Engineering systems

[MariusChE]

Hello everyone. A friend of mine has started out on a new plant and the engineering systems there are non-existent. The mass balances are incomplete, there are no P&ID drawings for some of the sections and there are also no data sheets for the majority of the equipment. What would your recommendations be about how to solve this situation? Is there a problem here or is this standard practice in some parts of the world?

 

[saxon]

Marius, How old is this plant? In the interest of increased profitablity, large numbers of plants world wide have scaled back or eliminated field engineering support services. Hence field revisions are never recorded and over time the documentation gets lost. Maintenance is notorius for this. "O&M manuals & PID's? We don't need no stinking manuals and drawings, it's all in our heads!"

If you want to get back to a start point, do the following:
1. for all equipment create name plate data sheets.
2. create Rocess flow diagrams for the plant
3. create instrument data sheets for all instrumentation
4. create P&ID's for the facility.
5. contact Manu'f. for replacement manuals.

Good Luck!
saxon

 

[pmover]

your friend definitely has a situation on hand, but obtaining essential equipment/plant data will be a chore.

in addition to saxon's suggestions, i'd determine engr design firm and make a request for documentation. if firm no longer exist, try and find out whom purchased them and make request with new firm. like saxon asked, "when was plant built" is key. you may be able to locate individual(s) whom may be able to assist you or provide direction. it would not surprise me that this suggestion does not develop results - as i have a personal matter, in which records have been destroyed (> 7 yrs ago).

u may end up accomplishing the work on an "as-is" plant basis, which is precisely what saxon stated. regardless, good luck!
-pmover

 

[Montemayor]

MariusChE (Chemical):

In a way, I envy your friend. I have gone through what he is experiencing and found that a lot of chemical process plants in the USA are in similar (if not worst) states. This has become apparant with the implementation of OSHA regulations involving Safety Relief devices. The reason I envy your friend is because I have found the experience to be challenging and rewarding when left to correct the situation.

The first thing I would do is generate accurate and up-dated Process Flow Diagrams complete with heat and material balances. The next area of importance is to generate accurate and "as-built" P&IDs (this is going to be tough and expensive). The P&IDs must be upgraded with relief valve information - which means you must have accurate records of all relief devices and accurate calculations of the design relief scenarios.

The next area of attack is preparing detailed specification sheets on all major equipment- especially process pressure vessels. Of course, you're going to have to duplicate the above efforts on all utility units - such as boiler plant, electrical supply, water supply, service and instrument air, storage tank farm(s), etc. Of course, I've assumed that by now there is an engineering information file "room" for all the above vital information to be stored and available, complete with duplication machines. A small staff of contract CAD designers may also be needed to document the findings in engineering drawings.

You have not stated where this chaos is taking place, but I can assure you that if the plant is under OSHA jurisdiction, it will be shut down (by Federal law) if it can't come up with the required up-dated and "as-built" P&IDs(which are a reflection of all the process information and safety data.

If I were a young, starting engineer again I would look forward to such a challenge because it offers a lot of "hands-on" experience and key learnings. The problems may be tough and very demanding, but the potential rewards are great for an aspiring career in engineering.

Art Montemayor
Spring, TX

 

[MariusChE]

Gentlemen and Ladies

Your responses have been most insightful and, I must admit, a tad unexpected. For the life of me, I cannot understand why companies would wilfully neglect their engineering systems. P&IDs/MFDs/PFDs are legal documents in my country. But apart from that: how do you trouble-shoot your process without proper data. Just yesterday I noticed that a steam valve seat was cut, by back-calculating the Cv and the corresponding valve output. We can now safely replace it on the next shut before we lose control of the process/shutdown. Also, if you have a quantitative opportunity i.e. a business oportunity that has to do with quantities of flow rather than quality, how do you possibly quantify this without a mass/energy balance? My opinion is that these deficiencies come about when managers stick their noses into engineering - and I do not mean this in the nicest possible way. There can be no doubt that their system is not sustainable for the long term without sustaining losses - whether they be quantified or not! In other words, I think to remove the engineers and the company engineering system is short-sighted and brings only short-term gain. What are your opinions?

Marius Grobler
Johannesburg, South Africa

 

[TBP]

The management of most companies typically looks only as far out as the numbers for the next quarter. I believe that many plants are regarded as disposable - build it cheap, run it hard, then walk away in 10 - 15 years. It doesn't matter to those in charge of building it, as they're usually gone before the end of the project anyway. (Commissioning? What's commissioning?)

I'm trying to remember the last time I saw a project "commissioned" by anyone other than the operations and maintenance people. They've basically been tossed a not-quite-completed mess, and told to get it on line - and RIGHT NOW - we've got to get rolling on the return on investment. Keep up documents and P&IDs? Most maintenance crews that I see have been so down-sized, and spread so thin, that they can barely keep up with repairs to production equipment, let alone documentation.

The situation described by MariusChe is much more the norm than the exception. Nothing will change until there's a series of really serious accidents, and responsibility for them lands at the feet of the MBAs running the companies.

 

[azertyuiop]

seems that the situation is the same everywhere , because I have been experiencing the same events in europe , where I am active.

I don't even want to adress the fact that the 50 years old in house engineering manager , if there is one , may be a guy that has been promoted away from post to post every 5 years , and has no engineering degree at all , but is specialised in economics or some other field , as I had the pleasure to discover in a huge petrochem multinational.

Bad mouthing on the production floor stated that this was the only remaining posting that was found to fit the competences of this guy. Since no one cared about engineering documents , everybody was happy with the new promotion , excepted the project/process engineers under this very relaxed and unstressed manager . . .

Sweet revenge by this PE was taken when the production lines couldn't be restarted properly after the umpteenth emergency shutdown , due to faulty or obsolete E drawings , and with the PE home for three weeks with a serious illness, leaving the manager with his problems and production losses.

I subsequently left a few months later , to work on another new plant project starting from scratch , and where I could make sure that the required engineering documents were produced by the involved personnel.