Upload
lekiet
View
217
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Challenges for the realisation of the Foundation Fieldbus Technology potential
Kees van Geel - Shell Global Solutions Int.
Shell Global Solutions International - SGSI
Who we areWho we are:An international technology service provider, supplying innovative technical, safety and environmental solutions primarily to the worldwide Oil & Gas industry
The HagueAmsterdam
Rijswijk
Thornton
Houston
Singapore/KL
Hamburg
Some 4000 staff based in:Some 4000 staff based Some 4000 staff based in:in:
FF Project Implementation Support facilities
• FF Implementation Support Team – 7 global staff GSES • FF Implementation Support Packages ( Technology awareness package, Consultancy for technology decision, Practical project implementation support, Design Guidelines)
•Capture first operational experience after 12 – 18 months; input to:
lessons learnt and guideline improvement
Foundation FieldbusStandard technology used for all greenfield Shell projects
• Available on the market 10 years
• In Shell first used 8 years ago
• Now used in Capital projects as standard technology for 3 years
V i s io nD e v e lo p m e n t
T e st in gS ta n d a rd
E a r ly A d o p t e r s
B ro a dP ro je c ts U p -t a k e
S u p p o r t fu n c t io n s& G u id e lin e s ,
T ra in in g
P ro j e c t s E x p e r ie n c e s
L e s s on s L e a rn t
T e c h n o lo g y a c c e p t a n c ea n d u p - ta k e
20051995 2000
Generic Benefits from FF technologyProject Phase Operational
Phase• Reduced Project Capex
• DCS & Field devices• Field infra structure• Civil/Buildings - footprint
• Engineering, Design, Construction
• Design eff by standardisation• Fast configuration
• Installation, Commissioning• Cable installation• Fast commissioning
• Reliability, Availability• Diagnostics, Self-check• Control in the Field
• Throughput & Quality• Accurate control
• Operations• Reduced manning• Remote operations
• Maintenance• Fact based and pro-active
• Safety• Less people in the field• Less transport of people
FF projects list – Jan 2005 Up-date
Size confirmedProject # FF I/O RFS date Type Status FF-SupplierP-LNG 20000 Gas New building BODCSPC Nanhai 16500 Chem 2005 New building Des ign & Com m YokogawaQatar GTL _ SMDS_Phase 1 12010 Gas 2008 New building FEED HoneywellQatar GTL _ SMDS_Phase 2 10257 Gas New building Technology choiceNAM GLT 10727 Up On-going Re-ins trumentation Technology choice YokogawaVarious SPDC 5000 Up New building Des ignNorco Olefins 4800 Chem Re-ins trumentation Des ign & Com m YokogawaSakhalin Downstream LNG 4600 Gas 2006 New building Des ign & FAT YokogawaHoudini 4300 Ref 2009 New building BODDeerpark HC 3000 Ref Re-ins trumentation Operational EmersonNorco Refinery 3000 Ref 2004 Re-ins trumentation Start-up EmersonSakhalin Ups tream _Offshore 2080 Up 2006 New building Detailed Des ign & FAT YokogawaSPDC Bonney Oil Terminal 1750 Up Re-ins trumentation Early Des ign, MAC selec tionMalampaya 1600 Up New building Operational EmersonDeerpark CC 1500 Ref Re-ins trumentation Operational EmersonPDO Yibal 1500 Up Re-ins trumentation Operational EmersonBukom HCU 1400 Ref Re-ins trumentation Operational YokogawaPDO Fahud FCS 1000 UpSUK Bac ton Oil Terminal 1000 Up Re-ins trumentation Des ignSCAN AOS 600 Ref New building Operational FoxboroRefidomsa 600 Ref Re-ins trumentation Operational Emerson
FF projects list – Jan 2005 Up-date (cont/2)
Ormen Lange 0 Up 2006 New building Technology choice ABBPernis Smeerol ie Ref Re-instrumentation Technology choiceChine W est P ipeline Up New building Technology choiceChina Kela Up New buildingBBL Up New building Technology choiceSchoonebeek Up Re-instrumentation Technology choicePernis Steiger Ref TestSCOT Rejuvinat ion Ref Re-instrumentation BODCorrib Up 2005 New building Detailed Design ABBPernis Marathon Ref Test HoneywellMoerdijk ChemStanlow Ref Test
Totals 120767
Deerpark CC 1500 nov-01 12202Expro BAR 150 dec-01 12352 dec-02PDO Qaharir Production Stn. 120 jan-02 12472 sep-02PDO Musallim Expansion. 50 jan-02 12522 jul-03BSP Egret 150 jan-02 12672PDO Marmul-A Production Stn. 100 jan-02 12772 dec-02Norco Refinery 3000 jan-02 15772PDO Nimr Deep Water Disposal. 100 feb-02 15872 feb-03PDO Rima Deep Water Disposal. 100 mrt-02 15972 mrt-03PDO Govt' Gas Plant Expansion. 400 apr-02 16372 jan-03CSPC Nanhai 16500 mei-02 32872SUK Bacton Oil Terminal 1000 aug-02 33872Norco Olefins 4800 aug-02 38672Chine West Pipeline aug-02 38672BSP CW 125 sep-02 38797Deerpark HC 3000 sep-02 41797NAM GLT 10727 sep-02 52524SMDS Qatar sep-02 52524 35796,00PDO Marmul-G Production Stn. 300 okt-02 52824 okt-03 37987,00Refidomsa 600 dec-02 53424 2003/04Various SPDC 5000 jan-03 58424
FF Technology up- take in Shell Projects
010203040506070
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Thou
sand
s
Time - Years
# FF
dev
ices
Nanhai
GLT
Norco Olefins
FF Technology Up-take in Shell Projects
2005: 120k I/O
FF I/O’s per Project Type
JAN 200450 Projects101150 FF I/O’s
FF IO's per Type
Unclear4%
Greenf ield59%
Re-Instr37%
Test0%
57 Projects120767 FF I/O’s
FF IO's per Type
Unclear3%
New66%
Re-Instr31%
Test0%
FF I/O’s per Application Sector
57 Projects120676 FF I/O’s
FF IO's per Appl SectorUpstream
30%Chem21%
Ref15%
Gas34%
FF IO's per Appl SectorUpstream
25%Chem18%
Ref12%
Gas45%
Jan 200450 Projects101150 FF I/O’s
Projects per Supplier
57 Projects120676 FF I/O’s
# Projects per Supplier
ABB4%
Honeyw ell13%
Foxboro2%
Emerson22%
Yokogaw a20%
Not decided39%
Jan 200450 Projects101150 FF I/O’s
# Projects per Supplie r
ABB4%
Honeyw ell8%
Foxboro2%
Emerson24%
Yokogawa22%
Not decided40%
FF IO per Supplier
57 Projects120676 FF I/O’s
Jan 200450 Projects101150 FF I/O’s
FF IO's per Supplier
Not decided28%
Yokogaw a36%
Emerson10% Foxboro
0%
Honeyw ell26%
ABB0%
FF IO's per Supplier
Not dec ided36%
Yokogaw a41%
Emerson12%
Foxboro1%
Honeywell9%
ABB1%
Definitions/1• Assets – all hardware available at a producing site
that has an impact on production availability and on production efficiency.– Specifically this will include process vessels, piping, process
control and automation system, electrical systems, rotating equipment, monitoring systems and tools, inspection systems and tools.
• Asset Management – the work process targeting optimum utilisation of Assets.– Specifically this will include work in the Project Phase –
system configuration and downloading, fast commissioning, trouble shooting – and work in the Operational Phase –effective planning and execution of maintenance, optimum operation.
Definitions/2
• Asset Management Systems – Systems that contain tools and provide input for plant staff –production planners, technologists, operators, maintenance staff – to assist in Asset Management.– Specifically this will include functionality for effective and
efficient Operations, i.e. to maintain planned availability and to optimise the performance of production facilities
– technical, financial, strategic
– Proper set-up of AMS should start in Project Phase
The Vision & the Expectation
Promises from Industry:Open System Architectures with FF technology will
provide
Enabling Platform for Operational Excellence andReduced Capex and Opex
– Time & cost effective automation project execution– Enable fast commissioning– Provide improved reliability/availability– Enable unmanned operations– Enable remote operations support– Enable pro-active maintenance schemes
Reality• Foundation Fieldbus is not much more then an
infrastructure• Currently asset management in DCS is instrument
asset management – Still stuck in development of basic applications– No platform for application developments
Challenge:• Move data into information• Working together of Supplier & Users to
develop applications
Contributing AMS elements – utilisation
ProcessUnitOptimisation
ProcessUnit/EquipmDiagnostics
ProcessInterfaceDiagnostics
DeviceDiagnosticsB
asic
A
dvan
ced
Type of Diagnostics InformationOn Process Unit utilisation
On basic Process Unit functioning
On Device utilisation
On basic Device functioning
Multiple input model, incl $$ info, reliability/stress relations to determine value/cost relation ship
Catalyst flow risk, Wrong temperature profile (all multi-input & model); pro-activeapproach is essential
Transmitter drift detected, Plugged Impulse line, Valve performance deterioration
Failure with sensor, A/Dconv, memory card
ProcessUnitOptimisation
ProcessUnit/EquipmDiagnostics
ProcessInterfaceDiagnostics
DeviceDiagnosticsB
asic
A
dvan
ced
Type of Development Action Type of Diagnostics Party Party Info
Production planner + Technologist, Automation Contractors
Technologist, Automation Contractor
Instrument Engineer/Automation Contr
Device Supplier
Targets for economical optimisation
Alert plus suggestion on action. Routing and action Criticality dependent.
Alert info plussuggestion on action & timing, SAP
DetailedDev. Diagnostics Data à SAP
Info toTechnologist
Operator
Operator/ Maint. Org.
Instrument Maintenance Organisation:Pro-active info
Traffic light to Op; Auto WO gen in SAP D
ata
In
form
atio
n
So
lutio
n
Str
ateg
ic
Opt
ions
ProcessUnitOptimisation
ProcessUnitDiagnostics
ProcessInterfaceDiagnostics
DeviceDiagnosticsB
asic
A
dvan
ced
Type of Development Action Type of Diagnostics Party Party Info
Production planner + Technologist. AC
TechnologistandAC
Instrument Eng. Automation Contr (AC)
Device Supplier
Advice for economical optimisation
Alert plussuggestion on
Alert info plussuggestion on action & timing
DetailedDev. Diagnostics Data à SAP
Info toTechnologist
Operator
Operator
Maintenance Organisation
Auto WO gen in SAP D
ata
In
form
atio
n
So
lutio
n
Str
ateg
ic
Opt
ions
Issue
• Little consistency in Vendor/User approach to AM• Little input from User Technologist/Process Engineers
– Different Departments– Little interest in perceived instrument/asset management(maintenance
issues)– Different priorities
Challenge:• Move instrument data into process unit information• Working together of Supplier & Users to develop
process/unit applications
A way forward• Vendor and User Engineers working together more
closely on AM requirements/ packages– Can this be done in an industry platform (FHI, WIB, IEC)– Can Users agree on generic requirements
• Vendor to develop “standard” AM building blocks around process equipment with Users– Requires Users to accept testing at another companies site– Willingness of users to invest in tests
• User friendly AM building blocks will make it easier for Technologist input and idea generation
• Implementation as a standard during design
Risk of doing nothing
• Getting stuck; FF based AM remains basic• Technology not used• Perception will remain AM = SAP• Lot $$ to loose for Users