Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Rating of Geometrical Methods of Tank Calibration: F-TOPSIS Approach

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
MAPAN Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Every new storage tank in the oil sector is required to be calibrated before using them for oil storage and also to be re-calibrated as statutorily required. Depending on the prevailing regulatory guidelines in the country, either a wet or geometrical method of calibration is adopted. This study examines various geometrical methods of tank calibration vis–a–vis their strengths and weaknesses. Tank farm owners (operators) are always faced with the challenge of selecting the best geometrical method of tank calibration while considering some number of factors. To address this aforementioned issue, this study was embarked upon to rank the known four (4) geometrical methods of tank calibration using Fuzzy TOPSIS (F-TOPSIS) approach. Three different experts were drawn from reputable calibration companies to respond to the questionnaire based on the following criteria: Accuracy; Hazard involved; Time consumed; Drudgery involved; and Cost. The interdependencies among the criteria were considered, and a triangular fuzzy set was adopted. The results revealed that the Electro-Optical Distance Ranging (EODR) is the best alternative with a closeness coefficient of 0.974, while the Optical Reference Line Method was ranked least with a closeness coefficient of 0.197. To validate the result of rating by F-TOPSIS, another hybrid MCDM, Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP) was used to rank the alternatives, and EODR was also ranked as the best alternative. Sensitivity analysis was carried out for five different scenarios to validate the robustness of the decision-making tool used in this study. All the scenarios considered for the sensitivity analysis ranked EODR and OTM (Optical Triangulation Method) first and second, respectively. So, it can be concluded that EODR is the best geometrical method of tank calibration. Though the cost of using EODR might be higher than other methods, this is being compensated for by higher accuracy, less time with less exposure to hazards. It can also be confirmed that F-TOPSIS is a formidable MCDM tool that finds its usage in every facet of life for a robust decision-making process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. O.O. Agboola, B.O. Akinnuli, B. Kareem and M.A. Akintunde, Decision on the Selection of the Best Height-diameter Ratio for the Optimal Design of 13,000 m3 Oil Storage Tank. Cogent Engineering, 7(1) (2020) 1770913.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. S. Y Kuan, Design, Construction and Operation of the Floating Roof Tank. University of Southern Queensland, Master’s Dissertation, (2009)

  3. DPR Guide, Addendum to Procedure Guide for the Determination of the Quantity and Quality of Petroleum and Petroleum Products in Nigeria (“addendum”). Department of Petroleum Resources, (2017) 1–14.

  4. O.O. Agboola, P.P. Ikubanni, R.A. Ibikunle, A.A. Adediran and B.T. Ogunsemi, Generation of Calibration Charts for Horizontal Petroleum Storage Tanks Using Microsoft Excel. MAPAN-J. Metrol. Soc India, 32(4) (2017) 321–327.

    Google Scholar 

  5. T.A. Oshin, O.O. Agboola, C.E. Ichebi, D.O. Ajani and D.O. Balogun, Volume-Level Calibrations for Partially-filled Liquid Process and Storage Vessels: Metering for Complex Geometries. MAPAN-J. Metrol. Soc India, 38 (2023) 985–996.

    Google Scholar 

  6. A. Meškuotien, P. Kaškonas, E. Raudien, J. Dobilien and B.G. Urbonaviˇcius, Calibration Periodicity of Fuel Tanks Assigned to Legal-Industrial Metrology: A Case Study. Sustainability, 14 (2022) 9817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. V. Knyva, M. Knyva and J. Rainys, New Approach to Calibration of Vertical Fuel Tank. J. Elektron. Elektrotech., 19(8) (2013) 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  8. E. A. Agbola, Petroleum Product Measurement and Quality Assurance. Presentation at the National Seminar on Petroleum Measurement, Department of Petroleum Resources, Lagos, Nigeria (2009).

  9. O.O. Agboola and P.P. Ikubanni, Application of Statistical Quality Control (SQC) in the Calibration of Oil Storage Tanks. Journal of Production Engineering, 20(1) (2017) 127–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. API 2555, Method for Liquid Calibration of Tank. Measurement Coordination Department, Washington, DC, (1998).

  11. S. Pate, B. Parrott, F. Abdellatif, H. Trigui, Custody Transfer Tank Calibration Technology. In: Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition & Conference. OnePetro; 2020.

  12. O. Ünal and N. Akkas, Smart Sounding Table Using Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 31 (2023) 273e282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. S. Savaraman, Vertical Cylindrical Storage Tank Calibration Technologies and Application, In- Proceedings of API Conference & Expo, Singapore, (2012).

  14. V. V. Nosach and B. M. Belyaev, The Calibration of Large Vertical Cylindrical Tanks by a Geometrical Method. Measurement Techniques, 45(11) (2002).

  15. API MPMS 2.2A, Measurement and Calibration of Upright Cylindrical Tanks by the Manual Tank Strapping Method, Measurement Coordination Department, Washington, D.C, (2000).

  16. O.O. Agboola, B.O. Akinnuli, B. Kareem and M.A. Akintunde, Modelling of Cost Estimates for the Geometrical Calibration of Upright Oil Storage Tanks. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 10(1) (2020) 464–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. G. Tian, Y. Hui, W. Lu and W. Tingting, Rate-Distortion Optimized Quantization for Geometry-Based Point Cloud Compression. Journal of Electronic Imaging, 32(1) (2023) 13047.

    Google Scholar 

  18. J. Stanojković and M. Radovanović, Selection of Solid Carbide End mill for Machining Aluminum 6082-T6 Using CRITIC and TOPSIS Methods. Journal of Production Engineering, 20(1) (2017) 133–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. A. Azizi, D.O. Aikhuele and F.S. Souleman, A Fuzzy TOPSIS Model to Rank Automotive Suppliers. Procedia Manufacturing, 2 (2015) 159–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. G. H. Tzeng and J. J Huang, Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. CRC press, (2011).

  21. M. Rajak and K. Shaw, Evaluation and Selection of Mobile Health (mHealth) Application Using AHP and Fuzzy TOPSIS. Technology in Society, 59 (2019) 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. D.L. Olson, Comparison of Weights in TOPSIS Models. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 40(7–8) (2004) 721–727.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. I. Chamodrakas and D. Martakos, A Utility-Based Fuzzy TOPSIS Method for Energy Efficient Network Selection in Heterogeneous Wireless Networks. Applied Soft Computing, 12(7) (2012) 1929–1938.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. F.T. Chan, N. Kumar, M.K. Tiwari, H.C. Lau and K.L. Choy, Global Supplier Selection: A Fuzzy-AHP Approach. International Journal of Production Research, 46(14) (2008) 3825–3857.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. C. Zheng, Y. An, Z. Wang, X. Qin, B. Eynard, M. Bricogne and Y. Zhang, Knowledge-Based Engineering Approach for Defining Robotic Manufacturing System Architectures. International Journal of Production Research, 61(5) (2023) 1436–1454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. C. Zheng, Y. An, Z. Wang, H. Wu, X. Qin, B. Eynard and Y. Zhang, Hybrid Offline Programming Method for Robotic Welding Systems. Robotics and computer-integrated manufacturing, 73 (2022) 102238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. G. Büyüközkan, O. Feyzioğlu and E. Nebol, Selection of the Strategic Alliance Partner in Logistics Value Chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 113(1) (2008) 148–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. T.Y. Chen and C.Y. Tsao, The Interval-Valued Fuzzy TOPSIS Method and Experimental Analysis. Fuzzy Sets Systems, 159(11) (2008) 1410–1428.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. S. Önüt and S. Soner, Transshipment Site Selection Using the AHP and TOPSIS Approaches Under Fuzzy Environment. Waste Management, 28(9) (2008) 1552–1559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Y.M. Wang and T.M. Elhag, Fuzzy TOPSIS Method Based on Alpha Level sets with an Application to Bridge Risk Assessment. Expert Systems with Application, 31(2) (2006) 309–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. T. Yang and C.C. Hung, Multiple-Attribute Decision Making Methods for Plant Layout Design Problem. Robot. Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 23(1) (2007) 126–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. D. Yong, Plant Location Selection Based on Fuzzy TOPSIS. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 28(7) (2006) 839–844.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. C. Kahraman, G. Büyüközkan and N.Y. Ateş, A Two Phase Multi-Attribute Decision Making Approach for New Product Introduction. Inf. Sci., 177(7) (2007) 1567–1582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Y.H. Chang and C.H. Yeh, A Survey Analysis Of Service Quality for Domestic Airlines. European Journal of Operation Research, 139(1) (2002) 166–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. I.C. Chang, H.G. Hwang, W.F. Hung and Y.C. Li, Physicians’ Acceptance of Pharmacokinetics- Based Clinical Decision Support Systems. Expert System with Application, 33(2) (2007) 296–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Y.H. Chang, C.H. Yeh and S.Y. Wang, A Survey and Optimization-Based Evaluation of Development Strategies for the Air Cargo Industry. International Journal of Production Economics, 106(2) (2008) 550–562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. M.P. Amiri, Project Selection for Oil-Fields Development by Using the AHP and Fuzzy TOPSIS Methods. Expert System with Application, 37(9) (2010) 6218–6224.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  38. X. Yu, S. Guo, J. Guo and X. Huang, Rank B2C e-commerce Websites in e-alliance Based on AHP and Fuzzy TOPSIS. Expert System with Application, 38(4) (2011) 3550–3557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. H. Hayati, S. Karimi, J. Sadeghifar, J. Ebrahimzadeh, S. Afshari, B. Khosravi and E. Ashrafi, Determining the Entitlement to Structural Indicators of Health by Means of Fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS: A case Study in Sistan and Baluchestan, Iran. J. Pharmacoecon. Pharm. Manag., 1(3/4) (2015) 61–64.

    Google Scholar 

  40. E. Charles, M. Angel and H. Nina, Using a Fuzzy TOPSIS-Based Scenario Analysis To Improve Municipal Solid Waste Planning and Forecasting: A Case Study of Canary Archipelago (1999–2030). Journal of Cleaner Production, 176 (2018) 1198–1212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. M.G. Kharat, S. Murthy, S.J. Kamble, R.D. Raut and S.S. Kamble, Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Environmentally Conscious Solid Waste Treatment and Disposal Technology Selection. Technology in Society, 57 (2019) 20–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. M.V. Khatir and Z. Akbarzadeh, Elucidation of Structural Relationships of SWOT: A Mixed Method Approach Based on Fmadm for Formulating Science and Technology Strategies. Technology in Society, 56 (2019) 44–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. H.S. Dhiman and D. Deb, Fuzzy TOPSIS and Fuzzy COPRAS Based Multi-Criteria Decision Making for Hybrid Wind Farms. Energy, 202 (2020) 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. J. Dai, J. Qi, J. Chi, S. Chen, J. Yang and L. Ju, Integrated water resources security evaluation of beijing based on GRA (Grey Relation Analysis) and TOPSIS. Frontier in Earth Science China, 4 (2010) 357–362.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  45. R.F. Lima-Junior, L. Osiro and L.C. Ribeiro, A Comparison Between Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy TOPSIS Methods to Supplier Selection. Applied Soft Computing, 21 (2014) 194–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. V. Knyva and M. Knyva, New Method for Calibration of Horizontal Fuel Tanks. Elektronika ir Elektrotechnika, 18(9) (2013).

  47. B. Li, T. Guan, L. Dai and G. Duan, Distributionally Robust Model Predictive Control with Output Feedback. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control (2023). https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.2023.3321375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Zhang, X., Deng, H., Xiong, Z., Liu, Y., Rao, Y., Lyu, Y., Li, Y. (2024). Secure Routing Strategy Based on Attribute-Based Trust Access Control in Social-Aware Networks. Journal of Signal Processing Systems.

  49. S. Nazari-Shirkouhi, S. Miri-Nargesi and A. Ansarinejad, A Fuzzy Decision Making Methodology Based on Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy TOPSIS with a Case Study for Information Systems Outsourcing Decisions. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 32(6) (2017) 3921–3943.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. M. Manoj and S. Sagar, Comparison of New Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods for Material Handling Equipment Selection. Management Science Letters, 8 (2018) 139–150.

    Google Scholar 

  51. O.O. Agboola, B.O. Akinnuli, M.A. Akintunde, P.P. Ikubanni and A.A. Adeleke, Comparative Analysis of Manual Strapping Method (MSM) and Electro-Optical Distance Ranging (EODR) Method of Tank Calibration. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1378 (2019) 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  52. S. Kavita, A. A Fahad, R. K. Srivastava and K. Rajeev, Hesitant Fuzzy Sets Based Symmetrical Model of Decision-Making for Estimating the Durability of Web Application. Symmetry, (2020)1–20.

  53. K. Rajeev, B. Abdullah, A. Hosam, A. Wajdi, A. Alka and A.K. Raees, A Hybrid Fuzzy Rule-Based Multi-Criteria Framework for Sustainable Security Assessment of Web Application. Engineering Physics and Mathematics, 12 (2021) 2227–2240.

    Google Scholar 

  54. K. Rajeev, A.K. Suhel and A.K. Raees, Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process for Software Durability: Security Risks Perspective. Proceedings of International Conference on Communication and Networks, Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, 508 (2017) 469–478.

    Google Scholar 

  55. K. Rajeev, J.A. Tarique, B. Abdullah, A. Hosam, A. Alka and A.K. Raees, A Multi-Perspective Benchmarking Framework for Estimating Usable-Security of Hospital Management System Software Based on Fuzzy Logic, ANP and TOPSIS Methods. KSII Transactions on Internet and Information Systems, 15(1) (2021) 240–263.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors appreciate all the experts used in this study for volunteering themselves to offer their expertise and opinions. We also express our deep gratitude to the management of Landmark University Omu-Aran and the Federal University of Technology Akure for providing an enabling environment to conduct this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Federal University of Technology Akure, Akure, Nigeria

    O. O. Agboola, B. O. Akinnuli, B. Kareem & M. A. Akintunde

  2. Department of Industrial and Production Engineering, Federal University of Technology Akure, Akure, Nigeria

    O. O. Agboola, B. O. Akinnuli & B. Kareem

  3. Deparment of Mechanical Engineering, Landmark University, Omu-Aran, Nigeria

    P. P. Ikubanni

  4. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Nile University of Nigeria, Abuja, Nigeria

    A. A. Adeleke

Authors
  1. O. O. Agboola
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. B. O. Akinnuli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. B. Kareem
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. A. Akintunde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. P. P. Ikubanni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. A. A. Adeleke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to O. O. Agboola.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Agboola, O.O., Akinnuli, B.O., Kareem, B. et al. Rating of Geometrical Methods of Tank Calibration: F-TOPSIS Approach. MAPAN (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12647-024-00748-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12647-024-00748-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation