3D Model Review Specification

THIS PRINT IS NON-CONTROLLED
Bechtel France S.A.S.
Reliance Petroleum Limited

Jamnagar Export Refinery Project
Piping Specification
25194-3PS-PL-016
Title
CAD 3D Model Review
This specification is based on 22960-3PS-PL-016 rev 3 and

Bechtel Corporate specification 3DI-G04D-00001 rev 0
27/01/06
25194-3PS-PL-016
Issued for Design
CM
SJH
DH
Page 1 of 25
PKS

Rev
Date
Revision

By
Chkd
Appr
Client
Contents:
1.0 PURPOSE..............................................................................................................................................................................3
2.0 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................................3
3.0 GENERAL.............................................................................................................................................................................3
3.1 DEFINITIONS........................................................................................................................................................................3
3.2 3D PROJECT EXECUTION ....................................................................................................................................................5
4.0 3D MODEL REVIEWS........................................................................................................................................................7
4.1 MODEL REVIEW EXPECTATIONS.........................................................................................................................................7
4.2 30% 3D MODEL REVIEW....................................................................................................................................................7
4.3 50% 3D MODEL REVIEW....................................................................................................................................................8
4.4 90% 3D MODEL REVIEW....................................................................................................................................................9
5.0 REVIEW PROCEDURES..................................................................................................................................................10
5.1 MODEL REVIEW PREPARATION ........................................................................................................................................10
5.2 ORGANIZATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY..................................................................................................................................11
5.3 MODEL REVIEW SCHEDULES AND PROGRESS...................................................................................................................12
5.4 GUIDELINES/GROUND RULES FOR ACCEPTING DESIGN CHANGES...................................................................................12
5.5 MODEL REVIEW COMMENTS AND SCREEN CAPTURES ....................................................................................................12
6.0 MODEL CONTENT...........................................................................................................................................................12
6.1 30% MODEL CONTENT.....................................................................................................................................................12
6.2 50% MODEL CONTENT.....................................................................................................................................................13
6.3 90% MODEL CONTENT.....................................................................................................................................................13
7.0ATTACHMENTS.................................................................................................................................................................13
25194-3PS-PL-016
page 2
of 25

1.0
PURPOSE
The purpose of this specification is to establish a consistent 3D Model Review work process and
the associated division of responsibilities for use in executing the Reliance Jamnagar Export
Refinery Project (JERP) projects in all performing office locations.
2.0
INTRODUCTION
This specification describes the work process for the preparation and execution of the 3D Model
Reviews using approved visualization software. The division of responsibilities is defined for
conducting reviews, the generation and resolution of action items, and the reporting of results.
See Section 7 Attachments 1, 2 & 3 for the Model Review Covenants, the Acceptable
Reasons for Model Review Changes and the 3D Model Review Codes. These Exhibits shall
be conspicuously displayed as wall hangings in the model review rooms for all client reviews.
3.0
GENERAL
3.1
25194-3PS-PL-016
Definitions
Model Review
A detail review utilizing the approved visualization software to

move through each design area while focusing on safety,
operations, maintenance, constructability and cost-effectiveness.
Conducted in two segments, the Internal and Client Reviews.
Model Driver -
Engineer assigned to conduct the 3D Model Review (manipulate

the approved visualization software).
Tag -
View taken in approved visualization software that captures the

comments in a specific area. Tag contains the information as
described in Exhibit G.
Process Systems -
Design discipline responsible for the P&IDs
PL&P -
Plant Layout & Piping, responsible for modeling the piping and
equipment components in the 3D Model and issuing the
Isometrics. Also responsible for the software, hardware and files
used in the assembling of the 3D Model visualization.
Other Disciplines -
Civil/Structural/Architectural (CSA), Electrical, and

Instrumentation and Controls (I&C); responsible for modeling
their respective components in the 3D Model.
PEM -
Project Engineering Manager, responsible for the overall

engineering on the project.
page 3
of 25

APE -
Area Project Engineer, responsible for the overall coordination of

the 3D Model and 3D Model Reviews.
Scope Change -
Items or activities not included in the scope of the base project

contract.
Trend -
Work process (and forms) used for approving scope changes.
COMET -
Basic 3D model package used for preliminary MTO of pipe and

elbows.
Construction Area A geographic area of the plot segregated to facilitate construction

staging and progress tracking.
25194-3PS-PL-016
Design Area
A geographic area of the plot segregated to facilitate detailed

design, progress tracking and 3D Model Reviews.
Equipment
Any item defined on the P&IDs with an equipment number (i.e.

Pumps, Vessels, Compressors, etc.).
Equipment Model
The model that contains the electronic representation of each

equipment item.
Process System
Schematic segregation of unit components based on their

functional application to the process; used to aid in definition of
scope and to track scope change.
page 4
of 25

3.2
3D Project Execution
The development of projects executed in a 3D Modeling environment are broken into the
following major development phases:
o The Conceptual Modeling Phase
o The Equipment and Critical Line Modeling Phase
30% 3D Model Reviews
o The Large Bore Modeling Phase
o The Small Bore Modeling Phase
o The Isometric Production Phase

Each 3D Model Review represents a major milestone in the design development of the
facility and the design accomplished in each phase concludes with a formal client review
of the progress as depicted by the 3D Model. The completion of the 30% review and the
resolution of all model comments initiate the Large Bore Modeling phase of the project.
The 50% review marks the conclusion of the Large Bore Modeling phase and initiates the
Small Bore Modeling Phase. The Small Bore Modeling Phase is concluded by the 90%
review, initiating the Isometric Production Phase.
Additional informal and/or unscheduled reviews with specific objectives may be utilized
as required during all phases of the project.
3.2.1 The Conceptual Modeling Phase
The Conceptual Modeling Phase precedes the development of the 3D Model. PDS
shall be utilized, if the set-up exists, to avoid duplication of effort. Alternatively, a
COMET model, or other means, may be used, to facilitate early development of
the plot plan arrangement, as well as early estimating.
3.2.2 The Equipment and Critical Line Modeling Phase
The Equipment and Critical Line Modeling Phase sets equipment locations,
platforms, nozzle orientations, the structural design basis, major large bore pipe
routing (12 and above), and other C1 critical line routings. Primary access,
piperack and structure column locations and extent of platforming are developed
25194-3PS-PL-016
page 5
of 25

during this stage. The space needed for primary electrical and control system
aboveground and underground raceways are also established at this time.
This stage culminates in the 30% or Equipment Model Reviews. This review
will serve as the basis for Freezing the overall plot, initiating the detailed design
of the balance of the large bore piping, as well as structural design of piperacks
and equipment structures, based on the column locations, access and platforming
extents agreed upon in the review. Most interferences are resolved during this
stage in the day-to-day inter-discipline communication as the model develops.
For a more detailed description of the model content in this cycle, see Section 6.1
30% Model Content.
3.2.3 The Large Bore Modeling Phase
As modeling design progresses, all disciplines (including PL&P) shall attach and
turn on all other discipline modeling files.
After the 30% Model Review, model development continues with the emphasis
on large bore piping layout. All comments from the 30% model review are
incorporated. The stress group provides all critical line layout input (pipe
flexibility and support requirements). Equipment models are fully developed with
all the information necessary to be provided to the equipment vendors. Other
disciplines refine the detail of their commodities, including refined structural
sections and foundation sizes, development of stair, ladder, handrail and grating
detailed models, modeling of on piperack aboveground raceway and underground
raceway, etc. For a more detailed description of the model content in this cycle,
see Section 6.2 - 50% Model Content.
3.2.4 The Small Bore Modeling Phase
At the conclusion of the 50% Model Review, structural work, foundations,
equipment locations and large bore pipe may be released for construction., and
all comments from the 50% model review are incorporated. .Subsequently, the
model emphasis turns to small bore piping. During this phase there may still be
modifications to large bore piping due to the small bore piping requirements, or
other design development due to new vendor information, late revisions to
P&IDs, observed interferences or finalized structural layouts and sizes. These
modifications need to be considered carefully, as they may impact work that is in
fabrication or under construction. For a more detailed description of the model
content in this cycle, see Section 6.3 90% Model Content. Modeling of
electrical equipment, aboveground and underground raceways are completed
during this stage, and all clashes are resolved.
3.2.5 The Isometric Production Phase
The Isometric Production portion of the project begins after the 50% Model
25194-3PS-PL-016
page 6
of 25

Review and concludes with the issuance of piping isometrics. Model adjustments
are made, as required, due to observations made in the isometric checking by the
layout and stress groups. Other design disciplines shall complete their model
efforts for the given design area, and then formal interference reports are
produced and corrections made to eliminate these interferences. At this time the
model is frozen. Final isometrics may then be extracted in preparation for
issuance.
4.0
3D MODEL REVIEWS
4.1
Model Review Expectations

The Project Engineering Manager and PL&P Supervisor shall develop a basis for the
following issues prior to the first model review:
Model Review Expectations

Model Review Objectives
Model Review Scope
Project Execution Unit Multi-office Participation
Client Participation
Construction Participation
A model review schedule will be issued well in advance of the first model review.
There are specific steps that should be taken in advance of each Client Model Review.
These are listed in Attachment 4, Typical Model Review Preparation/Execution
Checklist. In addition, the Model Review Cover Sheet (Attachment 5), for each
Design Area in advance of the Internal and Client Reviews shall be prepared, and the
bottom section shall be completed immediately upon conclusion of the review.
4.2
30% 3D Model Review

The 3D Model begins with the modeling of the equipment and critical lines based on the
IFD Plot Plan and preliminary area layout sketches. Project specifications and industry
standards are utilized to ensure proper equipment spacing.
4.2.1 Input
Input is based on current equipment drawings, data sheets and vendor models
(where applicable). Critical lines are routed (lines that will influence the
placement of equipment or nozzle orientation) and their influences examined and
applied to the layout as required. For a listing of the required model content at the
30% 3D Model Review stage, see section 6.1. In addition to the general
equipment and critical piping model, it is recommended that typical layouts of
specific modeling approaches, such as piping at a typical set of pumps, typical
25194-3PS-PL-016
page 7
of 25

bridle layout, etc., should be provided for review. This will enable the client to
review the proposed approach for the given items, allowing substantial model
development to proceed, and decrease the likelihood of future client comments.
4.2.2 Review
The Model Review will check stress, operations, maintenance, constructability
and safety issues. Items covered by the Client Review will be:
Placement and arrangement of equipment.

Access and egress to working areas, both emergency and operational
(extent of platforming).
Major routes for piperacks, sleeperways, and roadways.
Building and structure locations.
Underground sewer mains, sumps, and lift stations.
Laydown and maintenance areas.
Routes for critical piping runs.
Typical layouts.
Electrical space requirements.
Erection schemes for Major Equipment
Constructability Reviews
Hoisting Equipment and Monorails
4.2.3 Application of Comments

Upon completion of the Model Review, all approved comments impacting the
physical layout will be incorporated into the 3D Model. Comments that are not
within the defined project scope shall be addressed through the Trend Program, as
a scope change. The Plot Plan will be frozen at this point and issued for design
(IFD). Any physical changes to the plot from this point on will require joint
Reliance/Bechtel approval. This completes the 30% 3D Model Review cycle.
4.3
50% 3D Model Review

With the completion of the 30% 3D Model Review, development of the Large Bore
Modeling Phase is started. At this time, information pertaining to each individual design
area is compiled in the area folder. Area designers use this information to refine the
equipment model and to continue the input for the large bore piping.
4.3.1 Input
Discipline designers working in the model shall notify and coordinate design
changes that impact other disciplines in a timely manner.
25194-3PS-PL-016
page 8
of 25

The model is further developed by design area to include all large bore piping and
supports. Model components from other engineering disciplines (i.e. steel,
electrical equipment, aboveground and underground raceways, instrument panels,
etc.) are also input by the engineering group responsible for their design. For a
listing of the required model content at the 50% 3D Model Review stage, see
section 6.2.
Once Large Bore input is completed, the model is prepared for a series of reviews,
for each area. (At this stage, the model should be clash free, especially with
respect to Piping to Structural Steel.)
4.3.2 Review
The 50% model review shall have a separate review for each Design Area. A
review agenda should be generated prior to the 3D Model Reviews, detailing the
route to be taken through the model, the order of the specific areas to be reviewed,
etc. This agenda will facilitate efficient use of time and assure completeness of
the review.
The 50% 3D Model Review confirms the design integrity of all components
added to the model since the previous review. This includes large bore piping,
inline instruments, structures, piperacks, equipment orientations stairways,
ladders, platforms, and any small bore piping affixed to vessels. Once the review
has been completed all approved comments are incorporated into the model.
4.3.3 Application of Comments
The Area Project Engineer has the responsibility for ensuring that all approved
comments are implemented. If during the revision of the model, a previously
approved comment is deemed not workable or desirable, the PL&P supervisor
shall advise the participants of the reasons for non-implementation. This
concludes the Large Bore Modeling Phase of the project.
4.4
90% 3D Model Review

The Small Bore Modeling Phase of the unit design process is initiated with the
conclusion of the application of 50% 3D Model Review comments. As with the
50% 3D Model Reviews, the Reviews are segregated by Design Area.
4.4.1 Input
Input into the Small Bore Model consists of all the final details incorporated into
the design of the unit. This includes small-bore pipe, supports, instruments and all
other components not previously included in the other reviews, (i.e., items that
may have previously been on hold). For a listing of the required model content at
the 90% 3D Model Review stage, see section 6.3.
25194-3PS-PL-016
page 9
of 25

4.4.2 Review
Area reviews will be conducted similar to the 50% 3D Model Reviews after input
of all remaining components. The level of completion of model work represents
approximately 90% of the work applied to the model. During the 90% 3D Model
Review, comments incorporated into the model from earlier reviews will be reexamined for status and compliance with the intent, unless this step has been
completed previously. Additional comments will be generated pertaining to those
new items reviewed. A review agenda should be generated prior to the 3D Model
Reviews, detailing the route to be taken through the model, the order of the
specific areas to be reviewed, etc. This agenda will facilitate efficient use of time
and assure completeness of the review.
4.4.3 Comments and Extraction
Once all pertinent model comments have been resolved, the model fully updated
and all clashes identified and resolved; the extraction of isometrics can
commence.
5.0
REVIEW PROCEDURES
5.1
Model Review Preparation

Allow one day for all required PDS files to be downloaded to the approved visualization
software station prior to the model being reviewed. Ensure that the CADD files of the
various disciplines have been updated to the latest design information prior to the
download. A 3D person can be placed in the model to give the reviewers a grasp of
dimensions and size.
Reference documents for the review shall include the following:
Model File Index

Plot Plans / Equipment Location Plans
Set of P&ID's
Set of LDT's
See Attachment 4 Typical Model Review Preparation/Execution Checklist

Key members of the project team as well as the client conduct the Model Reviews.
Specific project requirements may change the makeup of this group as necessary, but
attendees are as follows:
Client Reviews:
25194-3PS-PL-016
page 10
of 25

PEM or Area project engineer

PL&P design lead
Client Construction Manager/Site Representative
Client management representative
Plant Operations representative
Plant Maintenance representative
Civil/Structural lead/responsible engr.
(part time as required)
Control Systems design supervisor
Electrical design supervisor
Mechanical system engineer
Construction representative
Start-up engineer
Safety representative
(TBD by client representative)
5.2
Organizational Responsibility
The applicable Execution Unit Design Office is Responsible for:
Organizing, scheduling and directing the Model Review.

Advance distribution of meeting agenda, necessary information and model review
calendar
Recording and convening all comments and decisions made at each of the model
reviews into a Model Review Action Item Tracking Form See Attachment 8.
Issuing Model Review Conference Notes to all participants immediately
following each review
Coordinating the resolutions of all Action Items.
Ensuring model completeness and accuracy
Providing feedback and review of Action Items
Tracking progress of Model Reviews
Estimating job-hours for comment resolution
Construction is Responsible for:
Providing constructability feedback (see Attachment 7 3D Model Review

Constructability Checklist).
Reliance is Responsible for:
25194-3PS-PL-016
Providing operation, maintenance, construction, and design representatives to

give feedback and to review Action Items
Client Representative to coordinate all Client Action Items for resolution by
appropriate Client personnel
All inconsistencies with client requirements, local codes/regulations and normal
page 11
of 25

industry practice shall be addressed accordingly. Preferential Changes will be

handled by the PEM prior to any model changes being implemented
5.3
Model Review Schedules and Progress

Model reviews will be conducted according to the schedule. If there is a change of
schedule, the team participants will be notified at least two weeks prior to the review
dates.
Action Items generated during a model review should be resolved prior to the next model
review. No changes to the model will be made after the 90% client review for an area
unless approved by the Project Engineering Manager.
5.4
Guidelines/Ground Rules for Accepting Design Changes

When reviewing the 3D Model, personal preferences are not acceptable reasons for
initiating a change. Guidelines/Ground rules have been established for approving
changes as shown in Attachment 2 Acceptable Reasons for Model Review Changes.
5.5
Model Review Comments and Screen Captures

Model screen captures shall be selectively taken to aid designers in implementation, and
to facilitate subsequent verification with Reliance.
Model review comments shall:

-
6.0
Be documented per format on Attachment 6 Internal/Client Model

Review Tag Structure Example.
Be clear, concise, and descriptive with definitive action requirements.
Tags should be saved in a PDF type format after each review and then
placed in their predefined respective directories.
Two sets of the tags should then be printed. One color set for the master
book and one black and white set to be issued to the disciplines.
MODEL CONTENT
6.1
30% Model Content

The 30% Model shall be developed to a level of detail that is consistent with the specific
project deliverable (approximately 30% of the overall modeling effort). The 30% Model
shall show equipment in representative shapes and to sufficient detail that will permit a
successful review of the basic operations, maintenance, constructability and safety issues.
Sufficient critical (large bore, alloy, high temp., high load...) piping runs, which directly
affect equipment location, will be depicted to support the equipment location shown.
25194-3PS-PL-016
page 12
of 25

The intent at this Model Review is to confirm the general equipment locations, define the
extent of platforming and provide for access and other general layout issues.
See Attachment 9 Model Content Matrix for the equipment commodities and other
features that are to be depicted in the model at the 30% stage:
6.2
50% Model Content

The 50% Model will expand the development of the model to include most large bore
piping runs and any object required to facilitate or any encumbrances to those routings,
and confirm that agreed actions from the 30% review have been done. This roughly
approximates 50% completion of the overall modeling effort.
See Attachment 9 Model Content Matrix, for the features that are to be depicted in the
model at the 50% stage:
6.3
90% Model Content

The 90% model review shall be held for the purpose of obtaining client approval, and
confirm that agreed actions from the 50% review have been done. All lines should be
modeled
See Attachment 9 Model Content Matrix, for the piping commodities and other features
that are to be depicted in the model at the 90% stage:
7.0
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 Model Review Covenants
Attachment 2 Acceptable Reasons for Model Review Changes
Attachment 3 3D Model Review Codes.
Attachment 4 Typical Model Review Preparation / Execution Checklist.
Attachment 5 Model Review Cover Sheet
Attachment 6 Internal / Client Model Review Tag Structure Example
Attachment 7 3D Model Review Constructability Checklist
Attachment 8 Model Review Action Item Tracking Form
Attachment 9 Model Content Matrix
25194-3PS-PL-016
page 13
of 25


Attachment 1
MODEL REVIEW COVENANTS
25194-3PS-PL-016
page 14
of 25

Attachment 2
Acceptable Reasons for Model Review Changes
25194-3PS-PL-016
page 15
of 25


Attachment 3
3D Model Review Codes
25194-3PS-PL-016
page 16
of 25

Attachment 4
TYPICAL MODEL REVIEW PREPARATION/EXECUTION CHECKLIST
PRIOR TO START OF ALL CLIENT MODEL REVIEWS:
Are the facilities provided for the review conducive to the review and appropriate for the number
of participants?
Are the necessary automation tools (Projector, web meeting, visualization software., etc.), ready
and checked prior to start of review?
Has checklist of required model content been completed in conjunction with each responsible
discipline?
Are the Model Review wall hangings displayed prominently in the room for reference?
Are necessary hard copies (Applicable P&ID's or other necessary documents) prepared for
distribution?
Has Model Review Coversheet for each area been prepared prior to start of review?
Has an agenda been prepared for the Model Reviews to ensure a deliberate and complete review?
EXECUTION OF THE REVIEW:
Were "Model Review Covenants" reviewed prior to start of the review?
Were "Acceptable Reasons for Changes" reviewed prior to the start of the review?
Were tags recorded in accordance with procedure?
Were tags reviewed immediately after the review with APE, PL&P lead and Process Systems
Engineering to confirm comment category and proposed action?
Were job-hours estimated for individual closure of action items?
Have out-of-scope tags been trended ASAP for proper control?
25194-3PS-PL-016
page 17
of 25

Attachment 5 - MODEL REVIEW COVER SHEET

SECTION A (Complete before start of Model Review)
PROJECT:
__________________________________________________________
JOB NO. :
________________________
UNIT: ______________________________
AREA: ___________________
MODEL REVIEW: Circle one (30%, 50%, 90%)
TYPE:
Circle one
(INTERNAL/CLIENT)
EQUIPMENT COUNT (TOTAL): ___________

PUMPS
COMPRESSORS
EXCHANGERS
HEATERS
AIR COOLERS
_____________
_____________
_____________
_____________
_____________
VERTICAL VESSELS
COLUMNS
HORIZONTAL VESSELS
COOLING TOWERS
OTHER
_____________
_____________
_____________
_____________
_____________
STRUCTURES (TOTAL): ____________

EQUIP STRUCT. _________
PIPERACK __________
BUILDING(S) _________
ITEMS ON HOLD: (Describe) _____________________________________________

ATTENDEES:
___________________________ Company/Dept.:____________________
___________________________ Company/Dept.:____________________
___________________________ Company/Dept.:____________________
___________________________ Company/Dept.:____________________
___________________________ Company/Dept.:____________________
___________________________ Company/Dept.:____________________
___________________________ Company/Dept.:____________________
___________________________ Company/Dept.:____________________
SECTION B (Complete at conclusion of the areas model review)
DURATION (TIME) OF MODEL REVIEW:
_______________
THOROUGHNESS OF CORRESPONDING INTERNAL MODEL REVIEW: (1 is none, 5 is thorough line-by-line

review, N.A. for Not Applicable) ________________
MODEL REVIEW PROCEDURE FOLLOWED? (1 is NO, 5 is Completely) _________
HAS CLIENT PREVIOUSLY REVIEWED MODEL? Circle one (Y / N)
MODEL REVIEW COVENANTS REVIEWED AT START OF MODEL REVIEW?
Circle one (Y / N)
ACCEPTABLE REASONS FOR CHANGE REVIEWED AT START OF MODEL REVIEW? Circle one
(Y / N)
RECORDED BY:
___________________________
DATE: _________________
APPROVED BY:
25194-3PS-PL-016
___________________________
DATE: _________________
page 18
of 25

Attachment 6 Internal / Client Model Review Tag Structure Example
25194-3PS-PL-016
page 19
of 25

Attachment 7
3D MODEL REVIEW CONSTRUCTABILITY CHECKLIST
1.0 ACCESSIBILITY
2.0
Erection
Crane
Rigging
Manlifts
Valves
High point vents
Low point drains
Orifice root valves
Weld location
Scaffolding
Obstructions
Flanged Joints
STRUCTURAL STEEL
3.0
Erection technique and sequence

Rigging
Scaffolding
Lifeline attachments
Safety hazards
EQUIPMENT
25194-3PS-PL-016
Pre-assembly
Erection technique and sequence
Rigging
Lifting attachments
Dress out of vessel, towers etc. (At grade)
page 20
of 25

Attachment 7 Continued
4.0
PIPING
Arrangement of piping runs

Erection technique
Rigging
Field welding (alignment location, and placement)
Safety hazards
NOTES.
I.
Avoid placing bolted connections and field welds in areas that are only accessible by
scaffolding and lift equipment, unless dictated by design constraints.
2.
Review location of weld placement taking into consideration accessibility, ease of

alignment and minimizing scaffold requirements.
3.
Avoid placing field welds in areas under or away from platform or walkways. unless
dictated by design restraints.
25194-3PS-PL-016
page 21
of 25

Attachment 8 Model Review Action Item Tracking Form

SAMPLE
Model Review Action Item Tracking Form
No. Session: Area: Name: Date:
Comment:
Item:
P&ID:
Type:
Action
By:
Code:
NA
15-00006 1A
NA
1 30%
1B0
2 30%
1B0
3 30%
1B0
CONFIRM ADAQUATE
CLEARANCE ON THE
SOUTHSIDE OF THE
MACHINE WHEN THE
BUNDLE IS PULLED FROM
THE HIGH PRESSURE
MACHINE PRIOR TO
07/01/03 LIFTING.
1-XX
MOVE PIPING TO THE
SOUTH AS MUCHAS
POSSIBLE FOR BETTER
07/01/03 ACCESS.
2-XX
CHECK IMPACT OF NOISE
WALLS ON
EQUIPMENTACCESS AND
07/01/03 CART PATHS.
3-XX
4 30%
1B0
CHECK CRANE ACCESS

07/01/03 TO GEAR BOXES.
4-XX
NA
P/M
5 30%
1B0
CHECK HOW TROLLEY

WILL BE MOVED FROM
TURBINETO TURBINE OR
PROVIDE INDIVIDUAL
07/01/03 HOISTS.
5-XX
NA
6 30%
1B0
CHECK FUNCTIONALITY
07/01/03 OF HOIST WITH PIGNONE. 6-XX
NA
25194-3PS-PL-016
By:
Resolution:
Disc:
Date:
APE: Date: Client: Date:
PAGE 22 OF 25

Attachment 9
Model Content Matrix
Item A
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Equipment Model Content

Mechanical equipment & nozzles
Ladders, cages & platforms
Vessel pipe supports attached to equipment
Equipment pulling areas
Reserved areas for future equipment
Equipment lay down/ access areas/ drop zones
Equipment access space
Emergency, Egress & aisle ways
Hoists, Cranes, Trolley Beams & Davits
Skirt access and Vent holes
Eye wash & Safety Shower locations
Utility station locations
Fire Hose racks, elevated fire monitors
Existing equipment, if applicable
Incorporation of Code 2 vendor data
Not in Model: Vendor piping and instruments within
boundary of skid
Item B
Piping Model Content
C1 Critical piping, Cryogenic piping
2
3
4
All 2" and larger A/G piping *

1/2 " - 1 1/2" A/G piping *
Vessel Trim piping
30%
x
x
PROGRESS
50%
90%
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
PROGRESS
30%
50%
90%
x
x
Vendor Supplied piping

Piping in Sumps & Trenches
Electrical or Instrument reserved spaces associated
with piping
8
9
10
Tap orientation for orifice flanges and venturies

Oil Mist piping (headers only)
Deluge piping (headers only)
11
Reserves areas or view directions for Instruments

Aboveground Manhole vents
Instrument Pull Zones
Existing piping, if applicable
Incorporation of Code 2 vendor data for Piping
Speciality Items
* To include in-line instruments, specialty items,
standard pipe support and spring supports, and in-
12
13
14
25194-3PS-PL_016
Remarks
Stress analysis
incorporated
Stress analysis
incorporated
x
x
Only where
required for
model clarity,
clash, etc
x
5
6
Remarks
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
PAGE 23 OF 25

line piping items (valves, strainers, special fittings)
Not in Model: Tubing, instrument piping beyond root

valve, OSBL piping.
Item C
Under ground Model Content
1
Known Under Ground Obstructions
Underground equipment, catch basins, manholes,
2
hubs etc
3
Underground sewer, utility & firewater piping
4
Hydrants, monitors, hose reels & PIVs
5
Manhole vents
6
Valve Boxes
7
Casings
Not in Model: Thrust blocks
Item D
Civil/Structural Model Content
Equipment foundations
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Steel foundations
Pipe rack steel
Sleepers
Equipment support Structures- Main Steel
Equipment support Structures- Bracings
Stairs
Ladders, Hand rails & Gratings
Enclosures
Buildings, Control Rooms & MCCs
Misc. Electrical supports
Misc. Pipe supports
Misc. Platform steel
Sumps, Trenches, Curbing, Extent of paving (incl
slopes)
Gusset plates
Roads
14
15
16
Item E
1
2
3
3
4
5
Electrical Model Content

Space volume for piperack aboveground and
underground raceways
Detailed design for piperack aboveground and
underground raceway
Equipment and enclosures
Column mounted items
Off piperack aboveground and underground
raceways
Welding and convenience receptacles(column
mounted only)
25194-3PS-PL_016
PROGRESS
30%
x
50%
90%
Remarks
PROGRESS
30%
50%
90%
x
Remarks
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
30%
x
PROGRESS
50%
90%
Remarks
x
x
x
x
x
PAGE 24 OF 25

Item F
Control Systems Model Content
1
Junction Boxes ( Modeled by Electrical)
2
Analyzer shelters ( Modeled by Piping)
3
Local Control Panels ( Modeled by Electrical)
PROGRESS
30%
50%
90%
x
x
x
Offline/remote mounted instruments with pipe stands
Code 2 vendor data for inline instruments
25194-3PS-PL_016
Remarks
PAGE 25 OF 25

3D Model Review Specification

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

3D Model Review Specification

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THIS PRINT IS NON-CONTROLLED

Bechtel France S.A.S.

Reliance Petroleum Limited

CAD 3D Model Review

This specification is based on 22960-3PS-PL-016 rev 3 and

Issued for Design

Reliance Petroleum Limited

THIS PRINT IS NON-CONTROLLED

Reliance Petroleum Limited

THIS PRINT IS NON-CONTROLLED

A detail review utilizing the approved visualization software to

Engineer assigned to conduct the 3D Model Review (manipulate

View taken in approved visualization software that captures the

Design discipline responsible for the P&IDs

Civil/Structural/Architectural (CSA), Electrical, and

Project Engineering Manager, responsible for the overall

Reliance Petroleum Limited

THIS PRINT IS NON-CONTROLLED

Area Project Engineer, responsible for the overall coordination of

Items or activities not included in the scope of the base project

Work process (and forms) used for approving scope changes.

Basic 3D model package used for preliminary MTO of pipe and

Construction Area A geographic area of the plot segregated to facilitate construction

A geographic area of the plot segregated to facilitate detailed

Any item defined on the P&IDs with an equipment number (i.e.

The model that contains the electronic representation of each

Schematic segregation of unit components based on their

Reliance Petroleum Limited

THIS PRINT IS NON-CONTROLLED

30% 3D Model Reviews

o The Large Bore Modeling Phase

50% 3D Model Reviews

o The Small Bore Modeling Phase

90% 3D Model Reviews

o The Isometric Production Phase

Reliance Petroleum Limited

THIS PRINT IS NON-CONTROLLED

Reliance Petroleum Limited

THIS PRINT IS NON-CONTROLLED

Model Review Expectations

Model Review Expectations

30% 3D Model Review

Reliance Petroleum Limited

THIS PRINT IS NON-CONTROLLED

Placement and arrangement of equipment.

4.2.3 Application of Comments

50% 3D Model Review

Reliance Petroleum Limited

THIS PRINT IS NON-CONTROLLED

90% 3D Model Review

Reliance Petroleum Limited

THIS PRINT IS NON-CONTROLLED

Model Review Preparation

Model File Index

See Attachment 4 Typical Model Review Preparation/Execution Checklist

Reliance Petroleum Limited

THIS PRINT IS NON-CONTROLLED

PEM or Area project engineer

Organizing, scheduling and directing the Model Review.

Construction is Responsible for:

Providing constructability feedback (see Attachment 7 3D Model Review

Reliance is Responsible for: