals adversary interest in meeting the prerequisites for doing so.”

White Paper: Six Fixed Gas Detection Innovations to Consider for Safer Facilities

This white paper, courtesy of MSA, details the how the latest digital technologies and advances in materials and construction techniques are improving fixed gas detectors for more efficient plant safety. Topics include electrochemical cell sensor advances, laser-based gas open path detectors, onboard diagnostics-ease of maintenance,  wireless Bluetooth, data and communications and dual gas sensor transmitters.

Download the "Six Fixed Gas Detection Innovations to Consider for Safer Facilities" from this link.


The MSA Ultima X5000 Gas Monitor

MSA Ultima X5000 Gas Monitor
The MSA ULTIMA® X5000 features a new design equipped with an Organic LED (OLED) display and bright status LED’s for extreme visibility. The gas monitor employs Green, Yellow and Red LED’s to signal normal, fault and alarm conditions.

Dual sensing technology doubles the sensing power with half of the footprint of a single gas transmitter. Sensors can be remotely mounted, mixed and matched to suit your gas detection needs.

Bluetooth wireless technology allows you to use your mobile device as an HMI screen and controller. The X/S Connect App is designed with high security standards and provides real-time information to your mobile device. Reduces setup time by at least 50%.

MSA’s patented XCell® sensors with TruCal® technology, extends calibration cycles up to 18 months. TruCal technology actively monitors the sensor integrity and compensates for environmental factors that cause regular electrochemical sensors to drift, allowing calibration cycles to be extended well beyond industry standards. TruCal can greatly reduce downtime and provides peace of mind.

https://powerspecialties.com
(816) 353-6550

More Reliable Gas, Vapor and Flame Detection

Human Sensory Model Gas Detection
Understanding the Human Sensory Model of Gas Detection
(courtesy of MSA)
Chemical plants, refineries, processing plants, and storage facilities contain large indoor and outdoor areas that include congested arrays of complex equipment, such as tanks, pumps, pipelines, and valves. Detecting combustible gas leaks and flames in these areas can be a real challenge - even under the best of conditions. Protection from accumulating gases or unnoticed flame depends on sensors that quickly alert you to their presence. If the gas, vapor, or flame goes unnoticed, lives and property are put in danger.

Legacy sensors traditionally relied on the "sense of smell" to detect minuscule amounts of gas emanating from a leak. There's a problem with this approach though. If a leak doesn't contact the sensor, it can go undetected, leaving you unaware of a potentially critical situation. Situations whereby leaks are prevented from reaching a detector are not uncommon and are further complicated by the physical layout complexity of a room or area. Gas and vapor leaks are affected by ambient conditions, and properties such as the density of the leaking material, the surrounding ambient temperature, and nearby air flow (such as wind or breeze) all impact the detection strategy.  Irrespective to the number of traditional sensors installed, these conditions jeopardize the reliability of the detection strategy.

Human Sensory Model

Given these difficulties, a recent strategy in gas and  flame detection has emerged for use within industrial plants. A practice referred to as "The Human Sensory Model" presents a more reliable system for gas, vapor, and flame detection. This model uses "layers" of monitoring and detection in hazardous environments, with smell based detectors being one of the layers.

The layers of detection include several additional technologies, that together, mimic the human sensory system of smelling, seeing, and hearing.  Integrated optical infrared gas sensors, along with gas imaging and optical flame detectors allow detectors to see a leak or flame, while catalytic bead detectors “sniff” for gases, and ultrasonic sensors “listen” for escaping gases. These detectors react in ways resembling those of human beings (hence the name) and use the combined intelligence of multiple inputs. Through layering sensor technology, a plant can achieve a much more reliable chain of defense against hazardous gases and flames.

Always consult an application expert before specifying or installing gas and flame detection equipment. Their expertise will help ensure a safe and reliable outcome.

For more information, contact:

Power Specialties Inc.
(800) 432-6550
https://powerspecialties.com

Understanding Safety Integrity Levels (SIL)

Safety Integrity Levels
Safety Integrity Levels (SIL)
To better understand SIL, it’s first important to understand Safety Instrumented Systems (SIS). SIS is an engineered system of hardware and software applied specifically for critical process systems. Critical process systems are usually defined as a system that needs to have a reserved “safe state” should a problem arise during operation. Some examples are steam pressure, critical water level, and burner control. Specific control functions are known as Safety Instrumented Functions (SIF) and SIL is a measurement the SIF performance.
toxic gas monitor
SIL-2 and SIL-3-rated
toxic gas monitor 

Safety integrity level (or SIL) is often used to describe process safety requirements. However, there are often misconceptions or misunderstandings surrounding SIL. While the general subject, functional safety and SIL, can be highly technical, the general ideas can be distilled down to a few readily understandable concepts. A basic understanding is imperative to understand why it is important, what certification means, and the implications and benefits of that certification to the end user.

The following white paper, courtesy of Scott Safety, provides an excellent understanding of why SIL is important and how it is beneficial.