首页> 外文期刊>Chemical News: Official Journal of the Indian Chemical Manufacturers Association >CRITICAL P&ID REVIEWS USING HAZOP/LOPA METHODOLOGY- OVERKILL OR UNDERRATED?
【24h】

CRITICAL P&ID REVIEWS USING HAZOP/LOPA METHODOLOGY- OVERKILL OR UNDERRATED?

机译:使用HAZOP / LOPA方法进行重要的P&ID审查-溢价还是被低估?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Prior to moving from define phase to execution phase on a given project, the typical project protocol is to perform a critical process and instrumentation drawing (P&ID) review as a transition from "issued for information or preliminary design" to "issued for design or HAZOP". The objectives of a critical P&ID review are to (1) identify commercially-positive design changes early in the project lifecycle to reduce downstream implementation costs, (2) identify operational concerns to ensure optimal resolution and long-term operational effectiveness, and (3) identify safety vulnerabilities for early application of inherently safer design (ISD) principles where possible and early identification of safety integrity levels (SIL) for required safety- instrumented systems (SIS). Companies perform critical P&ID reviews using various evaluation methods, including P&ID symbology/element checklists, process hazard analysis (e.g. Checklist, HAZID, and HAZOP), and "cold-eyes" review. Each of these approaches provides structure to a critical P&ID review; however, each also provides opportunities for commercial, operability, and safety vulnerabilities to remain in the design when applied independently. The authors posit use of a hybrid HAZOP/LOPA process hazard analysis methodology to conduct critical P&ID reviews (1) results in a more rigorous evaluation and (2) reduces the likelihood for commercial, operability, and safety vulnerabilities to persist into the design/execution phase of projects. In this paper, the authors present the advantages and disadvantages of using a hybrid HAZOP/LOPA approach for critical P&ID reviews. They also provide recommendations to enhance the effectiveness of the HAZOP/LOPA methodology when applied to critical P&ID reviews. Specifically, the authors provide examples of commercial benefits realized, enhanced operational insight, ISD successes, and application pitfalls when applying a hybrid HAZOP/LOPA PHA methodology to a critical P&ID review. The target audience for this paper includes project managers, project engineers, EH&S managers, PSM coordinators, and operators; however, anyone involved with small or large capital projects may also benefit from this paper's content.
机译:在从给定项目的定义阶段过渡到执行阶段之前,典型的项目协议是执行关键的过程和仪表图(P&ID)审查,作为从“发布信息或初步设计”到“发布设计或HAZOP”的过渡”。关键P&ID审查的目标是(1)在项目生命周期的早期确定具有商业积极性的设计更改,以减少下游实施成本;(2)确定操作问题,以确保最佳解决方案和长期操作有效性;(3)识别安全漏洞,以便在可能的情况下及早应用本质安全设计(ISD)原则,并及早识别所需安全仪表系统(SIS)的安全完整性级别(SIL)。公司使用各种评估方法执行关键的P&ID审查,包括P&ID符号体系/元素检查表,过程危害分析(例如检查表,HAZID和HAZOP)和“冷眼”检查。这些方法中的每一种都为关键的P&ID审查提供了结构;但是,每当独立应用时,它们还为商业,可操作性和安全漏洞提供了保留在设计中的机会。作者假设使用HAZOP / LOPA混合过程危害分析方法进行关键的P&ID审查(1)结果更加严格,并且(2)减少了商业,可操作性和安全漏洞持续存在于设计/执行中的可能性项目阶段。在本文中,作者介绍了使用混合HAZOP / LOPA方法进行关键P&ID审查的优缺点。他们还提供了一些建议,以在将HAZOP / LOPA方法应用于关键P&ID审核时提高其有效性。具体来说,当将HAZOP / LOPA PHA混合方法应用于关键的P&ID审查时,作者提供了实现的商业优势,增强的运营洞察力,ISD的成功以及应用陷阱的示例。本文的目标读者包括项目经理,项目工程师,EH&S经理,PSM协调员和操作员。但是,涉及小型或大型资本项目的任何人也可以从本文的内容中受益。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号