A common cause factor (CCF) significantly affects achieving high safety integrity levels (SIL), such as SIL3 and SIL4. Even with very low dangerous undetected failure rates, a high CCF reduces the resulting SIL. This study proposes a new method to classify common causes, to establish more practical countermeasures for lower CCF. Real statistics guide the classification into hardware failures, systematic failures, and human errors. To determine CCF, it is crucial to thorough investigate countermeasures for these three common causes on-site. The prevailing method for CCF determination uses a score table from the latest International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 61508. However, some controversies surround this table. This study proposes a new table based on systematic classifications (hardware failures, systematic failures, and human errors). Additionally, the table is designed to include elements for the latest technologies, such as digital transformation systems in process safety, aligning with the International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (IOGP) report requirements. A case study illustrates the efficacy of the proposed study, revealing that the proposed table is more effective in preventing accidents than the latest IEC 61508 Part 6 Edition 2.0.

中文翻译：

---

IEC 61508 第 6 部分 2.0 版常见原因评分表的制定

共因因素 (CCF) 会显着影响高安全完整性级别 (SIL) 的实现，例如 SIL3 和 SIL4。即使未检测到的危险故障率非常低，高 CCF 也会降低由此产生的 SIL。本研究提出了一种对常见原因进行分类的新方法，以制定更实用的降低 CCF 的对策。真实的统计数据指导对硬件故障、系统故障和人为错误进行分类。为了确定CCF，现场彻底调查这三种常见原因的对策至关重要。CCF 确定的流行方法使用最新国际电工委员会 (IEC) 61508 中的评分表。然而，围绕该表存在一些争议。本研究提出了一个基于系统分类（硬件故障、系统故障和人为错误）的新表。此外，该表的设计还包括最新技术的要素，例如过程安全中的数字化转型系统，符合国际石油和天然气生产商协会 (IOGP) 报告的要求。案例研究说明了所提议研究的有效性，表明所提议的表格在预防事故方面比最新的 IEC 61508 第 6 部分 2.0 版更有效。