Attached is the resume along with a summary of the project development: including proposals, feasibility studies, design plans, preliminary designs, and construction drawings (detailed...
Thread Content
This post was last edited by Lomi on 2017-3-6 09:18. During festive times, one misses family even more; the best place to be is in Hubei, somewhere close to home. Preface: Why am I writing this summary? Summary of commencement and construction in 201*, from my perspective as a user, I focus on the process of use – such as preliminary training, the three inspections and four confirmations on site, the adjustment and verification of design tasks for various specialties, preparations for commissioning, as well as the trial production phase and calibration. Although four years have passed, each time I read it, it seems as though everything is still fresh in my mind, yet there are always new insights ； By reviewing the old, one can gain new insights; I think this is precisely the charm of summarization and synthesis. I was involved in all the preliminary preparations for this oil upgrading project (including the optimization of heat exchange processes and the renovation and expansion of the PSA unit), such as feasibility studies, basic design, detailed design, review of construction drawings, Hazop analyses, as well as the detailed design of various components and coordination tasks. Although the project was small, with an investment of less than 80 million, it took two years to complete. During this time, I made some friends, from research institutes, design firms, and construction companies. Through collaboration, communication, and interaction with them, I learned about their work methods. Therefore, I would like to summarize this project from the perspectives of design and project management: examining the design process by looking at the division of tasks among different departments in the design firm, as well as the processes of task assignment and information dissemination; analyzing construction management by examining the on-site construction steps and the coordination between different teams; understanding what is “required,” “recommended,” and “strictly prohibited” by referring to standards and regulations and comparing them with actual on-site conditions, as well as determining how to make choices when standards do not provide guidance or when certain requirements cannot be met. I will also look at the preparations needed before the unit starts operating, as well as the policies and regulations related to unit acceptance and evaluation. By considering the entire process of design, review, procurement, construction, drawing approval, inspection, commissioning, acceptance, and evaluation, I aim to broaden my perspective and achieve a deeper understanding. I welcome any feedback regarding any shortcomings resulting from my abilities, skills, or level of experience. Through this project construction, a broader understanding of the overall EPC design has been gained: design merely involves scaling up the process routes in the process package on an engineering basis, based on assumptions regarding the properties of raw materials and product specifications, and it results in products that meet specific standards. This includes not only the owner’s requirements, the selection of design options, the setting of parameters by the design institute, the proper choice and arrangement of materials, as well as standardized construction by the construction team, but also the correct use and maintenance by the personnel on site. Therefore, for a system to meet the requirements of long-term, efficient, and optimal operation, the following conditions must be satisfied: 1. The owner must provide relatively accurate basic data and requirements ； Such as the properties of the raw materials (relatively reasonable; perfect accuracy is impossible), meteorological and hydrological conditions as well as geographical factors, the boundary conditions related to the plant’s utility systems, the quality standards that the product must meet, and the investment amount (which can be negotiated during the review process). 2. The EPC contractor’s recommendation and selection of the optimal process route, operating parameters, materials, as well as equipment and pipeline layout (determined based on the EPC approach) ； Based on the data provided by the owner and the quality assurance guarantees offered by the process package supplier, the optimal process route (process package), material flow, and operating parameters are selected for the given investment level. The required equipment and pipelines are arranged and specified in the most efficient way possible – such as with low pressure drops, minimal space requirements, and ease of operation. A stable and reasonable control scheme is established for normal production, while necessary interlock protection and monitoring measures are put in place for abnormal situations, thereby meeting regulatory and environmental safety requirements. This approach ensures an optimal investment profile, the lowest possible processing costs, compliance with specific quality standards and legal regulations, and thus smooth commissioning of the facility. 3. Good cost-performance ratio, reasonable and comprehensive procurement management. The procurement of equipment must be carried out in accordance with the design parameters specified in the inquiry and purchase documents; it is necessary to understand the usage patterns of mainstream equipment, and bidding should be conducted based on technical specifications. This aspect is less frequently encountered, so it will be briefly covered only ； However, procurement often affects the project schedule. This is especially true for pumps, valves, instruments, and pipe fittings made of special materials. First and foremost, the purchase orders must be accurate; it is advisable to use modular or skid-mounted equipment, as this will simplify the installation process. Yet, the parameters of such skid-mounted equipment (such as explosion protection ratings and types), as well as the instruments, valves, flanges, and the interfaces with the main system, need to be clearly defined. This is similar to the division of responsibilities between the process package supplier and the general contractor, as discussed later. Additionally, the delivery documents for skid-mounted equipment must be detailed; otherwise, it will be difficult to manage, inspect, and replace the vulnerable components. 4. Standardized construction and testing methods, along with a rational arrangement of the construction process based on the arrival of materials on site, to reduce construction costs. From the several project constructions I have been involved in, the management at the construction sites is rather chaotic and falls far short of various standards and requirements. Moreover, delays in the design and procurement of instrumentation, electrical systems, water supply and drainage facilities, as well as heating and ventilation systems, along with issues related to hidden works, cause construction to be postponed. As a result, progress is slow at the beginning, and then people work overtime through the night to catch up, which in turn leads to delays in completion and commissioning of the projects. According to the pipeline index table, which specifies the inspection ratio, the inspection method (ultrasonic, X-ray, or gamma ray) is selected based on the material and wall thickness. 5. Before trial production, it is necessary to conduct thorough tests on the design workload for various specialties, as well as on equipment, instruments, automatic control systems, electrical systems, telecommunications systems, piping installations, heating furnaces, water supply and drainage systems, etc. There are many standards set by CCCC as well as specifications for trial production; these will be discussed in more detail later ； At the same time, operators are required to be able to use the equipment, understand its principles, know how to perform maintenance, diagnose faults, and handle emergencies. In short, to build a system, it is necessary to accurately determine the properties of the raw materials and the environmental conditions, optimize the design of the process routes, parameters, and control schemes, make purchases that offer good cost-effectiveness, carry out construction in a proper manner, conduct thorough tests before commissioning, and ensure that operators have the necessary skills. This involves the owner and designers in defining the requirements, properly designing the process routes and parameters, selecting cost-effective suppliers, ensuring proper construction and installation, conducting tests before operation, and maintaining the system after it goes into use. It involves not only the owner and designers but also purchasers, equipment manufacturers, construction and commissioning staff, and operators. Any issue in one of these areas can trigger a series of problems. Therefore, there is no perfect overall system – only the most suitable one with the best cost-effectiveness. Given the long duration of the project, the involvement of many departments, and the detailed roles assigned to various professionals, timely coordination, repeated verification, and feedback are essential. This leads to various inspections, investigations, reviews, coordinations, and follow-ups. As a result, a strong owner or a capable general contractor is needed to manage the entire project; otherwise, responsibilities will be unclear, leading to conflicts, harm to all parties involved, and no possibility of achieving a win-win situation.
This post was last edited by 328104062 on 2017-2-6 at 14:35. I. Design Section: Processes, Responsibilities, and Standards (A) Preliminary processes: Proposal preparation, plan formulation, feasibility study, utilization of existing assets, project approval, requirements, and feedback. The preliminary stage involves the preparation of project proposals, discussions on plans, and the drafting of feasibility reports; these tasks are carried out through discussions between the project owner (including workshop staff) and design institutes or research organizations, with data provided by those parties. There are specific guidelines for preparing project proposals (regulating their content and depth for chemical construction projects), but these guidelines are less commonly applied to renovated or expanded facilities. The main difficulty in preparing such proposals lies in the estimation of costs, as workshop staff lack experience in handling financial matters. The feasibility study reports are also governed by the \"Regulations on the Content and Depth of Feasibility Study Reports for Chemical Engineering Construction Projects\" and the \"Regulations on the Preparation of Feasibility Study Reports for Petroleum Refining and Chemical Engineering Construction Projects in China\", with the main contents of these regulations being similar. The main differences between a project proposal and a feasibility study report: A. The content and level of detail vary. A project proposal is used for the initial selection of a project; it determines whether further action is necessary, focusing on the necessity and feasibility of the proposed project. A feasibility study requires comprehensive and in-depth technical and economic analysis, comparison of various options, recommendation of the best option, or rejection of the project with proper justification, in order to provide a reliable basis for the final decision. B. The basis for the information varies. Project proposals outline feasible solutions based on the current conditions of the equipment (product quality, energy consumption, etc.), for discussion and decision-making. In addition to using the approved project proposal as a basis for its preparation, a feasibility study report also needs to rely on basic design information (such as the design data provided by the process package provider) and other relevant data. C. The level of complexity and depth varies. Project proposals are required to be simple, qualitative in nature, and not quantitative. The feasibility study report builds upon this foundation by adding more content to make it more comprehensive, with additional quantitative evidence. In short: a project proposal provides preliminary plans, basis, and fundamental data for feasibility studies ； The feasibility study is conducted to compare various mainstream process routes in order to identify the recommended solution; it involves comparing the quantities of major equipment, their layout, the engineering requirements, preliminary investment costs, and benefits. This helps in making decisions regarding project approval, and it also provides a preliminary basis for determining the main design requirements for various specialties. 1. Investigation and preparation of project proposals (Optimization of heat exchange process, ** month, 201*) (1) Identification of problems and investigation recommendations: Lack of operational flexibility and excessive RON loss. Due to various factors – possibly inconsistencies between the operating conditions of the catalysts used (catalysts purchased later) and the design specifications, as indicated in the feasibility study for the renovation – issues were identified in the design of the heat exchange process since operations started in January 201*. As a result, the inlet temperatures of the reactors used in hydrodesulfurization lacked operational flexibility; the inlet temperatures of Reactor 1 and Reactor 2 could not be controlled independently. This led to poor product quality when producing gasoline that meets National IV standards (technical specifications: sulfur content below 50 ppm, octane number loss below 1.0 unit). The actual sulfur content was around 20 ppm, while the octane number loss was quite high (about 1.5 units for FCC gasoline blended with light gasoline). Moreover, the unreasonable heat exchange process caused excessive load on the heating furnaces (the furnace temperature was around 700°C under the initial National IV production plan), resulting in high energy consumption (about 17 kg of standard oil per ton, compared to an average design value of 16 kg per ton; the value for national standard light oil is less than 10 kg per ton). Additionally, the thiol sulfur content remained high (15–20 ppm, whereas the design value is below 10 ppm). The above situations will be more evident in the production plan for National V gasoline. The unreasonable design of the heat exchange process is evident in the failure to make proper use of the temperature rise in the reactor; high-quality heat sources are not utilized through step-by-step heat exchange. The products from Reactor 2 (at 270°C initially) are only exchanged heat with the outlet of P-201 (at 190°C, after which hydrogen is mixed in), within E-201. Currently, all bypass lines of the cooling circuit in E-201 are open, resulting in an inlet temperature of 190°C in Reactor 1. Excessive heat is wasted needlessly in hot water and air cooling. The heat source for the reboiler in the stabilizer T-202 relies entirely on F-201, which leads to an excessive load on F-201. All these factors contribute to high energy consumption in the plant. Given the current conditions of the raw materials, with a total sulfur content of 90–150 ppm (the design value being 200 ppm), the initial temperature in Reactor 1 should be 190°C, resulting in a desulfurization rate of 80%. The inlet temperature of Reactor 2 is 250°C; it cannot be increased any further, as doing so would raise the inlet temperature of Reactor 1 and lead to an increase in octane number loss. Since the inlet temperature of Reactor 2 cannot be increased, its function cannot be fulfilled, and thiols cannot be removed. The current operation screen is shown in the figure below.
This post was last edited by 328104062 on 2017-2-7 at 11:08 (2). For the preparation of the project proposal, it was decided to use **the petrochemical process flow (August 2014)**. On 20-8-6, I submitted the final version of the project proposal to the Planning and Coordination Department. The proposal outlined three options: a. Carry out the modifications entirely in accordance with the **petrochemical process flow**, requiring the addition of a heat exchanger between the outlet of Reactor 1 and the outlet of Reactor 2 (this option was adopted in Option b, which is the E210 system that was eventually implemented)； Modification of the heat source for the stabilizer reboiler and related pipelines (this is not included in option B). This process is the most optimized one known to date, enabling step-by-step utilization of high-temperature thermal energy. Thoroughly solve the problems of high energy consumption, significant loss of octane rating, and high cooler load. The cost estimate using Plan A is around 40 million yuan, which is relatively high. b. The modification was carried out entirely in accordance with the **petrochemical process requirements; it was necessary to add a heat exchanger for heat exchange between the outlet of Reactor 1 and the outlet of Reactor 2 (i.e., E210, which was implemented later), with control valves installed on the high-temperature inlet and outlet pipelines as well as on the bypass lines of this heat exchanger. This scheme can reduce the load on the heating furnace and increase the temperature difference between reactor 2 and the inlet of reactor 1, thereby reducing the load on the subsequent heat exchangers and air coolers; however, its effectiveness is limited. Option 2 results in an estimated cost of around 10 million yuan (70% for equipment purchase, and 15% each for works and other items), and it was approved after review on August 18. c. Not adopted; omitted here. Summary: In preparing a project proposal, in addition to identifying the problems, it is also necessary to propose feasible solutions. Due to differences in funding and scope of work, it is advisable to present multiple viable options, so that the most appropriate one can be selected based on actual conditions (funding and scope of work). The difficulty lies in the funding estimate; it is better to have a somewhat higher estimate to facilitate subsequent feasibility studies and cost estimates. After the proposal is completed, it is also necessary to consider the potential negative effects of the modifications. For example, in order to save energy by reducing the energy consumption of the equipment and increasing the temperature of the feed entering the tower (feed at the bubble point), it is necessary to determine whether the feed location in the tower needs to be modified and whether the load on the tower top cooler needs to be increased ； To prevent freezing of the pumps on site, a pump house was added; therefore, it is necessary to take into account all possible issues such as whether the fire separation requirements and explosion protection standards are met, as well as whether the fire resistance rating of the color steel panels (some of which have foam filling inside) is sufficient. New problems that may arise should be kept under control within feasible limits. 2. Plan design (November 20**) Based on the gasoline specifications for National IV standard after the upgrade by **Petroleum Company** (detailed specifications are omitted here; a plan was developed for upgrading the company’s products to meet National V standards). The specifications regarding aromatics and olefins are similar to those of National V standards, but the sulfur content differs significantly. It may be difficult to meet National V standards by adjusting the operations of the production facilities; therefore, technical upgrades are necessary to achieve this upgrading of vehicle fuel to meet National V standards. The issues related to total sulfur and hydrogen sources that need to be addressed include three aspects: optimization of the heat exchange process, increasing hydrogen sources (hydrogen production, PSA, purchased hydrogen, etc.), and advanced desulfurization of MTBE. (1) Heat exchange process optimization plan: The overall design of the heat exchange process is based primarily on the project proposal, the commission letter issued by the client for the design of this oil upgrading (National V standard) (144032A-Approved 01/01), the basic information of the client’s company, as well as the operating conditions of the catalysts under National V/National IV standards provided by the catalyst manufacturer. It has been explicitly included in this upgrade to National Standard V for petroleum products. Upon review, it was found that there is no heat exchanger mentioned in the project proposal, so this has been reported to the general contractor. Based on the catalyst usage conditions provided by the catalyst manufacturer, the reaction conditions as well as the operating conditions of the heat exchange network and heating furnaces were recalculated; only the heat exchangers for the feed to the hydrodesulfurization reaction and the feed to the pre-hydrogenation fractionator were added (i.e., **106 was implemented). (2) Hydrogen production options: Depending on the source of raw materials (catalytic dry gas, PSA-separated gas, overhead gas from gasoline upgrading distillation columns, as well as pressure and composition), options include purchasing hydrogen from fertilizer plants, installing new membrane separation units, upgrading existing PSA units, or setting up new hydrogen purification systems. These are merely suggested options; the specific choice must be made by the owner after comprehensive consideration. Due to the high costs of membrane separation, and the fact that the recovery rates and operating costs of industrial-scale plants are much higher than those in pilot and laboratory settings, the only option available, given the current layout of the plants, is to opt for a modified PSA approach. Summary: In project construction, the preliminary scheme design is very important. It should be developed in conjunction with the project proposal. Once assigned the task, designers need to understand why the project proposal was written in that way and what key issues need to be addressed before proceeding to create the PFD diagram. The design plan is similar to the foundation of civil engineering; therefore, it needs to be carefully reviewed. Once the plan is finalized, no changes should be made, unless the plan fails to solve the problems, in which case all subsequent tasks carried out by various specialists may have to be repeated. 3. Feasibility study report, review, and project approval (Month **, 201*) The feasibility study report is usually prepared under the leadership of the process engineering team, with contributions from specialists in piping, structure, equipment, instrumentation and automation, as well as those in water supply, electricity, HVAC, and technical economics. It is compiled based on the project proposal, the commissioning letter for this oil upgrading initiative in line with National Standard V, the conditions for using catalysts provided by the catalyst supplier (the Petroleum University), various basic data (I’m not exactly sure what these include; they should cover factors such as climate, hydrology, and geography), as well as the technical documentation provided by the process package suppliers (PSA and membrane separation manufacturers) and compressor manufacturers. (1) Data to be provided by the owner: In addition to information on the basic details of the project, the basic profile of the construction entity, the background of the project, the reasons for its construction, the main supporting conditions, and the sources of funding, the owner must also provide the general contractor with basic data on the site location and natural conditions. These data have been collected as part of the preliminary investigations conducted prior to the project, and they are used primarily in the design work for various specialties. Such data includes: A. Meteorological and geological conditions (required by all specialties): temperature, relative humidity, atmospheric pressure, precipitation, snowfall, evaporation, wind speed and pressure, data on frozen soil, as well as wind direction and wind rose diagrams. The current status of environmental protection (air, surface water, groundwater, noise, the surrounding aquatic environment, etc.), emissions of waste substances and environmental management, as well as the current status of monitoring account for 5.3% of the investments dedicated to environmental protection. B. Engineering geological conditions: topography and geomorphology, as well as engineering geology. C. Basic requirements for the civil structure discipline: engineering geological and hydrogeological conditions, wind pressure, snow load. D. Utility conditions: Water supply and drainage (fire water stations, circulating water, emergency water, etc.) on-site conditions ； Electrical conditions: Power supply (10KV, 1KV, 380V, 220V) details ； Telecommunication conditions: automatic fire detection, video surveillance status. E. Process conditions: source, properties, and quantity of raw materials ； Product nature and requirements. (2) Key contents of the feasibility study report (design responsibilities for various specialties and main engineering quantities) A. Process specialty: Determine the properties of raw materials and products, the main process technologies, energy consumption and investment comparisons, as well as recommended routes and solutions (this is the most important part). Calculate the operating parameters for this process scheme (such as pipeline pressure, temperature, flow rate, and heat), select appropriate control schemes, develop a preliminary layout of the equipment, prepare lists of process equipment, data sheets for pumps and compressors, information on the operating conditions of instruments, preliminary boundary condition tables and pipeline data sheets, as well as details regarding waste discharge, land usage, and technical risks associated with the process equipment. Those that involve other specialties should be reviewed and approved by those respective specialties. Distributed to various specialties. Summary: The choice of solution is primarily determined by the owner based on the results of inspections and personal preferences. The general contractor must clearly explain the advantages and disadvantages of the mainstream processing methods, and recommend the most suitable approach by taking into account the properties of the raw materials and the requirements of the product. This requires the design firm to conduct a comparative analysis of the technical data provided by the process suppliers, while the owner needs to carry out on-site inspections and comparisons; there is no perfect solution – only those that are suitable or not ； The most difficult aspect of the preliminary work is likely the layout of the equipment, similar to the arrangement of system pipe racks and pipelines. There is no perfect solution in this regard – only improvements can be made. Equipment layout takes into account various factors, including the existing layout of equipment, fire safety distances, underground pipelines and cables, as well as process requirements such as pipeline pressure drops, the placement of pipe bridges, and the owner’s management requirements. The layout of the equipment for optimizing the heat exchange process was designed by the design institute (as the site is quite spacious). The layout for the expansion of the PSA unit was planned after consulting with the process package provider (****); after several revisions, the analysis gas compressors were arranged side by side. Due to conflicts with underground infrastructure, the instrument wells and groundwater lines were rearranged during the detailed design and construction phases. For those elements that could not be modified, a compromise was reached by choosing between what was \"required\" and what was \"recommended\", and more details will be provided later. Other specialties carry out preliminary design based on the requirements of the process specialty, and ultimately an estimate is determined based on the volume of work: B. Piping specialty (process installation specialty): Based on the preliminary layout of equipment and piping lists submitted by the process team, it calculates the process pipelines and the main volume of work (a preliminary estimate). C. Equipment category: The material for the equipment is selected based on the basic requirements specified in the process description (process equipment list, temperature, pressure, heat exchange area, volume, and special corrosive agents such as H2S/H2), resulting in a list of major equipment items from which the engineering quantities can be estimated. D. Automatic control instrumentation specialty: Based on the process PFD, further define the control scheme, control room layout, main monitoring and control methods, power supply and grounding arrangements, as well as instrument selection (explosion protection rating, preferred types). The main workload needs to be determined through consultation with the process package provider; at this stage, only the basic specifications of the instruments can be identified from the PFD, while detailed specifications are not yet available. Estimates for air supply and power supply are required (air supply is estimated at 2 NM3/h per valve). Furthermore, an inspection was conducted to verify the reuse of existing components such as mounting brackets, power supplies, power cabinets, and grounding systems in the on-site cabinet room. Estimate the additional instruments, cards, power supplies, etc. E. Water supply and drainage: Based on the floor plan and pipe list, a preliminary layout of the water supply, drainage, and fire protection pipelines is created to formulate a water supply and drainage cost estimate. F. Electrical Engineering: The power consumption level and load are calculated based on the data sheets of mechanical equipment such as pumps and compressors provided by the process design; meanwhile, the additional power supply and distribution loads and corresponding plans are developed taking into account the existing power supply and distribution setup (the layout of existing distribution rooms and their loads, as well as the arrangement of existing high- and low-voltage switchgear). And determine whether the capacity of the existing substation can meet the requirements. It also explains the classification of the explosion area, cable laying, lighting, lightning and static electricity protection grounding, as well as the selection of main cables, and estimates the additional equipment and workload required in the electrical field. G. Telecommunications specialty: It mainly covers the automatic fire alarm system and video surveillance system. New equipment to be added (such as cameras, flame detectors, audio-visual alarms, explosion-proof buttons, etc.) is identified based on the equipment layout diagrams. The volume of work for this specialty is estimated by taking into account the existing telecommunications facilities, technical solutions, and relevant standards. H. Civil structure specialty: Based on the geological, hydrological, and atmospheric conditions provided by the client, as well as the key design parameters for this specialty (a service life of 50 years for the structures and foundations, the type of structure and foundation to be used), material selection, and anti-corrosion requirements, the volume of work required for civil and steel structures is estimated by taking into account information such as process equipment lists and layout plans. I. Mechanical engineering: It is not possible to reflect the workload in the feasibility study (as it is already listed in the table of compressor process equipment). J. Cost estimation: Based on the conditions provided by various engineering disciplines regarding the process, these disciplines prepare lists of the main workloads as well as lists of materials and equipment. The cost estimation team then compiles these into estimates for project costs and total investment costs, covering all expenses associated with the entire construction process, including project costs, other fees, contingency funds, and interest on loans during the construction period. There are many regulations regarding the preparation of investment estimates, key parameters for such estimates, and rate requirements; these differ significantly from those in engineering disciplines, so they will not be discussed here for now. (3) Review of the feasibility study report: I have participated in several feasibility study reviews. The main aspects examined include the process technology route (which is generally quite mature), the control schemes and adjustment methods shown in the PFD diagrams, the product design, the layout of equipment (taking practical considerations into account), the estimated investment costs, the boundary condition table (if available; these details will be clarified during the basic design review), waste treatment measures, three-level prevention and control strategies, and the reuse of existing facilities (mainly electrical, instrumentation, and automation systems) in order to reduce investment costs. Reuse of existing assets: It is necessary to assess switchgear and circuit meters (such as current transformers) that can be reused in electrical systems, as well as cards, power supplies, existing terminal blocks, junction boxes, and conduits that can be utilized by instruments. The reuse of on-site instruments and pumps, as well as storage facilities, switches, networks, and telecommunications equipment within the DCS system, along with network devices such as monitors and switches, requires reevaluation in the preliminary design phase. Regarding the review of the investment estimates, due to the limited number of projects I have actually been involved in, I don’t have a strong understanding of the project costs. I am not clear about the costs associated with various components of the project (such as equipment purchases, material costs, installation costs, construction costs, and costs related to instruments and equipment), nor their respective proportions (generally, instruments account for 12–15%). Additionally, I am not familiar with the market prices for raw materials and labor, so I am unable to give an accurate assessment on my own. After the feasibility study review, a response will be provided, resulting in a version of the feasibility study report to be submitted; the investment estimate may increase or decrease as a result. We have increased the figure from 68.72 million to 74.88 million, an increase of 6 million. This increase is mainly due to the addition of two compressors with stepless gas flow regulation capability from Hydorcom, as well as the implementation of a three-level prevention and control system. The feasibility study for the upgrade to National Standard V includes optimizations to the heat exchange process, modifications and expansions to the PSA system, and advanced desulfurization of MTBE; therefore, there might be an additional cost associated with the MTBE desulfurization process. (4) Project initiation and commissioning of the general design (Date: **/**/20**): After the approval of the feasibility study report, it is necessary to initiate the project and determine the sources of funding, loan interest rates, construction timeline, etc. After the project was approved, the client entrusted the main design institute with carrying out the preliminary design and detailed design of the project in accordance with the recommendations outlined in the feasibility study report. However, during the preliminary design phase, all maintenance tasks were incorporated into the National V quality improvement project; they were listed later in the preliminary design, and there were also significant changes to the layout. (5) Standards: Feasibility study reports generally follow the “Regulations for Compiling Feasibility Study Reports for Petrochemical Refining and Chemical Construction Projects in China” (2011 version; an amended 2014 version was released in March 2014), which specify a fixed format and content. The report will outline the main standards to be applied in various fields. The key standards currently in use include:
a. Piping (process installation) standards: “Code for Fire Protection Design of Petrochemical Enterprises” GB50160-2008, “Code for Design of Electrical Installations in Explosive Environments” GB50058-2014, “Code for Layout Design of Petrochemical Process Units” SH3011-2011, “Code for Selection of Materials for Petrochemical Piping” SH/T3059-2012.
b. Equipment (and piping) standards: “Regulations for Safety Supervision of Fixed Pressure Vessels” TSG R0004-2009, “Pressure Vessels” GB150.1~150.4-2011, “Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers” GB151-1999, “Steel Plates for Boilers and Pressure Vessels” along with its amendments GB713-2008, “Seamless Steel Tubes for Transporting Fluids” GB/T8163-2008, “Explosion-Welded Composite Plates for Pressure Vessels” NB/T47002.1～47002.4-2009, “Stainless Steel Plates and Strips for Pressure-Vessel Applications” GB24511-2009, “Stainless Steel Seamless Tubes for Boilers and Heat Exchangers” GB13296-2007, “Coating and Transportation Packaging for Pressure Vessels” JB/T4711-2003, “Forgings of Carbon and Alloy Steels for Pressure-Vessel Applications” NB/T47008-2010, “Forgings of Stainless and Heat-Resistant Steels for Pressure-Vessel Applications” NB/T47010-2010, “Horizontal Vessels” NB/T47042-2014, “Technical Specifications for Insulation of Petrochemical Equipment and Piping” SH/T3010-2013, “Technical Specifications for Anti-Corrosion Coatings on Petrochemical Equipment and Piping” SH/T 3022-2011.
c. Automation and instrumentation field (covering both processes and piping): “Code for Selection and Design of Automation Instruments in Petrochemical Industries” SH3005-1999, “Code for Fire Protection Design of Petrochemical Enterprises” GB50160-2008, “Code for Design of Electrical Installations in Explosive Environments” GB50058-2014, “Code for Design of Detection and Alarm Systems for Flammable and Toxic Gases in Petrochemical Industries” GB50493-2009, “Code for Design of Distributed Control Systems in Petrochemical Industries” SH/T3092-2013, “Code for Power Supply Design of Instruments in Petrochemical Industries” SH/T 3082-2003, “Code for Grounding Design of Instruments in Petrochemical Industries” SH/T 3081-2003, “Code for Gas Supply Design of Instruments in Petrochemical Industries” SH/T3020-2013, “Code for Pipeline Layout Design of Instruments in Petrochemical Industries” SH/T 3019-2003, “Code for Heating and Insulation Design of Instruments and Piping in Petrochemical Industries” SH/T3126-2013, “Code for Installation Design of Instruments in Petrochemical Industries” SH/T3104-2013.
d. Water supply and drainage field: “Code for Design of Outdoor Drainage Systems” (2014 version) GB50014-2006, “Code for Design of Water Supply and Drainage Pipelines in Petrochemical Industries” SH3034-2012, “Code for Design of Water Supply and Drainage Systems in Petrochemical Enterprises” SH3015-2003, “Technical Requirements for Prevention and Control of Water Pollution in Emergency Situations” Q/SY1190-2009.
e. Electrical field: GB50053-2013 “Code for Design of Substations up to 20 kV”, GB50052-2009 “Code for Design of Power Supply and Distribution Systems”, GB50054-2011 “Code for Design of Low-Voltage Power Distribution Systems”, GB50127-2007 “Code for Design of Cables in Electrical Engineering”, GB50055-2011 “Code for Design of Power Distribution for General Electrical Equipment”, GB50058-2014 “Code for Design of Electrical Installations in Explosive Environments”, GB50057-2010 “Code for Lightning Protection Design of Buildings”, GB50650-2011 “Code for Lightning Protection Design of Petrochemical Facilities”, GB/T50065-2011 “Code for Grounding Design of AC Electrical Installations”, SH3038-2000 “Technical Specifications for Electrical Design of Production Units in Petrochemical Enterprises”, SH3097-2000 “Code for Electrostatic Grounding Design in Petrochemical Industries”.
f. Telecommunications field: “Code for Fire Protection Design of Petrochemical Enterprises” GB50160-2008, “Code for Design of Automatic Fire Alarm Systems” GB50116-2013, “Code for Telecommunications Design of Petrochemical Facilities” SH/T 3028-2007, “Code for Telecommunications Design of Petrochemical Enterprises” SH/T3153－2007.
g. Comprehensive aspects: Standards and regulations related to energy conservation, water conservation, fire protection, solid waste management, and environmental protection – details are omitted here.
Summary: Standards and regulations merely provide a framework for design; the best design is one that suits the actual conditions on site. On-site installations must comply with the standards set at the time of design (whether they relate to product quality or fire safety standards). As demands for safety and environmental protection increase, design standards and regulations are continuously being updated. Therefore, it is advisable to use the latest standards at the beginning of the design process, or to go slightly ahead based on actual conditions, in order to avoid the need for modifications right after the facility starts operating. In various reviews, the assessment of standard timeliness has always been a weak point for owners; due to the different levels of involvement, few owners take part in the updating and reissuance of standards, so it is necessary for design institutes or overall project management agencies to ensure proper oversight in this regard. (6) The selection of standards needs to be checked against the acceptance specifications. There are also discrepancies among the standards; for example, regarding the pressure used for testing, it is not clear whether it should be based on the top or bottom of the container. As for the number of pressure gauges to be used during testing, and which reading should be taken as the reference, different opinions exist in the standards. Therefore, a decision can only be made after consulting with the client based on the actual circumstances. The selection of combustible gas detectors/toxic gas detectors is determined in accordance with fire safety standards such as 50016/50160, or toxic substance standards like GB5044 and GBZ230. To minimize risks, it is generally advisable to follow the stricter standard among those available ； The specifications for equipment use are generally based on national standards, which will be covered in the section on commissioning. Generally, corporate standards are stricter than industry standards and also stricter than **standards. When there are conflicts between these standards, the strictest one applies. Such conflicts actually provide greater flexibility in design, but they cause difficulties in auditing and acceptance processes. It is best for the standards used for auditing and acceptance to be consistent with those used in design – in other words, the design should correspond to the actual requirements. Therefore, it is also necessary to be familiar with the acceptance criteria; otherwise, the designed product cannot be put into production. The general contractor often only knows the design specifications and is not familiar with the acceptance criteria, while the client also has a limited understanding of both the design standards and the acceptance criteria, which leads to problems during the final acceptance phase.
a. Piping (process installation) standards: “Code for Fire Protection Design of Petrochemical Enterprises” GB50160-2008, “Code for Design of Electrical Installations in Explosive Environments” GB50058-2014, “Code for Layout Design of Petrochemical Process Units” SH3011-2011, “Code for Selection of Materials for Petrochemical Piping” SH/T3059-2012.
b. Equipment (and piping) standards: “Regulations for Safety Supervision of Fixed Pressure Vessels” TSG R0004-2009, “Pressure Vessels” GB150.1~150.4-2011, “Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers” GB151-1999, “Steel Plates for Boilers and Pressure Vessels” along with its amendments GB713-2008, “Seamless Steel Tubes for Transporting Fluids” GB/T8163-2008, “Explosion-Welded Composite Plates for Pressure Vessels” NB/T47002.1～47002.4-2009, “Stainless Steel Plates and Strips for Pressure-Vessel Applications” GB24511-2009, “Stainless Steel Seamless Tubes for Boilers and Heat Exchangers” GB13296-2007, “Coating and Transportation Packaging for Pressure Vessels” JB/T4711-2003, “Forgings of Carbon and Alloy Steels for Pressure-Vessel Applications” NB/T47008-2010, “Forgings of Stainless and Heat-Resistant Steels for Pressure-Vessel Applications” NB/T47010-2010, “Horizontal Vessels” NB/T47042-2014, “Technical Specifications for Insulation of Petrochemical Equipment and Piping” SH/T3010-2013, “Technical Specifications for Anti-Corrosion Coatings on Petrochemical Equipment and Piping” SH/T 3022-2011.
c. Automation and instrumentation field (covering both processes and piping): “Code for Selection and Design of Automation Instruments in Petrochemical Industries” SH3005-1999, “Code for Fire Protection Design of Petrochemical Enterprises” GB50160-2008, “Code for Design of Electrical Installations in Explosive Environments” GB50058-2014, “Code for Design of Detection and Alarm Systems for Flammable and Toxic Gases in Petrochemical Industries” GB50493-2009, “Code for Design of Distributed Control Systems in Petrochemical Industries” SH/T3092-2013, “Code for Power Supply Design of Instruments in Petrochemical Industries” SH/T 3082-2003, “Code for Grounding Design of Instruments in Petrochemical Industries” SH/T 3081-2003, “Code for Gas Supply Design of Instruments in Petrochemical Industries” SH/T3020-2013, “Code for Pipeline Layout Design of Instruments in Petrochemical Industries” SH/T 3019-2003, “Code for Heating and Insulation Design of Instruments and Piping in Petrochemical Industries” SH/T3126-2013, “Code for Installation Design of Instruments in Petrochemical Industries” SH/T3104-2013.
d. Water supply and drainage field: “Code for Design of Outdoor Drainage Systems” (2014 version) GB50014-2006, “Code for Design of Water Supply and Drainage Pipelines in Petrochemical Industries” SH3034-2012, “Code for Design of Water Supply and Drainage Systems in Petrochemical Enterprises” SH3015-2003, “Technical Requirements for Prevention and Control of Water Pollution in Emergency Situations” Q/SY1190-2009.
e. Electrical field: GB50053-2013 “Code for Design of Substations up to 20 kV”, GB50052-2009 “Code for Design of Power Supply and Distribution Systems”, GB50054-2011 “Code for Design of Low-Voltage Power Distribution Systems”, GB50127-2007 “Code for Design of Cables in Electrical Engineering”, GB50055-2011 “Code for Design of Power Distribution for General Electrical Equipment”, GB50058-2014 “Code for Design of Electrical Installations in Explosive Environments”, GB50057-2010 “Code for Lightning Protection Design of Buildings”, GB50650-2011 “Code for Lightning Protection Design of Petrochemical Facilities”, GB/T50065-2011 “Code for Grounding Design of AC Electrical Installations”, SH3038-2000 “Technical Specifications for Electrical Design of Production Units in Petrochemical Enterprises”, SH3097-2000 “Code for Electrostatic Grounding Design in Petrochemical Industries”.
f. Telecommunications field: “Code for Fire Protection Design of Petrochemical Enterprises” GB50160-2008, “Code for Design of Automatic Fire Alarm Systems” GB50116-2013, “Code for Telecommunications Design of Petrochemical Facilities” SH/T 3028-2007, “Code for Telecommunications Design of Petrochemical Enterprises” SH/T3153－2007.
g. Comprehensive aspects: Standards and regulations related to energy conservation, water conservation, fire protection, solid waste management, and environmental protection – details are omitted here.
Summary: Standards and regulations merely provide a framework for design; the best design is one that suits the actual conditions on site. On-site installations must comply with the standards set at the time of design (whether they relate to product quality or fire safety standards). As demands for safety and environmental protection increase, design standards and regulations are continuously being updated. Therefore, it is advisable to use the latest standards at the beginning of the design process, or to go slightly ahead based on actual conditions, in order to avoid the need for modifications right after the facility starts operating. In various reviews, the assessment of standard timeliness has always been a weak point for owners; due to the different levels of involvement, few owners take part in the updating and reissuance of standards, so it is necessary for design institutes or overall project management agencies to ensure proper oversight in this regard. (6) The selection of standards needs to be checked against the acceptance specifications. There are also discrepancies among the standards; for example, regarding the pressure used for testing, it is not clear whether it should be based on the top or bottom of the container. As for the number of pressure gauges to be used during testing, and which reading should be taken as the reference, different opinions exist in the standards. Therefore, a decision can only be made after consulting with the client based on the actual circumstances. The selection of combustible gas detectors/toxic gas detectors is determined in accordance with fire safety standards such as 50016/50160, or toxic substance standards like GB5044 and GBZ230. To minimize risks, it is generally advisable to follow the stricter standard among those available ； The specifications for equipment use are generally based on national standards, which will be covered in the section on commissioning. Generally, corporate standards are stricter than industry standards and also stricter than **standards. When there are conflicts between these standards, the strictest one applies. Such conflicts actually provide greater flexibility in design, but they cause difficulties in auditing and acceptance processes. It is best for the standards used for auditing and acceptance to be consistent with those used in design – in other words, the design should correspond to the actual requirements. Therefore, it is also necessary to be familiar with the acceptance criteria; otherwise, the designed product cannot be put into production. The general contractor often only knows the design specifications and is not familiar with the acceptance criteria, while the client also has a limited understanding of both the design standards and the acceptance criteria, which leads to problems during the final acceptance phase.
(II) Intermediate phase: basic design, division of design tasks, review, and mutual feedback on requirements. After the project is approved, the main process to be used has been determined (PSA for hydrogen recovery); in optimizing the heat exchange process, it is necessary to adjust the amount of catalyst used in order to minimize octane number loss. The quantities and specifications of the main equipment have also been determined, and the layout plan has been preliminarily finalized. As the maintenance projects from 201* were incorporated into this Phase V fuel upgrade, they consist of the following items in sequence: optimization of the heat exchange process for fuel upgrading and final adjustments related to fuel upgrading; final adjustments related to etherification for fuel upgrading; capacity expansion upgrades aimed at increasing hydrogen production during fuel upgrading; further capacity expansion efforts for increasing hydrogen production during fuel upgrading; and MTBE deep desulfurization (1219). In total, there are two project codes: ***0002 (covering fuel upgrading, as well as the capacity expansion upgrades for increasing hydrogen production during fuel upgrading), and ***0003 (covering new construction activities, etc.). January 201*, design follow-up visit ； In March 201*, coordination was carried out for the oil product upgrading and maintenance projects. The general contractor’s office established a site project team in March, and the detailed design for the National V project was divided into two separate projects. This includes the final items and maintenance tasks related to this National IV fuel standard upgrade, such as the installation of above-ground pumps, additional above-ground flare tanks, the addition of samplers, rectification of liquid presence at the compressor inlet, interlock system improvements, the installation of auxiliary control panels in the control room, rectification of the hoses in the heating furnaces, the addition of secondary exhaust lines, raising the covers of instrument and valve chambers, rectification of type A water seal chambers, repositioning of instruments, replacement of orifice plates, installation of heating elements, catalyst regeneration and loading, etc. These are omitted from this text; only the optimization of the heat exchange process and hydrogen recovery are discussed here.
1. Division of tasks with the general contractor and research institute (March 201*) (1) Optimizing the heat exchange process requires the catalyst manufacturer to provide information on the conditions under which the catalyst should be used, including the conditions at the beginning and end of its use, as well as diagrams showing how the catalyst should be installed. Due to the high activity of the catalyst in the original design, which resulted in significant RON losses, during this maintenance work, the volume space velocity of the desulfurization catalyst used in the production of National V gasoline was adjusted from 2.6 h-1 to 3.0 h-1, while the volume space velocity of the other catalyst was adjusted from 1.5 h-1 to 2.0 h-1. As a result, approximately 30 units of the desulfurization catalyst, amounting to about 4.4 tons, as well as about 15.5 tons of catalyst in total, were not used. And the loading diagram was reviewed. (2) Division of responsibilities between the process package provider and the general contractor in hydrogen recovery (first draft, early January 201*). The division of responsibilities is outlined in the technical annex and shall be signed by the owner, the process package provider, and the general contractor. The responsibilities are as follows: The area enclosed by the dashed lines falls within the scope of the process package provider’s responsibilities for the redesign of the equipment; the process package provider is responsible for the design of all equipment, instruments, electrical systems, and process pipelines within this area. Regarding instrument design, the boundary lies at the junction box – the cables from the field instruments to the junction box are designed by the process package provider, while the cables from the junction box to the control room are designed by the general contractor. Cable trays are considered to be within the scope of the general contractor’s responsibilities starting from 1 meter outside the designated area. The hydrogen compressor units added as a result of the capacity expansion, the civil foundations for the desorption gas compressors, the piping systems, electrical equipment, control instruments, and the compressor plant are designed by the designer, while the process package provider provides the design requirements ； The vacuum pumps that are added or reused as a result of the capacity expansion are included within the design scope of the process package provider; the latter is responsible for the process flows related to the vacuum pumps, instrument control, piping design, and the criteria for selecting the vacuum pumps. The design volume for each specialty is omitted here. The capacity expansion and modification design work to be carried out by the designer are as follows: 1) Power supply for instruments throughout the installation (cable trays outside the installation area, cables from the control room to the field instruments) ； 2) Extended design and selection of control systems and control room instruments ； 3) New process and utility pipelines outside the equipment boundary area (including insulation and heat tracing) ； 4) Addition of designs for various disciplines related to compressors ； 5) All electrical design ； 6) Fire protection design of the entire installation ； 7) Design modification of the vacuum pump foundation for the original 8-tower VPSA unit ； 8) Addition of the design for the civil foundation of the 8-tower VPSA unit ； 9) Improve the design of the primary prevention and control system as well as underground pipeline facilities ； 10) The compressor requires monitoring parameters, control circuits, safety interlocks, etc., to be integrated into the DCS system (to be coordinated by the process package provider) ； 11) As-built drawings of the complete plant (for disciplines such as process, equipment, automatic control instruments, electrical systems, piping, civil engineering, fire protection, etc.).
2. Determination, arrangement, purging, service life, and fire/explosion prevention of process design parameters (1) Determination of process design parameters: The common parameters include pressure, temperature, and material level (liquid level). Generally, a liquid level of 50% in the control system is considered optimal; the specific design for the liquid level should be carried out in accordance with HG-20570.8 (which applies mainly to gas-liquid separators and raw material tanks), while SH3007 is primarily used for storage tanks and intermediate raw material tanks. Design pressure and temperature for equipment and pipelines: The design pressure and design temperature should be determined by referring to the maximum allowable values. The relevant standards include HG-20570.1, GB150 (for containers), SH3059, SH3074, and GB50316. The contents of these standards are similar, but there are also differences among them. In oil refining, SH-3059 and GB50316 are more commonly used. The determination of design pressure is based on the operating pressure. So what is operating pressure? The Safety Technical Inspection Regulations for Fixed Pressure Vessels stipulate that working pressure refers to the highest pressure (gauge pressure) that the top of a pressure vessel may reach under normal operating conditions. The design temperature of a device (HG20570.1) refers to the temperature reached by the material of the device under normal operating conditions, corresponding to the highest pressure it experiences. Note here that it is the temperature of the material, not the temperature of the medium inside the device. It shall be implemented in accordance with the methods specified in 20570.1 for determining the design pressure and design temperature of equipment and piping systems: \"The process system discipline is responsible for determining the design pressure of vessels, towers, and heat exchangers.\" This method is basically consistent with that specified in GB150, except that it takes various operating conditions into full consideration from a process perspective. SH3121: When determining the maximum operating pressure and the maximum or minimum operating temperature, various operating conditions such as normal operation, start-up and shutdown, regeneration, changes in feed to the unit, and potential fluctuations in the actual operational data of the plant must be taken into account (e.g., the sulfidation temperature of pre-hydrogenation is 320, while the normal operating temperature is 110) ； When the maximum operating pressure and the maximum operating temperature do not occur under the same operating condition, all combinations of the maximum operating conditions should not be used together to determine the design conditions. Moreover, the maximum operating pressure and temperature should be selected based on the pressure source and different parts of the equipment. It means that pressure drop and temperature rise/fall should be considered. Maximum operating pressure: According to SH3074, the operating pressure (i.e., the maximum operating pressure specified herein) refers to the highest pressure that may be reached at the top of the container during normal operation (expressed as gauge pressure). Maximum operating pressure of a pressure vessel: refers to the highest pressure that may occur at the top of the vessel during normal operation. Maximum operating pressure of the vacuum vessel: refers to the highest degree of vacuum that may occur at the top of the vessel during normal operation. Maximum operating pressure of a pressure vessel: refers to the maximum difference between internal and external pressures that may occur at the top of the vessel during normal operation. Maximum (or minimum) operating temperature: refers to the highest (or lowest) metal temperature that the metal components of the container may reach during normal operation. Determination of the maximum (or minimum) operating temperature of the equipment: When heat transfer calculations or actual measurements are not possible, the normal operating temperature of the medium during normal operation is increased (or decreased) by a certain margin to determine the maximum (or minimum) operating temperature of the equipment. When the medium inside the equipment is directly heated by steam or indirectly heated by built-in heating elements (such as heating coils, electric heating elements, etc.), the maximum operating temperature is taken as the highest temperature of the medium during normal operation. When different parts of the equipment may reach different temperatures during operation, the corresponding maximum (or minimum) operating temperature should be selected based on those temperatures of each part, along with recommended partitioning points. The detailed selection criteria (provided by the general contractor’s institute) can be found in the guidelines regarding the determination of the maximum operating pressure and maximum (or minimum) operating temperature of the equipment, as well as the specified design pressure and design temperature for the process pipelines of the installation; these standards are repeated here, so no further details are given. For this project, the operating pressure during adsorption is between -0.08 and 0.5 MPa, with the maximum operating pressure reaching 0.6 MPa; therefore, the set pressure for the safety valves of the adsorption tower, the raw gas liquid separation tank, and the mixing tank is 0.78 MPa (corresponding to the design pressure of the containers) ； The normal operating pressure of the gas buffer tank is 0.02 MPa, and its maximum operating pressure is 0.2 MPa; therefore, the set pressure of the safety valve is 0.38 MPa (which corresponds to the design pressure of the container).
This post was last edited by 328104062 on 2017-2-6 at 14:59 (2). Fire classification, fire protection, and detection for devices. Fire protection is mentioned first because it is a mandatory requirement; specialties such as piping (process installation) and general layout design will not compromise on this, and this was evident in this project. The fire protection codes include the \"Code for Fire Protection Design of Petrochemical Enterprises\" GB50160, the \"Code for Design of Electrical Installations in Explosive Environments\" GB50058, the \"Code for Fire Protection Design of Buildings\" GB50016, and the \"Technical Code for Fire Protection of Steel Structures in Petrochemical Industries\" SH/T3137 ； These all relate to licenses for safe production, and they will be discussed in detail in the laws and regulations prior to commissioning. The installation of combustible and toxic gas detectors can follow GB50493; there are no specific petrochemical standards, which will be discussed later. A. First, let’s discuss the classification of fires (process engineering). Only with the classification of fires can fire separation distances and fire resistance ratings be determined; only then can fire resistance limits be established, and regulations regarding fire protection materials and their thicknesses can be set. Refer to GB50016-2014 (the latest version of the Building Code) and the Code for Fire Protection Design of Petrochemical Enterprises GB50160. According to building codes: gases with Class A fire hazard include gasoline and hydrogen ； Category B includes kerosene and light diesel ； Category C includes heavy diesel, circulating oil, etc. The fire hazard associated with storage is omitted here. According to the Petrochemical Regulations (50160), classification is not based on production and storage methods but rather on the physical state of the substances – flammable gases, liquefied hydrocarbons, flammable liquids, and flammable solids (similar to 50016). The Petrochemical Regulations provide the following classification for fire hazards; examples are given below. The classifications outlined in these two sets of regulations are not contradictory, with the Petrochemical Regulations offering more detailed examples.
B. Fire resistance and fire protection (architecture and structural engineering): Code 50016 specifies the fire resistance rating of factories (warehouses) as well as the fire resistance limits of their components. Code 50160 does not provide any regulations in this regard; it is necessary to refer to Code 50016 instead. Typical oil refining plants use open or semi-enclosed structures, primarily constructed of steel; therefore, the fire protection regulations SH3137 for steel structures are applied here. In this preliminary design and detailed design, the protection range of fire-resistant coatings for steel structures is generally more than 4.5 meters; for facilities with air cooling or compressor rooms, this range is required to be more than 10 meters. The fire protection requirements are as follows: the fire separation distances and areas are specified in standard 50016 (which seems to apply mainly to warehouses and buildings), and it outlines the maximum allowable building area based on the number of floors in such facilities. Standard GB50160 for the petrochemical industry is easier to understand. GB50016 divides fire separation distances into four parts: area planning (used for selecting geographical locations and planning the overall layout), process units and systems (used for arranging devices among themselves and within them), storage and transportation systems, and docks. The fire separation distances specified in the preliminary design and detailed design are all in accordance with standard 50016: for example, the distance between the gasoline heat exchanger and the heating furnace is greater than 15 meters, while the distances for the compressor sheds are 18 meters and 11.8 meters (the standard requires a distance of more than 9 meters). Summary: In general, as long as it is required by the building codes, one should follow the requirements set out in Code 50016. Since the organizing bodies behind these building codes are the ***Fire Research Institute and the **Public Security Fire Brigade, I assume that in most cases, inspections are carried out in accordance with these building codes. For those aspects not specified in the building codes (such as the required thickness of fireproof coating), the Petrochemical Industry Standards and Standard 3137 can be used as references.
B. Fire resistance and fire protection (architecture and structural engineering): Code 50016 specifies the fire resistance rating of factories (warehouses) as well as the fire resistance limits of their components. Code 50160 does not provide any regulations in this regard; it is necessary to refer to Code 50016 instead. Typical oil refining plants use open or semi-enclosed structures, primarily constructed of steel; therefore, the fire protection regulations SH3137 for steel structures are applied here. In this preliminary design and detailed design, the protection range of fire-resistant coatings for steel structures is generally more than 4.5 meters; for facilities with air cooling or compressor rooms, this range is required to be more than 10 meters. The fire protection requirements are as follows: the fire separation distances and areas are specified in standard 50016 (which seems to apply mainly to warehouses and buildings), and it outlines the maximum allowable building area based on the number of floors in such facilities. Standard GB50160 for the petrochemical industry is easier to understand. GB50016 divides fire separation distances into four parts: area planning (used for selecting geographical locations and planning the overall layout), process units and systems (used for arranging devices among themselves and within them), storage and transportation systems, and docks. The fire separation distances specified in the preliminary design and detailed design are all in accordance with standard 50016: for example, the distance between the gasoline heat exchanger and the heating furnace is greater than 15 meters, while the distances for the compressor sheds are 18 meters and 11.8 meters (the standard requires a distance of more than 9 meters). Summary: In general, as long as it is required by the building codes, one should follow the requirements set out in Code 50016. Since the organizing bodies behind these building codes are the ***Fire Research Institute and the **Public Security Fire Brigade, I assume that in most cases, inspections are carried out in accordance with these building codes. For those aspects not specified in the building codes (such as the required thickness of fireproof coating), the Petrochemical Industry Standards and Standard 3137 can be used as references.
C. Escape routes (structural and general layout aspects): In the event of a fire, it is necessary to have ways to escape, which is also referred to as safe evacuation. GB50016 (Building Code) specifies the number and distance of safety exits: this requirement dictates that if there are more than 2 steel structure platforms within the facility, such as those for air cooling, support structures, combined platforms for towers, and entrance/exit areas, the distance between these platforms should not exceed 30 meters; if the distance is greater than 30 meters, then 3 safety exits must be provided. The minimum clear width of evacuation stairs is greater than 1.1 m, the clear width of corridors is greater than 1.4 m, and the minimum clear widths of doors are 0.9 m and 1.2 m.
D. Fire alarm and response (telecommunications specialty): Automatic fire alarms and fire control rooms are covered in both Code for Building Design 8.4 and GB50116; there is no specific regulation for the petrochemical industry. The existing systems mainly consist of these elements, and they can be integrated with fire control rooms: