Guidelines for Safe Automation of Chemical Processes

by Center for Chemical Process Safety

Copyright © 1993 American Institute of Chemical Engineers

APPENDIX H

FACTORY ACCEPTANCE TEST

GUIDELINES

Before a BPCS/SIS is shipped from its staging site to the final plant site, a
factory acceptance test (FAT) may be perfonned. Use of guidelines such as the
following will ensure a successful FAT. The user may select alternate method@)
to accomplish similar objectives.

H.1 PURPOSE OF THE FAT

ThepurposeoftheFATisto test both thesoftwareand hardware functionality

of the BPCS/SIS system as an integrated unit. The goal is to identify and
resolve any problems in the system before it arrives at the plant site. There
may be some areas where certain problems cannot be corrected until the
equipment is received at the plant, b u t these should be kept to a minimum.
The FAT should include testing of all hardware components and software
in the system. This may be accomplished by having the testing perfonned by
the vendor or the user, ora combination of the two. The latter approach is the
most desirable.

H.2 PARTICIPANTS IN THE FAT

Participants of the FAT represent both the vendor and the user. The combined
team should consist of the following personnel:
The user engineer responsible for the system specification.
The user and/or vendor personnel responsible for software program-
ming/configuration.
The user and/or vendor personnel responsible for hardware integration.
The user and/or vendor support personnel.
One of the team members, generally the user engineer, should be selected
as leader of the FAT. The number of participants depends on the technologies
involved and the size, and complexity of the system to be tested.
402
APPENDIX H. FACTORY ACCEPTENCE TEST GUIDELINES 403

H.3 PREPARATION FOR T H E FAT

As a part of the purchase order, the user team members should specify the test
requirements by including a list of items that the test will encompass. This
should include, at a minimum:

A general description of the test procedure based on the system specifica-

tion.
A definition of responsibilities for each task during the FAT.
A schedule showing the daily activities during the FAT.
A list of the documents that are required at the FAT site during the test.
A list of the test equipment and instruments required to conduct the FAT.
A detailed procedure to be followed during the FAT.

The FAT team leader should present the list of requirements to the vendor
thmugh written correspondence prior to the scheduled FAT. The vendor may
wish to modify some items, but this should only be done with the agreement
of all team members. The final document may be referred to as the FAT
Preparation Document.

H.4 GENERAL PROCEDURE

The general testing procedure should outline the details to be addressed in

the test. These should include the following considerations, as a minimum:

A statement of the location and dates of the FAT.

A description of the general approach.
A description of the format of the FAT punch-list.
Specification of the revision levels of the hardware and software to be
tested.
Specification of the exact configuration of equipment being tested.
Personnel safety issues that may apply during the test.

Documentation of procedures and results is key to accomplishing the test’s

intended purpose. One method of ensuring that all findings are documented
is to maintain a punch-list for logging any e m r s found during the test. Each
item on the punch-list should be numbered serially dated when found,
described in an understandable format, dated when corrected, and dated
when rechecked.
404 APPENDIX H. FACTORY ACCEPTENCE TEST GUIDELINES

H.5 RESPONSIBILITIES

The general assignment of responsibilities should depend on the application.

Table H.1 indicates several scenarios of distribution. The FAT Preparation
Document should identify the general responsibility assignments. In all in-
stances, the user should approve the test(s).

I Table H.l Possible Testina Scenarios I

Software Responsible
Hardware Programming/ for Conducting Hardware Software
Case No. Integration* Configuration* Test Corrections Correction
S S S S S
S S U S S
S S s/u S S
S U s/ u S U
S U U S U
U U U U U
S = responsibility assigned vendor
= determined system specification
U = responsibility assigned user
I
Case 1:The vendor is responsible for integrating the hardware and program-
ming (or configuring) the software. The test is run by the vendor, and prob-
lems are corrected by the vendor. The user team members witness the test.

Case 2: Responsibilities are the same as Case 1 except the user team members
conduct the test, and the vendor corrects any problems found.

C u e 3: Responsibilities are the same as Case 2 except that the vendor team
members assist the customer in conducting the test.

Case 4: The user is responsible for the software program/configuration. The

test is conducted by both user and vendor. The user is responsible for comct-
ing problems found in software programs/configurations.
Case 5: The user is responsible for software programming/configuration and
conducting the test. The vendor is responsible for correcting any hardware
problems.

Case 6: This is an example of a BPCS/SIS for which the user purchased

off-the-shelf hardware, integrated the system in-house, and perfonned the
pmgramming/configuration. The user is responsible for conducting the test
and resolving all pmblems encountered during the test.
APPENDIX H. FACTORY ACCEPTENCE TEST GUIDELINES 405

If possible, the FAT team should be separated into two groups: one p u p
conducting the test; the second group correcting the problems identified by
the first. The benefit of this method is that the FAT may continue nearly
uninterrupted for one shift while problems are com:cted on the following
shift. This will require some overlapping of the hours of work of the two teams
to ensure information is transferred in a timely and accurate manner.
Each individual team inember should be assigned specific tasks during the
FAT. The FAT Preparation Document should define these task assignments as
clearly as possible.

H.6 FAT SCHEDULE

The FAT schedule should show a daily list of activities, identifying each item
in the system to be checked on a particular day. The schedule should include
enough time to review the punch-list.
The schedule should allow enough slack time to permit one day each week,
usually on the weekend, when testing is discontinued. This day should be
used to reduce the punch-list to a manageable size. It is the responsibility of
the FAT team leader to utilize the slack time for such purpose.

H.7 DOCUMENTS

The purchase order for the system should list the documents required for the
test. An example of such a list follows:
System Functional Requirements Specification
System 1 / 0 List
Process Control Description
Control Logic Specification Sheets
Configuration Worksheets
Logic Flow Diagrams
Instrument Specifications
Process Flow Sheets
Graphic Design Drawings
Program Listings (Documented)
System Self-documentation Printouts
System Arrangement Drawings
Termination Lists
Vendor Manuals
Punch-list Form
406 APPENDIX H. FACTORY ACCEPTENCE TEST GUIDELINES

Responsibility of supply should be assigned to either the useror the vendor

for each document on the list. The FAT should not onlycheck the functionality
of the system, but should also check the accuracy of the documentation. A t
the end of the FAT, all documentation should accurately describe the system.
Any exceptions should be included on the punch-list.

H.8 TEST EQUIPMENT

The purchase order should list the test equipment required to perfonn the
FAT. The list should be submitted separately to the vendor for confirmation.
Both parties should agree upon responsibility of supply for each item on
the test equipment list.
The test equipment list should include all items required to perform 100%
of the test. The list should also include equipment required for tmubleshoot-
ing. The user teain leader should verify the availability of required tools such
as screwdrivers, pliers, wrenches, special tools, jumpers, soldering iron, etc.
An example of a typical test equipment list follows:

I~ ~~~~
Device
~
Usage I
Digital Multi-meter Monitor system outputs and
troubleshoot wiring
DC m A Source Input current signals
(instrument siniula tion)
Two-w i re Transni it ter Input current signals
Simulator (instrument
simulation)

I DC mV Source
I Thermocouple or other
low-voltaac input simulation I
IPulse G n e r a tor
1
~ 1 Input
. p. u l s e T"m a l s I
I

RTD sinlulation

(instrument simulation)
Bred kou t Box
Discrete Device Simulation
Panel (with discrete switch
devices, lights, and power
S U D U ~ Vif needed)
Troubleshoot ddld
communication links
Test sequence logic involving
(valve, switches, and
contactI/O simulation)
APPENDIX H. FACTORY ACCEMENCE TEST GUIDELINES 407

H.9 DETAILED TEST PROCEDURE

The detailed test procedure should ensure that all aspects of the system are
checked against system documentation. It should include, at a minimum, the
following:
Adescriptionofa typicalloop testforeachtypeofI/Oin thesystemusing
the proper test equipment. Inputs should be simulated at O%, 50%, and
100% signal input. Outputs should be monitored at 0%, 50%, and 100%
of output level.
A description of a typical method for testing each classification of soft-
ware programs in the system (i.e., interlocks, special calculation blocks,
batch control programs, etc.).
A description of what checks are to be made on graphic displays. These
should include graphic layout, color specifications, text, touch areas,
paging functions, point addressing, and any system-specific items.
A description of the method to ensure proper point (DCS tag) configura-
tion. Included in this check should be point range, signal conditioning,
alarm settings, and point type,
Provision for a method for checking all other aspects of the system (i.e.,
visual checks, trends, logs, system failures, etc.).

H.10 EQUIPMENT ACCEPTANCE

The equipment maybe released for shipping at the conclusion of the FAT. An
official document should be signed by both the user team leader and by the
vendor.
The acceptance document should state whether open items on the punch-
list are to be resolved in the field or prior to shipping.
The user should have the right to return to the factory to back-check any
items agreed to be resolved at the factory. For convenience, the user may
choose to waive this right.

H . l l FAT PREPARATION DOCUMENT

The FAT Preparation Document should include the items described in Sec-
tions H.4 through H.9 and should be submitted for review and acceptance to
all team members prior to the issuance of the purchase order for the system.
This document should then become a part of the purchase order.