Rancang Bangun Safety Instrumented System Pada Meter Regulating Station (MR/S)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.53026/r8171377Keywords:
SIS, FTA, MTTF, MTS, PFDavg, Safety Instrumented System, Fault Tree Analysis, Mean Time To Failure, Probability of Failure on DemandAbstract
This study is conducted to design efficient and adaptive Safety Instrumented System (SIS) to improve the operational safety on Metering Regulating Stasion (MRS). This system uses two main sensors, which are flame detector and gas detector. These sensors are used to detect fire hazards and gas leaks that can generate accidents and serious property damage. System prototype consists of two safety instrument function (SIF) that is supported by Outseal Mega V2 PLC Controller to process the data from sensors. Those data are analyzed to control the alarms, indicators, solenoid valves, and pumps. Performance evaluation of SIS system is done using Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) method to evaluate Safety Integrity Level (SIL) of the prototype. The maintenance data, such as Mean Time To Failure (MTTF) is obtained using OREDA 22 Handbook to calculate Probability of Failure on Demand (PFD) from each SIS components. The study results evaluate that the SIS system has PFD value of 0,551 and beyond the SIL
References
[1] Anderson, J. (2018). Understanding Metering and Regulating Stations (MRS) in Gas Distribution Networks. Journal of Gas Technology, 23(2), 56-71.
[2] Smith, J. (2020). Fundamentals of safety instrumented systems.
[3] Nasimi, E, Gabbar, H.A (2016). Application of Safety Instrumented System (SIS) Approach in Older Nucler Power Plant, Nuclear Engineering and Design 301 (2016) 1–14
[4] Romadhon, M. F. (2023). Rancang Bangun safety instrumented system Berbasis Progammable Logic Controller Pada Simulator Pressure.
[5] N. Nugraheni, S. H. (2018). “Perancangan dan Implementasi safety instrumented system pada Miniatur Pasteurisasi Menggunakan Programmable Logic Controller,”. vol. 10, no. 1,.
[6] Kuphaldt, T. R. (2008-2018). Lessons In Industrial Instrumentation. International Public License.
[7] Exida. (2006). IEC 61508 Overview Report, Version 2.0, January 2, 2006.
[8] Gulland, W.G. (2004). Methods of Determining Safety Integrity Level (SIL) Requirements - Pros and Cons. In: Redmill, F., Anderson, T. (eds) Practical Elements of Safety. Springer, London.
[9] King, A. G. (2009). SIL DETERMINATION AND PROBLEMS WITH THE APPLICATION OF LOPA†. IChemE SYMPOSIUM SERIES NO. 155, 287-293.
[10] Torres-Echeverria, A. (2014). On the Use of On the Use of LOPA and Risk Graphs for SIL LOPA and Risk Graphs for SIL determinant determination ion.
[11] Prakoso, Amarendra Bagus (2016) Hazard and Operability Study (HAZOP) Dan Safety Integrity Level (SIL) Dengan Metode Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) Pada Fuel Gas Superheat Burner Unit Ammonia PT. Petrokimia Gresik. Undergraduate thesis, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember.
[12] MAGNETROL. (2019). UNDERSTANDING SAFETY INTEGRITY LEVEL. Magnetrol International, Incorporated
[13] Gabriel, A. (2017). Design and Evaluation of safety instrumented systems: A Simplified and Enhanced Approach. IEEE Access, vol. 5, 3813–3823.
[14] SINTEF Industrial Management (2015). Offshore and Onshore Reliability Data Handbook 6th Edition. OREDA Participants
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Mochamad Pradana, Rahmat Friandi Ramadhan, M Syauqi Sada Putra
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
