Engineering Practice Process Plant Layout — Becoming a Lost Art? Plant layout is as importanta part of process plant design asit ever was, but itis rarely taught as part of chemical engineering courses ‘Sean Moran Expertise Ltd. je process plant lay- out is a critical aspect of chemical process indus- ‘tries (CPI) operations, ‘tha majority of the seminal works: in this area have been published n trade journals [1-10] or classic texts such as Pery’s Handbook [71]. Too ‘often, process plant layout is cov- feed in ony a cursory fashion in the engineering cunicula; as a result, much of the knowledge of how lay out process plants resides inthe heads of engineers who are nearing the ond of ther carcers, This artoe ‘was developed from a recently up- dated book on process plant layout by the author [12}. ‘Good plant layout is as important as ever today. A recent study by kidarn and Herme [73] showed that 79% of process plant accidents in- volved a design error, and the most ‘common type of design error lead- ing to accidents was poor layout, a5. shown in Figure 1 This aricle reviews the com- mon terms and discusses the basic methodology for sound plant layout. What is layout design? ‘The diseipiine of layout design refers: {o that part of process-plant design that determines how the equipment and supporting structures needed for a process — along with their in- fercomnection by means of pipes, ‘ducts, conveyors, vehicles, wired or ‘wireless connections — are to bo laid out. Layout designers have to satisfy several key criteria to ensure ‘that their designs do the following: © Ensure reliable and safe plant operation '* Provide safe and convenient ac- ess for maintenance of items, and for the removal or in situ re pair of components or process ‘equipment ‘+ Ensure acceptable levels of hazard oy a a ee) Mite sin errs FIGURE 1. inthis iy of design errs tat occur mos often inthe CF, lant yout emerges es the "most prominent facto to blame (Repeted wih permission frm | 4) and nuisance to the pubke * Provide adequate levels of securty {to protect agalnst the risk of crime, vandalism and, potentialy, tererism *Faciitate safe and” efficient ‘construction ‘© Realize effective, economical and ergonomic use of space = Demonstrate compliance _ with local planning regulations regard- ing aesthetics © Ensure compliance with U.S. En- Vironmental Protection Agency (EPA) or equivalent requirements © Demonstrate compliance with any other relevant codes and standards. ‘© Guarantee that the supply of ser- vices to the plant and access to the periphery of the plant for main- tenance, construction and emer- gency services are supported by ‘he location and layout of the site On a new “greenfield” site, the layout design wil necd to reflect the known needs of the process plant or process units to be constructed. Alternatively, a plant may be placed ‘on a number of plots on an existing “brownfield” site, In tho latter caso, it is a common scenario that requirements of the newer plant may not have bean tors seen at the time of the onginal site layout. As a result, at least some of the access arrangements that would rormally be provided on a new site will have to be provided post hoc by the layout designers. Existing access arrangements may need 10 be re- considered to suit the evolving inter- relationships between the exsting site and the new plant or equipment. Site, plot and equipment layout There is widespread disagree- ment about what the terms site, plot and equipment mean. This ar- ticle attempts to standardize the description and use of these terms to avoid contusion, following the aming convention set forth in Ref. 12 In a brownfield situation, layout designers have to consider three: rate things: ite layout —- How plots relate to each other within the overall sito, and with other activities outside ‘tho sito * Plot — The consideration ‘of how process units relate to each other's disposition within a plot © Equipment layout — The con- sideration of the arrangement of process units and _associ- ated of allendant items around Process unit ‘This article, and the book on which itis based [12], do not use the termFIGURE 2. Tis iu lusts, ncimpifed ‘orm, a process production faci or “se” (Asie, “diced note bythe rey tnx. is dined 2s“ bounded and within which process plant is). Asite may cantina numberof press plans ‘unten memsatves may occupy several its, earn ‘of wich typical contin many types of eqip- ‘mend, as wel as non proces plat and baling aa Sauer ames Ss eral combinations of them. Rather, we define a “plant” as being the ee ee a cones inte ivicual plots by its principal road system, with additional access roads provided for the larger plots. fan eee eee ae sited eaten eoeereonrn a or mare plots, and a site may contain a = plant). fA process plant is defined ee ae ee tional function to produce a product ‘or products..." Plot layout. Plants may be arranged: eee coe fined as being bounded by the road Sa ee Fie pierces sometimes used by practitioners: with plot, reflecting woes ot chad See Saleen ae tee aes a cauretee sages associated support systems...") and ‘equipment layout (defined as “layout cone teeooe eee these disciplines are often referred to — Initially, plot layout involves mainly ‘equipment layout, and piping layout comes in later, at the detailed de- sign stage. Plot layout offen occurs, in the context of a “masterplan,” that aims to define the site's over- all design intent, especially if archi- tects are involved. In such cases, it may be important to fallow the architect's approach to site and op- rational layout through the use of masterplanning (an approach out- lined in Ret. 12, Appendo« E). How to lay out process plants ‘One can identity six broad layout philosophies (the first one is less for- mal, and the other five are based on more: formal methodologies): * Intuition based on experience. Using this approach, an exper fenced plant layout designer simply permutates and combines con- figurations that have been used successfully in the past, analyz- and evaluating the resulting ‘combinations forts typically aim to minimize dis tanoes traveled by materials; this approach is particularly well suited to be incorporated into software. This approach also clearly relates recommended by Meckienburgh [7/4] but never taken up by prac- ttioners. It might, however, have value in academic seltings © Rating — Raling approaches as- sign values to equipment, plots and so on, from the point of view of intorconnectedness, various facial ordi [eiLorcerde ung ard Separation re- raat "sodeting. There are a number of academic ap- roaches based on this, but they are currently at an early stage of development * Software-based approaches. Modern 3-D CAD software often includes programs ta develop a rough layout of pipework once the ccalemert cabon is apeliod For any given project, several of these approaches are ‘often com- bined in various ways in different sectors, and such combinations vary among layout designers of cif ferent disciplines. A formal technique is any logical method that provides definitive in- formation on relationships between items or numerical data on spacing distances. It must be based on a procedure that is adequatoly defined and recorded and can be examined and crtcized. Before staring a layout, the rel evant information should ideally be assembled. Such information type cally includes process and site data, regulatory and contract require ments, company and other recog- nized codes of practice. Otten, not all such data are available at the start of a project. To avoid delays and to provide a starting point, it fs useful {o have information on typical spac- ings. However. itis emphasized that such spacings are rough and must bbe confirmed or replaced later by the proper project data or design. A first layout is almost “always based on process flow. Intuition drawn from experience indicates that such a layout is basically a good one and can be altered successfully to accommodate the specific requirs- ments. of operation, maintenance and safely. The intuition (and ex- perience) of the engineering design team usually indicates immediately what the principal alterations to this detauit case should be. Thereafter, ‘he formalized methods shown in the bulleted list above should be used to ‘inetune and improve the preliminary design that was put together based 6 the inital intuitive approach: Historical, formal layout methods, mainly developed within the CPI, have tended toward optimization for minimum capital cost. However, the impetus for developing formal’ lay- ut methods was generated by the hanging attitude of society toward the CPI, and to the consequences of accidents in CPI operations, ‘Atthough safety has always been ‘4 major constraint in plant layout, ts est visible effect on the layout was typically related to relatively simple rules for spacing and electrical zon- ingin accordance with codes of prac- tice. The adoption of more danger tus proceceds the metoasng seals of piants and associated chemical storage, and the shortage of skilod staff, coupled with greater public concem, have required companies to be able to justify the reasons for selection of a given layout to a far greater extent than was necessary in ‘the past. Today, enginesring teamsare required to dovolop and maintain records of potential problems, ater- haves thal were considered (wih ‘supporting data) to justify design de- ‘dscns to satisfy prevaiing legslation and to support a legal defense in the ‘event that problems arise later. There are stl very few formal lay- ‘out techniques available to the de- Signer, and none can completely re- place the designer's ables ether to ‘conceive new solutions oF to evali- ato atematives. As with all enginoar- ing, plants built without experience ‘nd infution are “bad plants.” The intuitive approach is tested and cor- rected as the result of using other formal techniques along with more experience. Computer-aided. tech nigues can supplement but not re- place engineering by experts Formal techniques reported ap- poar to aim at ono or more of three Iman objectives: &. Generation of spatial retatonships between items b. Specification of distances be- tween items ‘¢. Comparison of alternative layouts bby numerate rational examination When used to supplement or verity the designer's experience, the formal techniques available today are able ‘to improve the layout and provide ra- tional justification of layout decisions. Ref, 12 discusses ten formal ap- proaches to plant layout that are widely followed by chemical engi- neers, piping designers and process architaets in diferent GP! sectors. “The approach discussed below is a modified Meckienburgh method [75], adapted from that given by Meckien burgh in the first edition Ref. 14. When considering 3 greonfild site, the development typically fol lows this sequence (each of the steps is desorbed briefly below): ‘= Pratminary plot layout (Steps 1-0) * Proliminary sito layout (Steps. 10-15) + Design sanction, possible site pur- chase + Detailed site layout (Steps 16-17) * Detaled plot layout (Steps 18-19) However, existing browned sites (with their pre-existing conditions) wil impose patticular constraints, 0 some ofthe folowing site-layout steps may nat be needed The layout mathods described below suggest a highly formalized, ‘structured, rigorous and frankly, ‘expensive process. Tho version of the layout process suggested here is typically only aporopriate to the largest process plants. Professional judgment is recpired to understand ow much ofthis approach is appro- priate, glen the site*specifcrequire- ments and constraints of the project being consideret Preliminary plotlayout Step 1. Plot data. The data needed at this step include preliminary pro- ‘cess flow diagrams (PFD) and pip ing and instrumentation diagrams (P8ID3), which must show the size ‘of major pipework and suggested ‘elevations of major equioment), process engineering design for the ‘equipment (such as size and shape), ‘the results of preliminary hazard a5 sessments of the flowsheet, and the ‘codes of practice to be followed in the plant design Step 2. Plot layout. The layout is made using the data gathered in Step 1, in the sequence of the pro- ‘ces flow using the experience of the engineer to recognize constraints, such as major piping and cabling. Typical layout spacings (described in Ref. 12, Appendix C) are useful at ‘this stage. Simple drawings and out- ‘outs are typically employed. ‘Step 3. Elevation, The elevation as sumptions in the flowsheet should be questioned. This enables the pro- ‘cess objectives and constraints on elevation to be defined. Various al- ‘mative elevation arrangements aro generated, possibly by using formal ‘techniques, such as travel and oor- relation charts. The cost of each potential eleva- ‘ton alternative is examined, primarily ‘or dferences between, for example, ‘the number of plant items needed to achieve the objective, or ctterences: in the material-transfer costs, such 23 piping, pumping requred to ele- vate items and power consumption, ‘Simple elevation drawings can bo prepared showing oniy heights and relative positions of items, but struc- ‘ure and floor levels are not intro- ‘duced at this point. Step 4. Plot plan. Plant tems, build ings and principal pie and cable runs are laid out in a plan, to ensure that ‘the obvious layout constraints (op- ‘eration, maintenance, construction, ‘environmental, safety and dranage areas) ate accommodated. Cutouts ‘aro helpful at this stage. A cost as- sessmentis made of each competing arrangement being considered. The moro promising arrangements may be optimized to produce even more economical layouts. Step 5. Plot buildings. ‘Housing CPI plants inside bukiings is more expensive than having piants in the open, even for plants on elevated structures. The need for enclosed buildings specified in the process design should therefore be exam- ined crticaly. Step 6. Plot layout. The selected plan and elevation layouts are now combined with building studies to determine possible positions of sup- ort and access structures, and to study civil requirements (such as ‘toundations), These may force re- laxation of earlier constraints. The layout altematives are usually pro- sented as 2-D drawings, though 3-D ‘computer models may also be used (Figure 3). These models will help both the layout designer and other disciplines to visualize functional and safety as- pects. Consequently, it is useful at this stage to have brief and mainly intuitive reviews of the layout be car- ried out by the various discipiines. Cost evaluations are camied out again or finetuned for the acceptable layouts and a short list of particular layout arrangements is developed and recorded as plot plans (deally just one selection is chosen, but in ‘some cases, competing options ara sfil on the short fist. Stop 7. Hazard assessment of plot layout. Areas within the plot where loss of containment can oocur must be identified, and the amount of ma- terials that could potentially be lost must be quanttied by analyzing vati- ‘ous potential hazard scenarios. The consequences of oach loss. with respect to explosion, fire or toxicity should be calculated. ‘Within the plant, those caloulations villincicate separation distances be~ tween potential sources ot ignition {and sources of leaks and wall specity the various hazard zones for electri cal equipment and fired equipment. ‘The safe positioning and protection of control rooms will also be calcu- lated. These calculations are also eosential to as9095 and prodiot the potential losses that could occur at various distances outside the plot,| with regard to the danger to people, equipment and buildings trom fre, explosion and toxicity. The layout may well have to be adjusted, ‘The Mond Index method [75] may be used prior to (out not instead of) the above assessments, Step 8. Layout of piping and other connections. The principal pip- ing and pipe routes are confirmed during this step. Principal electrical mains routes are also checked. Var us connecting arrangements are considered and the most promising ones are further optimized. Piping models can be used as aids and computerized versions can be used to support optimization efforts. The best layout arrangement should now be selected and recorded, Step 9. Critical examination of plot layout. The proposed arrangs- Ment should satisty all of the obvi- ous requirements in light of all the information available. It should be examined formally by the various disciplines to make sure less obv- ous features (discussed below) have ot been omifted ‘Spectic aspects to examine inciude: '» Ease of operation * Ease of maintenance ‘* Ease of construction ‘+ Ease of commissioning ‘+ Ease of escape and firefighting * Safety of operators and other personnel during construction, commissioning, operation and maintenance ‘© Environmental impact = Future expansion 3-D models can be good aids to the review process, though they are expensive to produces. Chaok lists to assist with this process can be found in Ret. 12. ‘The results of the critical examina- tions carried out by the various disc plines, and the results of the hazard assessment, must be reconciled Carrying out such a muiti-discipinary consultation is essential In some cases, it may be found that the layout is impractical or even impossible. When this occurs, it wil be necessary to rethink the process design or even undertake ‘urther laboratory and other develop- ment work. In most cases, though, the resulls of the crllical examination will mean adjusting the layout by means of further iteration from Step 2 onward, F.GURE 3. The output of atypical 20 pant ayut model is shown here. This model cf solids-handing facity was produced using CAUWort rm Inerraph Preliminary site layout ‘Step 10. Site data. Steps 1-9 wil be carried out for each separate plant and storage area within the pro- posed site. This wil provide the size and shape of each plot, will help to define aocess requirements (for ve~ icles and people during construc tion, operation, maintenance and emergencies), and will provide an approximate evaluation of the sepa- ration needed around each plant to ensure proper hazard containment. Using the process data of the various plants, the layout engineer should compile information re- lated to the site materials and util- ties PFDs, pedestrian and vehicular traffic capacities (for both intemal and extoral movements), size and shape of the plots, bulldinas, and re- quired tities, central services and amenitios.. Step 11. Site layout. The PFD for ‘the site allows the various processes to be positioned relative to one an- other. The flow pattern may be modi fied in order to isolate hazardous Processes and to accommodate the Proposed rail and road entry points ‘or wharf positions. Next, services, such as the boiler house and effluent plant, are added in the most convenient positions, subject to the provision that they are rot likely to be put out of action by a cisastor. The central buildings aro placed so that the distances traveled by personnel who use them are mink- mized, providing that these buildings aren safe places. Aiter this, the rod and rail sys- toms are marked in greater dotal. Try to keep the various types of traf fic segregated as far a= is possible and desirable, There should be ac- cess tfom at least two directions 10 all parts of the site, to alow for emer- gence, as shown in in Figure 4. The size of the site is determined from the area of individual plants, storage areas and central buildings plus the clearances between the Piants. It is also necessary to allow ample space for things like parking, loading and unioading, stores and firefighting water storage. Typical clearances, size and areas are given in Rot. 12. Dunng the development of this layout, allowance must be ‘made for future plant expaneion and for goneral construction and other access considerations. itis essential to establish, within the vera layout, al tho important posi- tional realionships between slerments of the layout that must be maintained. This consideration is cructa because available sites may not conform in shape or te to the prelmi- nny yout and sere eompremites and amendments to the layout are al most certain to be needed. night of this, it must be known which reation- ships can be relaxed to fit the plant in the avaiable space. Simple drawings and paper cut- ‘outs are very useful for site layout development. Physical and 3D computer. models. may also be Used especially to" gauge the vvioual impact. Step 12. Hazard assessment of site layout. The plots on the sitewhere loss of containment can pos- ‘occur are noted. Vulnerable parts of the site are listed, such as offices, central tities, key com- mercial plants and the ‘site bound- aly (representing the start of the public domain). The consequences of each loss through fire, explosion or toxicity on the vulnerable items are calculated. The layout is adjusted so that the consequences become acceptable; in particular, the chance of escala- ion of an occurrence throughout the site (via the “domino effect’) is made less likely. Ref. 12 goes into further detall on this topic. ‘Step 13. Site-layout optimization. When there are feasible altoma- tive arrangements, cost estimations should be developed for each with respect to transport and piping con- nections between the various plots and so on, The most economical layout can then be subject to further optimization of the plot spacings, subject to the hazard constraints. Step 14. Critical examination of site layout. The proposed site plan shoud ideally be examined critically by the various disciplines first sepa- rately and then together. Points to review include the following: * Containment of hazards and safety of employees and public '» Emergencies ‘= Transport and piping systems = Access for construction and maintenance ‘* Environmental impact, including rift of airbome effluents and dis charge of liquid effluents “+ Future expansion, ‘Additional points are included in the checklist In Ref. 12. In the worst ccaco, it may become obvious durng tho raviow that one or more of the proposed plants is unaccaptable, but in most cases, the review will e- sul in adjustments to the site layout, iterating from Step 11 onward. Step 15. Site selection. The results of site layout will be: fa. The size and shape of the site b. The pipeline, road, rail and water access neaded to the site . Necessary hazard-separation ‘ances around the site d. Position of the various structures ‘and their foundation loacing These factors, plus the others out- lined in Ref. 12, will guide the selec- d site layout Step 16. Site data. No site will be ‘deal, however much cares taken in ‘ts selection, So after site purchase, the engineer has to adjust the layout to the constraints of the site and itis important that these are clearly es- tablished. They could include: a. Site topographical details referring to: ‘© The load-bearing abilty of the soll and subsurface conditions site grading and drainage features . The atmospheric conditons with regard to: Extremes of weather, which may make it desirable ‘to provide special shelter or protection for ‘equipment or operators + Prevaling wind direction tor con- sideration when locating intake ‘or exhaust stacks, or fumaces up- or dovmwind in relation to ‘tho romaindor of the plant. Alco sand, sea-spray and leaves can be blown by the wind onto plant c.Environmental conditions relat- ing to adjacent properties, such ‘a5 residential property or public places, neighbors’ hazardous or vbratcry operations, roads, ralk ways, atfields or rivers dd. Site Boundary and services param- ‘eters for normal and emergency ‘conditions, such as access from public roads, waterways and rail systems, sevvets, water supplies, power Supplies,” pipe trenches, ‘drains, public paths and rights of way . Lagal requirements, such as plan- hing and building laws and by- laws, requirements for dealing with otfluent pollution and noise, trafic regulations, fro, insurance and ‘other safety requirements The following items should be based (on the owmer's and national stan- dards and codes of practice: * Road width, radi and gradients * Sorvice corridors * Pipe-bridge heights over roads, railways and pipo-trenenes © Buiding lines, + Architectural finish to buildings It is likely that while the site is being selected and purchased, fur- ther process and engineering design and market research work has been undertaken on the individual plants could have been updated and the further information, relevant to the site layout, made available. Site 17. Site layout. Steps 11-14 should be repeated, but in greater detail and subject to the constraints Of the selected site, Possible layout changes to the original plan could be caused by the following: «The desirability of placing a heavy plant on good load-bearing soll ‘© The position of road, rail and ser- vice access points ‘= The need to put hazardous plants away from public places, such as schools, and to take note of neigh boring hazards ‘+ The desirablty to have a good en- vironmental impact (es described In Soction 3.8 of Ret. 12) + Planning restrictions. The hazard assessment can now take account of known vulnerable features outside the site bound- ary. The crtical examination wil, in Addition to the items given in Step 414, also check that site constraints and standards have not been vio- lated. Extensive consultation will be made with the various regulatory and emergency authorities during the detailed layout stage. The final site plan wil show the roads, railways, site pipe routes, sewers, central buldings and ser” Vices. It will ideally be produced in the form of, and with the aid of, d2- tailed drawings and possibly mode's, ‘whether computer nmanual or both. Detailed plot layout Step 18. Plot layout data. The de- tailed plot layout information includes the folowing: a. Standards, in particular: + Owner's basic practices and standards ‘+ National and international codes: ‘of practice, standards, speci ‘cations and reguiations’ + Contractor's standards where the above are not available b, Tho detailed site information aiven in Step 16, which could impinge cn plot layout ¢. Site plans and details, giving the features that might influence the pict layout * Location and relationship of roads and railways surtounding the plot and estimates of traffic that might interact with the plot's+ Steam, water, sewage disposal, and other services, particularly the terminal points relating to the plot Raw material and product pipe- line terminals © Sources of atmospheric poll fion that might affect the pro- ‘cess operatars or maintenance stat . The detalled process engineering ‘design, which contains © P&IDs indicating (with identifies tion codes) the process equip- ment and instrument require ‘ments and showing the pipeline ‘connections ‘+ PFDs showing the flows and ‘composition of each stream * Line schedules aving each pipe ifs size, specification and the temperature and pressure con- ditions * Equipment schedules and draw- ings providing the specification ‘of each item together with its plant size, register number, crit- cal dimensions, process power requirements, process and utlty nozzle connections and flows, materials of construction, pro ‘cess conditions, operation and maintenance requirements ‘+ Procoss design datashsots con- taining the process design data, philosophy and calculations and indicating any process layout re- quirements + The results of the hazard and [AGURE 4. This ste layout model, produced using CADMons rom interop, shoms piped oad andl Tinks operability studies of the pro- cess design * The drawing conesived in Steps 19 Step 19, Plot layout. Most of the initial steps, particularly Step 4, and 69 are repeated in greater detail and subjected to the site constraints ven in Step 18. It f= important that, in repeating Step 6, there Is good coordination between the layout, process, op- erating, piping, civil, structural and mechanical disciplines. The piping arrangement studies (repeat of Step 8) done here are discussed in more detail in Ret. 12. The hazard reassessment (Step 9) will be mainly concered with in: temal plant spacings, cuch as area hazard classificalion zones and control room and other plant buld- ing positions. Inter-plot spacings are considered in hazard assessment of the site layout. The repeat of the critica examination chould (as well as considering the aspects given in Step 9) also see that standards, reg- uations and site constraints on the plot have not been violated. Hazard assessment Increasingly, regulatory authorities wil require a combined hazard as- sosemont of the site and plot layouts ailer both have been tentatively final zed. Some existing activites will be required to submit hazard assess- ments. These include the following: * Interactions between items within tho plot ‘Interactions between plots within the site ® Interactions between the site and its surroundings The approach discussed here is a formalized summary of the steps that are typcally taken by chemical engi neers on large or dangerous plants. Less tormal approaches ars more ‘commonly used in practice, however, for reasons of economy and practi” cality. Critical examination in particu- laris a resource-hurgry exercise. i Edited by Suzanne Sheley Author Sein Noten is manacina deta: of rise Li. 5 Narre, Wrewrm Dero, UK nal. sear merangepanss: Fi coue Phae: 44-1629 2686 He alsa Masters De (> t BuctenicalFnghesting From thivesiy Caley Lond " sa 82 Tew of ho mets CChemeal Eriners, Moran tas 25 years of experience as proms plant dese, Cormissoniy engine: al hoses. He as pubis wo books (12.16, ara poseny wong ‘anchor Donk, orttad “Ar AN Gude Co War ‘ndEffvetTeabnert lat Desi” References 1. ramones pois ar strap vos, re, 4,93, 1977 2. . How manage el eno oben cs, Gham. tra, 0, 197 3. Ke Fw o get te best ces at yas or os aid compres, Chem Fr, 131, 197. 4 an, Layo arent cat crs, Coan, 84,183, 1077 5 Kam, HO om he opr at ot teroes Cie. nn, 34, 169,197 6. Hem, R. Space queens rl tout br process ‘anes, ten fo, 117, 1978 7 Kean, Ring fe asa chemical pes la Ce. rg 8,13, 1978 8 Ken, stove rangers res ae veges ai cma earn a Fy, 5 127, 1918 9. am, Coty tn cs fabs pn se. hen. 86,145, 1978. 10. Ha, , How tb arargp to pt pn fo procs sls, Chem fre. 5,181, 178 11. Gen DO, a Pay iL, Tans Genie Eno egg) "a ie Mra, 2007 12 a, Sn “Pcs Papo Est (Cesta igs, autre Hasan, 2018, 13. em, Kan arme, M, Deoon a a cra homie rocco axon, Jura af Less Porton ‘lb oes estes 2; 2012, 65-666. M4 Msc, 0, "Moces Pa Lye” Hale Pras, 1B, 15. The Nertnkx C2 Asoxats, 1985, 1G, Nea, See.) Ace Geo Process and et Desig" Hearn 2315,