Course Design Project

Course Title: Plant Piping Total Module Duration

Module: 1 Prework Requirements Fitness for Service course API 579
Damage Mechanism API 571
Rules of Root Cause Failure Analysis (RCFA)
Practice with Failure Mode Effect Analysis (FMEA)
Module Title:
Design Element Description
Terminal Objective 1 Identify piping systems in a field organization.
Enabling Objectives NA
Need-to-know content: Knowledge of P&ID standards (ISA 5.1 and 5.2)
Activity 1 Team activity
Resources: • Drawings: Block Flow Diagram (BFD), and Process Flow Diagram (PFD), Process and Instrumentation Diagram (P&ID) for
a GOSP/Refinery/Utilities/Gas plant (EO 1-4). P&ID will contain 2-3 common mistakes if possible. Commented [MERR1]: One more resource would be
• Participant Workbook pictures of the actual plant (since most of the errors in
• ISA codes P&IDs are because the plant has been modified, but the
P&ID is not updated). Also, as you’ve mentioned below, we
• Groups of 4
will include some draftsman errors.
Activity Description: Participants break into teams.
Teams will use the P&IDs in their workbooks OR a larger P&ID that is handed out in class (preferred). All teams use the
same P&ID. Teams refer to the P&IDs to identify: Commented [MERR2]: Let’s have four different P&IDs,
• The symbols in the P&ID. for a GOSP, refinery, utilities, and gas plant. All of the
• If ISA standard Codes in the P&ID are correct activities are required (identify symbols, check ISA codes,
identify mistakes, and to summarize the P&ID piping
• Any mistakes they find in the P&ID drawings. They will be told a few exist and to look out for them. system) at the group level.
• They will answer: What process is being controlled in your P&ID?
• Finally, they will come up with a short summary of the P&ID piping system, using the example in their workbook: Commented [BBA3]: ISA 5.1 and 5.3 standards can be
included in the Appendix? Does Aramco use 5.1 and 5.3
This P&ID summarizes the _______________, with a piping line going from ___________ to
__________... (continue).

Participant Outcome: Participants will fill in the blanks on the P&ID to identify symbols, codes, describe the process they are viewing in the
PDF, and construct a summary as a group.
Debrief: Facilitator calls upon one group to present their findings, starting with identifying symbols. Another group then is
asked if the ISA codes are correct. A third group responds to which process is being outlined, and a fourth reads their
summary. Facilitator corrects or adds to answers as needed.
Facilitator then asks classroom:
• What are the common mistakes in engineering drawings? Solicits answers.
Course Design Project

• Points out common mistakes and where they appear in the P&ID (a few mistakes could be intentionally added to and
the class told that some exists and they are to find them. Discussion on errors is tabled until the end if the mistakes are
pointed out and need elaborating)
Key Learning Point: What is to be included and excluded in each diagram; What are the most common symbols used in piping field; What Commented [MERR4]: Suggest to have this as an
are the common mistakes in engineering drawings; interactive game—maybe a bingo card with different piping
Need-to-know: NA symbols, and they play a round of bingo, with the instructor
pulling out the equipment/item name and the learners
Setup: 10 (check prior knowledge, activity set up) looking for the symbol it represents on their card. Play the
To do: 15 round of bingo at the end of this activity.
To present: 15
Commented [MERR5]: I think we can make the
To debrief: 20 assumption that the target audience will be familiar with
Total activity time: 1 hour (as per SME) P&IDs. We have several P&ID e-learning courses we can add
Cumulative Module Time: 1 hour as prerequisites, as well. I think you will be able to jump
(Break) directly into the P&ID activity without too much build up.
That said, we do need to check their familiarity with the
standards and codes governing plant piping. What activity
Design Element Description do you suggest the learners do to demonstrate their
knowledge foundation?
Terminal Objective 2 Given a defect notification, develop a scope of work for piping repair and/or maintenance, in compliance with
Saudi Aramco standards. Commented [MERR6]: I don’t see this activity taking
a. Identify the type of failure more than 20 minutes, max. If you add in the bingo game
Enabling Objectives
(or other game), that would take it to 30 min).
b. failure criticality (1 urgent, 2 high, 3 medium, 4 low)
c. Identify the failure location from the P&ID, confirmed with a visual inspection in the field (add images of what to Commented [BBA7]: Will they need to do a root cause
look for in a site visit) analysis?
d. Consult isometric drawing to determine piping material type Commented [MERR8R7]: No. The type of failure should
e. Select repair method (need to go into Aramco standard applicable to the defect and criticality) be given, but the learners should determine the criticality.
f. Identify mechanism of procurement – warehouse/yard/direct charge material (i.e. not in Aramco system) This task is specific to repair that is outsourced to a third
g. Describe repair process steps (i.e. how to perform the repair). Coordinate with Operations (i.e. plant foreman), party (as opposed to completed internally). They need to
practice writing a competent scope of work for a given
Metal Foreman, Engineering (isolation procedure, hydrotest procedure), Inspection Teams for repair execution
repair. I’m sure the SLB SME has a good example of a repair
Need-to-know content: • Saudi Aramco standards for all repair scopes scope of work. For example, we can give them an SOW
• How to do a root cause analysis template as an interactive pdf. The generic terms and
• How to run a failure mode effect analysis conditions would remain unchanged, but they would need
to update the template with the specifics of their required
• Identify appropriate situations for permanent vs temporary repairs
repair work, location, duration of repair, etc.
• Participants need to know if a shut down can be had or not (cold or hot). This depends on amount of time, and
should be taken case by case Commented [BBA9]: Will participants need to run failure
mode effect analysis?
Activity 2.1 Group Workbook and flipchart activity
Resources: • Defect notification for the most common piping failures (leak, metal loss, dent, gauge, bulge, welding failures) Commented [MERR10R9]: No. We’re not going that
deep with this activity.
• location of failure
Commented [MERR11]: We’ll troubleshoot in terminal
objective 3.
Course Design Project

• tools of measurement for defect nature and criticality (methodology template, material data sheet, operation
datasheet)
• measurement readings (corrosion mapping, NDT, UT readings, existing thickness-max and min)
Activity Description: • Participants work in groups, 4 groups in total.
• Each group is assigned 2 defect notifications. There are 8 notifications in total.
• Groups walk through all of the enabling objectives a-g
• Images of site locations are available/displayed Commented [MERR12]: Preferably in the workbook.
Participant Outcome: 8 repair scopes of work that include details outlined in a-f above
Debrief: • Groups present their cases to the class, with proposed repair scope of work. Identify the standard/section/sub-
section applicable to the planned repairs. Commented [MERR13]: To make this a little more
• Class discussion is then held on the types of repairs for each notification, and the various types of approaches for engaging, let’s have the groups identify possible repair
methods and justify the selected repair method. During the
defects depending on different environments.
debrief, the facilitator will ask drill-down questions as to
Key Learning Points: Be familiar with most common types of defects; Locate defects on P&ID; Learn tools of measurement to identify defect why option a was selected over b, c and d.
nature and criticality; familiarize with methods for piping inspection
Commented [MERR14]: I’m not sure if this is entirely in-
Need-to-know: 15 (check prior knowledge) scope for this activity.
Setup: 15 (activity set up)
Commented [BBA15]: From SME: The number (20) of
To do: 90 (45 minutes each defect notification) defect cases to be submitted by trainees is too much for the
To present: 60 (4 teams to present) limited course duration of 3 days.
To debrief: 60 (class discussion) as per SME
Commented [MERR16R15]: Learners are not expected
Total activity time: 4 hours to write SOWs for this activity. This is purely a scheduling
Activity 2.2 and coordination task. Please see a scheduling activity (for
scheduling a vendor performing inline inspection at various
facilities) attached to this response. This particular exercise
Activity Description: Suggest that part 2 of this activity uses the same 8 defect notifications for participants to make the schedule. is email-based, but I wouldn’t use only email chains for this
20 listed in the original Scope of Work is too many for this course length. Suggest shortening to 8 total, without adding exercise (the email chains used in this activity were a long
12 more. read). I would suggest a mix of email chains (documenting
coordination requests with Inspection, Operations, etc.), but
A question was raised as to whether the 12 additional plus scheduling all 20 is OTJ work – to be completed separately also minutes of meetings, perhaps an Operations calendar
from the course? This would be extremely unlikely to happen. Someone in in Aramco will need to follow up with for a given month with major items listed. I envision this as
participants. a fun game, where 10 or 15 minutes into their scheduling,
Participant Outcome: Repair schedule for execution over 3 to 6-month period for previously scoped 8 defect notifications. Including Prepare groups need to select two cards, each with a curve ball (i.e.
OSPAS directives, management directives, T&I expedited by
schedule and Responsible, accountable, consult, inform (RACI) model in the schedule.
a month, or unexpected critical failure of a major unit) that
Debrief: scrambles their current schedule a bit. I’m not expecting
Key Learning Point: them to be able to schedule all 20 repairs in the 5-month
window, but I want them to see how many they can
Need-to-know: accommodate. Some of the repairs may not be feasible in
To do: this window, with the constraints we’re throwing at them.
To present: In addition, this will be a timed exercise (maybe 2 hours?)
and they get as far as they get in the allotted time.
Course Design Project

To debrief:
Total activity time:
Cumulative Module Time:
(Break)

Design Element Description

Terminal Objective 3 Troubleshoot common piping failures, such as leaks, corrosion, erosion, and fatigue.
Enabling Objectives a. Draft a problem statement
b. Review data
c. Identify root cause/causal factors
d. Recommend resolution strategies for the issue, both immediate, medium and long term
e. Justify recommendations
f. Calculate hydrotest pressure
Need-to-know content:
Activity 3
Resources:
Activity Description:
Participant Outcome:
Debrief:
Key Learning Point:
Need-to-know:
To do:
To present:
To debrief:
Total activity time:
Cumulative Module Time:
(Break)

Design Element Description

Terminal Objective 4 Conduct Fitness for Service assessment
Enabling Objectives
Need-to-know content:
Activity 4
Course Design Project

Resources:
Activity Description: This LO has been suggested to be moved to a different course – Fitness for service course 579
This can be included if they have already completed Fitness for Service course, in which case with the job aids and
templates provided it will be possible. – wil need to be conducted by someone versed in fitness for servicegbh41’2¡0
Participant Outcome:
Debrief:
Key Learning Point:
Need-to-know:
To do:
To present:
To debrief:
Total activity time:
Cumulative Module Time:
(Break)

Design Element Description

Terminal Objective 5
Enabling Objectives
Need-to-know content:
Activity 5
Resources:
Activity Description:
Participant Outcome:
Debrief:
Key Learning Point:
Need-to-know:
To do:
To present:
To debrief:
Total activity time:
Cumulative Module Time:
(Break)