IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i24p7062-d296237.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Method for Selecting the Safety Integrity Level for the Control-Command and Signaling Functions

Author

Listed:
  • Dariusz Szmel

    (Department of Traffic Control and Infrastructure, Faculty of Transport, Warsaw University of Technology, 00001 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Wiesław Zabłocki

    (Department of Traffic Control and Infrastructure, Faculty of Transport, Warsaw University of Technology, 00001 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Przemysław Ilczuk

    (Department of Traffic Control and Infrastructure, Faculty of Transport, Warsaw University of Technology, 00001 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Andrzej Kochan

    (Department of Traffic Control and Infrastructure, Faculty of Transport, Warsaw University of Technology, 00001 Warsaw, Poland)

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to present selected method of risk assessment of railway control and signaling systems, including current normative and legal bases, such as directives and regulations that regulate the interoperability and safety of the railway system. Selected methods used at the initial stage of creating safety requirements and referring to the initial definition of the system defined at a high level of abstraction are considered. Issues of holistic approach and residual risk management are also discussed. Risk models are presented as well as individual steps of risk analysis, evaluation, and assessment, including hazard identification, impact analysis, and selection of the risk acceptance principle. Selected model based on hazard and operability studies (HAZOP) and an adapted risk graph was applied to the real signalling equipment. The key aspect undertaken in the article is the proposal to set quantitative safety objectives based on the safety integrity level/tolerable hazard rate (SIL/THR) indicator, as an important parameter in further analysis of the system, especially in computer applications. The result of study showed that application of proposed combination HAZOP and adapted risk graph method are efficient and suitable for a railway signalling application. The results and conclusion are presented in Chapters 4 and 6 of the article.

Suggested Citation

  • Dariusz Szmel & Wiesław Zabłocki & Przemysław Ilczuk & Andrzej Kochan, 2019. "Method for Selecting the Safety Integrity Level for the Control-Command and Signaling Functions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-15, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:24:p:7062-:d:296237
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/24/7062/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/24/7062/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aven, Terje & Kristensen, Vidar, 2019. "How the distinction between general knowledge and specific knowledge can improve the foundation and practice of risk assessment and risk-informed decision-making," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    2. Aven, Terje, 2010. "On how to define, understand and describe risk," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(6), pages 623-631.
    3. Aven, Terje, 2012. "The risk concept—historical and recent development trends," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 33-44.
    4. Jensen, Anders & Aven, Terje, 2018. "A new definition of complexity in a risk analysis setting," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 169-173.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jan Kowalski & Mieczysław Połoński & Marzena Lendo-Siwicka & Roman Trach & Grzegorz Wrzesiński, 2021. "Method of Assessing the Risk of Implementing Railway Investments in Terms of the Cost of Their Implementation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-11, November.
    2. Tomasz Krukowicz & Krzysztof Firląg & Józef Suda & Mirosław Czerliński, 2021. "Analysis of the Impact of Countdown Signal Timers on Driving Behavior and Road Safety," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-33, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Aven, Terje, 2013. "A conceptual framework for linking risk and the elements of the data–information–knowledge–wisdom (DIKW) hierarchy," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 30-36.
    2. Nguyen, Son & Chen, Peggy Shu-Ling & Du, Yuquan & Shi, Wenming, 2019. "A quantitative risk analysis model with integrated deliberative Delphi platform for container shipping operational risks," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 203-227.
    3. Goerlandt, Floris & Montewka, Jakub, 2015. "Maritime transportation risk analysis: Review and analysis in light of some foundational issues," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 115-134.
    4. Veland, H. & Aven, T., 2013. "Risk communication in the light of different risk perspectives," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 34-40.
    5. Peter Blokland & Genserik Reniers, 2019. "An Ontological and Semantic Foundation for Safety and Security Science," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-25, October.
    6. Wan, Chengpeng & Yan, Xinping & Zhang, Di & Qu, Zhuohua & Yang, Zaili, 2019. "An advanced fuzzy Bayesian-based FMEA approach for assessing maritime supply chain risks," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 222-240.
    7. Garcez, Thalles Vitelli & de Almeida, Adiel Teixeira, 2014. "A risk measurement tool for an underground electricity distribution system considering the consequences and uncertainties of manhole events," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 68-80.
    8. Liu, Quanlong & Peng, Yumeng & Li, Zhiyang & Zhao, Pan & Qiu, Zunxiang, 2021. "Hazard identification methodology for underground coal mine risk management - Root-State Hazard Identification," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    9. Aven, Terje, 2012. "On the link between risk and exposure," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 191-199.
    10. Montewka, Jakub & Goerlandt, Floris & Kujala, Pentti, 2014. "On a systematic perspective on risk for formal safety assessment (FSA)," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 77-85.
    11. Christoph A Thieme & Børge Rokseth & Ingrid B Utne, 2023. "Risk-informed control systems for improved operational performance and decision-making," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 237(2), pages 332-354, April.
    12. Merkourios Papanikolaou & Yiannis Xenidis, 2020. "Risk-Informed Performance Assessment of Construction Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-20, July.
    13. Xiao Zhang & Xiaofeng Hu & Yiping Bai & Jiansong Wu, 2020. "Risk Assessment of Gas Leakage from School Laboratories Based on the Bayesian Network," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(2), pages 1-18, January.
    14. Antonín Korauš & Miroslav Gombár & Pavel Kelemen & Jozef Polák, 2019. "Analysis of respondents' opinions and attitudes toward the security of payment systems," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 6(4), pages 1987-2002, June.
    15. Marcela Tuzová & Martina Toulová & Lea Kubíčková, 2017. "The Specifics of the Internationalization Process of Czech SMEs in the Food Industry," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 65(3), pages 1055-1064.
    16. Andrew Kirby, 2022. "The Right to Make Mistakes? The Limits to Adaptive Planning for Climate Change," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-10, June.
    17. Charles Sabel & Gary Herrigel & Peer Hull Kristensen, 2018. "Regulation under uncertainty: The coevolution of industry and regulation," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(3), pages 371-394, September.
    18. Khastgir, Siddartha & Brewerton, Simon & Thomas, John & Jennings, Paul, 2021. "Systems Approach to Creating Test Scenarios for Automated Driving Systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 215(C).
    19. Majeed Abimbola & Faisal Khan, 2018. "Dynamic Blowout Risk Analysis Using Loss Functions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(2), pages 255-271, February.
    20. Caputo, Antonio C. & Federici, Alessandro & Pelagagge, Pacifico M. & Salini, Paolo, 2023. "Offshore wind power system economic evaluation framework under aleatory and epistemic uncertainty," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 350(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:24:p:7062-:d:296237. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.