Work Practice Process

Appendix 3 - Weighted Process Evaluation Scheme

 Contents

1. E V AL U AT IO N PU R PO S E .............................................................................................................. 3
2. E V AL U AT IO N MET HO D ................................................................................................................ 3
3. E V AL U AT IO N AN D S C O RI NG L IST .......................................................................................... 4
Table 3.1: Process Evaluation and Scoring ............................................................................................. 4

Page 2 Document No: Appendix 3

1. EV ALUATION PURPOSE

The four purposes of a weighted process evaluation scheme are:

To provide a quantitative framework for a subjective decision

To provide a checklist to avoid missing important criteria

To provide a format to determine Customer preferences

To document the decision-making process

2. EV ALUATION METHOD

A weighted method is usually employed at the conceptual stage of a project in order to:

Choose between a large number of process candidates

Evaluate emerging or unfamiliar technologies

Guard against internal or Customer biases towards or against any particular process licensor

The method is as follows:

1. The provided List of Criteria should be reviewed with the Customer to ensure that the proper weighting
has been applied. The Customer may request additional criteria. However, the headings provided by
the List of Criteria are broad enough to accommodate these as highlights. The evaluation and scoring
can become very cumbersome if the List of criteria is expanded.

2. A spreadsheet should be developed with a column for each of the following:

Description of each criteria

The pre-determined weight factor of each criteria

The evaluation given to the process

The score the process was given for the criteria

(i.e.: Evaluation x Weight Factor = Score)

3. Generally, each process would be scored using a separate spreadsheet or hand-prepared page.

4. Each sheet would then be tabulated and totaled on a summary sheet by someone not involved in the
evaluation.

5. Often, in order to increase objectivity, the weight factor and final score is unknown to the process
evaluator until a summary sheet has been prepared.

6. Depending on the equipment involved, the scoring may be supplemented with separate evaluations by
the appropriate Detailed Discipline, usually Mechanical.

7. After the summary sheet has been prepared, it is reviewed in a meeting between the Customer and
the evaluators to confirm the results.

Page 3 Document No: Appendix 3

8. When a State of the Art type review is required, the following is required:

Review of the literature

Preliminary screening of processes into one of the following levels of technology:

- Inappropriate

- Research and development (bench scale)

- Promising (pilot plant)

- Emerging (demonstration plant)

- Commercial

- The Customer should be given the opportunity to be involved in the pre-screening.

9. When a State of the Art type review is done, each level of technology (i.e. R&D, commercial, etc.) is
usually evaluated separately and the results provided on a summary sheet for each technology level.

3. EV ALUATION AND SCORING LIST

The following is the list of suggested criteria, for process evaluation and scoring.
Table 3.1: Process Evaluation and Scoring

Suggested
# Parameter Definition
Weighting Factor
1. Technical:
a. Commercial Status Measure of the availability and suitability of the process for 0.15
this application. A process that in the past used an
identical raw material as the required application would
receive a high score whereas a process that has been
bench tested only with a different material would receive a
low score.
b. Pretreatment Measure of the amount and type of pretreatment required. 0.05
A process for which no pretreatment is required would
receive a high score whereas a process that requires a
complex pretreatment system would receive a low score.
c. Post Treatment Measure of the amount and type of post treatment required 0.05
before product can be sold. A process that requires no
post treatment would receive a high score, whereas a
process that requires expensive and complex post
treatment would receive a low score.

Subtotal Technical 0.25

2. Operation:
a. Process Simplicity Measure of the simplicity of operation of the process. A 0.04
process simple to operate would receive a high score
whereas a complex process that is difficult to operate
would receive a low score.

Page 4 Document No: Appendix 3


# Parameter
b. Sensitivity to Upset
c. Shutdown
Complexity
d. Interdependency
e. Experience with
Technology
f. Feedstock Sensitivity
g. Turndown Ratio
h. Ease of Maintenance
i. Impact of Climate
j. Quality of Operator
Required
Subtotal Operation
3. Safety
a. Occupational Health
and Safety
Suggested
Definition
Weighting Factor
Measure of the inherent sensitivity to process upset in the 0.04
process itself (not sensitivity to changes in the feedstock).
A process that is inherently stable would receive a high
score where a process that is inherently unstable would
receive a low score.
Measure of the complexity of the shutdown of the process. 0.02
A process that is simple and easy to shutdown would
receive a high score whereas a process that is complex
and difficult to shutdown would receive a low score.
Measure of the interdependency among various 0.03
components comprising the process. A process with a low
degree of interdependency (i.e. failure in one area has a
minimal or deferred effect in other areas) would have a
high score, whereas a process with a high degree of
interdependency would receive a low score.
Measure of the quality of experience with the process and 0.03
its associated equipment. A process whose operating
history has been troublefree would receive a high score,
while a process whose operating history has been
troublesome would receive a low score.
Measure of the degree of sensitivity of a process to 0.04
changes in the feedstock. A process that is not sensitive to
changes in the feed would receive a high score, whereas a
process that is highly sensitive to changes in feed would
receive a low score.
Measure of the turndown ratio of the process. A process 0.02
with a high turndown ratio would receive a high score, while
a process with a low turndown ratio would receive a low
score.
Measure of the ease, overall quantity and skill required for 0.03
maintenance of the process equipment. A process with
equipment that is easy to maintain would receive a high
score, while a process with equipment that is difficult to
maintain would receive a low score.
Measure of the degree to which the process is affected by 0.02
the climate. A process whose operation is inherently
independent of the climate would receive a high score,
whereas a process that is considerably affected by the
climate would receive a low score.
Measure of the quality of required operating personnel. A 0.03
process that requires unskilled operators would receive a
high score whereas a process that requires highly skilled
operators would receive a low score.
0.30
Measure of the degree to which occupational health and 0.06
safety are affected on a day-to-day basis. A process that
poses minimum risk to health and safety would receive a
high score while a process that poses maximum risk
Page 5 Document No: Appendix 3
 Suggested
# Parameter Definition
Weighting Factor
(relative to the other processes) would receive a low score.

b. Uncertainty of Long Measure of the degree of uncertainty regarding long-term 0.04

Term health and effects on health and safety inherent in the process. A
Safety Effects process that is known to have no long-term adverse effects
would receive a high score, whereas a process whose
long-term effects are not well known would receive a low
score.
Subtotal Safety 0.10
4. Environmental
a. Short-term Measure of the short-term effects of the process on the 0.06
environment. A process with little effect would receive a
high score whereas a process with greater effect would
receive a low score.
b. Long-term Measure of the long-term effects of the process on the 0.06
environment. A process with little effect would receive a
high score whereas a process with greater effect would
receive a low score.
c. Regulatory Measure of the degree to which the process meets current 0.03
Requirements regulatory body requirements. A process that without
question can meet the requirements would receive a high
score while a process whose ability to meet the
requirements is more questionable would receive a low
score.
Subtotal Environment 0.15
5. Economic:
a. Capital Measure of the capital cost of the process. A low cost 0.08
process would receive a high score whereas a high cost
process would receive a low score.
b. Operating Measure of the operating cost of the process. A low cost 0.12
process would receive a high score whereas a high cost
process would receive a low score.
Subtotal Economic 0.20
TOTAL 1.00

Page 6 Document No: Appendix 3