<img src="https://secure.7-companycompany.com/796766.png" style="display:none;">
Skip to content

Engineering Smarter from the Start:
Conceptual Relief & Flare Design


A facility’s relief and flare systems must be carefully considered from the earliest design stages—whether it’s a greenfield site or a major brownfield upgrade. At Smith & Burgess, we provide high-impact conceptual engineering studies that evaluate early-stage design decisions and prevent costly modifications later.

Our approach blends decades of hands-on engineering experience with advanced modeling tools to ensure your conceptual design is safe, compliant, and optimized. We identify high-volume loads, assess design feasibility, and help you avoid scope creep and rework as the project progresses.

All work is aligned with owner standards and Recognized and Generally Accepted Good Engineering Practices (RAGAGEP), as outlined in OSHA 29 CFR 1910.119.

Third-Party Relief and Flare Concept Reviews


Our engineers are routinely engaged to review designs provided by EPCs, licensors, or internal project teams. These independent reviews help identify costly oversights early and reveal opportunities for hybrid instrumentation-mechanical solutions that increase reliability and reduce capital outlay.

Smith & Burgess has developed conceptual strategies for offshore flaring, flare gas recovery systems, and high-volume flaring operations. We specialize in simplifying complex system interactions while helping owners retain control of design intent.

Conceptual Relief and Flare System Design


Flare System Feasibility: Applying the 80/20 Rule

At the conceptual stage, flare system feasibility often depends on understanding the few largest contributors to system demand. Our methodology follows the 80/20 rule—recognizing that a small number of high-flow scenarios drive most flare system decisions.

Smith & Burgess uses this targeted approach to confirm which loads control the system and to forecast design implications. This insight ensures accurate scoping of downstream FEED and detailed design phases.

Greenfield vs. Brownfield Relief System Reviews

Smith & Burgess tailors its conceptual engineering approach based on facility type and lifecycle stage. We apply different strategies for new construction versus capacity expansions or process reconfigurations.

New Facility Relief System Design

In greenfield projects, we confirm that the EPC or licensor has correctly followed owner engineering standards and that major loads are clearly defined. We verify that sizing and load assumptions align with end-user practices and current regulatory requirements.

Debottlenecking and Throughput Expansions

Changes in product economics often lead to increases in unit capacity. Our engineers evaluate whether existing relief and flare systems can handle new load profiles—and recommend targeted upgrades when required.

We draw from a deep database of past solutions and leverage hybrid instrumentation/mechanical approaches to ensure compliance and reduce capital impact.

Outcomes of Our Conceptual Engineering Reviews


Our process delivers clarity to owners early in the project lifecycle:

  • Identification of large and long-lead equipment
  • Validation of major relief contributors
  • Reduced design scope changes in FEED and detailed phases
  • Improved alignment between owner standards and EPC deliverables
  • Documented compliance with RAGAGEP and internal design practices
  • Relief design deficiencies identified and corrected to enhance safety and ensure regulatory compliance

Explore How FEED Engineering Builds on Early Insights to Deliver Compliant, Actionable Design Plans.

Need Expert Input on a Relief System Design
for a New Facility or Expansion?


Schedule a conceptual review to reduce project risk and ensure your flare and relief systems are compliant and cost-effective.