Journals / Journal of Energy Systems / 2026 / Volume: 10 Issue: 2

Assessing gas turbine safety and efficiency: A comprehensive analysis of HAZOP, LOPA, and SIL methodologies

Ahcène Akni(University Constantine 1 - Brother's Mentouri)0000-0002-3180-4218
Manel Bidi(University Constantine 1 Brother's Mentouri)0009-0005-2969-9198
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-06-24
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The simulation conducted by using the ALOHA software highlights the risks associated with an accidental release by illustrating the potential extent of environmental impacts and threats to human safety.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This work has been conducted at the Roude Nouss gas compression station with the aim of managing the risks associated with the “PGT25 gas turbine” section, assessing the Safety Integrity Level (SIL), and optimizing the safety and performance of the facilities.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The findings of the simulation prove that a risk reduction factor of 32 has been achieved for scenario 1 through the implementation of a Safety Instrumented System at SIL2 level, which reduces the frequency of undesired events to 9.86×10⁻⁸ per year.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The simulation conducted by using the ALOHA software highlights the risks associated with an accidental release by illustrating the potential extent of environmental impacts and threats to human safety.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Gas turbine · HAZOP · IPL

Abstract

This work has been conducted at the Roude Nouss gas compression station with the aim of managing the risks associated with the “PGT25 gas turbine” section, assessing the Safety Integrity Level (SIL), and optimizing the safety and performance of the facilities. The findings of the simulation prove that a risk reduction factor of 32 has been achieved for scenario 1 through the implementation of a Safety Instrumented System at SIL2 level, which reduces the frequency of undesired events to 9.86×10⁻⁸ per year. Regarding scenario 2, a risk reduction factor of 100 requires the establishment of a safety barrier of the IPL type, resulting in a reduced event frequency of 9.98×10⁻¹⁰ per year. On the one hand, scenario 3 reveals a risk reduction factor of 32, thereby justifying the adoption of a Safety Instrumented System at SIL2 level, with a reduced event frequency of 9.85×10⁻⁷ per year. The simulation conducted by using the ALOHA software highlights the risks associated with an accidental release by illustrating the potential extent of environmental impacts and threats to human safety.

🔖

Cite This Article

Akni, A., Bidi, M. (2026). Assessing gas turbine safety and efficiency: A comprehensive analysis of HAZOP, LOPA, and SIL methodologies. Journal of Energy Systems, Volume: 10 Issue: 2. https://doi.org/10.30521/jes.1809832

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (27)

  1. Smith A, Johnson B, Davis C. The impact of digital transformation on managerial roles. J Manag Innov. 2021;42:57–78.
  2. Bai J, Zheng D, Jia C. Safety technology risks and countermeasures in the intelligent construction of coal mines. Geofluids. 2022;2022:4491044. doi:10.1155/2022/4491044
  3. Smith SE, Travis KN, Djeridi H, Obligado M, Cal RB. Dynamic effects of inertial particles on the wake recovery of a model wind turbine. Renew Energy. 2021;164:346–361. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2020.09.037
  4. Pawełczyk M, Fulara S, Sepe M, De Luca A, Badora M. Industrial gas turbine operating parameters monitoring and data-driven prediction. Eksploat Niezawodn. 2020;22:391–399. doi:10.17531/ein.2020.3.2
  5. Ulanowicz L, Dudzinski A. Two-layer heat-resistant protective coatings for turbine engine blades. Coatings. 2023;13:588. doi:10.3390/coatings13030588
  6. Fioravanti A, De Simone G, Carpignano A, Ruzzone A, Mortarino G, Piccini M. Compressor station facility failure modes: causes, taxonomy and effects. Petten: European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC); 2020.
  7. Bizon N. Real-time optimization strategy for fuel cell hybrid power sources with load-following control of the fuel or air flow. Energy Convers Manag. 2018;157:13–27. doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2017.11.084
  8. International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). IEC 61511: Functional safety—Safety instrumented systems for the process industry sector. Parts 1 and 3. Geneva: IEC; 2003.
  9. Ouazraoui N, Nait-Said R. An alternative approach to safety integrity level determination: results from a case study. Int J Qual Reliab Manag. 2019;36:1784–1803. doi:10.1108/IJQRM-02-2019-0065
  10. Sallak M, Simon C, Aubry JF. A fuzzy probabilistic approach for determining safety integrity level. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst. 2008;16:239–248. doi:10.1109/TFUZZ.2007.903328
  11. Puello J, Gómez S, Ruiz I, Lombana S, Figueroa S. Application of HAZOP, LOPA and SIL to an alkylation unit in a refinery: a case study. Chem Eng Trans. 2020;82:343–348. doi:10.3303/CET2082058
  12. Akni A. Méthodes qualitatives et quantitatives d’analyse des risques. Riga: Éditions Universitaires Européennes; 2018.
  13. Hu J, Zhang LB, Liang W, Wang Z. Quantitative HAZOP analysis for gas turbine compressor based on fuzzy information fusion. Syst Eng Theory Pract. 2009;29:153–159. doi:10.1016/S1874-8651(10)60065-8
  14. Isimite J, Rubin P. A dynamic HAZOP case study using the Texas City refinery explosion. J Loss Prev Process Ind. 2016;40:496–501. doi:10.1016/j.jlp.2016.01.025
  15. Akni A, Bidi M. Quantitative risk assessment of hazardous chemical discharges and simulation of threat zones in hydrocarbon storage systems. Bull Pol Acad Sci Tech Sci. 2025;73:e152705. doi:10.24425/bpasts.2024.152705
  16. Wang Q, Chen S, Chen F, Zhang J, Chen L, Li J, Dou Z. A dynamic assessment method for risk evolution in chemical processes based on MFM-HAZOP-FDBN. Chem Eng Res Des. 2024;204:471–486. doi:10.1016/j.cherd.2024.02.049
  17. Marhavilas PK, Filippidis M, Koulinas GK, Koulouriotis DE. An expanded HAZOP-study with fuzzy-AHP (XPA-HAZOP technique): application in a sour crude-oil processing plant. Saf Sci. 2020;124:104590. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2019.104590
  18. Noriyati RD, Prakoso AB, Musyafa A, Soeprijanto A. HAZOP study and determination of safety integrity level using fault tree analysis on fuel gas superheat burner of ammonia unit in petrochemical plant, East Java. Asian J Appl Sci. 2017;5:396–409. doi:10.24203/ajas.v5i2.4683
  19. Zhu XP, Zhang LB, Liang W, Shi G. A quantitative comprehensive safety evaluation method for centrifugal compressors using FMEA-fuzzy operations. In: Proc. 2nd Int Symp Instrumentation and Measurement, Sensor Network and Automation (IMSNA); 2013 Dec 23–24; Toronto, Canada. IEEE; 2013. doi:10.1109/IMSNA.2013.6743251
  20. Cleaver RP, Maycock K, Halford AR, Potts SJ, McCollum DJ, Sadd AWT, Acton MR. Risk evaluation at natural gas compressor stations and above ground installations. In: ASME International Pipeline Conference; 2012 Sep 24–28; Calgary, Canada. ASME; 2012. p. 743–748.
  21. Chastain JW, Delanoy P, Devlin C, Mueller T. Beyond HAZOP and LOPA: four different company approaches. Process Saf Prog. 2016;36:38–53. doi:10.1002/prs.11831
  22. Akni A, Chaib R, Verzea I. Contribution to the evaluation of safety barriers at the treatment section ‘STRIPPER’. Recent. 2020;62:100–111. doi:10.31926/RECENT.2020.62.100
  23. Iskender H. HAZOP and ALOHA analysis of acetone. Acad Perspect Procedia. 2020;3:927–934. doi:10.33793/acperpro.03.02.30
  24. Koulinas GK, Demesouka OE, Bougelis GG, Koulouriotis DE. Risk prioritization in a natural gas compressor station construction project using the analytical hierarchy process. Sustainability. 2022;14:13172. doi:10.3390/su142013172
  25. Bouam A, Aissani S, Kadi R. Improving the performance of gas turbines by injecting steam upstream of the combustion chamber. J Renew Energy. 2008;11:291–306. doi:10.54966/jreen.v11i2.79
  26. Zhou D, Zhang H, Li Y, Weng S. A dynamic reliability-centered maintenance analysis method for natural gas compressor station based on diagnostic and prognostic technology. J Eng Gas Turbines Power. 2016;138:061601. doi:10.1115/1.4031644
  27. Yuan S, Cai J, Reniers G, Yang M, Chen C, Wu J. Safety barrier performance assessment by integrating computational fluid dynamics and evacuation modeling for toxic gas leakage scenarios. Reliab Eng Syst Saf. 2022;226:108719. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2022.108719