Life Cycle of a Process Plant

Life Cycle of a Process Plant

Editors

Mahdi Nouri

Triumph Gas Technology Consulting, LLC, Houston, TX, United States

Eberhard Lucke

Lucke Consulting Technology Services, LLC, Houston, TX, United States

Table of Contents

Cover image

Title page

Copyright

Contributors

Begin with the End in Mind.

Chapter 1. General guidelines and definitions

1.1. Process design

1.2. Gated design process

1.3. Facility siting

1.4. Fabrication and construction terms

1.5. Sustainability

1.6. Lean manufacturing

1.7. CAFE

1.8. NextGen facilities

1.9. Business sectors

1.10. Capital estimate classifications

1.11. Permitting

1.12. Cradle to grave

1.13. Cradle to cradle

1.14. Internet of Things

1.15. Digital Twin

1.16. Other definitions

Chapter 2. Feasibility studies

2.1. Introduction

2.2. The process industries

2.3. The importance of chemistry

2.4. Chemical engineering: an essential skill

2.5. Phase equilibria

2.6. Chemical reactions

2.7. Chemical engineering drawings

2.8. Engineering skills

2.9. Business skills

2.10. Report writing

2.11. Classification of studies

2.12. Project planning studies

2.13. Feasibility

2.14. The feasibility study report

2.15. Pre-FEED work

Chapter 3. Process design

3.1. The role of a FEED package in the definition of the project

3.2. Importance of process design during FEED

3.3. Basis of Design

3.4. Process development

3.5. Role of process engineer during the FEED

Chapter 4. Cost estimating

4.1. Introduction

4.2. Basic concepts for studies

4.3. The engineering stage

4.4. Conceptual design emulation

Appendix A: Estimating gas pipelines and compressor stations

Appendix B: CDE modeling results for a gas plant amine unit

Chapter 5. Fabrication and construction

5.1. Construction management team

5.2. Quality of FEED and work packages

5.3. Procurement and expediting

5.4. Selection of fabrication method

5.5. Selection of construction method

5.6. Mechanical completion

Chapter 6. Commissioning and testing

6.1. Definition of terms

6.2. Testing

Chapter 7. Start-up and performance test

7.1. Readiness for start-up

7.2. Start-up plan and schedule

7.3. Status reporting

7.4. Temporary modifications for start-up

7.5. Material cost control

7.6. Training

7.7. System turnover to operations

7.8. Integrated approach

Chapter 8. Operation, maintenance, and turnarounds

8.1. Operations philosophy

8.2. Operations staffing considerations

8.3. Maintenance philosophy

8.4. Maintenance cost and budgeting

8.5. Turnarounds

Chapter 9. Process plant optimization, debottlenecking, and revamps

9.1. Overall procedure

9.2. Defining the boundaries

9.3. Setting the operating boundaries

9.4. Product values

9.5. Utility costs

9.6. What equipment to choose for initial review?

9.7. Process variables to consider

9.8. Energy optimization

9.9. Flow/capacity optimization

9.10. Financial optimization

9.11. Facilities optimization guideline

Chapter 10. End of plant life

10.1. Plant shutdown

10.2. Tank inventory management

10.3. Environmental considerations

10.4. Disposal or materials

10.5. Reuse

10.6. Repurpose

10.7. Most common mistakes

Chapter 11. Project management in oil and gas

11.1. Introduction

11.2. Project management in oil and gas industry

11.3. Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK)

11.4. Conclusion

Index

Copyright

Elsevier

Radarweg 29, PO Box 211, 1000 AE Amsterdam, Netherlands

The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1GB, United Kingdom

50 Hampshire Street, 5th Floor, Cambridge, MA 02139, United States

Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Details on how to seek permission, further information about the Publisher’s permissions policies and our arrangements with organizations such as the Copyright Clearance Center and the Copyright Licensing Agency, can be found at our website: www.elsevier.com/permissions.

This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by the Publisher (other than as may be noted herein).

Notices

Knowledge and best practice in this field are constantly changing. As new research and experience broaden our understanding, changes in research methods, professional practices, or medical treatment may become necessary.

Practitioners and researchers must always rely on their own experience and knowledge in evaluating and using any information, methods, compounds, or experiments described herein. In using such information or methods they should be mindful of their own safety and the safety of others, including parties for whom they have a professional responsibility.

To the fullest extent of the law, neither the Publisher nor the authors, contributors, or editors, assume any liability for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products, instructions, or ideas contained in the material herein.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN: 978-0-12-813598-3

For information on all Elsevier publications visit our website at https://www.elsevier.com/books-and-journals

Publisher: Jonathan Simpson

Acquisitions Editor: Anita Koch

Editorial Project Manager: Rafael G. Trombaco

Production Project Manager: Vijayaraj Purushothaman

Cover Designer: Miles Hitchen

Typeset by TNQ Technologies

Contributors

Vahid Faghihi,     Construction Science Department, School of Architecture, Prairie View A&M University, Prairie View, TX, United States

Peter G. Kauders,     CDE Projects Ltd, London, United Kingdom

Larry Lilly,     Lilly Consulting, Norman, OK, Unites States

Eberhard Lucke,     Lucke Consulting Technology Services LLC, Houston, TX, United States

Hemawatee Indira Ramroop,     Lucke Consulting Technology Services LLC, Trincity, Trinidad and Tobago, West Indies

Edgar Amaro Ronces

Begin with the End in Mind.

In his book "7 Habits of Highly Effective People," author Stephen R. Covey lists Habit 2 as follows:

Begin with the End in Mind.

These are very simple, yet powerful words. And those who tried to follow this advice know how difficult it is to consistently remind ourselves of what the goal or target of our activities are. Too many times we get caught in the turmoil of day-to-day challenges and activities that require our attention. And too many times we are drawn into details and small tasks that occupy our mind while we are losing sight of the big picture. If we are honest with ourselves, most of the decision making is done under pressure and is mainly driven by short term analysis and by meeting urgent deadlines. And in many cases, this is just what we need to do. We learn standard management techniques and their application, and we get trained to follow procedures and workflows to monitor and steer work outputs that meet the targets we are given. In excel in our daily routines and thrive to become a valuable and productive part of a big team or a company. It is the editor's experience that this can be accomplished a lot better when we have an understanding of how our work fits into the work of others and how it impacts the performance of the whole team or company, in a positive as well as negative way.

This book is not about good management. This book is about leadership. Habit 2 reflects the philosophy that all things are created twice. The first creation is the mental creation. It is the idea, the vision of something new that can't be touched yet. The second creation is the physical creation, the realization of the idea, making the vision we had a reality. By providing an overview over the complete life cycle of a process plant, we want to help engineers and all other interested people understand the vision that is the driving force behind their work. Everything we do is geared toward creating a piece of a bigger idea, a vision that started the company we work for, or that started a project we work on. Understanding how it all fits together is a key step to reaching the next level of performance, to move from being a manager to becoming a leader in the organization we support.

The second goal of this book is to raise awareness of the fact that the ultimate goal in the life cycle of a process plant is not operation of the plant. While we agree that this is where the company realizes the revenue and gets the benefits out of the realizing the vision, it is important to understand that there is more than just that. We as leaders in the industry have a responsibility to focus on sustainability and implementation of long-term solutions that will benefit generations after us. Just making a profit by operating a process plant and leaving a big mess behind for others to deal with is not a legacy we should thrive for. The vision we have for our work must consider the last step in the life cycle of the process plant. Begin with the End in Mind. Only if we understand the true meaning of these words and learn how to incorporate this habit into our daily routines and decision making, we will become the leaders in the industry that will ensure that all we do is going to benefit the team, the company, the environment, and the society.

We trust that this book provides the reader with information that helps understanding how a process plant evolves from an idea and vision to a real working facility and beyond.

Chapter 1: General guidelines and definitions

Eberhard Lucke     Lucke Consulting Technology Services LLC, Houston, TX, United States

Abstract

This chapter gives an overview over general guidelines and definitions as well as explains very specific terms that are used throughout the book for reference and better understanding. These explanations set the tone and the overarching theme for the book.

Keywords

Definitions; Design; Engineering; Guidelines

1.1 Process design

1.1.1 Definition of design

1.1.2 Design philosophy

1.1.2.1 Function over form

1.1.2.2 Simplicity

1.1.2.3 The good design redefines itself

1.1.2.4 Tailored or customized design

1.1.2.5 Off-the-shelf design

1.1.2.6 Copy and paste design

1.1.2.7 Fit for purpose

1.1.2.8 Proven design

1.1.2.9 First of a kind design

1.1.2.10 Licensed design

1.1.2.11 Open art design

1.2 Gated design process

1.2.1 Phase 0—an idea is born

1.2.2 Phase 1—an idea develops into a study

1.2.3 Phase 2—a concept is developed

1.2.4 Phase 3—preliminary design

1.2.5 Phase 4—detailed design

1.2.6 Phase 5—the design is implemented

1.2.7 Phase 6—the idea becomes reality

1.3 Facility siting

1.3.1 Green-field site

1.3.2 Brown-field site

1.4 Fabrication and construction terms

1.4.1 Shop fabrication

1.4.2 Field fabrication

1.4.3 Stick-built construction

1.4.4 Modular construction

1.5 Sustainability

1.6 Lean manufacturing

1.7 CAFE

1.8 NextGen facilities

1.9 Business sectors

1.10 Capital estimate classifications

1.11 Permitting

1.12 Cradle to grave

1.13 Cradle to cradle

1.14 Internet of Things

1.15 Digital Twin

1.16 Other definitions

Before we dive into the details of our journey through the life of a process plant, let's make sure we all have the same understanding of some of the basic concepts and definitions around process design and process plant life cycles. Different companies use different terminologies when describing their design and engineering processes. And depending on factors like industry sector, project size, company size, or simply personal preference, the definition of these terms and the details of the content of each of the engineering and design steps will differ. Therefore, we feel that is of utmost importance to list and discuss terms and definitions in some detail before using them. This will allow us to have the same understanding of terms and labels as we move on into the next chapters of this book.

1.1. Process design

Let's forget for a moment that we are engineers and like to deal with numbers, laws of physics, and chemical reactions, and let's step back and think about the term design. As we mentioned above, words may mean different things depending on which context they are used. And the word design is no exception to this.

1.1.1. Definition of design

The probably most applicable definition of the word design in the world of engineering is that design is a plan or drawing developed to represent the look and function of a building, a piece of equipment, or another object before it is fabricated, constructed, or installed. There are many synonyms for the word design in this context, like plan, drawing, outline, schematic, or model. It is the engineer's way of communicating to the fabricator and constructor what should be built and how it should be built. We all know that saying that pictures are the language of the engineers, or that a picture says more than a 1000 words. All these sayings apply when it comes to process design. Engineers use a wide range of drawings to communicate the concept as well as the details of a process design. These drawings and models can range from very simple, two-dimensional flow diagrams to highly complex and very detailed three-dimensional electronic models for either a complete process plant or just for a piece of equipment or even a component of a piece of equipment. But engineers also use other forms of documents to define the look and function of these objects, for example, equipment data sheets and specifications.

Some of the other definitions of the term design are more applicable to arts and fashion design. Here we think of design more in terms of pattern or shape of things. However, don't underestimate the creativity of engineers and the importance of artistic elements in the development of a process plant design. If you look at design simply as the arrangement of lines and shapes to create a pattern, you should realize that this definition not only applies to arts and fashion but also applies to process plant design and engineering. Designers in arts and fashion don't just randomly put lines and shapes together to create something new—although sometimes one can get this impression. Artists and fashion designers follow certain rules and concepts when developing their new designs. Examples for these rules range from the concept of perspective, the mixing of colors, functionality of the object, limitations in the selection, and use of certain materials to even considerations of safety and environmental issues. Engineers do the same thing; they just follow different rules when putting together lines and shapes to create a process plant or pieces of it.

Another definition of design shifts the focus more toward the purpose, plan, or intention that is put behind the object of the design. Other terms used in this context are objective or goal. In the world of engineering, we include the definition of these items in a document we call Design Basis or Basis of Design. The content and purpose of the Design Basis or Basis of Design will be discussed in more detail in Section 4.3.

The area where artistic design elements and engineering design elements come together in the most obvious way is architecture. While architects have the freedom to play with forms and shapes to create innovative and esthetically appealing objects, they also have to obey the rules of statics, materials, and construction to make their designs work. Process Plant Design is much more limited in this regard, but similarities are present.

1.1.2. Design philosophy

Now that we have established some common ground between areas of design, we can explore the meaning and significance of the design philosophy. If asked about design philosophy, most engineers will most likely not know what to say. Engineering and philosophy don't seem to be connected, since all engineering concepts are derived from scientific principles, correct? Well, let's think about it. The philosophy of a design describes the assumptions, foundations, and implications of the design itself. While we realize that there is probably some overlap to what we already called the Design Basis or Basis of Design, but in many cases, a design philosophy is part of that document.

Many design philosophies have been developed over the years, some apply to fashion only, some to industrial design. Some philosophies were very successful while others have failed. In the following paragraph, we will make the connection between some of the most famous philosophies in the design world to our more practical view of process plant design.

1.1.2.1. Function over form

This design philosophy is applied to objects that have a well-defined and specific use. It simply states that the design will be successful if the object is built to provide the functionality as required by the user, despite its form or looks. In other words, it is impossible to sell a toaster that doesn't serve its purpose, which is making toast, no matter how good it may look on the kitchen counter. If it doesn't make toast, nobody will buy it. In process plant design this is even more valid than in other areas of design. It is very simple: a pump must pump, a filter has to filter, and a control valve has to control. Do we care about the form or look of these things? No, we don't. At least in most cases, we don't. There might be areas where engineers have some degree of freedom and where the definition of form is an option. For example, when given a technically feasible range of heights and diameters for a vertical vessel, some engineers prefer a tall and slender design to a short and stubby design. Others may see it the other way around. However, these examples are rare and most of the time engineering rules will determine the form and look of the parts that we use to build our facility.

1.1.2.2. Simplicity

Now here is a philosophy that applies to every area of design: simplicity. Keep it as simple as possible. So why is a process plant design so complex and complicated, you may ask? There are many reasons for that. Here are a few:

• Multiple modes of operation due to issues like seasonal product specification or seasonal heating/cooling requirements

• Process safety requirements

• Personal safety requirements

• Emergency operations and shutdown

• Normal start-up and shutdown

• Monitoring and optimization

• Maintenance and turnaround

These are the most significant reasons why process plant designs become more and more complex. However, wherever feasible and applicable, the simplest solution should always be applied to any plant design.

1.1.2.3. The good design redefines itself

This philosophy might be hard to apply in the engineering world since many companies—operators as well as vendors and fabricators—like to stick to a solution that is proven and that they know to be safe and working. However, many safe and efficient features of a current process plant design were new and innovative at some point in time. And in our efforts to become safer, better, more efficient, and less expensive with every design we develop, changes to the design are inevitable. How we handle these changes and implement those is the key to success. Not every change is a good chance. Not every change applies to all process plants. But without change, without innovation and creativity, every design will be doomed to fail at some point in time and will be replaced with something better.

These have been examples of general or industrial design philosophies that can be related to process plant design to some degree. But now let's have a look at the more engineering-specific design philosophies or design approaches that our industries work with.

1.1.2.4. Tailored or customized design

This design approach is based on the principle that all parts and pieces of the process plant will be designed, fabricated, and installed based on very specific and—in some cases unique—customer requirements. This design approach requires a very high engineering effort and a longer project schedule to accommodate the design phase of the work.

1.1.2.5. Off-the-shelf design

The exact opposite of the tailored or customized plant design is the off-the-shelf design. This approach is applied to minimize or even eliminate all engineering efforts by using an already completed and well-documented design that fits the client requirements. At some point in time, the design documents to be reused would reside in binders on the shelf of an engineering company. Therefore, we still use the term off-the-shelf design. In times of modern technology, the design documents are available electronically in a document management system. The off-the-shelf approach allows clients to minimize the cost of engineering and to shorten the overall project schedule. This is especially desirable when the time to market is one of the key parameters that determine the financial success of the project.

1.1.2.6. Copy and paste design

This design approach could be a subset to the off-the-shelf design approach as the engineer will use existing design and specification documents, copy them, and rename them to develop a second design package for a different client or a different location. We decided to mention this approach as a separate philosophy since it can be applied to parts and pieces or a process plant only. In a case where a process plant consists of multiple sections that serve different purposes, some of these sections may be fully designed to client specifications and process requirements, other sections may be copied and pasted into the process flow from former applications and plant designs. This will give the client a partial benefit of lower engineering costs and a shortened project schedule.

1.1.2.7. Fit for purpose

The fit for purpose design approach was developed to control the capital expenditure of a facility by limiting the design to the bare minimum complexity and functionality that is a requirement to achieve safe and reliable operation within the parameters given by the design basis and the output targets for the facility. Some of the features of a fit for purpose design are:

• Very low to no design margins, therefore very little to no extra capacity built-in

• Redundancy only for highly critical equipment and systems

• Typically, only one mode of operation

• No features added to accommodate potential future changes in plant operation

• Minimum required plot space used

The only preparation for future requirements that may be incorporated in a fit for purpose design would be tie-ins and additional plot space to duplicate equipment or equipment trains for expansion purposes.

1.1.2.8. Proven design

The proven design approach describes engineering activities around well-known equipment and process configurations that have been proven as safe, reliable, and effective. It is considered safe, but also a very conservative approach that minimizes the risk of malfunction or inadequate performance. It is not necessarily the same approach as for the off-the-shelf or copy/paste design as it may require scaling the unit capacity up or down as well as other minor modifications that require engineering effort but will not change the basic concept and functionality of the applied process technology.

1.1.2.9. First of a kind design

With this design approach, we are moving into the area of technology development and new, innovative technologies. Many companies avoid working in this sector due to the attached risk and uncertainties. Other companies specialize in helping developers, R&D companies, and financial institutes in developing safe, reliable, feasible, and economically attractive process designs for these new processes. A typical development approach would include the following steps:

• Laboratory tests to prove a basic concept

• Bench-scale test unit—typically using small laboratory equipment

• Pilot plant—typically with a capacity of 10–100 barrels per day

• Demonstration plant—typically with a capacity of 100–500 barrels per day

• Small commercial plant—1000 to 10,000 barrels per day

• World-class commercial plant—10,000 to 50,000 barrels per day

The capacities listed above are examples of typical capacity ranges used in classifying facilities by their size. Depending on the scale-up factor that the client feels comfortable with, there can be additional intermediate steps on the way to full commercial plant development. As mentioned before, these projects are bearing a lot of risks based on the nature of the clients and the technical uncertainties:

• Technology is not safe

• Technology is not feasible for commercial scale

• Economics is not attractive

• Developer runs out of money

If you are successful in developing a first of a kind design though, the result will be highly rewarding.

1.1.2.10. Licensed design

The licensed design is a variation of the proven design approach as it uses a well-known and proven design concept offered by a licensor, who owns the sole rights to design and sell the respective process license. In this approach, the client pays a license fee to transfer the risk of delivering the desired plant performance to the licensor. In return, the Licensor reserves the right to decide which equipment and other components will be used in the process design. The important step for the client in this approach is the definition of the design basis and operational envelope for the new facility as this determines the quality of the license package that will be developed.

1.1.2.11. Open art design

The opposite of the licensing process is an open art design. This approach is taken for the design of units and facilities that have been designed and constructed many times and that apply very well-known principles, technologies, and process configurations. In this case, a full license with a performance guarantee is not required. A hydraulic guarantee with normal warranties from the equipment suppliers is sufficient. Any engineering company or team that has the appropriate experience and knowledge about the respective process can perform open art design work.

1.2. Gated design process

In almost all projects, you will find that the more detail is added to the design, the more the overall scope of the project grows, and with that, the cost of installation also increases. Instead of moving ahead with the project to a point where the project owner spent a lot of money on the design just to find out that due to cost creep the economics of the project don't work out anymore, most projects apply a gated or phased design approach. A gated or phased design approach allows for well-defined milestones (gates) in the project schedule at which the scope of work and the overall cost of the project are evaluated against the project goals and financial limitations.

There are many different philosophies around the definition of the gated design process. And they are also different names for the distinct phases between gates, which sometimes makes clear and concise communication between entities very difficult. It is therefore critical for the success of a project that all parties involved agree on a common definition of the phases, their deliverables, and timelines.

A very common convention is to refer to the initial phases of the design process as Front-End Loading or short FEL. We will use this convention as one of the ways to define the design phases and gates. Other names and definitions are taken from company-specific design guidelines and project management procedures that the authors have applied to multiple projects throughout their careers.

To provide a complete overview of the typical stages of the design process and the plant life cycle, the following paragraphs describe seven project or design process phases, all their different names, and the typical tasks and goals for each of the phases.

1.2.1. Phase 0—an idea is born

This initial phase may not be required for all projects, but in some cases, the process of developing a project starts on a very high level by discussing and assessing ideas and opportunities that would improve the performance of a company or facility. Potential labels for this phase include:

• Brainstorming

• Strategic planning

• Pre-FEL

This phase is typically used to define the overall envelope for the development and execution of a project. Required resources like capital, feedstocks, utilities, manpower, and intellectual property are listed and included in the planning process. Roles and responsibilities for project sponsors and potential partners are defined. The team performing this phase will also develop all criteria that the project and its success will be measured against. To some degree, the scope of the project is defined. And finally, several models will be defined that will need to be created when moving into the next phase. This list can include but is not limited to:

• Simple mass balance

• Simple utility balance

• Simple energy balance

• Financial and cash flow model

• Project execution model

Once all these tasks have been completed, the idea or project opportunity will be presented to the top management of the company for project assessment and initial approval to move into the next phase. This gate or milestone can be called Project Screening or Strategy Meeting. In these meetings, several project ideas or opportunities are compared using certain criteria like profitability, return on investment, schedule, risks involved, safety impact, and others. After an assessment of these criteria, a certain number of projects will get approval to move forward. Others may get delayed as additional information or a better definition of certain aspects or risks is required. Other ideas may be discarded and will not move forward.

1.2.2. Phase 1—an idea develops into a study

Once an idea is deemed worthy of a closer look, it gets carried into a phase where multiple studies are conducted to identify the quality and very rough quantity of benefits from realizing this idea. This phase is labeled in numerous ways:

• Feasibility study/studies

• Identification/identify

• Appraise

• Visualization

• FEL 1

The studies performed in this phase target the identification of different options and scenarios for the realization of the idea, the classification of the associated risks, the alignment of objectives for the project, and the identification of quick wins or low hanging fruit, which are terms for ways to quickly achieve the full objectives or part of the objectives of the project with minimum to very low capital investment.

1.2.3. Phase 2—a concept is developed

The information developed in Phase 1 as described above is then being used to develop sufficient information that will allow the stakeholders of the project and the decision-makers to select the option or scenario that they want to carry into the design stages of the project. Common labels for this phase are:

• Conceptual design

• Define

• Select

• Conceptualization

• FEL 2

The main targets of this phase are to select the most promising option for the project by the application of the following steps:

• Quantification of the economics for each feasible option

• Definition of the option portfolio

• Ranking of options by using the following criteria

○ Value

○ Risk

○ Effort

The result of the Conceptual Phase is one single option for the project that will be carried into the next design phases. The documentation of this phase will allow for the stakeholders and the execution team to closely monitor the project performance and projected outcome versus the targets and performance indicators that were developed in this phase.

1.2.4. Phase 3—preliminary design

Now that the project scope is well defined and the preferred option is selected and conceptualized, the engineering team will carry the concept into the next phase to perform enough engineering for this option to allow the stakeholders and decision-makers to come to a Final Investment Decision (FID). Other labels for this phase are:

• Basic design/engineering

• Planning

• Definition/define

• Develop

• FEL 3

This phase will provide a certain level of engineering of plant components that are required to develop a Total Installed Cost (TIC) Estimate for the project with an accuracy level high enough that allows the group of stakeholders and decision-makers to decide over the path forward. While the cost of executing the past phases was somewhat manageable as an expense for developing a project, the next phase will require a very significant capital investment as material and long lead equipment items will have to be purchased early in this phase. Therefore, a lot of detail and accuracy should go into the TIC Estimate coming out of this phase to ensure the correct decision is being made.

It should be mentioned that in some terminologies either Phase 3 or the combination of Phases 1–3 are referred to as Front End Engineering Design (FEED). The package that is delivered at the end of Phase 3 is consequently referred to as a FEED Package. This package will include other sections like:

• Operations plan

• Risk plan

• Contracting strategy

• Construction plan

• Procurement plan

1.2.5. Phase 4—detailed design

Once the FID was made in favor of the project, the team carries the FEED Package into the next phase, which is typically labeled as Detailed or Detail Design/Engineering or Execution Phase. In many cases Phases 4 and 5 are merged and are referred to as Execution Phase. Phase 4 has a stronger focus on finalizing the engineering and design efforts to construction quality documents, while Phase 5 is the actual manufacturing, construction, and implementation phase of the project. One way of optimizing the project execution schedule is the merging of these phases to seamlessly move from engineering to procurement to manufacturing to construction.

Planning and logistics play a key role in this phase and are critical in managing the cost and schedule of the project.

Some terminologies refer to this phase also as the EPC Phase, where EPC stands for Engineering, Procurement, and Construction. In some cases, Fabrication is considered significant enough to be included, resulting in the term EFPC Phase. Depending on the contracting strategy, there are subsets to this, for example:

• Separation of E and PC as different contracts

• EPCm and C, where the first contractor handles Engineering, Procurement, and Construction Management, while a second contractor only handles the Construction.

1.2.6. Phase 5—the design is implemented

The implementation part of the project focuses on the manufacturing of equipment, plant components, and systems, and on the construction and assembly of these parts and components to build the facility as per the design developed in the previous phases. This phase requires strong supervision and risk management with sophisticated systems in place to measure the success (or failure) of the project. It is highly desirable to predict deviations from the project plan (schedule and/or budget) very early and before they materialize to have sufficient time for implementation of corrective or preventative measures. This phase typically ends with a certificate of mechanical completion and merges seamlessly with the next phase of the project.

1.2.7. Phase 6—the idea becomes reality

This last phase is divided into several steps that can be described as follows:

• System completion (see Phase 5)

• Commissioning

• Start-up

• Ramp-up

• Performance test

• Plant turnover

• Operation/maintenance

In this phase, the plant or facility has been handed over from the construction team to the operations team under the supervision of the main contractor and/or licensor. The operations team will perform all activities under the supervision and responsibility of all entities/contractors that provide the performance guarantees for the facility or certain parts, systems, or equipment. Only after all performance tests have been completed satisfactorily, the owner of the facility will sign off on the turn-over certificate and assume full responsibility for the facility.

1.3. Facility siting

One of the big decisions that need to be made very early in the life cycle of a project/facility is the selection of the location for the facility or the facility siting. This decision typically has a massive impact on items like:

• Capital expenditure (CAPEX)

• Plot plan

• Permitting

• Complexity and scope of project

• Project schedule

• Execution strategy

Other things to consider when deciding on a facility site are:

• Climate and its impact on the project

○ Tropical or hot/humid climate

○ Arctic climate

○ Rainy season

• Impact on design basis and code requirements

○ Earthquakes

○ Soil conditions

○ Neighborhood

• Other industrial facilities

• Residential areas

• Parks and recreational areas

• Accessibility

• Availability of qualified workforce

• Availability of resources

○ Manual labor

○ Support staff

○ Utilities

○ Feedstocks

These lists could be extended more depending on the actual type of facility and more specific project requirements, but they give you an idea of what needs to be considered. These factors will also impact decisions like procurement and construction strategy: stick-built versus modular design.

There are two types of sites that are differentiated as shown in the following paragraphs.

1.3.1. Green-field site

The term green-field site or installation refers to a site that represents a clean sheet with no restrictions nor constraints imposed by existing installations. A green-field site has no existing installations or facilities that would impact the arrangement and construction of the new facility. On the other hand, green-field sites typically don't have any or very little infrastructure and support systems like:

• Access roads

• Site security

• Buildings

• Utilities

Green-field sites can be either in remote locations or can be part of a bigger industrial development, which makes a significant difference in the scope of the project.

1.3.2. Brown-field site

In contrast, a brown-field site is a piece of land within an existing installation or facility. Most of the brown-field projects therefore are expansions or revamps of existing facilities. In some cases, the new facility can be a separate unit from the existing facility, but due to certain reasons like logistics or synergies, co-location with the existing facility is preferred. Other advantages can be:

• Use of common utilities

• Use of common emergency systems

• Use of existing office space/buildings

• Available site security

• Exchange of intermediate products

• Reduced CAPEX

On the other hand, building within an existing and operating facility adds certain challenges and complexity to the project scope, for example:

• Permitting for hot work and construction activities

• Tie-ins

• Space constraints

• Added risk due to operational hazards

• More parties to coordinate work with

• Cost impact

• Schedule impact

There is no optimum solution for a project, each project needs to be assessed by itself and all potential sites for the facility need to be assessed in detail and compared to enable the stakeholders and decision-makers to select the best site for the specific project and its needs.

1.4. Fabrication and construction terms

Although we have a chapter dedicated to Fabrication and Construction, we thought a few key terms should be defined in this section to provide a general understanding of the different philosophies used in the fabrication and construction phase of projects.

The first section deals with the fabrication of equipment and support structures. Some of these items like rotary equipment, pressure vessels, or instruments determine by their nature and complexity where and how they will be fabricated. Other items like piping, normal vessels, and structures may be fabricated based on project-specific requirements and needs. And then there are items like foundations that can only be fabricated or constructed on-site.

1.4.1. Shop fabrication

The term shop fabrication simply describes the concept of building and assembling the plant component in a workshop, where it also will be tested and inspected before it will be shipped to the construction site for final setting and connection work. Shop fabrication allows for a safe and controlled working environment and the availability of skilled and experienced labor.

1.4.2. Field fabrication

The opposite of shop fabrication is field fabrication, which can be applied to simple plant components like support structures and vessels. All materials will be delivered to the site and used to assemble the plant component on-site. This concept is mainly used for components that due to size can't be assembled in a shop or not be transported from a shop to the site. It is also used for certain parts of the piping that can easily be assembled and cut to fit on-site based on hand sketches instead of going through the complete engineering workflow of creating piping isometric drawings that will be required to fabricate piping sections in a shop.

The second section differentiates the two main concepts for construction. The selection of one of these concepts must happen early in the project as the design process for each of these routes shows significant differences. This is one of the reasons why a member of the construction management team should be involved early in the project to provide input to constructability and the potential impact of engineering decisions on schedule and project cost.

1.4.3. Stick-built construction

When using a stick-built construction approach, all equipment and major plant components are delivered and installed separately. Each column, vessel, or pump has its foundation. All piping and electric cable trays will be routed on dedicated pipe supports or pipe racks. Almost all components will be assembled, installed, and supported individually.

1.4.4. Modular construction

In modular construction, a piece or pieces of equipment are assembled within a steal frame including all connecting piping, supports, and instrumentation as well as electric cabling, each pipe and cable that connects to another module will have a termination connection at the limit of the module. The module is limited in size due to the need for transportation. Modules can be stacked vertically and connected horizontally to combine to a complete processing unit. Foundations and module supports can be built to hold and support several modules.

1.5. Sustainability

The concept called Sustainability combines the idea of looking at the economic strength of a project/facility in context with the environment and the surrounding communities with a long-term outlook into the future.

The Brundtland Report defines sustainable development as a development that meets the needs and aspirations of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (Fig. 1.1).

As a first step, Sustainability requires a broader approach and understanding of a project and its impact not only on the economics of the company or region where the company operates but also on the environment and the communities surrounding the new facility. Additional studies will be required at the preliminary stages of the project to satisfy these areas. The second step is to make sure that these studies not only cover the design life of the new facility (typically 20 years) but go far beyond that time frame to give a better assessment of the long-term impact the new facility may have.

Figure 1.1 Definition of the term sustainable.

1.6. Lean manufacturing

The Lean Manufacturing principle is a methodology that was originally derived from the Toyota Production System (TPS) that was developed and implemented in the 1990s and helped Toyota to become the largest car manufacturer in the world. Over the past decades, TPS was improved and expanded to meet the needs of a broader range