Knowledge dissemination for the pre-commissioning and commissioning phases-1
Thread Content
This post was last edited by houzh2004 on 2011-5-23 00:02. When working on projects, I’ve noticed that those working in chemical manufacturing companies are not very clear about the classification of stages and the definitions related to testing. When trying to find relevant standards, I found that the language used is rather dull. In order to help chemical industry professionals gain a better understanding of testing processes, I’ve taken the liberty of sharing my humble opinions in my free time; please feel free to discuss any mistakes or inaccuracies. Let’s get started officially: The chemical industry belongs to the process industry. What is the process industry? Simply put, it involves putting raw materials into production, going through a series of various chemical or physical changes, and then obtaining a product. Someone asked me whether coal mines belong to the category of process industries. I can tell you with certainty: NO. It’s simple – no raw materials need to be invested, as all that needs to be done is to extract coal from underground. (The knowledge on trial runs provided in this post is intended for the process industry; it is only for reference for those working in industries other than the process industry. ) When the new People’s Republic of China was first established, there was little to nothing available; everything had to be learned from the foreigners*. As a result, concepts such as trial operation and pre-trial operation were introduced. Joint trial operation is not mentioned here, as I have not found any information about it in foreign sources; therefore, I believe that joint trial operation is an indigenous concept. If we really want to find a corresponding term abroad, perhaps cold commissioning could serve as an equivalent for it in China. In the Specifications for Commissioning of Medium and Large-Scale Units in the Chemical Industry (Version 91), chemical industry technical managers are likely familiar with these guidelines. If you are not aware of this specification, that’s okay – the new version is currently under review, so you can simply refer to it in the future. The initial commissioning process is divided into two main stages: pre-commissioning and actual commissioning, with joint commissioning falling under the category of pre-commissioning. But everyone should note that in the new version of the specifications, the linked testing attempts to break away from the preliminary testing and conspire to join the main testing process. The English term for pre-test operation is pre-commissioning. “Pre” means before, and “commission” refers to the act of bringing together various teams to carry out work; test operations require the involvement of different specialists, so “commission” denotes test operations. Pre-commissioning therefore refers to all the tasks that are carried out before the actual test operation, and Chinese experts translated this concept as Preliminary test run. Do everyone understand? The pre-test run is a phase within the preparation stage for testing; don’t get confused just because it involves the word “testing”. Since the pre-commissioning phase encompasses all the work done before actual commissioning, what is then commissioning? The starting point of the commissioning phase is when the plant begins to receive real materials; it is at this point that commissioning begins. However, in the 1991 version of the standards, the pretreatment of catalysts was also included under the pre-commissioning phase – tasks such as pre-wetting and reduction of hydrogenation catalysts before feeding them in. In fact, it is unreasonable to categorize catalyst pretreatment in such a forced manner under pre-commissioning, as both the pretreatment of catalysts and the subsequent operations take place sequentially in terms of time and practical execution; therefore, once feeding begins, it can be considered the start of the commissioning process. This approach is also reflected in the newer versions of the standards. The reason why we go into such detail regarding pre-commissioning and commissioning here is mainly due to the signing of contracts, especially those with foreign parties. It is essential to pay close attention to the division of stages. If you ever have the opportunity to sign contracts abroad, do not assume that the methods used for dividing stages during domestic commissioning can be applied to foreign contracts – it will lead to serious consequences. I will give a detailed explanation on the classification of overseas testing
This post was last edited and replied to by houzh2004 on 2011-5-18 at 17:26. Reply 1# houzh2004: As domestic engineering companies expand their operations overseas to undertake turnkey projects, most of these are EPC projects, meaning the work extends until the machinery is completed; a smaller number are EPCC projects (EPCC: engineering, procurement, construction, commissioning), which involve getting the equipment up and running and handing it over to the foreign client after performance tests are completed. Such EPCC contracts also exist in China, as a result of investors from various industries entering this field. Commissioning abroad is generally divided into: pre-commissioning, commissioning (commissioning with feedstock, trial operation, performance testing), and commercial operation. The completion of the pre-commissioning phase marks the completion of the mechanical installation, which falls under the scope of construction work ； Commissioning includes chemical feeding commissioning, trial operation, and performance testing. Please note that when it comes to the concept of trial operation, in China this term is used as a generic label – almost anything can be referred to as a trial operation. However, abroad, trial operation generally refers to the period from when a product is deemed qualified until performance testing begins. The classification method mentioned above is a common one; if foreign clients are familiar with it, they will generally use this approach for classification. However, there are exceptions as well, where the definitions of various stages are poorly formulated, and this situation stems from problems with the contract template. Currently, when signing contracts internationally, I have seen two versions: one based on the FIDIC format and the other based on the ICHEM Red Book general contract terms. Generally speaking, the FIDIC version is not suitable for the process industry, which leads to chaotic arrangements regarding the testing phases; whereas using the ICHEM template results in much clearer structures. I recommend that those who sign contracts with foreign parties take a close look at the ICHEM contract conditions. I originally wanted to explain in detail the definitions of pre-test drives and actual test drives, but that would require too much time. Additionally, I felt that people weren’t very interested in this topic, so I’ll stop here with the explanations. However, I have clarified the principles used to distinguish between test drives conducted domestically and those conducted abroad; I hope this will be useful for your project management. For more in-depth research, please refer to relevant materials on your own. I recommend the following: FIDIC contract conditions, ICEM contract conditions, API 700, IEC-62337, commissioning procedures of well-known Japanese engineering companies (as their procedures are detailed), specifications for commissioning large and medium-sized plants in the chemical industry, Sinopec’s commissioning preparation guidelines, CNPC’s commissioning preparation guidelines, and so on. The key is to be careful when signing contracts with foreign parties to avoid losses; with domestic contracts, even if there are issues, it is still possible to negotiate.
Reply to 2# houzh2004: The EPCC model you mentioned is known internationally as the \"EPC TURNKEY\" model. One of the FIDIC contract texts, the Silver Book – Conditions of Contract for Design, Procurement and Construction (EPC) Turnkey Projects (1999–1) – is specifically designed for industrial projects.
In overseas engineering projects, RFSU (ready for start up), that is, the condition being met to begin operations, serves as an important milestone. The projects of foreign companies do not necessarily use mechanical completion as the milestone. Based on the projects of Shell in the South China Sea, RFSU is generally used as the point of contract handover.
Thank you for your hard work; I really appreciate it! ! !
Reply to 3# Zhi Zhe Ming: The reason why FIDIC forms are widely used in domestic contracts is that a professor at Tsinghua University was the first to translate it into Chinese and introduce it; this established a precedent. Later, the chemical industry also began to use FIDIC. Although it may not be suitable in all cases, since everyone in China uses it, who bothers to scrutinize the contracts closely? In fact, FIDIC is designed for civil engineering and mechanical and electrical engineering, and is not suitable for process industries
Reply 4# cage_zhao: ready for start up (RFSU), also known as ready for commissioning (RFC); they mean the same thing. From this point on, it enters the trial operation phase, whereas before that it was just pre-trial operation. Furthermore, whether it is RFSU or mechanical completion (MC), they are basically the same. MC focuses on the perspective of construction, while RFSU focuses on the perspective of testing. Detailed descriptions of these definitions can be found in API 700 and IEC-62337, including the specific contents included in each stage.
I won’t go into too much detail. If you have any questions, please leave a message and we can discuss them together. Although a lot has been said, in fact, foreign standards also differ in the way they classify various testing stages; therefore, I can’t expect there to be a unified standard. The key is that the definitions in the contract must be clear, and everything should be based on those definitions.
I won’t go into too much detail. If you have any questions, please leave a message and we can discuss them together. Although a lot has been said, in fact, foreign standards also differ in the way they classify various testing stages; therefore, I can’t expect there to be a unified standard. The key is that the definitions in the contract must be clear, and everything should be based on those definitions.
Reply to 6# houzh2004: FIDIC is regarded as the “bible of the international civil engineering industry, and a universal language”. The use of FIDIC contract conditions emerged with the arrival of international loans from institutions such as the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank in China, and it was first applied in industries such as infrastructure, public works, and hydropower. Moreover, all contracts awarded through international bidding or those signed with international contractors must be drafted under FIDIC contracts. In recent years, with the opening up of the Chinese market and the increasing internationalization of engineering projects, China’s engineering construction projects are gradually adopting scientific, fair, and rigorous contract terms in line with international practices. The \"Model Text for EPC Contracts\" (draft for comments) issued by the National Development and Reform Commission in 2009 was China’s first model contract text applicable to EPC projects, similar to the FIDIC conditions. Currently, there are some inequalities in China’s engineering industry; in particular, regarding the contract terms drafted by the clients, favorable terms are retained, or unreasonable requirements are added, while the terms imposing obligations are kept to a minimum. The owner holds a position far higher than that of the contractor, whereas the FIDIC clauses impose constraints on both the owner and the contractor, giving them equal status. In fact, those who have used the FIDIC contract terms know that for contracts signed under these conditions, both parties will cooperate actively during the project’s execution, which reduces many unnecessary complications and is highly beneficial to the smooth progress of the project.
This post was last edited by houzh2004 on 2011-5-19 at 11:04. What Brother Zhi said is absolutely correct; I also think that the FIDIC contracts are excellent. As you mentioned in your post, FIDIC is considered the bible of the construction industry. What I mean is that FIDIC is not suitable for the process industry. Furthermore, I disagree with the statement that \"all contracts awarded through international bidding or those signed with international contractors must be concluded under FIDIC contracts.\" This may be the case in the civil engineering industry, but it is different in the process industry. The chemical plant construction contracts prepared by foreign professional consulting firms that I have seen are based on ICHEM’s Red Book. However, I have also seen another foreign EPCC contract in which a Chinese company served as the general contractor; that contract used the FIDIC version. Since the provisions of FIDIC do not meet the needs of the process industry, the contract was poorly drafted, with contradictions even in the definitions. Later I found out that this contract was drafted by a Chinese company. In China, only FIDIC is known, while ICHEM is unknown. In addition, there are several internationally renowned contract versions that are also widely used, though they have not been introduced in the domestic market. I hope everyone will learn more about ichem, and I hope that ichem can be applied in China’s process industries.