Posts by aeSolutions :

February 6, 2019

S4: Getting a Handle on Consequences

John Cusimano, vice president of cybersecurity at aeSolutions, was recently featured in a panel at the S4X19 conference exploring the strengths and benefits of conducting a Cyber Process Hazard Analysis (CyberPHA) or Consequence-driven Cyber-informed Engineering (CCE) process.  A recent article on highlighted some takeaways from that panel:   “In a CyberPHA we leverage processes […]

Read More
January 18, 2019

ISA welcomes aeSolutions’ Paul Gruhn as its 2019 Society President

The International Society of Automation (ISA) announced that Paul Gruhn, PE, CFSE, and ISA Life Fellow, is its 2019 Society President. In his role as Society President, Gruhn will lead the ISA Board of Directors, which is responsible for governing, setting policy and establishing the strategic direction of the organization. ISA is a nonprofit professional […]

Read More
December 17, 2018

Happy Holidays from aeSolutions

Christmas is a time of year that we reflect back on how much each of us personally value the relationships we have with our clients. We hope that together we have achieved project objectives in 2018 that make a difference in the lives of your employees and ours well into the future.   Very best wishes […]

Read More
November 15, 2018

Using the cloud to secure the cloud – Control Magazine

Excerpts from Control Magazine: “This is a very simple setup. You don’t need to be an IT or cybersecurty expert to use these tools,” said Peter Eliya, safety and control systems automation specialist at aeSolutions. “Remote access enables technical support and increased worker productivity to counter the exponential growth of automation, but it comes with […]

Read More

White Papers by aeSolutions :

Risk Criteria Selection and the Impacts on LOPA Results: To Sum or Not to Sum, That is the Question

In the CCPS book Layer of Protection Analysis – Simplified Process Risk Assessment, Layers of Protection Analysis (LOPA) is initially described as the analysis of a single cause-consequence pairing. However, later in the book, there is the discussion of summing risk for multiple scenarios. In practice, several companies prefer to sum the frequencies of multiple causes leading to a single consequence when conducting LOPA. Summing the causes can be a useful tool in that it will ensure proper integrity of a safety function to address all of the causes for a single consequence and assist in the reduction of the numbers of Independent Protection Layers (IPLs) necessary at a facility. However, caution must be taken in using this method, as there may be unrealized effects on LOPA results, and therefore unintended impacts to the entire safety lifecycle. In contrast, evaluating only a single cause-consequence pair also poses different concerns when relating the results to selected risk criteria.

This paper seeks to provide insight into the effects of each choice, including the pros and cons of each method. Deeper examinations into the definitions of risk criteria and consequence are explored.

Read More