Is it necessary to integrate the furnace flame detection into the SIS interlock?
Thread Content
In the past, when working, the flame detectors of the heating furnaces were connected to the DCS for display and alarm purposes. Now, experts have said that the flame detection systems in heating furnaces should be integrated into the SIS for interlock functions. I’m not sure whether there are any standards or regulations requiring interlocking for fire detection; if such regulations exist, I would like to know them ； If there are no regulations, is it necessary for the flame detection system to be integrated into the SIS for interlocking?
Heating furnaces fall under the BMS in SIS applications; any safety interlocks related to them should be included in the SIS
To check the original design from the design institute, it would be best to send a confirmation letter to them if possible
All interlocks related to safety should be incorporated into the SIS. I agree with this statement. What I want to ask is whether interlocking is required for the flame detector?
The original design did not include interlocks; it only had display and alarm functions. I inquired with the oil refining companies in the area; they didn’t even have flame detectors back then, let alone interlocks.
It’s of course better to have flame monitoring at SⅠs, and the quality of flame monitoring must be reliable.
What is the purpose of flame monitoring in SIS? Is it to interlock the entire system, or just the heating furnace? If it is a interlocked heating furnace, I think it is very necessary. If it is a full interlocking system, then it needs to be analyzed on a case-by-case basis. Where I am, GTS convection heating furnaces are used (equipment made entirely by foreigners), and a FireEye flame detection system is employed; flame detection is carried out through this FireEye system, and the furnace stops operating if no flame is detected.
We have over 200 fire detection alerts here; some require the shutdown of the furnace, while others require the cessation of feed supply. Fire detection systems are also from foreign companies, such as ABB and FIREYE.
Then don’t add it; when it’s necessary to enter it into SIS, it’s best to have the design institute or the technical department issue a sequential change order
Is it the PLC of the furnace itself that initiates the request to shut down the furnace or to stop feeding material, or are the relevant signals sent to the DCS or SIS in the control room, where the DCS or SIS handles such requests? If it is carried out by the furnace’s own PLC, strictly speaking (or more precisely), that PLC must be a safety PLC, that is, one designed for fail-safe operation. Of course, in most cases, the PLCs used in furnaces are not of this type; they are ordinary PLCs, unless the design requirements specify the use of a safety-type PLC. If it is sent to the DCS in the control room, it can certainly fulfill its functions, but it won’t pass the inspection (it cannot be detected by those who are not highly skilled in inspections). If it is a SIS sent to the control room, then there are definitely no problems.
If an expert says so, you have to follow it, otherwise there will be frequent checks every now and then