Application of CHARMS for the

Redeployment of a Mothballed
Methanol Plant
Session ID: 2135
Presenters

 Joffre Bourgeois

 Bernd Dahmen
Introduction. Presenters
 Presenter
• Joffre Bourgeois is currently the Senior Engineering Manager for Process, Electrical and
Instrumentation with PROMAN GmbH based in Düsseldorf, Germany. He has more than 12
years’ experience in the construction, commissioning, operation and maintenance of World
Scale Methanol and Ammonia plants in Trinidad and Oman. Additionally he has 11 years’
experience in the Engineering Office of PROMAN GmbH in the development of various
petrochemical grassroots projects, stabilization and upgrade projects on existing plants as
well as the reconstruction and commissioning of a mothballed Methanol plant in Texas, USA.
He has also had direct experience with numerous instrument and control systems including
extensive work with several Delta V systems since 2001.
 Co-Presenter
• Bernd Dahmen is a Senior Sales Engineer at Emerson in Haan / Germany. Prior to
Emerson, he worked 21 years for a Chemical Company (formerly known as Henkel, Cognis
and now BASF) in Düsseldorf / Germany where he held positions of Service Engineer,
CAD/CAE Engineer and Project Manager. Bernd has 30 years of experience working in
process automation business (control systems, instrumentation and sales).
Introduction. The Proman Group
 Corporate Overview
– Proman is a leading engineering, procurement and construction group operating
worldwide in the gas processing, petrochemical, steel, infrastructure and automotive
sectors. The group has key competencies in engineering, feasibility studies,
construction, project execution, procurement, marketing and management services.
– The group’s success and reputation have been achieved through strong relationships
with its partners and local communities and its advanced skills in project management
and Engineering, Procurement, Construction (EPC) services for the implementation of
complex projects worldwide.
– Established in 1984
– 1,500 employees worldwide
– Present on 4 continents in more than 12 countries
– 31 operating subsidiaries
Introduction. The Proman Group
 Corporate Structure
PROMAN GROUP

CONTRACTING INVESTMENTS SERVICES

- Switzerland
- Germany
- Trinidad
- USA
- Mexico

Oman Methanol Company LLC

Introduction. The Proman Group
 Current Major Projects in the Petrochemical Sector
– 4,100 MTPD Methanol Plant in Lake Charles, LA, USA
– 2,200 MTPD Ammonia Plant in Topolobampo, Sinaloa, Mexico

 Other Projects on Existing Petrochemical Plants

– Alternative Fuel Upgrade Project fot CNC, N2000 & AUM Ammonia Plants, Trinidad
– Stabilization and Upgrade Project #2 – M5000 Methanol Plant, Trinidad
– Stabilization and Upgrade Project #2 – CNC Ammonia Plant, Trinidad
– Methanol Tank Farm Extension – M2, M3, M4 & M5000 Methanol Plants, Trinidad
– Ammonia Plant Tank Farm Upgrade – CNC / N2000 Ammonia Plants, Trinidad
Abstract
 Application of CHARMS for the Redeployment of a Mothballed Methanol Plant

 The reconstruction and commissioning of a mothballed methanol process unit at a new site
comes with many challenges including the development of completely new instrumentation
systems in a very short time window. Equipment from the mothballed process plant had to
be combined with several pieces of new equipment to form a functional unit. The control
logic from the original process unit needed to be adapted and integrated with the
requirements for the new equipment to allow the unit to function as a whole. This together
with the accelerated time schedule therefore required a high degree of flexibility in the
systems that needed to be deployed. It was also a requirement that the main systems
(DCS, SIS and F&G) be ordered as early as possible in the project cycle before the
completion of the detailed engineering. The application of CHARMS to this project enabled
the maximum flexibility to be achieved.
Agenda
 Project Overview
 Project Location
 Challenges
 System Architecture Options
 Selected Architecture
 System Solutions Decision
 Implemented Solution
 System Overview
 Lessons Learnt
 Business Results Achieved
 Summary
Project Overview
 Methanol Plant Originally Constructed in Cheyenne, WY, USA
 Plant was part of a larger MTBE complex owned by Coastal Chemicals Inc.
 The original plant was designed by Davy McKee and built in 1991
 Plant was shutdown and decommissioned in 2005
 Plant was disassembled in 2007
 Project to rebuild the plant in Pampa, TX, USA was kicked-off in 2012
 Plant was reconstructed on the site of a former Petrochemical Complex
 Construction completed in May 2015
 Full commercial operations commencing in June 2015
Project Location

Source: Google

Source: G2X Energy

Challenges
 The Methanol Process Plant needed to be setup as a standalone unit
– Integration of New Utility & Off-Site Units
– Integration of existing equipment from the former Petrochemical Complex
 Documentation limited or non-existent for the original plant equipment
 Reverse engineering of control requirements
 The need to order the main instrument systems early in the project cycle
before the completion of the detailed engineering
 Overall tight project schedule for engineering and construction of Plant.
Challenges
 Standing over the many bits
and pieces of the mothballed
plant:

– How do we put all these

pieces back together and still
achieve our objectives?

– How best do we handle the

main instrumentation
systems?
System Architecture Options Considered
 OPTION 1:
Distributed Control System (DCS)
Classical Design with Centralized I/O Cards & Marshalling
– Pros:
• Proven – Implemented on Several of our other plants
• Personnel experienced with design, procurement, and troubleshooting
– Cons:
• Complete detailed engineering needed to be completed before design finalization and
procurement.
• Difficult to make adaptations later on in design cycle and detailed engineering to deal with
project design changes and updated requirements due to changes in package equipment or
project scope.
• Field changes required during construction and commissioning not as easy to handle
System Architecture Options Considered
 OPTION 2:
Distributed Control System (DCS)
New Design with Electronic Marshalling in Field Junction Boxes
– Pros:
• Number of I/O for each plant area can be estimated and the required number of Junction
Boxes fixed in the design early in the Engineering phase.
• Adaptations later on in the design cycle and detailed engineering to deal with project design
changes and updated requirements due to changes in package equipment or project scope
can be easily accommodated.
• Field changes required during construction and commissioning can be quickly and easily
implemented.
• Reduced installation effort due to the removal of multi-core Home Run cables.
– Cons:
• New technology – not proven on any of our other facilities
• Learning curve for those involved with the design, procurement, and troubleshooting
Selected Architecture
 After weighing the Pros and Cons of the two options OPTION 2 was
selected primarily for the following reasons:
– In case the Classical DCS Design, with centralized I/O Cards and Marshalling, would be
applied then the planned project schedule could not be achieved.
– Due to the high number of unknowns for the new plant setup the risk of major changes during
the project execution was very high and a flexible system would be required to deal with this
risk.
– Construction could be started earlier – even before the completion of the final detailed
engineering – because the field junction boxes could be installed and connected to the main
systems independent of the field wiring.
– Simplified site implementation as the number multi-pair cables to the main system would be
minimized
– Due to the relatively small production capacity of the Pampa Methanol Plant the risk of testing
the new Electronic Marshalling technology was low. This would be the ideal opportunity to test
the Field Electronic Marshalling system before we apply it to any of our World Scale facilities.
System Solutions Decision
 To derive the maximum overall benefit from the Electronic Marshalling Field
Junction Boxes arrangement it was also decided to apply this architecture to
all of the following systems on the plant:

– Distributed Control System (DCS)

• The Primary Control System for the Plant

– Safety Instrumented System (SIS)

• The Primary Instrumented Safety System for the Plant

– Fire & Gas System (F&G)

• Fire & Gas Monitoring / Fire Suppression Systems for the Plant
Implemented Solution
 DCS
– DeltaV S-Series Electronic Marshalling
– Local Field Junction Boxes (22 pieces)
– 2 Server (ProfessionalPLUS, Application Station)
– 7 Workstation (Professional Station, Operator Station)

 SIS
– DeltaV SIS with Electronic Marshalling
– Local Field Junction Boxes (6 pieces)

 F&G
– DeltaV SIS with Electronic Marshalling
– Local Field Junction Boxes (5 pieces)
System Overview
Lessons Learnt
 Space at Bottom of Electronic Marshalling Junction Boxes
– Review the space available for bending of the fibre optic cables at the bottom of the
Junction Boxes to ensure that the required bending radius can be comfortably achived
without risking damage to the FO cable.
Lessons Learnt
 Review Requirement for SPD Boxes on SIS and F&G Electronic Marshalling
JBs
– Review the power supply arrangement for the SIS and F&G Electronic Marshalling JBs
so that the EMC filter surge protection device can be installed in the same box.
Lessons Learnt
 Power Supply Units
– Review Power Supply Units and Power Feeder Arrangement used - multiple failures
experienced at site
– Power Supply units were replaced under warranty.
– Due to the redundant power supply arrangement there were no complete failures of any
Electronic Marshalling Junction Boxes.
Lessons Learnt
 Proper End Termination of Fibre Optic Cables
– During installation it is imperative that the end-termination be properly completed to
minimize losses in the line

 Resolution of loss of communication between CSLS‘s and SZ Controller

Issue
Business Results Achieved
 Business Results Achieved
– The many changes that needed to be implemented after the detailed engineering were
completed efficiently at the plant site due to the nature of the CHARM electronic
marshalling. During plant commissioning several last minute changes were
implemented in a very timely fashion reducing the overall commissioning time and cost
for the plant.

– The Electronic Marshalling Junction Boxes were delivered to site on time so that the
construction activities could proceed without delay. The sequence of construction was
very flexible – in fact the field cables were actually installed before the power and fiber
optic cables to the system cabinets were installed.
Summary
 The Electronic Marshalling system proved to be as flexible in the real world
as was advertised.
 The Electronic Marshalling system has functioned satisfactorily for more
than one year now.
 Based on this successful implementation at the Pampa Methanol plant we
are strongly considering applying the Electronic Marshalling system to our
new World Scale Petrochemical Plants.
Video
Questions?

?
Let’s Connect

 Joffre Bourgeois
LinkedIn.com/in/joffre-bourgeois-3a7a1833
joffre.bourgeois@proman.org

 Bernd Dahmen
LinkedIn.com/in/bernddahmen
bernd.dahmen@emerson.com