LINE NUMBERING FOR STEAM TRAPS

[IFER]

Good Morning,

We are working in a AS BUILT 3D MODEL of a Refining facility, and found that steam traps have no line number in the P&ID.
To number each line, we follow the "function" approach as explained by James Pennock. Thus, we plan to add a new line number for each branch of a steam trap. I would like to know if anyone had a similar issue and what was their approach to assign a líne to a steam trap.

Best regards.

 

[IFER]

Hello Everybody,

I found another Project with this approach:

Each branch line that goes to a trap has assigned a new line number up to the steam trap. Down stream the trap, the line changes numbering due it is not steam anymore, it is condensate .

I appreaciate if any one has another approach to number lines for steam tramps, so I can compare and evaluate which one to apply.

Best regards

 

[mbt22]

Does it add value to have all these 'lines' numbered? They're presumably short lengths hanging off a major system.

Matt

 

[pennpiper]

Everyone,
Why would you NOT line number each one of these little Steam and Condensate lines? I know of no logical reason to not Line Lumber them!

Why should you Line Number these lines?
If you show them on your P&ID's then you should Line Lumber them!
If you are going to model them in the 3D Design Model then you should Line Lumber them!
If you are going to issue Isometrics for each of these lines then you should Line Lumber them (the Line Number is the Isometric number)!
If you (or someone else) are going to purchase material for these lines you should Line Lumber them!
If these lines will be prefabricated in any way (Offsite or onsite) then you need to Line Lumber them!
If you are going to include these lines on the Insulation or Painting Contractors Scope of Work then you need to Line Lumber them!
If the Plant Owner/Operator is going to properly train their employees then you need to Line Lumber them!
If these lines are in any way included in the Plants Asset Records, then you need to Line Lumber them!

Sometimes its possible to do all the right things and still get bad results

 

[mbt22]

I agree that they need a number, it's just whether they sit under the same line designation as the main line the same way a branch to an instrument might. It's physically continuous, same temperature, pressure, overpressure protection and fluid, but different diameter and flow rate. I could argue it either way.

If it's an as built, why not ask the operator? As Pennpiper says, they're used for a whole lot of other stuff, so presumably they identified them somehow during construction (and operation?).

Matt

 

[mk3223]

In the refinery, the condensate system isn't part of the PSM requirement. In the old day, the traps were numbered as part of the steam lines, and only the condensate mains were shown on P&IDs without the each condensate trap piping.
Now, as in the smart P&ID with 3D piping modeling, every condensate line are identified on P&IDs with a number, and the lines are marked with "Area ID". So, one will know where the line is located approximately.

 

[Ehzin]

If you elect to assign line numbers, my only comment would be to review the length of the existing line number for the header. The most "logical" approach would be to add suffix number to the header designation. If the header is HPS-10000 followed by HPS-10100 or similar you just name the lines to the traps as HPS-10001, HPS-10002 etc following the leading number scheme. I'd say it depends on the existing numberng system. The bonus is it quickly identifies what steam or condensate header it's off of if you're familiar with it.

This may be the method you mentioned, not familiar with it. And sorry on phone so excuse typos please.


Thanks,
Ehzin