How do you approach the closed-loop management of HAZOP analysis in project construction?
Thread Content
This post was last edited by 328104062 on 2017-8-30 14:45. As the title suggests: 0. Which devices require and must undergo a Hazop analysis? In other words, what is the range of devices that are subject to Hazop analysis? For example, devices with high risk factors such as FCC/CCR/CDU/HDS/VRDS require analysis; then do devices with lower risk factors, such as air separation/power stations/water treatment/seawater desalination, also need to be analyzed? What is the basis for making this distinction? 1. When is a hazop analysis conducted, and what level of detail should the drawings have at that time? What professional drawings are needed? Is the PID drawing sufficient during the basic design phase? 2. Is it necessary to make changes to the Hazop analysis findings, and should a closed-loop management approach be adopted? 3. Will the closed-loop management of hazop analysis reports and the recommendations resulting from such analyses be included in the safety and environmental compliance inspections? 4. In which aspects of acceptance is it necessary to check the closed-loop management of hazop recommendations?
1. When is a Hazop analysis conducted, and what level of detail should the drawings have at that time? What professional drawings are needed? Is the PID drawing sufficient during the basic design phase? The HAZOP review of the unit is generally carried out during the basic design phase; therefore, documents at the appropriate level of detail for basic design are sufficient. These documents include PID diagrams, equipment data sheets, and interlock conditions. Of course, during the detailed design phase, a separate HAZOP review is also required for the complete set of purchased equipment, etc. 2. Is it necessary to make changes to the Hazop analysis findings, and should a closed-loop management approach be adopted? Generally, HAZOP recommendations are suggestions. At the HAZOP review meeting, various parties can discuss relevant issues. Regarding the review comments, modifications are not necessarily mandatory. Of course, a formal response is required to the HAZOP review comments, including whether changes will be made, how they will be made, or why no changes will be made. 3. Will the closed-loop management of hazop analysis reports and the recommendations resulting from such analyses be included in the safety and environmental compliance inspections? Relevant content is usually included in the special section on basic design safety, and it becomes a focus of review for that section. So, during the safety acceptance phase, it will definitely be given attention. 4. In which aspects of acceptance is it necessary to check the closed-loop management of hazop recommendations? A HAZOP review is primarily a safety analysis; it may occasionally cover aspects such as environmental protection as well.
During acceptance, the acceptance of design issues will certainly be verified (by qualified acceptance experts); there are also some irresponsible experts who pay no attention to this, but they will have to take responsibility for it. Recently, the Work Safety Administration issued a notice after discovering that the acceptance reports submitted by some evaluation companies did not match the actual situation.
0. Which devices require and must undergo a Hazop analysis? In other words, what devices fall within the scope of Hazop analysis? For example, devices with high risk factors such as FCC/CCR/CDU/HDS/VRDS require analysis; then do devices with lower risk factors, such as air separation/power stations/water treatment/seawater desalination, also need to be analyzed? What is the basis for the distinction?
0. Which devices require and must undergo a Hazop analysis? In other words, what devices fall within the scope of Hazop analysis? For example, devices with high risk factors such as FCC/CCR/CDU/HDS/VRDS require analysis; then do devices with lower risk factors, such as air separation/power stations/water treatment/seawater desalination, also need to be analyzed? What is the basis for the distinction?
It’s so annoying! Send a technician – there are leaks and fires every day. It’s a waste of effort; it would be better if workers carried out thorough inspections
The \"AQ 3033-2010-T Guidelines for Safety Design Management in Chemical Construction Projects\" sets relatively clear requirements for HAZOP; it’s worth taking a look