Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology

, Volume 32, Issue 11, pp 5263–5271 | Cite as

Reliability evaluation of conceptual design for the dehydration package

  • Sanghyun Park
  • Jae-Won Oh
  • Su-gil Cho
  • Kwangu Kang
  • Cheonhong Min
  • Jung-Yeul JungEmail author


In this study, reliability evaluation in conceptual design stage is performed to develop the dehydration package of offshore plant equipment. Dehydration package is commonly used in the gas treatment system but has still being developed. Since the technology for the dehydration package relies on almost 100 % in overseas companies, it is necessary to acquire the design/engineering technology for dehydration package. The design must also consider reliability and safety with the special characteristic of ocean environment and the danger of gas process. Therefore, the concept of adsorption dehydration package and design philosophy for development of dehydration package is derived through reliability evaluation in conceptual design stage in this study. After defining the equipment for dehydration package by IDEF0, reliability evaluation of conceptual design for the dehydration package is performed using fault tree analysis (FTA), based on the result of hazard identification (HAZID) analysis. In the future, this result will be applied in detail design.


Reliability evaluation Conceptual design Dehydration package Hazard identification Fault tree analysis 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    D. H. Lee, M. K. Ha, S. Y. Kim and S. C. Shin, Research of design challenges and new technologies for floating LNG, International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, 6 (2) (2014) 307–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    A. Fernandes, M. F. Ribeiro and J. P. Lourenco, Gas–phase dehydration of glycerol over hierarchical silicoaluminophosphate SAPO–40, Catalysis Communications, 95 (2017) 16–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    M. Neagu and D. L. Cursaru, Technical and economic evaluations of the triethylene glycol regeneration processes in natural gas dehydration plants, Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 37 (2017) 327–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    D. Parks and R. Amin, Novel subsea gas dehydration process, the process plant and dehydration performance, Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 81 (2012) 94–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    D. Parks and D. Pack, Design concept for implementation of a novel subsea gas dehydration process for a gas/condensate well, Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 109 (2013) 18–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    H. Liu, X. Shi, X. Chen and Y. Liu, Management of life extension for topsides process system of offshore platforms in Chinese Bohai Bay, Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 35 (2015) 357–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    J. D. Kim, S. B. Choi, J. M. Lee, M. K. Kim, S. C. Choi, I. J. Hwang and J. B. Choi, Conceptual design of a web–based LNG plant management system through adoption of the integrated environment for design and maintenance, Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology, 28 (9) (2014) 3759–3767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    X. F. Liang, L. Y. Chen, H. Yi and D. Li, Integrated allocation of warship reliability and maintainability based on toplevel parameters, Ocean Engineering, 110 (2015) 195–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    I. H. Choi and D. Chang, Reliability and availability assessment of seabed storage tanks using fault tree analysis, Ocean Engineering, 120 (2016) 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Y. Seo, H. You, S. Lee, C. Huh and D. Chang, Evaluation of CO2 liquefaction processes for ship–based carbon capture and storage (CCS) in terms of life cycle cost (LCC) considering availability, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 35 (2015) 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    S. Seo, B. Chu, Y. Noh, W. Jang, S. Lee, Y. Seo and D. Chang, An economic evaluation of operating expenditures for LNG fuel gas supply systems onboard ocean–going ships considering availability, Ships and Offshore Structures, 11 (2) (2016) 213–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    J. Oh, A study on the feedback loop design (FLD) method for concurrent engineering process of offshore plant, Ph.D. Thesis, Hanyang University (2016).Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    N. Xiao, H. Z. Huang, Y. Li, L. He and T. Jin, Multiple failure modes analysis and weighted risk priority number evaluation in FMEA, Engineering Failure Analysis, 18 (4) (2011) 1162–1170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    S. Mandal and J. Maiti, Risk analysis using FMEA: Fuzzy similarity value and possibility theory based approach, Expert Systems with Applications, 41 (7) (2014) 3527–3537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    A. Cheng–Leong, K. L. Pheng and G. R. K. Leng, IDEF*: A comprehensive modeling methodology for the development of manufacturing enterprise systems, International Journal of Production Research, 37 (17) (1999) 3839–3858.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    WINTEK Co. LTD., Available online at: http://www. wintek––sieve–dehydrationunits–msdu.html (1986).Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    G. J. Colquhoun, R. W. Baines and R. Crossley, A state of the art review of IDEF0, International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 6 (4) (1993) 252–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    M. H. Sulaiman, Gas dehydration using glycol solution in absorption and adsorption unit, Ph.D. Thesis, Malaysia Pahang University (2009).Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Honeywell UOP Co. LTD., Available online at: https: //–dehydration/(2005).Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Abbott Risk Consulting Ltd. & Woodfibre PMC., Woodfibre PMC Project Safety Studies: HAZID Study Report, Woodfibre PMC, Vancouver, Canada (2015).Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    DNV GL., Offshore reliability data handbook (OREDA), Sixth ed., Det Norsk Veritas, DNV, Hovik, Norway (2015).Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    J. H. Jang, W. H. Kwon, S. H. Chun and Y. H. Moon, Reliability analysis of process–induced cracks in rotary swaged shell nose part, Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology, 26 (7) (2012) 2155–2158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    T. B. Mohammed and L. Zoubida, Safety assessment of flare systems by fault tree analysis, Journal of Chemical Technology and Metallurgy, 51 (2) (2016) 229–234.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    K. Ranjan and K. G. Achyuta, Mines systems safety improvement using an integrated event tree and fault tree analysis, Journal of the Institution of Engineers (India): Series D, 98 (1) (2017) 101–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    PTC., PTC WQS (Windchill Quality Solutions) 11.0 Manual (2015).Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    M. Tanabe and A. Miyake, Risk reduction concept to provide design criteria for emergency systems for onshore LNG plants, Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 24 (4) (2011) 383–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Korean Society of Mechanical Engineers and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sanghyun Park
    • 1
  • Jae-Won Oh
    • 1
  • Su-gil Cho
    • 1
  • Kwangu Kang
    • 1
  • Cheonhong Min
    • 1
  • Jung-Yeul Jung
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Offshore Industries R&BD CenterKorea Research Institute of Ships & Ocean Engineering (KRISO)Gyeongsangnam-doKorea
  2. 2.Marine Safety and Environmental Research DepartmentKorea Research Institute of Ships & Ocean Engineering (KRISO)DaejeonKorea

Personalised recommendations