.3
•
—
,
—~
~
…4
…
—
–
r
r—~
-~
~z -Ø~iNoVATlYE ENGINEE’ NG
•
•
-‘
~-
3
.
DESIGN FAC ITATES PLANT
CONSTRUCTION
~::J.
~
By Richard Burkhalter
Covenant Engineering Services, LLC.
Branson, Missouri, USA
Abstract
Traditional engineering design
for any new facility, including
manufacturing and processing
facilities, has involved the
development of drawings which
detail all elements of construction.
In addition to the drawings,
basic material specifications and
construction criteria are detailed
on the drawings and provided in
supplemental written form. A
complete construction package can
contain tens of drawings, or more,
depending on the size of the facility,
and multiple binders containing
very detailed specifications.
This paper explores the use of a
computer generated 3D model
for the construction of smaller
facilities, such as lubricating grease
manufacturing facilities. The 3D
model not only provides an image
of the finished plant that can be
manipulated by a free software
viewer to see the details of the future
facility from any angle, but also
through the viewer provides the
ability to obtain dimensions on the
screen, thus eliminating the majority
of the detailed mechanical drawings.
When compared to the traditional
engineering design approach, the
use of a 3D computer generated
model of the proposed plant can
help reduce capital cost and shorten
start-up time.
L.
I
-.
•1_..
:7,
7,_
IL
—
r~LI
—~.
I
. ——
A
11
—
II
(used by permission)
– 40 VOLUME 79, NUMBER 4
I
tt~44..4~ ~
:.:
~jntroduct:on~:~
t…
_.~LWhen ap~plymg gen~ral engineering desig~i the
approach~ grea’tly affected by the typ~ of design
requi?eLGFfroots’ facilities ai~ gehefàlly require the
~ hve the
high~st~o~t to capitã1~ ratio; .Pláiit mo~1ifications will
-geñè~ãlly-~equir~3~s ~e~tensive engineering design, but
most~often has higher cost to capital ratio Trouble
sh~oting,~hird category for engineering design
isshi~ly’~riablLin cost to.capital ratio. At times,
troubleshootingsissues.require very little engineering
~
designeffort ev~irthc5ugh the ii é~ti~ãtive éffort may
be substantial. .fn thi~ paper, we will focus more on the
•
grassroots ~ategory, grass roots being~defined as a new
faci1ity-froimthe~grouhd-u~ which includes-”green field”
facilities as well ~s additions to an existing facility.
•
When developing tF~e engineering approach for a grass
_rQots:facility, there are three. basic.steps recommended.
: ~These include a feasibility study or conceptual design,
~basic:or process design, and detailed design. These steps
are building blo&s for the project and have check points
throughout to provide careful review and economic
analysis before the. major capital expenditure is executed.
~.
4
-.
—
ditiii~dEiigineiring Design
-Coiiceptii~1. P~sign. A conceptual design will often be
Iiiterchangeable ~with a feasibility study. Both attempt
todefine piojec~t objectives develop basic design
~paratheterS, an~d provide the opportunity for ecor~omic
evalu~tioii~Ec~mic evaluation is u~ually condi.’icted
~ —b~the client &~rnpãhy, but uses information from
the concepti’ial d~ig~itin that evaluation This step is
consiäë~Td~criticaflo the success of the project
Bydeyelopig.~nd:documenting the~project objectiyes:
and basic designfrarameterL the chances of scope
• :~
o~J~Jd-ea~ion of the project sco~e,
–
–
—
Basic 1~esign. Basic design is sometimes,used
interchangeably with process design. ~The objective
of this en~gineering stage is to define the details of the
process. By defining the details of the process, we
include development of the product flow, sizing major
equipment, establishing required field instrumentation,
and defining the control philosophy. The basic design
is critical:for several reasons. First, it establishes
another check point in the project for evaluation of
the proje~t objectives and for revisiting the economic
analysis. Second, the basic design provides the basis
for the detailed design, including general equipment
arrangement, equipment specifications, and relating the
process design paramenters. Again, depending on the
size of the project, the basic design can cost 5% to 10% of
the total ~nstalled cost of the new facility.
Detailed Design. Detailed design is the final design
stage, but. is not necessarily the final stage for engineering
support. The detailed design provides all of the detailed
dimensions for fabrication and installation of the
new facility for all discipline,s. Detailed drawings are
generated for civil, structural, mechanical, and electrical,
including controls, construction. Needless to say, this ~s
normally the most intensive stage of engineering. The
following highlight some of the activities associated with
the detailed design of a new facility.
Site Layout. The site layout includes the civil!
structural design of the general facility, including
buifdings, road and rail access points, site drainage,
and! exterior mechanical iieeds such as pipe
–
—
:are signific~ntly rëdifced 1~ep ending on the size of the
4
rOje&,~ ~ càh ~ôst between $15,000
~i~(USD)aidi$300QO:cJSD)..~Thi~ is-thdriey well spent.
~onsidering exi5enditure foi~ the new facility may range
~ñ~iO ~ll~(U~YT~$30 niilli~ (ii~) T~
~ ~is ~not fuily.implemented, cost
~-
overruns can be 30% to 50% of the original capital cost
stif~ate..~4~
•~…
•
– 41
1~LGI SPOKESMAN, SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2O1~
I.
~~1
•
sup~orts.
Util~ity Supply. The utility supply includes water,
~1e9rical;power, aiid sewer services. It sh~uld
be rjoted that the engineering completed during
the pasic design is essential for assuri~ig ad~quatè
utilities afe proyided for the new facility.
Equ~zpment Layout An initial plant ayoutis
con~pleted. during the basic design pFjáse. -Iowe~er,
during detailed design, the e4üfpthent.1a~roüt
is developed with greater ~etaiI ~iii ~ and
~l~tsEAi ~hispoint, ~~tandThg sfr~kfuial
sup~orts for the equipmei1t are cl~vel6ped,
utili~zing the interface between ~roce~s design and
mechanical design’. if equIpment supports :are
—
-~
–
•
—
•
.
•
— .
4
—‘
-i
.4.
~_*
.4
-.4
.4
–
‘l’
I
~
I
is-i.
I
9 )3~’lE’
a
.~Ilii
I
____._s
I
~
—
—
~
-t
A
5-3 WV
Figure 1
—
Typical Double Line Piping Detail (Plan)
+
~._e0L
~4” ~IJC
t
1/is- flfl (lit)
I
I
_________
I
-t
cant icon ecsza~cm
S
V FLAIU. 300 LB OtTO.
C
3~ LB. R$,WJL
Figure 2
—
SECTION A-A
i.co pooa ecois
(RE DOUB ‘311 0-it-Do)
nrssjc np coiocww
~SCE era u.s 0000NC)
Typical Double Line Piping Detail (Elevation)
–
42
–
VOLUME 79, NUMBER 4
5
integral to the building, the structural design must
occur during the design of the building based on
the equipment layout developed during the basic
design.
• Detailed Pipe Routing. Once the equipment is
set, the pipe routing can be done. Often, during
this process, adjustments need to be made in the
plans and elevations to accommodate the process
piping. Plans, elevations, and details are developed
to assure adequate access is provided for both
operations and maintenance. Needless to say,
this activity can be very time consuming to assure
constructability and operability, and requires
careful review by the process engineers. Figures
1 & 2, show a typical double line piping detail.
Consider each pump will need at least one elevation
detail drawing and a plan drawing as shown on
page 42.
• Oversights in the development of the details
contribute a great deal to the necessity for field
modifications.
• Electrical Routing. Electrical routing usually
follows pipe routing design so that clear paths are
maintained for both the piping and electrical runs.
When considering the above activities, it is not difficult
to understand why the drawing package for the new
facility can consist of a hundred or more drawings for a
II~
r.
medium sized plant. At $500 to $1500 per drawing,
the cost for the detailed design can easily exceed a
half million dollars when adding the engineering and
overhead costs, and the design firm’s profit. Add in
bid package preparation and acquisition of equipment
quotes and evaluations, it is not hard to understand how
detailed engineering can amount to 10% to 15% of the
total installed cost of a new grease plant.
Modified Engineering Design
When designing a new facility, certain engineering
activities are generally considered essential to achieve
the most cost efficient construction and trouble-free
start up. One of these activities is the conceptual design.
It cannot be emphasized enough how important this
engineering step is to the overall success of the project.
Establishing a solid basis of design and accommodation
for future growth is vital to not only the initial
construction efficiency, but also for future additions
and modifications. It is far too common for clients to
“paint themselves into a corner” by not giving adequate
consideration to future needs. Once the conceptual
design is complete, consideration can be given to a
modified approach to the subsequent design stages.
Basic Design. Basic design activities can be increased
by moving some of the detailed design activities into this
step. For example, general pipe routings and electrical
4~.
1’
.4
(used by permission)
– 43 NLGI SPOKESMAN, SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2015
‘~~r~L~r
4~+~*..if~
•.
*~
~.
~
~-
.
~
. ~- ~‘‘~T
e
3….
4..
-.~L3
~
-~‘
‘~
—
4’
-.
–
~.
-~
–
:
‘~
‘.
. .- ., —.
. . .
~ ~ routings
can be.more.completely
defined.. Some
details
.4
S
H-~
i”’T
~ arfd~lévätioiis, aiid ‘control
‘.t ‘+#flt 1’t ~
.wiring d~agrams can-also be-done in this ~ rhesc. are
—tt~1~..1’~’;~. ‘~:
‘done.to.set up~ the-modified
detailed
design-step:
1”
tI….. .4…
• D~etaz1ed Design -Thi~is the stage~th_at can, if executed
~
~:
‘-~-‘properly, provide a significant :cost savings. .The modified
~app~o~ch f2~r.the~ ~i1e~’ design is the use of a 3D.CAD
~ are a
,jnumber of fac~tors that i~ed to be understood for this to
Ebeasuccessful~’d~sr~viiigappi~ach
. : i7èndorbrawings. ;G~5dd vendor drawings are
-‘
~‘-~
–
‘‘
-“
.
—
–
…~-
~
I—. —
—
~
‘“
—
–
—~
.-“-‘
~
..
–
~.. •.
-•:–
—
–
: necessar~for devel9prng the various equipment
CAD~blócks-used~iñ the i~nodel. For the most part,
vendors ~supply very basic dimensional drawings
thai’are
i~üfft~ ~ransiate ~n~o a 3D image.
~ ~ b~t~i~thedrawings.supp1ied, the less time
consum~n~ and the more realistic the 3D image.
If the veñdors’can supply CAD drawings of the
equipment, the process of developing the 3D image
is greatly facilitated.
•. Structural Drawings. The 3D model is built on the
strhctural drawings provided. They are essentially
~ the skeleton of the tiio&l. Incidentally, the first
oppprtunity for identifying and correcting steel
interferences occurs when fitting in the equipment
blocks (3D images) in to the model. Kettle
nozzles can easily be blocked or partially blocked
~ by supporting steel. Insufficient clearance for
piping.ai~d insulation is a problem that is nearly
• ini~ossi1~leto correct during construction. By
id~T~fyfhg’ the interferences at this ~tage, either the
31’… ste~1 ~a~ijke modified or the nozzles shifted on the
–
~.
.,
—
1…
~
—.
•~-
–
..
aj~1d develop ~a good sense of what t,heir part of the
installation would look like. ~The 3b computer
generated model takes the place ofthe physical
model once used to facilitate construction. The
advantage the computer model off~rs is that it’
provides the ability to ‘move’ withi~i the model,
look in any direction, and zoom in on a detail;
smething that was impossible with the physical
model.
The 3D model, like its predecessor, allows the.
c~ntrac~or to ‘see’ what is being built. Many, if
npt most, contractors can nearly build a facility
by looking at a good picture of the unit. ‘We have
encountered many very ‘visual’ contractors and
heard them express their ability to do a much petter
job by having a ‘picture’. to look at. .If, on the ~ther
hand, the general contractor and sub-contractors
ai~e not visual, much of the advant~ge will be lost.
The contractor and the designers must be able,
to work together. There will alway~ be questions
and interpretations that will need to be clarified.
Providing the means and encouraging good
communications between the two groups is an
essential function of the owner. However, both
entities must be willing to work together.
–
–
–
–
t~
–
–
E~.
hr—
EL
• k.~let~ provide the clearance needed.
• Capable~1nstallation Contractor. Having•
• an installation contractor that is experienced
with using a computer generated 3D model is
absblutél~cr.iti~äl.td the success of this alternate
approach~. The cont’ractor must deal, with several
cha~l.eng~ -including interpreting the model and
corn~u4catfng the~dejails to his subcontractors,
to take advantage of? the opportunities the model
aff~rdsthecontra~ctor.
–
•
–
.
In years past, physical models were built by an
engineering firm and kept at the construction site
du~r~ng-the entire construction period. Each of the
co~itractc~r disciplines could observe the model
‘
Advantages: There are a number of advantages
associated with using a 3D computer generated model
for constructing the new’facility.
construction advantage. In addition to enabling
th’e contractors to see the plant in general, it
allows them.to see the, equipment location~ and
understand how everything fits together., Perhaps
m?re importantly, the various contractors can see
wl~iere they are to install their equipment, pipe and
el~ctricâl routing, and areas to avoid. Th~ electrical
contractor can readily locate cable trays and other
el~ctrical runs and avoid conflicts ~ith pIping.’
The fire’prote~chon contractorcari locate ~ runs
fo~ their piping, giving precedence to the process
piking. In short, by having a visual representation
of the facility;’ contractors can ‘avoid interferences
and rework.
Operations advantage. By having a visual
re~resentation of the facility; the owner can feel
confident the plant will lOok and function likes
VOLUME 79, NUMBER 4
I
.
-(CI),.direcost
a project caused by rework
intended. Since the model is built before any
construction begins, any changes deemed necessary
can be made well in advance of construction, simply
changing lines on paper. Perhaps one advantage
not often thought of is the ability to have the plant
reviewed by operators and maintenance personnel.
Critical input from these two groups can save
construction cost and improve the efficiency of
the operation. Furthermore, new operators can be
partially trained prior to start-up. Pipe and valves
can be identified and the operations procedures
checked before the plant is built.
Marketing advantage. The 3D model can be an
effective marketing tool. It can serve as a preview
for the suppliers, sales people, distributors and
selected customers.
Engineering advantage. The 3D model can
eliminate nearly all of the detailed drawings. Of
course this depends on the contractor’s ability
to build from a visual model. Only a few critical
drawings are provided with dimensions for
significant portions of the facility~ In addition,
through the use of a free (downloaded) viewer,
dimensions can be obtained from the model,
particularly true when using Solid Works’~ to
generate the model. Needless to say, using the
viewing tool requires a certain amount of computer
literacy on the behalf of the contractor. Instead of
generating tens of drawings, the engineering design
firm wouJd~need to provide only a few drawings to
~
cover the critical areas.
-Reworka4vantage. Rework or field modifications
~.
— -““ ‘—-
are the nemesis of all construction projects.
According to the Construction Industry Institute
•‘
– -. -.
–
averaged 5% of the total construction costs in
2005.1 Th~ largest contributors to the rework
costs were repQ~c~ to be design change, design
errors or omissions, and constructor’s errors or
omissions.~ Each of these are controllable, but
always seem to find their way into a project. When
working with a 3D model, design changes can
be minimized by.having the owner, along with
the operations and maintenance representatives,
-;
review the model BEFORE construction begins.
Walking through the process step-by-step, and
following the model, late changes in the design can
be nearly eliminated. Review by the construction
manager and contractor representatives can greatly
reduce any misunderstandings in the design and
catch any constructability problems BEFORE
construction begins. By performing these reviews,
it is reasonable to assume 1% to 2% of the direct
costs and a similar amount of indirect costs (loss of
schedule and productivity) can be saved. Recent
projects that used the 3D model for construction
did not report any significant rework costs and, to
the contrary, cost was avoided on one project when
the riggers reviewed the model and were able to
pre-plan the kettle installation more effectively.
Disadvantages: There are number of disadvantages
associated with using a 3D computer generated model
for constructing the new facility.
Computer/Technical capability. Since the model
is computer generated and a computer must be
used to view the model, the owner and contractors
must possess a reasonable degree of computer
skills. In some cases, this requirement could
eliminate an otherwise capable constructor thereby
reducing the effectiveness of the bidding process.
Some constructors are not comfortable with
using a computer to determine the construction
requirements and communicate those requirements
to their crews. Furthermore, the constructors must
have the ability to field design some of the details
when using the model as the primary construction
document. This is particularly true for the electrical
and fire protection contractors since these systems
are not usually shown on the model. General
electrical drawings are usually provided, but
detailed routing and installation drawings are no~.
And, since fire protection contractors must, design
their system to provide adequate fire suppression
should a fire occur, sprinkler systems are rarely, if
ever, designed by an engineering design firm.
New work only. The 3D model approach is not.
well suited for modifications to existing facilities;
Few plants have retained sufficient nor current
dra~ings to allow a truly representative model to
45
NLGI SPOKESMAN, SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2015
—
~ . ~.
~
~3Ih.
~
.~
~
L
&4~
~
~ 3~US
•~ ~V~*
~3
~
IJ e
l3~’~
•
-~
~
,.
—
.-.~
~1 II~~a4~
~
~
~
~
•1V~I~W
~
‘–~
g
~
~rs~wzi
~
L
.
d
–
~
~
-.
. . .
••~..
.
:~.j ~.•
,4._.L&
‘
.
~
C
It
1
~.
–
–
—
~
–
i
.
.
.
I~E
.~.— ~-
.-
.
-.
;as large a f~ctor asit:ii~ight.have been in the past.
Th~ eh.LtroniL ni?del~can be archived and used for
treferL ni. e but, li
rawings of the past, will
become out of date within a few years
~—–~-‘~Bläèklibiary-needed; Most of the main
processin~ equipment for a grease plant is
somewhat ~unique the industry. Few suppliers
:Lz~ have ~utoCAD files.that they are willing to share
.-.with ~ engineering firm, much less having a 3D
Vto
–
~•
4
CAD~fi1e for that equipment; An engineering firm
_~y need l~o expend a significant amount of time
~ccfu~ing t~he drawings and developing the various
j
3D e~uiprnent-blocks needed for the model In
~&lit~on,sIeveloping a 3D block for used equipment
can b~ ~y JiaiIengi~ig Depending on the1age and
V
~
•
–
– –
V
V
I
I
_
-.
~T
–
.4~
•
V
,~
•4
•
—
•
••
.~
–
,-
•
..~
–
4
1
~‘‘:‘
. .
.
.
..
-…
•,..i
~..
.
V
•~
C4
-.
V
–
–
thei~eby providing the mechanical pa~kagefor
app~oximately $36 000, resultirg in atn engineering
cost savings of about $44 000
R~work/field modifications reduced Rework costs
are ~lifficult to quantify foi- mai~1 projects because
these costs are not often rigorously tracked When
the~~ are tracked, only the ~irect costs are accounted
for ~nd the -indire~t costs overlooked~ For example,
indirect costs ~puld’inclu’~e loss of schedule an~
V
~V•~
Adding these-two examples together, the cost.
savi~igs to the project would be abQut~$605990. a
retu~rn of~00% oh the cost of the iD ~déL~ O~hèF
savi1ngs may als1o be garnered, such Jred~ed
tra4ing time after the plant is l~uilt for both~ the
operations and maintenance sta~ff
I
–
—
V
V
•
medium size grease plant, rework costs could e4ily I
amount to $160,000 If only 1% of the 50o attrib~ited
to 4work costs were avoided, a savings of $16,000
_~ay not be available fpr developing the block. Such
is-the~case ~hen usedgrease kettles are use4 in
~
5—
-1
I
~ Wheh d~ã’vingsare hot available,
~
~ira~vmgsJ~ be avai~ab1e from a supplier for a
—similar piece of equipment from ‘which a black can
~ be geiuierated It must be recognized by the owner
and constri~ictor that using a substitute equipment
_:ra~i~g,•additionalVfi~ldtime.willbeVrequired to.
~
.-;-5
1 used equipment.
.-lfield-fitV..the
_—– —
~
~ .~
productivity; though real they are sometimes hard
to q1uantify As mentioned above, rework costs
avei~age about 5% of construction costs For the!
.:.
-~
~.
•
one contactor and three kettles managed on twenty
eigl~t(28)pipmg/~chanical~rawings At todays ——
rate of about $500 to $1,500 (USD) per drawing!
I
I
dep1ending on the level of detail, the approximate
cost for those drawings, ~‘ould be $30,000 ~US~{)
The number of drawings required foi~ a medium~
siz9d grease plant would be about twp and~a half
(2 times as many, resulting in a co~t pfr~ear1y
$80 000 Just for the drawihgs In co9ipãri~o~, a 3D
co4puter generated mod~l for a medium ~ plant
in the Midwest USA, cost approximately $30 000
i~
1-
~- ‘.,:-,. ~
. –
—~
i…
.
V
4
‘
+-
1
•
c
I:i~.)
Economics: There are-some rEal cr~dits th’at ca~ii be-l
j
garnered through the use of a 3D~~nptiter g~eñ~r’ated
1
model Some are reasonable specu1~tion~ but others~are
I
based oi~ exp~rience.
I
The number of piping/mechanical drawings
reduced In or~e case a new, small grease plant with
and nnv not bt i e~di1v4 ailable in
i~I areis Th~rtfoa tht. ~D niodd approach is only
well suited tor ntw hL1lItI~ or new additions to an
e~.’4..r-.-l~.-•.,
t’~st1ng flLi1it~
J Fe~ residual dfawd,gs _As wo~uld be expected
4IëW~li~Wii1gs would be prodI~ffoi~th~ew
fklhtyTht I Kk of reference drawings could be a
1disad’.~ant~g~. for tutufr moditiL itions to that facility
PoLentiifl~ mon. fidd i~Vork ~%ouId be required
~tQ de~ elop~thi design br th~ proposed facility
modihcati~nsHoiv~~ er sinLe the trend has been
not pt~men
‘
.
V
~
– .
.••
•
V
• • •
•—~—.-
~ ié~hnology
f. _1,~L
existshthat~roduc~.the i~itbaiioñrè~uired~~
4
to Lit~iId a ~1) lfi~del ot portioi~b1 -in e-ucting
r ~
‘~t~’tt’ _t’
is-usually prohibitive.
—t
-r~ ~ ~ ~
~~ni~s pos~ss’ng’thç.skilIs~ind t~. ~quipment
i~kratt~ ~I) imagL. of ~n Listlng iaLilit~ an.
~
~ —
—
-•
– •.
j
I
—
~—-V•..
~
. ‘~-~
•
–
——-
~
.
+
W~
a2
•÷—.—I..~
4
.
–
–
———
—-—
[
–
–
..
–
– –
–
~
..
– ..
~.
:.~
– ;..
.~.,
–
–
– –
–
.~.
~.
,i.
•,.
–
1.
I
I
46
–
Summary:
Utilization of the 3D computer generated model can reduce
the engineering costs for a new, medium sized grease plant
by approximately 10%, and reduce construction costs by
approximately 1% o 2%. The 3D model provides the means
for the owner to review the designed facility and gain feedback
from operators and maintenance personnel. It can also be
used as a pre-startup training tool for new operators. And, it
can serve as a marketing tool, demonstrating the enhanced
production facility that will provide quality products to
customers. With these benefits, it is prudent to consider the use
of this innovative design tool when constructing a new plant or
a new addition to an existing plant.
References:
[1] Construction Industry Institute (CII). (2005). “Making
Zero Rework a Reality.” RS 203-1 (Nov), The University of
Texas at Austin, Austin, Tex.
[2] Hwang, B., Thomas, S., Haas, C., and Caldas, C. (2009).
“Measuring the Impact of Rework on Construction Cost
Performance.” Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management. ASCE March 2009.
Covenant Engineering
Services, Inc.
Quality Engineering
Service~i~cked
~ with Integrity
E
Specialists:
Grease Manufacturing
and ~S.ube”Oil Blendin’g
ConctjaI~Process,
and Detail Design
140 Corporate Place
Branson, MO 65616
Phone: 417-336-9810
WWW. Co venantengr. corn
-47NLGI SPOKESMAN, SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2015