Scribd
Upload
281 views

LOPA Definition

LOPA stands for Layer of Protection Analysis. It is a process used to evaluate risk and ensure it is within explicit risk tolerance levels for specific consequences. The LOPA process involves 7 steps: 1) Identify a single consequence, 2) Define tolerable frequency for that consequence, 3) Assess probability of initiating events, 4) Identify independent protection layers, 5) Calculate new expected frequency, 6) Decide if risk is acceptable, 7) Determine additional safeguards if needed. An example LOPA is provided to evaluate overpressure risk in a reboiler condensate pot, identifying protection layers like a pressure safety valve and adding a high pressure shutdown instrumented function to reduce risk to an acceptable level defined

Uploaded by

btjajadi
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
281 views

LOPA Definition

LOPA stands for Layer of Protection Analysis. It is a process used to evaluate risk and ensure it is within explicit risk tolerance levels for specific consequences. The LOPA process involves 7 steps: 1) Identify a single consequence, 2) Define tolerable frequency for that consequence, 3) Assess probability of initiating events, 4) Identify independent protection layers, 5) Calculate new expected frequency, 6) Decide if risk is acceptable, 7) Determine additional safeguards if needed. An example LOPA is provided to evaluate overpressure risk in a reboiler condensate pot, identifying protection layers like a pressure safety valve and adding a high pressure shutdown instrumented function to reduce risk to an acceptable level defined

Uploaded by

btjajadi
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 49

What is a LOPA?

LOPA stands for Layer of Protection Analysis

LOPA is a process to evaluate risk with explicit risk tolerance for a specific consequence

Its about creating value without taking unnecessary risk

The level of risk acceptance is expressed in terms of tolerable frequency

Tolerable frequency is a decision criteria

The higher the consequence


the lower the tolerable frequency

Single fatality risk tolerance*


0.01% per year Compared to

Multiple fatality risk tolerance*


0.001% per year
*Generalized risk tolerance in an industrial environment

Lets try to make these numbers resonate with some relativity

Driving fatality 0.01% per year

(i.e. same as the acceptable risk for industrial work environment)


[NIOSH 1997]

Alaska crab fishing fatality 0.356% per year (i.e. 35x the acceptable risk for industrial work environment)
[NIOSH 1997]

Do you know the tolerable frequency of for your company?

If so, who decide how much risk your company can take on? Are the decisions consistent across the company?

Lets break down the LOPA into seven steps:

Step 1: Identify a single consequence to analyze

In our example, the reboiler condensate pot can overpressure leading to vessel rupture and resulting in a single fatality

D-101 Re-boiler Condensate Pot


PSV 111
Size SET @ 700kPag

Steam
Drawing Ref.

To atmosphere at safe location

D-101
2 3

3/4

LT 253

HLL=2550 mm
PG 253

NLL=1650 mm LLL=250 mm
2 3

LC 253

3/4

LY 253

LV 253

Condensate
6 Drawing Ref.

Step 2: Define the tolerable frequency for the consequence

Multiple Fatality

0.001%/year

Single Fatality

0.01%/year
0.1%/ year

Hospitalized Injury

Step 3: Assess the probability of the initiating events

The level control valve can fail in the closed position leading to overpressure

D-101 Re-boiler Condensate Pot


PSV 111
Size SET @ 700kPag

Steam
Drawing Ref.

To atmosphere at safe location

D-101
2 3

3/4

LT 253

HLL=2550 mm
PG 253

NLL=1650 mm LLL=250 mm
2 3

LC 253

3/4

LY 253

LV 253

Condensate
6 Drawing Ref.

Lets say this control loop has a 0.1 probability (10% chance) of failure per year

Step 4: Identify independent protection layers and assign a risk reduction factor

Important! Each protection layer must be independent from the initiating event and independent from other safeguards

D-101 Re-boiler Condensate Pot


PSV 111
Size SET @ 700kPag

Steam
Drawing Ref.

To atmosphere at safe location

D-101
2 3

3/4

LT 253

HLL=2550 mm
PG 253

NLL=1650 mm LLL=250 mm
2 3

LC 253

3/4

LY 253

LV 253

Condensate
6 Drawing Ref.

Lets say the pressure safety valve will reduce the likelihood of rupture by 100
or you can say Risk Reduction of 100 you can also say the Probability of Failure on Demand of 0.01

Step 5: Calculate the new expected frequency of the consequence

Expected frequency = initiating events frequency x probability of failure of the safeguard


New expected frequency = 0.001 (0.1 valve failure per year x 0.01 probability of safety valve failure)

D-101 Re-boiler Condensate Pot


PSV 111
Size SET @ 700kPag

Steam
Drawing Ref.

To atmosphere at safe location

D-101
2 3

3/4

LT 253

HLL=2550 mm
PG 253

NLL=1650 mm LLL=250 mm
2 3

LC 253

3/4

LY 253

LV 253

Condensate
6 Drawing Ref.

Given a person will be around the vessel when ruptured Our expected frequency of a fatality in this scenario is 0.001 per year Or

0.1% chance of a fatality per year

D-101 Re-boiler Condensate Pot


PSV 111
Size SET @ 700kPag

Steam
Drawing Ref.

To atmosphere at safe location

D-101
2 3

3/4

LT 253

HLL=2550 mm
PG 253

NLL=1650 mm LLL=250 mm
2 3

LC 253

3/4

LY 253

LV 253

1/1000 chance a fatality per year

Condensate
6 Drawing Ref.

Step 6: Decide if risk is acceptable based on the tolerable frequency

Expected frequency of a single fatality = 0.001/year

Tolerable frequency of a single fatality = 0.0001/year

Thats 10 times

more likely than the maximum frequency your company can accept for a single fatality

Step 7: Determine additional safeguards to reduce the risk

Lets add a high pressure shutdown to the inlet as a safeguard

D-101 Re-boiler Condensate Pot


XV 253 PSV 111
Size SET @ 700kPag

Steam
Drawing Ref.

To atmosphere at safe location

D-101
2 3

LT 253

HLL=2550 mm
HH

PT 253

NLL=1650 mm LLL=250 mm
2 3

LC 253

LY 253

LV 253

Condensate
6 Drawing Ref.

This safeguard consist of a pressure sensor, logic solver (independent from the level control) and a valve as a final element

This safeguard is a safety instrumented function (SIF)


XV 253

PT 253

Since we need to reduce the risk by a factor of 10 The probability of failure on demand of the safety instrumented function must be less than 0.1

Or you can say the safety instrumented function must meet the requirements of safety integrity level 1

This safety instrumented function is at SIL 1

XV 253

PT 253

Expected frequency with the new safeguard = 0.1 probability of valve failure per year x 0.01 probability of safety valve failure x 0.1 probability of the safety instrumented function failure =0.0001/year

New expected frequency of a single fatality = 0.0001/year

Tolerable frequency of a single fatality = 0.0001/year

Now the risk is acceptable

Adding a safety instrumented function is one option to meet the tolerable frequency. Is it a good decision? Is there a better option?

Any Questions?

Risk. Inspired.

For more lessons go to www.icarus-orm.com

You might also like