DCS Migration Lessons Learned

Standards

Certification

Education & Training

Publishing

Conferences & Exhibits

DCS Migration

Lessons Learned

Presented at the 2015 Process Control and Safety Symposium Houston, Texas, USA, 9-12 November 2015

Copyright 2015. All Rights Reserved. www.isa.org

2

Presenter

• Randy Conley is DCS/ SIS/ APC Implementation Supervisor for TOTAL’s Port Arthur Texas refinery. He is currently architect for PAR’s multiyear refinery-wide DCS and SIS migration projects. He also supervises the advanced control group. Randy’s previous employers include Profimatics and CITGO’s Lake Charles Louisiana refinery.

• Randy is a Registered Professional Engineer (PE), Project Management Professional (PMP) and TOTAL’s AFPM Decision-Support committee member. He holds BS and MS degrees in Chemical Engineering from Lamar University.



DCS MIGRATION:LESSONS LEARNED

TOTAL – Port Arthur Refinery (PAR)

• PAR is a 174MBPD transportation fuels, merchant refinery• The site began in the 1920s as an Atlantic Refining oil terminal. The terminal

shipped crude oil from the nearby Spindletop oil field to Atlantic’s New Jersey refinery

• PAR has operated as a fuels refinery since 1936• The site has been owned and operated by Atlantic (1920s), ARCO (1938),

BP (1969), FINA (1973) and TOTAL (1999)• Major processing units include an FCC, Reformer, and Delayed Coker• Most products are shipped east of the Rockies via pipeline




What I will cover

• Program Background

• Selling the Program

• Project Staffing

• Handling Scope Discovery Items & Discrepancies

• Current Program Status

More detail is available in the Hydrocarbon Processing article (“DCS Migration: Lessons learned”, Jan 2015, pp. 75-80.

For other control migration issues, I recommend…




Control System Migrations

• Published in 2013 – Daniel Roessler

– Project Justification/FEL (Front End Loading)

– Bid Specification/ Vendor Selection

– Scope, Schedule, Budget

– Project Staffing/Training

– Progress Monitoring/ Change Orders

– High-Risk Areas/Cutovers

– Project Closeout/Lifecycle Management




Program Background




Where We Were

• Our DCS (Distributed Control System) migration program began in 2005

• Existing Honeywell TDC-2000 DCS systems were at/ over capacity

• 80% TDC-2000, 20% TDC-3000

• 8 Data Hiways, 2 LCNs (Local Control Networks), 18,000 I/O (Inputs/Outputs)

• Manufacturer announced a 2016 TDC-2000 end of support

02,0004,000

6,0008,000

10,00012,00014,000

16,00018,00020,000

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

Year Installed

Po

ints TDC-3000

TDC-2000




Program Plan

• Eight project steps were planned – one per Data Hiway

– Modernizing by Hiway allowed us to apply lessons-learned to future steps

– Program steps were ordered according to system capacity, equipment age and maintenance history

– Schedule was to begin a new step every 12 months to distribute capital commitments and comply with Honeywell’s 2016 end-of-support date

– Each step took 18-24 months to complete, resulting in overlap• Hot cutover (HCO) at Junction Box was our chosen approach

Month

Issue RFP, Select Contractor

Front End Loading

Project Kick-Off

Field Engineering

DCS Engineering

Factory Acceptance Test

Site Acceptance Test

Hot Cutover

Construction

Demolition

2421 22 2319 201 2 3 4 131211109 185 6 7 8 17161514




Hot Cutover (HCO)

• Pros

– Minimize risk of upset (one loop at a time)

– Easier operator transition to new system

– No critical path or start-up issues for turnaround

– Schedule is decoupled from turnaround• Cons

– Requires footprint and electrical power sufficient to handle both systems

– If required, RIE (Remote Inst Encl) adds $1M

– HCO somewhat complicates field-input wiring




Developing the Scope

• Used industry contacts to get recommendations for MAC (Main Automation Contractors)

• Narrowed list of 12 recommended MACs to 5

• Awarded an FEL (Front End Loading) study (±10%) to three MACs

• Used FEL results to prepare the capital request for the first step

• Presented factored total program estimate in first-step management review




Selling the Program




Our Audience

• Senior management (Houston/ Paris)

• Information needs are different than for a technical presentation

– Stakes are higher - $77M multiyear program

– Avoid unnecessary acronyms – use terms familiar to the audience

– Use common language – money (you need it, they control it)

– Anticipate questions, be prepared with answers – but don’t volunteer info

– Speaking to persuade as well as inform

– Make no unsubstantiated claims

• Practice, practice, practice




PAR Uses the Dossier

• Dossier vetted by local management, delivered to senior management a week in advance for review by their technical staff

• Pre-sell (answer corporate staff’s questions before formal review, if possible)

• In-person or videoconference formal management presentation• Executive Summary

– Two or three slides - summarize the dossier (some managers may notread past the Executive Summary)

– Include scope, justification, project schedule

– Solid wrap-up/ conclusions

– Specific ±10% funding request• Dossier Body:

– 7-12 slides

– Benefits (not features) – explain assumptionsPresented at the 2015 Process Control and Safety Symposium

Houston, Texas, USA, 9-12 November 2015 Copyright 2015. All Rights Reserved. www.isa.org


Dossier

• Body (continued):

– Provide functional scope description (fit-for-purpose, not state-of-the-art)

– Emphasize project results, not details

– Include a major milestone schedule

– Acknowledge lifecycle costs - framed in a positive manner

– Include resource demands as well as costs

– Focus on justifying the project

• Appendix – place supporting detail here –

use only to address questions




Project Staffing




Operations - key role in project success

• Have a Console Operator (CO) assigned early-on

– CO will sell other operators on project • Determine cable-tray routing, RIE location

• Approve graphics updates

• Help develop operator training

• Develop hot cutover order/risk analysis

• Maintain operations punch-list

• Participate in FAT (factory acceptance test), SAT (site acceptance test)




Hot Cutover (HCO) team

• Two outside teams, each having

– Systems hardware specialist

– One TOTAL & two contract instrument technicians

– Shared outside operator

• Construction coordinator – directs both outside teams

• Inside team (Central Control Room)

– DCS systems manager–directs inside activities

– Extra console operator

– Two contract configuration specialists

– Two MAC engineers




HCO Execution

• With daily HCO contractor cost approaching$10,000 - important to be efficient

• Decide on cutover order

– Back to front of unit

– Simple to complex loops

– If HMI upgrade is part of the step, attempt to cut over all points on a graphic before moving to next one

– If issue arises, skip that loop and come back

• Supply lunch for efficiency

• Schedule: Four-10 hour days, target 35 points/day cutover. Reserve Fridays for rain-out and to address issues identified earlier in the week




Handling Scope Discovery Items & Discrepancies




Scope Discovery Items (Lessons Learned)

• First phase generated 170+ items not identified in the FEL

– Some are hardware-based

– Some are to meet PAR Engineering Standards

– Some to meet preferences/ best practices/ improve efficiency• Supplied this list to MAC, FEL contractors for future steps




Discrepancies found during HCO

• Develop an explicit plan and system to handle these before the HCO

• Don’t allow these discrepancies to slow down the HCO

– Log all discrepancies (loop sheet errors, range changes, questionable configurations, graphic errors)

– A separate group addresses high priority issues immediately using expedited MOC (Management of Change) process

– Hand-off other issues to process support engineer for later follow-up




Current Program Status

• We have completed 4 of 9 steps, on schedule and within budget

• Fifth step approved April 2014

• With the TDC-2000 support extension to 2025, beginning in 2012, we lengthened our program schedule by planning a new step every 18 months

• This extended schedule will complete our TDC-2000 conversion by 2025




Recommendations

• Read the book “CONTROL SYSTEM MIGRATIONS”

• Choose your MAC and MAC Project Manager carefully – rely on customer recommendations

• Develop detailed, comprehensive RFPs (Request for Proposals) for FEL development and Detailed Design/Engineering/Commissioning. Comprehensive RFPs will pay for themselves in reduced change orders

• Consider using a configuration/graphics specialty contractor - with their own licensed DCS hardware and software – get maximum benefit from new technology

• Maximize your local staff’s involvement for long-term success




Thank You



Documents

DCS Migration Lessons Learned