Contents of the process package review
Thread Content
As the owner, what exactly needs to be reviewed for the process package? I’m a newcomer; I’ve never participated in something like this before, so I don’t know where to start. I took a quick look at the specifications in Sinopec’s process package, and it seems that the content outlined in those specifications differs significantly from that of the actual process package used for review. According to Sinopec’s regulations, there are too many things missing in this process package. Briefly speaking, this domestic small process package – the description of its working principle is very simple, just two pages. The description of the production process is also very simple; it’s only given a brief overview, and some minor steps are simply omitted. (Ps: Should the process description not be detailed according to the PID diagram of the equipment?) This includes parameters such as normal temperature, pressure, and flow rate. If we don’t discuss these, learning about PID control diagrams becomes very difficult – it’s all about guessing, estimating, and figuring out that it might be done this way. ) The material balance sheet is also a balance shown in a simple box diagram; it is by no means the material balance of a PFD. These are the main issues I see, and some data sheets are also not detailed, such as the lack of an alarm interlock table. Compressor data sheets, vacuum pump data sheets, data sheets for instruments and valves, etc. (including safety valves, towers, vessels, heat exchangers, etc.) I would like to ask everyone about the types of questions and comments that the owner can raise during the process package review. If you don’t understand, you can ask too, right?
This isn’t even a process package – it’s not even considered a data package. I’ve encountered this situation too; it’s extremely frustrating when people treat the laboratory parameters and procedures as if they were process packages, and on top of that, the experimental data isn’t complete~~~~
This post was last edited by innovate1989 on 2016-2-15 at 19:43. In fact, the original poster has already made it clear that a standard process package should include a process design description (covering aspects such as the process principles, selection of main equipment, requirements for utility systems, and environmental protection), a Process Flow Diagram (PFD), a Process Instrumentation Diagram (PID), material balance sheets, suggested equipment layout diagrams, equipment data sheets (for containers, heat exchangers, towers), safety valve data sheets, instrument specifications, and so on. Having these elements constitutes a process package with sufficient depth for detailed design. Of course, different companies may vary; what I’ve listed are the basic aspects, which the original poster can use as a reference.
Agree with the second-floor view. The package you described is, at best, a preliminary data package that provides no guidance for the basic design.
I have been involved in the process package review for Daqing Petrochemical; our documents were prepared in accordance with Sinopec’s standards, including procedures, instructions, and data sheets. Therefore, the experts who reviewed us examined the contents of our process package from aspects such as technology, equipment, instruments, and safety, identified any errors or unreasonable elements in it, and provided various suggestions and recommendations. You can tell them directly in that review that the process package documents were not prepared in accordance with Sinopec’s requirements, and ask them to redo them. There should be an agreement between you regarding which standards to use for producing the documents and when they need to be delivered.
Based on past experience, the review of process packages should be carried out through specialized discussions, such as those related to process design, equipment, safety, occupational health, automatic control, telecommunications, etc. The process team serves as the core group responsible for reviewing the process flow, ensuring that the main route is correct; other relevant specialists then assist in this review process. The review of a process package is a team effort, and much can be learned throughout this process. Although disagreements may arise from time to time, the process of exchanging ideas is itself a form of innovation. Many issues that were not considered can also be brought up. :'(