Api rp 691 2017 (american petroleum institute)

Risk-based Machinery Management API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 691 FIRST EDITION, JUNE 2017 Special Notes API publications necessarily address problems of a general nature With respect to particular circumstances, local, state, and federal laws and regulations should be reviewed Neither API nor any of API's employees, subcontractors, consultants, committees, or other assignees make any warranty or representation, either express or implied, with respect to the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of the information contained herein, or assume any liability or responsibility for any use, or the results of such use, of any information or process disclosed in this publication Neither API nor any of API's employees, subcontractors, consultants, or other assignees represent that use of this publication would not infringe upon privately owned rights API publications may be used by anyone desiring to so Every effort has been made by the Institute to assure the accuracy and reliability of the data contained in them; however, the Institute makes no representation, warranty, or guarantee in connection with this publication and hereby expressly disclaims any liability or responsibility for loss or damage resulting from its use or for the violation of any authorities having jurisdiction with which this publication may conflict API publications are published to facilitate the broad availability of proven, sound engineering and operating practices These publications are not intended to obviate the need for applying sound engineering judgment regarding when and where these publications should be utilized The formulation and publication of API publications is not intended in any way to inhibit anyone from using any other practices Any manufacturer marking equipment or materials in conformance with the marking requirements of an API standard is solely responsible for complying with all the applicable requirements of that standard API does not represent, warrant, or guarantee that such products in fact conform to the applicable API standard All rights reserved No part of this work may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher Contact the Publisher, API Publishing Services, 1220 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005 Copyright © 2017 American Petroleum Institute Foreword Nothing contained in any API publication is to be construed as granting any right, by implication or otherwise, for the manufacture, sale, or use of any method, apparatus, or product covered by letters patent Neither should anything contained in the publication be construed as insuring anyone against liability for infringement of letters patent This document was produced under API standardization procedures that ensure appropriate notification and participation in the developmental process and is designated as an API standard Questions concerning the interpretation of the content of this publication or comments and questions concerning the procedures under which this publication was developed should be directed in writing to the Director of Standards, American Petroleum Institute, 1220 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005 Requests for permission to reproduce or translate all or any part of the material published herein should also be addressed to the director Generally, API standards are reviewed and revised, reaffirmed, or withdrawn at least every five years A one-time extension of up to two years may be added to this review cycle Status of the publication can be ascertained from the API Standards Department, telephone (202) 682-8000 A catalog of API publications and materials is published annually by API, 1220 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005 Suggested revisions are invited and should be submitted to the Standards Department, API, 1220 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005, standards@api.org iii Contents Page 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 Scope General Machinery Risk Management Limitations Work Process Overview Normative References 3.1 3.2 Terms, Definitions, Acronyms, and Abbreviations Terms and Definitions Acronyms and Abbreviations 14 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 Feasibility and Concept Selection Introduction Technical Risk Categorization Technology Readiness Level Product Qualification API 691 Feasibility and Concept Selection Facility Audit 17 17 19 19 20 23 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 Front-end Engineering Design Introduction Preliminary Machinery Risk Assessment Reliability, Availability, and Maintainability Analysis Machinery Design and Selection Process and Instrument Diagram (P&ID) Reviews Long Lead Machinery Vendor Qualifications Operations, Maintenance, and Facilities Strategies Optional Field Testing 25 25 27 28 29 29 29 29 30 31 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9 6.10 6.11 Detailed Design Introduction Detailed Machinery Risk Assessment Design Failure Mode and Effects Analysis Risk Mitigation-Task Selection Process RAM-2 Analysis Safe Operating Limits and Integrity Operating Windows Qualification of Manufacturing and Design Start-up and Commissioning Plans Machinery Standard Operating Procedures Facilities Completion Planning and Execution Implementation of Risk Mitigation Tasks and Strategies 32 32 32 33 36 38 38 39 39 39 40 40 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 Installation and Commissioning Introduction Installation Commissioning, Decommissioning, and Decontamination Pre-start-up Safety Review Optional Tests 41 41 41 41 43 43 8.1 Operations and Maintenance 44 Introduction 44 v 1 Contents Page 8.2 8.3 8.4 Field Risk Assessments 46 Risk Mitigation 48 Operating Company Implementation 51 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 Documentation and Recordkeeping General Documentation During Feasibility and Concept Selection Documentation During FEED Documentation During Detailed Design Documentation During Installation and Commissioning Documentation During Operations and Maintenance 51 51 52 53 53 54 54 10 Training and Qualification 55 10.1 Operation and Maintenance Training 55 10.2 Proof of Qualification 56 Annex A (informative) API Risk Assessment Methodology 57 Annex B (informative) Risk-based Machinery Validation Checklists 75 Annex C (informative) Machinery Failure Modes, Mechanisms, and Causes 96 Annex D (informative) Guideline on Risk Mitigation Task Selection 113 Annex E (informative) Guideline on Condition Monitoring and Diagnostic Systems 123 Annex F (informative) Guideline on Machinery Prognostics 135 Annex G (informative) Guideline of API 691 Facility Audits 142 Annex H (informative) Datasheets 167 Annex I (informative) API 691 FMEA Worksheet 183 Bibliography 186 Figures API 691 Work Process Overview Feasibility and Concept Selection Process 18 Technology Readiness Process Flowchart 24 Functional Performance Test Logic Flowchart 25 Preliminary Machinery Risk Assessment Process 26 Fundamental Detailed Risk Assessment Process 35 Fundamental Risk Mitigation Task Selection Process 37 API 691 Work Process During the Operations and Maintenance Phase 45 A.1 API 691 Risk Assessment Process 59 A.2 Typical Risk Matrix with COF and POF Categories 62 A.3 Detailed Risk Assessment Process Utilizing a LOPA 67 A.4 LOPA Depicted Using Bow Tie Diagram 68 A.5 Typical Feedback of Analysis from Collected Reliability and Maintenance Data 69 A.6 Typical Fault Tree Diagram 72 E.1 Illustration of the Basic Principles of Condition Monitoring 123 E.2 Influences on Functional Failure and Condition Monitoring Specifications 125 E.3 Subsystem Boundary Guidance for the Assignment of CM Tasks 125 E.4 CM Operational Life Cycle 130 E.5 Breakdown of “Analyze” for CM 132 F.1 RUL Curves 136 F.2 Relationship Between Diagnostics and Prognostics 138 F.3 Prognostics Classification Approaches 139 vi Contents Page F.4 I.1 I.2 Bathtub Curves 140 API 691 Machinery FMEA Worksheet 184 API 691 Machinery FMEA Definitions 185 Tables Definition of Technology Readiness Levels 20 Outline of Detailed Design 33 A.1 Example Safety Question and Response 60 A.2 Machinery Technical Risk Classification 64 A.3 Risk Methodologies by Machinery Life Cycle 73 C.1 Observations Associated with Common Machinery Failure Mechanisms 97 C.2 Failure Mode Descriptions 99 C.3 Machinery Failure Mechanisms 101 C.4 Machinery Failure Causes 112 D.1 Centrifugal and Screw Compressors 116 D.2 Centrifugal Pumps 117 D.3 Gas Turbines 118 D.4 Gear Boxes 118 D.5 Reciprocating Compressors 119 D.6 Steam Turbines 121 D.7 Fans, Blowers, and Special Machinery 122 E.1 Machinery Faults Matched to Condition Monitoring Technology 127 E.2 Comparison of Basic CM to Advanced CM 134 Introduction The origins for the development of this recommended practice came from the recognition among responsible companies that more effective machinery risk management requirements are needed in view of: — major accidents occurring within the industry; — new manufacturing centers having difficulty in consistently achieving acceptable levels of quality; — new applications and services that involve unproven design envelopes; — larger fleets of aging machinery operating in process and pipeline facilities; — limited experienced resources operating and maintaining machinery These and other drivers have influenced the content of the pages that follow, including understanding of the following 1) Machinery risk is context dependent It may be quite different among companies operating identical machinery within the same process service Therefore, to be truly effective, the API Subcommittee on Mechanical Equipment (SOME) determined that prescriptive design requirements, as seen in machinery base standards, such as API 610, could not be imposed upon the industry by API 691 Since every company has unique engineering specifications, process requirements, worker competencies, work processes, risk tolerances, etc., API 691 allows internal risk criteria and methodologies to be utilized by individual operating companies for the purpose of identifying and managing high-risk machinery applications within the context of their own operating regimes 2) Machinery risk is systemic As such, the recommended practice sets minimum requirements for operating companies, selected designated responsible parties (DRPs), and vendors Depending on the companies within this system, risk levels may either rise or fall for any given machinery asset Each company is encouraged to map the API 691 processes outlined herein to their internal work process to the extent possible The vendor is required to maintain on file design failure mode and effects analysis (DFMEA) as specified by the operating company They are also responsible to track the technology readiness levels (TRL < 7) of components and subcomponents whose failure may lead to a loss of containment and/or a loss of functionality that could lead to a potential process safety event and to define integrity operating window (IOW) as required Any other risk management requirement placed upon the vendor is considered outside the scope of this recommended practice The DRP is required to perform all tasks and activities required by the operating company to enable safe and environmentally compliant machinery 3) Machinery risk is dynamic It changes over time and, therefore, API 691 is organized by machinery life cycle phase, including feasibility and concept selection; front end engineering design; detailed design; installation and commissioning, and operations and maintenance There are periodic risk assessments that are required in each of these phases The recommended practice requires the operating company to put in place a management system to track and mitigate risks where required over time, develop machinery standard operating procedures, define safe operating limits (SOLs), and provide adequate training for operating and maintenance personnel working on high-risk machinery, hereafter referred to as “API 691 Machinery.” While not required, the user of this recommended practice is encouraged to utilize the Informative annexes where internal requirements are either lacking or found to be insufficient The operating company and/or their DRP will find that issuing both the base API machinery datasheet (e.g the API 618 datasheet) concurrently with the API 691 data sheet (Annex H) at the proposal stage is a useful way to define and communicate all API 691 requirements to ensure these are properly addressed and in the most timely manner A bullet ( Ɣ ) at the beginning of a section or subsection indicates that either a decision is required or further information is to be provided by the operating company When such decisions and actions are taken, they may be specified in company documents (e.g requisitions, change orders, datasheets, and drawings) Risk-based Machinery Management 1.1 Scope General 1.1.1 This recommended practice defines the minimum requirements for the management of health, safety, and environmental (HSE) risks across the machinery life cycle It shall be applied to the subset of operating company and/or vendor defined high-risk machinery 1.1.2 Unless otherwise specified, the following criteria shall be used for initial risk screening to identify potential high-risk machinery for which this recommended practice will be applied: a) hazardous gas or liquid services as defined by jurisdiction, appropriate regulatory body, and/or operating company standards or specifications, b) services operating at temperatures >350 °F (177 °C) and having design or specified off design operating pressures >80 % maximum allowable working pressure (MAWP), c) services operating at temperatures >400 °F (204 °C), d) components and subcomponents having technology readiness levels (TRLs) < whose failure may lead to a loss of containment and/or a loss of functionality that could lead to a potential process safety event (see Table 1), e) liquid services operating at pressures in excess of 600 psig (41.4 bar), f) liquid services having specific gravities less than 0.5 It is acknowledged that most operating companies and vendors may have existing risk management processes This recommended practice is not written to replace or invalidate company practices but is meant to supplement them to provide safe working and living environments for facilities and surrounding communities Operating companies (i.e Sections 5, 6, 7, and for design, installation, and operating purposes) or vendors [i.e in Section for research and development (R&D) and product development purposes] can use their own initial risk screening criteria where these have been found to be effective or the criteria recommended above NOTE Typically only between 10 % and 20 % of machinery falling within any given initial risk screening will be considered API 691 Machinery This can include a subset of “critical,” “unspared,” “special purpose,” “prototype,” and/or worst actor machinery Risks can include loss of containment of hazardous fluids, loss of functionality, high energy releases, etc NOTE Applicable international (e.g GHS [1]) or national (e.g OSHA 1910.119, API 570 service classifications are typically defined within operating company specifications [2] , Class 1, etc.) hazardous NOTE Operating companies and vendors can choose to apply this recommended practice to machinery not covered by existing API standards (e.g hyper compressors) 1.1.3 The following machinery protection and safety standards shall be applied to new API 691 Machinery where applicable: a) API 670; b) IEC 61508-1, IEC 61508-2, and IEC 61508-3; c) IEC 61511 (Parts 1, 2, and 3) or ANSI/ISA-84.00-2004 (Mod IEC 61511); d) IEC 62061 or ISO 13849-1 and ISO 13849-2 API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 691 1.1.4 Other standards and technical reports may be used to further assist in the application of this standard including: a) ISO 12100, [3] b) ISO/TR 14121, [4] c) VDMA 4315, [5] d) IEC 60812, [6] e) IEC 64244-3 [7] 1.1.5 This recommended practice is intended to be used by operating companies, their designated responsible parties (DRP), and vendors that are identified as potentially operating at high risk It is applicable to both new (Sections to 8) and existing (Section 8) installations NOTE This can include some supporting process equipment, for example, knockout drums, instrumentation, etc that are located off-skid 1.2 1.2.1 Machinery Risk Management General The term “API 691 Machinery” is used in this recommended practice to identify machinery that warrants a comprehensive machinery risk management system Using risk ranking to prioritize machinery for further study and/or action provides a focus that maximizes the risk reduction of ongoing activities and improves the effectiveness of machinery risk management systems 1.2.2 Management System A management system to implement and sustain risk management programs for machinery should include: 1) procedures covering implementation, program maintenance, and reassessment (including reassessment triggers), 2) roles/responsibilities, training, and competence testing to ensure employment of qualified personnel, 3) documentation requirements of the risk analyses (e.g scope, boundaries, assumptions, and mitigation actions), 4) data requirements including validation requirements, 5) acceptable risk limits and thresholds, 6) management of change (MOC) process, 7) program audit traceability requirements 1.2.3 Risk Assessments Assessment of probability and consequence can be done by a variety of approaches at the operating company or vendor’s option Refer to Annex A for further information This recommended practice allows flexibility in assessment approaches (various qualitative, semi-quantitative, or quantitative methods) and defines only the deliverables needed at each stage to determine appropriate mitigations 176 API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 691 JOB NO API 691 ANNEX H.3 EQUIPMENT DATASHEET DETAILED DESIGN P URCHA SE ORDER NO SP ECIFICA TION NO REVISION NO P A GE REQUIRED DOCUM ENT Required Do cuments Fro m Earlier Life Cycle P hases Detailed M achinery Risk A ssessment (OC o r DRP , 6.2) Finalized Equipment Datasheet (e.g A P I 610 datasheet) (OC o r DRP , 6.2.3) Co mments & Exceptio ns to A P I Standards (V, 6.2.3) 10 DFM EA (V, 6.3.2) 11 IOWs (V, 6.6.1) 12 SOLs (OC o r DRP , 6.6.1) 13 M ajo r Repair P ro cedures (V, 6.7.2) 14 Welder P QR (V, 6.7.3) 15 Co mmissio ning P lan (OC o r DRP , 6.8) 16 Finalized Cause and Effects M atrix (OC o r DRP , 6.8.2) 17 SOP s (OC o r DRP , 6.9) 18 Facilities Systems Co mpletio n, P lanning & Executio n Deliverables (OC o r DRP , 6.10.1) 19 A P I 691Datasheets - A nnex H (OC o r DRP , 6.4.1) 20 RA M -2 A nalysis Repo rt (OC o r DRP , 6.5) 21 Facility A udit in A cco rdance With A nnex G (OC o r DRP , 6.7.4) 22 23 24 25 26 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 BY M ark the required cuments that sho uld be retained – reco rd co py o r maintained “ as o perating” Include additio nal key cuments in the blank cells Finalized P &IDs (OC o r DRP , 6.2.3) 29 OF INCLUDED DOCUM ENTS (9.4) N OT E: 28 DA TE R E F E R E N C E D O C UM E N T A T IO N 27 Revision ITEM NO RISK-BASED MACHINERY MANAGEMENT R E M A R KS A N D / O R S P E C IA L R E Q UIR E M E N T S REV # DOCUM ENT NUM B ER RISK-BASED MACHINERY MANAGEMENT 177 JOB NO API 691 ANNEX H.4 P URCHA SE ORDER NO SP ECIFICA TION NO EQUIPMENT DATASHEET REVISION NO INSTALLATION AND COMMISSIONING FOR VENDOR SITE M ODEL UNIT CONTINUOUS SERVICE OF BY N OT E: TA G NO INTERM ITTENT P &ID SHEET NO STA NDB Y NO REQUIRED INFORM A TION TO B E COM P LETED: 10 SERIA L NUM B ER DA TE P A GE Revision ITEM NO RISK-BASED MACHINERY MANAGEMENT B Y OP ERA TING COM P A NY (OC) B Y VENDOR (V) B Y VENDOR IF NOT B Y OP ERA TING COM P A NY B Y DRP B Y DRP IF NOT B Y OP ERA TING COM P A NY IN S T A LLA T IO N (7.2.1) INSTA LLA TION P ER A P I 686 STA NDA RD 11 N O T E : M ark whether Installatio n and Co mmissio ning to be perfo rmed acco rding to A P I 686 standard (Yes o r No ) YES NO 12 13 14 15 A S S UR A N C E C H E C KLIS T A SSURA NCE CHECKLIST N OT E: M ark whether the checklist items have been co mpleted 16 COM P LETE ID 17 ITEM Special risk mitigatio n steps identified in FEED and Detailed Design are reflected in the co mmissio ning, test, start-up and o perating pro cedures 18 Co mmissio ning/test plan includes verificatio n o f special risk mitigatio n design features identified in FEED and Detailed design 19 A cceptance criteria fo r all test and co mmissio ning activates is agreed to by o perating co mpany, start-up team and co ntracto r 20 P ro cedures fo r reso lutio n o f no n-co nfo rmances in place 21 P ro cess in place fo r M OC and capturing changes to permanent plant reco rds fo r changes triggered during co mmissio ning and start-up 22 P SSR (P re-start-up Safety Review) Co mplete 23 Emergency plans develo ped o n issues and risks surro unding installatio n and co mmissio ning 24 Changes to the lo gic, set po ints, o r co ntro l variables fo r machinery pro tective functio ns appro ved by manufacturer 25 Unreso lved risk items identified and entered into M anagement o f Change (M OC) system 26 10 A ll wo rk pro cesses (spare parts management, maintenance tasks, o perato r ro unds etc.) finalized prio r to initial start-up 27 11 B aseline o perating data was captured with the machine in the as-new co nditio n to enable future co nditio n mo nito ring 28 12 Field perfo rmance test data permanently archived in a fo rmat to suppo rt future o peratio n o r risk assessment activities 29 13 Inco mplete co mpliance items cumented and with assigned fo llo w-up to the o perating o rganizatio n 30 31 32 33 A D D IT IO N A L R E Q UIR E M E N T S A DDITIONA L REQUIREM ENTS N OT E: M ark the relevant items belo w that sho uld be addressed by the Respo nsible party as indicated Items that are checked by default indicate No rmative requirements 34 COM M ISSIONING P ROCEDURES (7.3.2) 35 FIELD FUNCTIONA L SA FETY TESTS (7.3.3) 36 CONTROL A ND P ROTECTION SYSTEM FUNCTIONA L TEST P LA N (7.3.3.1) 37 OP ERA TIONA L RUN TEST P ROCEDURES (7.3.6.2) 38 P RE-STA RT UP SA FETY REVIEW (7.4) 39 COM M ISSIONING OP ERA TIONA L TEST - STEA M TURB INE SOLO RUN (7.5.2) 40 COM M ISSIONING OP ERA TIONA L TEST - M OTOR SOLO RUN (7.5.3) 41 COM M ISSIONING OP ERA TIONA L TEST - CENTRIFUGA L COM P RESSOR INERT GA S TEST (7.5.4) 42 COM M ISSIONING OP ERA TIONA L TEST - RECIP ROCA TING COM P RESSOR INERT GA S TEST (7.5.4) 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 178 API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 691 JOB NO API 691 ANNEX H.4 EQUIPMENT DATASHEET INSTALLATION AND COMMISSIONING PURCHASE ORDER NO SPECIFICATION NO REVISION NO REQUIRED DOCUMENT Change Under the MOC process to Required Documents For Earlier Life Cycle Phases Facilities Systems Completion, Planning & Execution Deliverables (OC or DRP, 7.1.2) Functional Safety Test Reports (OC or DRP, 7.3.3) Process Safety Valve Test Reports (OC or DRP, 7.3.4) 10 Operating & Maintenance Procedures (OC or DRP, 7.3.6) 11 PSSR Report (OC or DRP, 7.4) 12 API 686 Deliverables (OC or DRP, 7.2.1) 13 Optional Test Reports (OC or DRP, 7.5) 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 BY Mark the required documents that should be retained – record copy or maintained “as operating.” Include additional key documents in the blank cells 25 OF INCLUDED DOCUMENTS (9.5) NOTE: 24 REFERENCE DOCUMENTATION Required Documents From Earlier Life Cycle Phases 23 DATE PAGE 22 Revision ITEM NO RISK-BASED MACHINERY MANAGEMENT REMARKS AND/OR SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS REV # DOCUMENT NUMBER RISK-BASED MACHINERY MANAGEMENT 179 JOB NO P URCHA SE ORDER NO API 691 ANNEX H.5 SP ECIFICA TION NO EQUIPMENT DATASHEET REVISION NO OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE FOR VENDOR SITE M ODEL UNIT CONTINUOUS SERVICE OF BY N OT E: TA G NO INTERM ITTENT P &ID SHEET NO STA NDB Y NO REQUIRED INFORM A TION TO B E COM P LETED: B Y OP ERA TING COM P A NY (OC) 10 SERIA L NUM B ER DA TE P A GE Revision ITEM NO RISK-BASED MACHINERY MANAGEMENT B Y VENDOR (V) B Y VENDOR IF NOT B Y OP ERA TING COM P A NY B Y DRP B Y DRP IF NOT B Y OP ERA TING COM P A NY F IE LD R IS K A S S E S S M E N T - KE Y F IN D IN G S ( ) ENTRY CRITERIA (8.2.5) 11 N O T E : 12 M ark the relevant item(s) belo w that fo rm the basis fo r the Field Risk A ssessment Initial risk assessment fo r legacy machinery 13 Newly installed A P I 691M achinery 14 M achinery affected by a risk relevant change and no t assessed during the M OC pro cess 15 M achinery that has sustained mo derate to severe safety failure co nsequences 16 M achinery that has experienced a significant near miss with po tential fo r severe failure co nsequences 17 M achinery fo und to be o perating o utside o f the safe o perating limits (SOL) criteria 18 M achinery that has received Supplier Technical A lert(s) which highlight the po tential fo r a release o r o ther hazardo us co nditio n 19 20 EQUIP M ENT B OUNDA RY DEFINITION (A NNEX A 2.3) 21 N O T E : M ark In Sco pe elements o f bo undary definitio n fo r the equipment type Remarks can be used to further co mment o n equipment bo undary details 22 M achinery Driver Electric mo to r, turbine o r engine 23 M achinery Driven Co mpresso r, pump 24 P o wer transmissio n Gear bo x, co upling M achinery Co ntro ls P LC, unit co ntro l panel A uxiliary Equipment Equipment suppo rting machinery functio n such as lube o il pump, co o lers, seal system, starter units 25 26 27 P ro cess Equipment Inlet scrubbers, discharge co o lers and asso ciated pro cess equipment P ro cess Co ntro ls P ro cess instruments co ntro lling fluid co nditio ns and machinery respo nse Co nditio n M o nito ring Instrument senso rs and equipment used to mo nito r perfo rmance 28 29 R E M A R KS : 30 31 32 RISK A SSESSM ENT A P P ROA CH (8.2, A NNEX A 2.4) 33 N O T E : Identify the risk assessment appro ach, o r appro aches, that were co nducted and used as basis fo r Field Risk A ssessment 34 HA ZOP P ROCESS FA ILURE M ODES A ND EFFECTS A NA LYSIS (P FM EA ) 35 COF A SSESSM ENT LA YERS OF P ROTECTION A NA LYSIS (LOP A ) 36 P OF / COF A SSESSM ENT (see 8.1.2 a-f) FA ULT TREE A NA LYSIS OTHER, P LEA SE SP ECIFY 37 38 R E M A R KS : 39 40 41 42 RISK CONSEQUENCE CA TEGORIES CONSIDERED 43 N O T E : 44 A t a minimum, safety and enviro nment sho uld be used A t Operato rs discretio n, o ther catego ries may be applied such as financial, reputatio n, and co st SA FETY ENVIRONM ENTA L A SSET / P RODUCTION / FINA NCIA L OTHER, P LEA SE SP ECIFY IN REM A RKS 45 46 HIGH RISK THRESHOLD DEFINITION 47 N O T E : Identify the basis used fo r identificatio n o f HIGH risk items 48 COM P A NY RISK M A TRIX - A TTA CH COP Y, INCLUDING RELEVA NT DEFINITIONS 49 A P I 691RISK M A TRIX (A NNEX A 2.4.6) 50 51 N O T E : R E M A R KS : OTHER, P LEA SE SP ECIFY IN REM A RKS When A P I 691Risk M atrix is selected, P ro bability o f Failure (P OF) and Co nsequence o f Failure (COF) definitio ns fro m Figure A sho uld be used 180 API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 691 JOB NO API 691 ANNEX H.5 REVISION NO OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE P URCHA SE ORDER NO SP ECIFICA TION NO EQUIPMENT DATASHEET Revision ITEM NO RISK-BASED MACHINERY MANAGEMENT P A GE DA TE OF BY FIELD RISK A NA LYSIS RESULT (8.2, A NNEX A 2.4) M ark the o verall risk assessment result N OT E: ACCEPTABLE RISK AS-IS NEEDS RISK M ITIGA TION UNM ITIGA TED HIGH RISK EQUIP M ENT ITEM S (6.2.2, A NNEX A 2.4) N OT E: Enter the risk analysis results belo w o nly fo r tho se failure mo de, mechanism and cause co mbinatio ns within the equipment bo undary resulting in a HIGH risk rating N OT E: The A P I 691FM EA Wo rksheet may be used to co nduct the detailed risk assessment (A nnex I) ID M A INTA INA B LE ITEM 10 11 12 13 14 15 10 RISK TYP E (Safety, Env, Other) FA ILURE DESCRIP TION (FA ILURE M ODE / M ECHA NISM / CA USE) 16 17 R IS K M IT IG A T IO N - R E C O M M E N D E D A C T IO N S (8.3) 18 N OT E: Fo llo wing the Field Risk A ssessment, reco mmendatio ns shall be assigned to ensure that adequate mitigatio n is achieved 19 20 RECOM M ENDED SUP P LEM ENTA RY P ROTECTIVE M EA SURES (5.2.5) 21 N O T E : In the Remarks field belo w, describe any reco mmended supplementary pro tective measures to suppo rt risk mitigatio n 22 R E M A R KS : 23 24 25 26 27 RECOM M ENDED DESIGN UP GRA DES 28 N O T E : In the Remarks field belo w, describe any reco mmended design upgrades to suppo rt risk mitigatio n 29 R E M A R KS : 30 31 32 33 34 RECOM M ENDED M A INTENA NCE TA SK UP GRA DES (6.4, A NNEXES D and E) 35 N O T E : In the table belo w, identify any reco mmended updates to existing maintenance pro gram tasks 36 N O T E : Task Types may include: C M - Co nditio n M o nito ring, P M - P reventive M aintenance, and F F - Failure Finding 37 N O T E : M ark 'Related Risk IDs' fro m the Risk A nalysis Results table abo ve where the reco mmendatio n was credited in the assessment o f risk mitigatio n 38 N O T E : Fo r tasks invo lving o nline data sampling, a frequency o f "ONLINE" sho uld be used 39 N O T E : Risk M itigatio n task selectio n guidance and example templates is pro vided in A nnex D Guidance o n co nditio n mo nito ring and diagno stics is pro vided in A nnex E 40 ID 41 A 42 B 43 C 44 D 45 E 46 F 47 G 48 H 49 I 50 J 51 TA SK TYP E TA SK DESCRIP TION FREQUENCY RELA TED RISK IDs RISK-BASED MACHINERY MANAGEMENT 181 JOB NO P URCHA SE ORDER NO API 691 ANNEX H.5 SP ECIFICA TION NO EQUIPMENT DATASHEET REVISION NO OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE Revision ITEM NO RISK-BASED MACHINERY MANAGEMENT P A GE DA TE OF BY RECOM M ENDED TRA INING N OT E: In the Remarks field belo w, describe any reco mmended additio nal training requirements to suppo rt risk mitigatio n R E M A R KS : 10 R E LIA B ILIT Y D A T A C O LLE C T IO N A N D A N A LY S IS (A 2.4.9) HISTORICA L FA ILURE EVENT DA TA N OT E: 11 N O T E : If available, pro vide info rmatio n belo w fo r lo ss o f co ntainment o r po tential lo ss o f co ntainment failures that have o ccurred since the previo us risk assessment M ark as "In Sco pe" tho se failure events that sho uld be included in M B TR and Weibull A nalysis 12 In Sco pe DA TE M A INTA INA B LE ITEM 13 FA ILURE EVENT (EQUIP M ENT, FA ILURE M ODE) CONSEQUENCE ROOT CA USE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 S A F E O P E R A T IN G LIM IT S (6.6) SA FE OP ERA TING LIM ITS (SOLs) 27 N OT E: No te the M anufacturer shall define all A P I 691IOW Critical Limits The Operato r shall use this info rmatio n to determine safe o perating limits (SOLs) 28 N OT E: No te the SOLs fo r the A P I 691required design basis elements design basis belo w A dditio nal SOLs sho uld be added if applicable Remarks can be used to further co mment 29 # 30 M aximum allo wable vibratio n DESIGN B A SIS ELEM ENT 31 M aximum allo wable suctio n pressure 32 M inimum allo wable suctio n pressure 33 M aximum allo wable casing pressure 34 M aximum allo wable inlet temperature 35 M aximum allo wable speed 36 M inimum co ntinuo us stable flo w 37 M aximum allo wable so lids co ncentratio n 38 M aximum allo wable co rro sive limits 39 10 M aximum allo wable bearing temperature 40 11 41 12 42 13 43 14 44 15 45 16 46 47 48 49 50 51 R E M A R KS A N D / O R S P E C IA L R E Q UIR E M E N T S SOL VA LUE R E M A R KS : 182 API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 691 JOB NO API 691 ANNEX H.5 EQUIPMENT DATASHEET OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE Revision ITEM NO RISK-BASED MACHINERY MANAGEMENT P URCHA SE ORDER NO SP ECIFICA TION NO REVISION NO P A GE DA TE OF BY A D D IT IO N A L R E Q UIR E M E N T S A DDITIONA L REQUIREM ENTS N OT E: M ark the relevant items belo w that sho uld be addressed by the Respo nsible party as indicated Items that are checked by default indicate No rmative requirements DOCUM ENTED TRA INING P LA N (8.4) OP ERA TING P ROCEDUREES (8.4) M A INTENA NCE P ROCEDURES (8.4) A UDIT P ROCESS (8.4) INCIDENT INVESTIGA TION P ROCEDURES (8.4) M A NA GEM ENT OF CHA NGE P ROCESS (8.4) 10 EM ERGENCY RESP ONSE P LA N (8.4) 11 P RE-TURNA ROUND RISK VA LIDA TION CHECKLIST REVIEWS (A NNEX B 5.1) 12 M A CHINERY M INOR A ND M A JOR OVERHA UL RISK VA LIDA TION CHECKLIST REVIEWS (A NNEX B 5.2) 13 A DDITIONA L P RESSURE B OUNDA RY INSP ECTIONS FOR M A CHINERY IN CORROSIVE, EROSIVE, HA RSH SERVICE (A NNEX B 5.3) 14 15 16 R E F E E R E N C E D O C UM E N T A T IO N INCLUDED DOCUM ENTS (9.6) 17 N OT E: M ark the required cuments that sho uld be retained – reco rd co py o r maintained “ as o perating” Include additio nal key cuments in the blank cells 18 N OT E: Items that are checked by default indicate required data to co nduct a Field Risk A ssessment 19 20 REQUIRED DOCUM ENT Required Do cuments Fro m Earlier Life Cycle P hases 21 Changes Under the M OC P ro cess to Required Do cuments fo r Earlier Life Cycle P hases 22 Field Risk A ssessments (OC o r DRP , 8.2.5) 23 RA M Data B ase (OC, 8.3.4) 24 Field P erfo rmance Test Repo rt On P ro cess Gas (OC o r DRP , 8.3.7) 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 R E M A R KS A N D / O R S P E C IA L R E Q UIR E M E N T S REV # DOCUM ENT NUM B ER Annex I (informative) API 691 FMEA Worksheet I.1 Introduction The purpose and intent of the API 691 FMEA worksheet is to provide a suggested methodology and template for machinery Companies may use their own format The FMEA worksheet can be used in a DFMEA or PFMEA as outlined in Annex A and can be used in conjunction with the failure modes, mechanisms, and cause codes provided in Annex C I.2 API 691 FMEA Worksheet The API 691 FMEA worksheet is shown in Figure I.1 Definitions for each of the FMEA worksheet data fields are shown in Figure I.2 183 Item # Functional Performance Standard Failure Mode Failure Effect(s) Functional Failure/Loss of Performace Failure Mechanism(s) Existing Safeguards COF RPN POF Other Safety Detection Figure I.1—API 691 Machinery FMEA Worksheet Failure Cause(s) NO REQUIRED STA NDB Y PRE-MITIGATED RISK ASSESSMENT P &ID SHEET NO INTERM ITTENT TA G NO SERIA L NUM B ER SERVICE M ODEL UNIT CONTINUOUS M A NUFA CTURER SITE DA TE REVISION NO SP ECIFICA TION NO P URCHA SE ORDER NO FOR (PFMEA) WORKSHEET PROCESS FAILURE MODES AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS API 691 ANNEX I: RISK-BASED MACHINERY MANAGEMENT Environment Mitigating Actions Action Ow ner/Due Date MITIGATED RISK ASSESSMENT R E M A R KS : Detection (Rate 1-5) ITEM NO COF Environment JOB NO RPN POF Other Safety Functional Performance Standard Failure Effect(s) 5—CATASTROPHIC: Environmental impact is long term, external to facility, very large spill, massive remediation necessary 4—MAJOR : Environmental impact is medium term and external to facility, major release, major remediation w ork 3—SIGNIFICANT: Environmental impact is short term, significant release, spill not contained on-site, some remediation required 2—MINOR: Environmental impact is short term and contained w ithin site; no remediation required 1—NEGLIGIBLE: Spill to containment or minimal release; no longterm consequences Existing Safeguards Safety COF Other Product of COF * POF * Detection Criticality ranking that may be used to prioritize risk mitigating actions 5—FREQUENT: Failure event occurs 60 months RPN Action Ow ner/Due Date COF What is the consequence after implementing changes Safety Revised criticality ranking that assumes all risk mitigating actions (maintenance tasks) are in place Revised Residual RPN Describe actions taken to control or prevent failure(s) What are the recommendations to eliminate/prevent failures(s) Mitigating Actions MITIGATED RISK ASSESSMENT Figure I.2—API 691 Machinery FMEA Worksheet Definitions 5—CATASTROPHIC: Potential fatality or permanent disability 4—MAJOR : Lost time incident, severe injury 3—SIGNIFICANT: Minor injury requiring medical treatment 2—MINOR: Minor injury or minor first-aid case 1—NEGLIGIBLE: Negligible impact or exposure Consequence of Failure (COF)—Safety POF Initial Risk Priority Number (RPN) How often does it happen? How bad is it? Detection Probability of Failure (POF) Ease or method of failure detection List activities to control or eliminate the failure Failure Mechanism(s) What are the mechanism(s) for the cause(s) List them What are the cause(s) for the failure mode(s) List them Failure Cause(s) 5—VERY LOW: Absolute uncertainity w ith failure detection 4—LOW: Very low chance of detecting failures 3—MODERATE: Moderate chance of detecting failures 2—HIGH: High chance of detecting failures 1—VERY HIGH: Almost certain that failure w ill be detected Detectability What are the effects? … at device, subcomponent and system level? Describe "What can go w rong" w ith the device List all of them from a design, process, and service perspective Functional Failure/Loss of Performace Consequence of Failure (COF)—Environment Description of device being analyzed and its required performance standard Item # Failure Mode NO REQUIRED STA NDB Y PRE-MITIGATED RISK ASSESSMENT P &ID SHEET NO INTERM ITTENT TA G NO SERIA L NUM B ER SERVICE M ODEL UNIT CONTINUOUS M A NUFA CTURER SITE DA TE REVISION NO SP ECIFICA TION NO FOR WORKSHEET (INFORMATIVE) FAILURE MODES AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS P URCHA SE ORDER NO Environment API 691 ANNEX I: Detection RISK-BASED MACHINERY MANAGEMENT Environment R E M A R KS : how bad is it? Other ITEM NO POF JOB NO RPN Bibliography [1] Global Harmonized System of Classification & Labeling of Chemicals (GHS, United Nations) [2] API 570, Piping Inspection Code: In-service Inspection, Rating, Repair, and Alteration of Piping Systems [3] ISO 12100 6, Safety of machinery—General principles for design—Risk assessment and risk reduction [4] ISO/TR 14121, Safety of machinery—Risk assessment [5] VDMA 4315 7, Turbomachinery and generators—Application of the principles of functional safety [6] IEC 60812 8, Analysis techniques for system reliability—Procedure for failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) [7] IEC 62443-3, Security for industrial process measurement and control—Network and system security [8] API Recommended Practice 686, Recommended Practice for Machinery Installation and Installation Design [9] Gulati, R., J Kahn, and R Baldwin (2010), The Professional’s Guide to Maintenance and Reliability Terminology, Reliabilityweb.com, ISBN 978-0982516362 [10] API Recommended Practice 17N, Recommended Practice for Subsea Production System Reliability and Technical Risk Management [11] Kurz, R., J Thorp, E Zentmyer, and K Brun (2013), “A Novel Methodology for Optimal Design of Compressor Plants Using Probabilistic Plant Design,” Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power [12] Bloch, H (1988), Practical Machinery Management for Process Plants—Improving Machinery Reliability, Elsevier Science [13] ISO/TS 29001:2010, Petroleum, petrochemical and natural gas industries—Sector-specific quality management systems—Requirements for product and service supply organizations [14] ISO 9000, Quality management systems—Fundamentals and vocabulary [15] ISO 14224: 2016, Petroleum, petrochemical, and natural gas industries—Collection and exchange of reliability and maintenance data for equipment [16] API Recommended Practice 687, Rotor Repair [17] API Recommended Practice 500, Recommended Practice for Classification of Locations for Electrical Installations at Petroleum Facilities Classified as Class I, Division and Division [18] API Recommended Practice 505, Recommended Practice for Classification of Locations for Electrical Installation at Petroleum Facilities Classified as Class I, Zone 0, Zone and Zone [19] IEC 61882, Hazard and operability studies (HAZOP studies)—Application guide International Organization for Standardization, 1, ch de la Voie-Creuse, Case postale 56, CH-1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland, www.iso.org Mechanical Engineering Industry Association (Verband Deutscher Maschinen- und Anlagenbau), Lyoner Str 18, 60528 Frankfurt, Germany, www.vdma.org International Electrotechnical Commission, 3, rue de Varembé, 1st Floor, PO Box 131, CH-1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland, www.iec.ch 186 RISK-BASED MACHINERY MANAGEMENT 187 [20] ISO 17776:2000, Petroleum and natural gas industries—Offshore production installations—Guidelines on tools and techniques for hazard identification and risk assessment [21] ISO 60300-1, Dependability management—Part 1: Guidance for management and application [22] IEC 61078, Reliability block diagrams [23] ISO 61025, Fault tree analysis (FTA) [24] API Recommended Practice 580, Risk-based Inspection [25] ISO 17359, Condition monitoring and diagnostics of machines—General guidelines [26] ISO 13373-1, Condition monitoring and diagnostics of machines—Vibration condition monitoring—Part 1: General procedures [27] ISO 13373-2, Condition monitoring and diagnostics of machines—Vibration condition monitoring—Part 2: Processing, analysis and presentation of vibration data [28] ISO 13373-3, Condition monitoring and diagnostics of machines—Vibration condition monitoring—Part 3: Guidelines for vibration diagnosis [29] ISO 22096, Condition monitoring and diagnostics of machines—Acoustic emission [30] ISO 13380, Condition monitoring and diagnostics of machines—General guidelines on using performance parameters [31] ISO 14830-1 Condition monitoring and diagnostics of machines—Tribology-based monitoring and diagnostics—Part 1: General guidelines [32] ISO 18434-1, Condition monitoring and diagnostics of machines—Thermography—Part 1: General procedures [33] Garvey, J., and J Hines (2008) “Merging Data Sources for Predicting Remaining Useful Life,” MARCON, Knoxville, TN, 2008 [34] Jardine, A.K.S., L Daming, and D Benjevic (2006) “A Review of Machinery Diagnostics and Prognostics Implementing Condition-based Maintenance,” Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, Vol 20, pp 1483–1510 [35] Sikorska, J.Z., M Hodkiewicz, and L Ma (2011) “Prognostic Modelling Options for Remaining Useful Life Estimation by Industry,” Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, Vol 25, pp 1803–1836 [36] Luo, J., A Bixby, K Pattipati, L Qiao, M Kawamoto, and S Chigusa (2003) “An Interacting Multiple Model Approach to Model-based Prognostics,” Systems Security and Assurance, Vol 1, pp 189–194 [37] Hines, W.J., and B Rasmussen, “Empirical Modeling and Prognostics,” workshop, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, August 11–13, 2008 [38] ISO 13381-1, Condition monitoring and diagnostics of machines—Prognostics—Part 1: General guidelines [39] Abernathy, R.B (2005) The New Weibull Handbook, 4th edition, Abernathy, North Palm Beach, FL [40] Bogdanoff, J.L., and F Kozin (1989) “Probabilistic Models of Cumulative Damage,” Proceedings ICOSSAR ‘89 5th International Conference on Structural Safety and Reliability, pp 787–794 188 API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 691 [41] Lu, J.C., and W.Q Meeker (1993) “Using Degradation Measures to Estimate a Time-to-failure Distribution,” Technometrics, Vol 35, No 2, pp 161–174 [42] API Standard 671, Special Purpose Couplings for Petroleum, Chemical and Gas Industry Services [43] API Standard 674, Positive Displacement Pumps—Reciprocating [44] API Standard 675, Positive Displacement Pumps—Controlled Volume for Petroleum, Chemical, and Gas Industry Services [45] API Standard 681, Liquid Ring Vacuum Pumps and Compressors for Petroleum, Chemical, and Gas Industry Services [46] API Standard 685, Sealless Centrifugal Pumps for Petroleum, Petrochemical, and Gas Industry Process Service [47] IEEE 841-2009 9, Petroleum and Chemical Industry—Premium-efficiency, Severe-duty, Totally Enclosed Fan-cooled (TEFC) Squirrel Cage Induction Motors—Up to and Including 370 kW (500 hp) [48] ISO 21789, Gas turbine applications—Safety Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 445 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, New Jersey 08854, www.ieee.org 3URGXFW1R&