Source: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/8983635.html
Timestamp: 2020-02-28 12:43:24
Document Index: 208192442

Matched Legal Cases: ['arts 1', 'art 50', 'arts 20', 'art 52', 'arts 20', 'art 50']

System and method for protection system design support - Curtiss-Wright Flow Control Corporation
United States Patent 8983635
A method and system for examining, auditing, and safely evaluating process systems, including fluid pressure systems and nuclear plant systems, to aid overpressure design and/or sizing of overpressure equipment. The system includes a server subsystem, a storage subsystem, an assessment subsystem, and optionally a report generation subsystem, including computer hardware and application software for supporting these subsystems.
Kolenc, Josh (Sherwood Park, CA)
Hoover, James H. (Edmonton, CA)
Olekshy, Antony G. (Edmonton, CA)
Saunders, Paulette Meaux (Lake Charles, LA, US)
13/323232
Curtiss-Wright Flow Control Corporation (Parsippany, NJ, US)
G05B9/02; G06Q10/06
700/79, 700/97, 700/108, 700/109, 700/110, 702/81, 702/82, 702/83, 702/84, 702/183, 702/184, 702/185, 702/186, 702/187, 702/188, 703/1, 703/6, 703/18, 376/207, 376/210, 376/216, 376/217, 376/245, 376/246, 376/247, 376/249, 376/250, 705/7.28
Download PDF 8983635 PDF help
8606548 Energy facility control system 2013-12-10 Webster et al. 703/1
8566139 Method for deterministic safety analysis in non-stationary high risk system, control method and control system using thereof 2013-10-22 Fedosovskiy et al. 705/7.28
8090460 System and method for protection system design support 2012-01-03 Kolenc et al. 700/97
20110224953 ENERGY FACILITY CONTROL SYSTEM 2011-09-15 Webster et al. 703/1
7904190 System and method for protection system design support 2011-03-08 Kolenc et al. 700/97
20100138253 All aspect quantification system for the risk rating of operating errors for an advanced boiling water reactor 2010-06-03 Chao et al. 705/7
20100125528 SYSTEM AND METHOD TO SUPPLEMENT AND/OR MODIFY AN ISO QUALITY SYSTEM PROGRAM TO COMPLY WITH NUCLEAR POWER PLANT GOVERNMENT REGULATION REQUIREMENTS AND/OR STANDARDS ORGANIZATION REQUIREMENTS 2010-05-20 Reddy 705/317
7617013 System and method for protection system design support 2009-11-10 Kolenc et al. 700/97
7565215 System and method for protection system design support 2009-07-21 Kolenc et al. 700/97
20080288121 METHOD FOR DETERMINISTIC SAFETY ANALYSIS IN NON-STATIONARY HIGH RISK SYSTEM, CONTROL METHOD AND CONTROL SYSTEM USING THEREOF 2008-11-20 Fedosovskiy et al. 700/292
20080258099 Service Regulator Vent 2008-10-23 Hawkins
7426458 Nuclear reactor reload licensing analysis system and method 2008-09-16 Horton et al. 703/6
7191108 Structured approach for risk-informing deterministic safety analyses 2007-03-13 Pappone 703/6
20060191993 Feed-forward control in event-based manufacturing systems 2006-08-31 Markham et al.
20060149407 Quality management and intelligent manufacturing with labels and smart tags in event-based product manufacturing 2006-07-06 Markham et al.
7032816 Communication between machines and feed-forward control in event-based product manufacturing 2006-04-25 Markham et al.
20050117685 Maximum extended load line limit analysis for a boiling water nuclear reactor 2005-06-02 Casillas et al. 376/260
20040086071 Optimum evaluation system for safety analysis of a nuclear power plant 2004-05-06 Lee et al. 376/259
6721383 Maximum extended load line limit analysis for a boiling water nuclear reactor 2004-04-13 Casillas et al. 376/245
6697447 Maximum extended load line limit analysis for a boiling water nuclear reactor 2004-02-24 Casillas et al. 376/245
20040013220 MAXIMUM EXTENDED LOAD LINE LIMIT ANALYSIS FOR A BOILING WATER NUCLEAR REACTOR 2004-01-22 Casillas et al. 376/245
20040002990 Shared drive that provides shared access to editable files in a database 2004-01-01 Sander et al.
20030158795 Quality management and intelligent manufacturing with labels and smart tags in event-based product manufacturing 2003-08-21 Markham et al.
20030114946 Electronic system for custom-reporting safety relief design parameters in a high pressure fluid flow environment 2003-06-19 Kitchen
20020183880 Remote maintenance method, industrial device, and semiconductor device 2002-12-05 Arima et al.
6434495 Two-phase heat-flow analyzing method and the apparatus thereof 2002-08-13 Kitamura et al. 702/50
6385497 Remote maintenance system 2002-05-07 Ogushi et al.
20020013635 Machine component monitoring, diagnosing and selling system 2002-01-31 Gotou et al.
6061412 Nuclear reaction protection system 2000-05-09 Stucker et al. 376/217
6049334 Method and system for graphically indicating the activity of a plurality of users within a shared data collection 2000-04-11 Bates et al.
5971106 Step ladder 1999-10-26 Brown et al.
5774372 Pressure protection manager system & apparatus 1998-06-30 Berwanger
5358030 Method for managing retort over-pressure during pressure cooling 1994-10-25 Veltman et al.
4745572 Software editing instrument 1988-05-17 Wilburn
4675147 Generating an integrated graphic display of the safety status of a complex process plant 1987-06-23 Schaefer et al. 376/245
4632802 Nuclear plant safety evaluation system 1986-12-30 Herbst et al. 376/216
Hoover, James H., Tony Olekshy, Garry Froehlich, and Paul Sorenson, Dept.of Computing Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta: Avra Software Lab Inc., Edmonton, Alberta. “Developing Engineered Product Support Applications”.
Edwards, John E., Relief and Blowdown in Batch Processes, European ChemCad Symposium 1999, pp. 1-20.
International Search Report, dated Nov. 3, 2005.
This application is a Continuation-In-Part of U.S. Utility patent application Ser. No. 12/486,366, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,090,460, filed on Jun. 17, 2009, incorporated by reference in its entirety, and which claims the benefit of Ser. No. 11/016,001, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,617,013, filed Dec. 17, 2004, incorporated by reference in its entirety including the Computer Program Listing Appendix incorporated therein, and which claims the benefit of provisional application Ser. No. 60/530,724, filed on Dec. 18, 2003, incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. Related U.S. utility patent application Ser. No. 11/015,382, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,565,215, filed on Dec. 17, 2004 is also incorporated by reference in its entirety.
1. An evaluation system for evaluating construction of nuclear facility components, said nuclear facility comprising a plurality of pressure equipment including a protection device for protecting the nuclear facility, said evaluation system comprising: a storage subsystem for storing an equipment database including equipment information representing each of said plurality of equipment of the nuclear facility, said storage subsystem also for updating said equipment information with updated equipment information such that only one user can provide said updated equipment information at any given time; a server for serving content, via a public communication network, to a web browser executing on a user computer, said server further for concurrently serving additional content, including at least a portion of said content, via the communication network, to the application or another application executing on another user computer, wherein said user and said another user use respective computers attached to different computer networks located geographically distant from each other; a reception subsystem for receiving said updated equipment information for providing to said storage subsystem, said receiving from one or both of the user computer and the another user computer via the communication network; and an assessment subsystem for automatically determining, by utilizing said equipment information, an adequacy of the protection device for protecting the nuclear facility, and for generating protection assessment information therefrom, said protection assessment information also being stored in said equipment database, or in another database, by said storage subsystem, wherein said assessment subsystem is located remotely from said user, and wherein said content includes some portion of said equipment information and further includes some portion of said protection assessment information, and wherein said assessment subsystem is further for updating said protection assessment information by utilizing said updated equipment information, and further wherein said server is further for serving updated content including some portion of said updated protection information to the user computer and/or the another user computer via the communication network.
3. The evaluation system of claim 1, wherein said content is formatted according to the http protocol for serving by said server, and wherein the application is a web browser application, and further wherein the communication network supports the TCP/IP communication protocol.
4. The evaluation system of claim 3, wherein the communication network is the Internet.
5. The evaluation system of claim 4, wherein the web browser application is a commercially available general purpose web browser application supporting the http protocol for running on a general purpose computer utilizing a commercially available operating system, and wherein said content and said updated content are displayed by the user computer using the browser application.
6. The evaluation system of claim 1, wherein the public communication network is the Internet or a derivative thereof.
7. The evaluation system of claim 1, wherein said protection device is an overpressure device, and wherein said determining an adequacy includes an overpressure assessment based on various overpressure scenarios.
9. An evaluation system for evaluating construction of nuclear facility components in support of a plurality of concurrent users located remotely from each other, said nuclear facility comprising a plurality of pressure equipment including a protection device for protecting the nuclear facility, said evaluation system comprising: a storage subsystem for electronically storing an equipment database including equipment information representing each of said plurality of equipment of said nuclear facility and also for storing revision control information; a server for serving content including some portion of said equipment information, via a public communication network, to web browsers executing on a remotely located user computers; and an assessment subsystem for automatically determining, by utilizing some portion of said equipment information, an adequacy of the protection device for protecting the nuclear facility, and generating protection assessment information therefrom, said protection assessment information also being stored in said equipment database or in another database by said storage subsystem, and wherein said server is adapted for concurrently serving at least a portion of said protection assessment information and/or at least a portion of said equipment information to at least one of the said web browsers while also serving at least a portion of said protection assessment and/or least a portion of said equipment information to at least one other of said users, and further wherein said evaluation system is adapted for allowing one of said users to edit a portion of said equipment information for updating said portion of said equipment information, and in response to updating said portion of said equipment information, said evaluation system automatically updates said revision control information to record information about the update associated with information about the user making the edit.
10. The evaluation system of claim 9, wherein said editing includes one or both of changing a piece of equipment of said nuclear facility or changing one or more parameters associated with a piece of equipment of said nuclear facility.
11. The evaluation system of claim 9, wherein said editing includes changing information about said protection device.
12. The evaluation system of claim 9, said evaluation system is adapted, when one of said users is currently editing information in said equipment database, to prevent others of said users concurrently accessing said evaluation system from concurrently editing said information in said equipment database.
13. A web-based evaluation system for evaluating construction of nuclear facility components in support of a plurality of concurrent users located remotely from each other, said nuclear facility comprising a plurality of pressure equipment including a protection device for protecting the nuclear facility, said evaluation system comprising: a storage subsystem for electronically storing an equipment database including equipment information representing each of said plurality of equipment of said nuclear facility and also for storing revision control information; a server for serving content including some portion of said equipment information, via a public communication network, to web browsers executing on a remotely located user computers; and an assessment subsystem for automatically determining, by utilizing some portion of said equipment information, an adequacy of the protection device for protecting the nuclear facility, and generating protection assessment information therefrom, said protection assessment information also being stored in said equipment database or in another database by said storage subsystem, and wherein said server is adapted for concurrently serving at least a portion of said protection assessment information and/or at least a portion of said equipment information to at least one of the said web browsers while also serving at least a portion of said protection assessment and/or least a portion of said equipment information to at least one other of said users, and further wherein said evaluation system is adapted for allowing one of said users to edit a portion of said equipment information for updating said portion of said equipment information, and in response to updating said portion of said equipment information, said evaluation system automatically determines an updated adequacy of the protection device for protecting the updated system and displays a result of said updated determination to the user.
In an increasingly competitive environment, software technology must support the ability of operating units to improve process plant productivity (including for nuclear power plants), reduce cost and risk, and enhance manufacturing uptime. A new technology for hosting a broad range of new forward thinking approaches and tools that can meet and surpass these challenges is thus desired.
Also provided is a method for evaluating a process system, comprising a plurality of equipment including a protection device for protecting the process system.
FIG. 6a is a work flow diagram for a Relief Valve project as a commercially available embodiment of the iPRSM™ system might be used;
FIG. 6b is a Flow Chart showing an implementation of a commercially available embodiment, iPRSM™, might be utilized for performing an evaluation;
FIG. 7 is a screen shot of a commercially available embodiment, iPRSM™, showing a schematic of a process system being evaluated;
FIG. 8 provides an overview of an example embodiment of the Evaluation System using the iPRSM structure;
FIG. 9 provides a project workflow diagram of the example embodiment of FIG. 8; and
FIG. 10 provides an architecture model of the example embodiment of FIG. 8.
“API Omega Appendix D-2Phase Flow” provides two-phase relief calculations are based upon the Design Institute of Emergency Relief Systems (DIERS) methodologies. The API Omega model has been standardized in the System.
Equipment Libraries:
The System preferably supports an arbitrary number of equipment (or device) types. These individual pieces of equipment can be classified as” providing protection, requiring protection, or neither. All pieces of equipment can be assigned descriptive data that physically describes model, configuration, and identification. Equipment that is classified as “protected” or “protecting” also has defined variables that provide process data.
Similarly, the report generation subsystem 7 and/or the assessment subsystem 6 could be distributed across multiple computers, implemented on the same computer, or combined with the storage subsystem 5 and server subsystem 2 on a single computer. The software of the Computer Program Listing Appendix in the related application contains examples of code for implementing the System, including the report generation subsystem 7 and the assessment subsystem 6.
FIG. 3 shows a more complex implementation 1B of the system 1. In this system 1B, a plurality of servers 21A-21n can be utilized to implement the server subsystem 2 functions of FIG. 1. Further, a plurality of CPUs 23A-23n can be utilized to implement the assessment subsystem 6 functions of FIG. 1. A plurality of database storage devices 25A-25n can be used to implement the storage subsystem 5 functions of FIG. 1. And a CPU 30 and printer 31 can be used to implement the report generation subsystem 7 functions of FIG. 1, for example. Finally, a router 29 can be used to connect to a Public Communications Network 35 (such as the Internet, for example).
Continuing to use FIG. 3 showing the more complex implementation 1B, a plurality of users can be supported in various configurations. For example, a plurality of users 10B operating single workstations 18A-18n, individually connected to the public communications network 35, can be supported. Furthermore, complex user networks can also be supported, as represented by the example shown in 10C. Of course, the Evaluation System of FIG. 1 might also be utilized to support users in the manner of 10B and 10C, as well.
FIG. 5 shows a structure map of the software design of a commercially contemplated version of the Evaluation System known as iPRSM™. This structure map represents the software contained in the Computer Program Listing Appendix in the related application, incorporated herein by reference.
FIGS. 6a and 6b are representations of the use of the Evaluation System to evaluate a process system. FIG. 6a shows a workflow for such an evaluation process. FIG. 6b is a flow chart describing the evaluation process in more detail. Note that at some point, all of the necessary equipment information describing the process system must be properly entered into the Evaluation System database. Equipment lists and tool sets provided by the System support this task, although customized equipment can also be entered.
the Evaluation System preferably uses ASME and API standards-based evaluation of possible overpressure contingencies. Hazard analysis is equipment-based, rather than relief-device-based, to ensure that all equipment is properly protected.
Calculation Worksheets:
the Evaluation System can contain a complete set of ASME/API standards-based engineering worksheets for accurate consistent calculation of relief flow rates, orifice areas, inlet/outlet piping losses. Installations that are inconsistent with industry standards and codes can be flagged and identified. Calculation worksheets are under version control, and every evaluation is recorded with respect to the version of the worksheet used to perform the evaluation.
the Evaluation System aids the user to establishing dependency links between the parameters used to perform a hazard analysis on a piece of equipment and other worksheets and equipment characteristics that were used to determine those parameters. This means that decisions can then be traced back to their assumptions. If an assumption changes, then analyses based on these assumptions are flagged by the Evaluation System as needing to be re-examined for protection implications. Other system features include:
Standards Tracking:
the Evaluation System maintains historical versions of standards calculation worksheets. When a standard changes, the impact of the proposed changes can be evaluated relative to the current hazard analysis.
Evergreen Data Management:
the Evaluation System enables consolidated evergreen data management to maintain a current picture of operations in order to minimize hazards and re-evaluation errors and costs.
Evaluation System programs can be made to work with any standards-compliant web browser, such as Netscape Navigator, and Microsoft Internet Explorer, for example. Internet Explorer issued as the Evaluation System's principal test browser.
Evaluation System programs can be made to work with any CGI-compliant web server, in particular Microsoft IIS and Apache, for example. Apache is available on all Microsoft and Unix-like back ends and is one of the top web servers in use.
The Evaluation System includes its own database management system (DBMS), with full support for atomic transactions and referential integrity. Testing has shown that the Evaluation System DBMS is faster than an outboard DBMS for databases of the size required by a typical application. Alternatively, the Evaluation System can utilize any of the common DBMSs for its back-end database functions, including Postgres, Oracle, and DB2, as required, for example.
The Evaluation System also preferably has a real-time distributed transaction logging facility, which allows multiple (geographically dispersed) machines to keep hot-backup copies of the production database. In the event that the primary service disappears, the site administrator can simply point the domain name service to the next-level backup machine, and the Evaluation System will pick up from the point of the last successfully completed transaction.
Plants & Units Model:
Equipment and protected systems are organized into a plants and units hierarchy. When there is a large amount of equipment involved, some sort of organization for access is beneficial.
Protected System Model:
The basic concept is that any kind of equipment can be linked to a protected system in one of four roles:
The protected systems also have per-system data.
Multiple Valves Model:
The protected system model preferably explicitly handles multiple valves.
Equipment Abstraction Model:
the Evaluation System can support an arbitrary number of equipment types, including Protecting Equipment and Protected Equipment, for example.
Cause of Overpressure Abstraction Model:
the Evaluation System can support an arbitrary number of overpressure types, each of which has its own flowchart.
Maintenance Database:
A maintenance database that links to equipment is preferably provided.
Workflow Model:
An explicit workflow model is preferably implemented that automatically manages the steps the user needs to follow to get the job done. This includes keeping track of who took each step (by person login id) and when.
Signoff Model:
The workflow model preferably includes signoff steps, and can keep track of who did each signoff and when.
Version Control Model:
A revisions database is preferably provided, linked to protected systems, for tracking versions of equipment, protected system, and causes of overpressure signoff.
Permissions Model:
Data access and workflow steps can be controlled by per-user access levels.
Worksheets and Units:
Units handling is preferably provided. Engineering values know their units category and style, so any variable in valid style (such as inches, feet, or meters, and pounds or kilograms), can be looked, at but the underlying calculations are preferably always done in what engineers call “basis units”, which is technically required by the standards.
Object Models:
the Evaluation System provides a user interface for the manipulation of data relating to plants and the devices they contain, and for management of the workflow related to relief device compliance auditing. The data is structured according to a set of persistent classes, instances of which are stored in the database. The persistent objects are related according to the following schematic, which is described below.
FIGS. 8A through 8X of the parent U.S. Pat. No. 7,617,013 filed on Dec. 17, 2004, and incorporated by reference, show screen shots of a number of the functions described below, for a contemplated commercial embodiment of the System, as they might be seen by a user of the system, displayed by a web browser on the user computer.
The Evaluation System, such as the example embodiment having the example Prothos Framework architecture as shown in FIG. 10, can be utilized to perform evaluations and audits for a number of industrial systems, such as petroleum plants and other process plants, using the project workflow model shown in FIG. 9.
However, an industry that can particularly benefit from applying the principles and features of the Evaluation System is the nuclear industry, which requires the use of pressurized fluids both for cooling systems, and for thermal transfer of reactor heat to power generating systems. FIG. 8 shows an example physical structure implementation of such a use.
The nuclear industry is required to meet a number of regulatory standards in order to obtain the desired operating licenses. For example, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licenses all commercially owned nuclear power plants that produce electricity in the United States. Standard Technical Specifications (STS) are published for each of the five reactor types as a NUREG-series publication. Plants are required to operate within these specifications. The NRC's regulations are found in Chapter I of Title 10, “Energy,” of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Chapter I is divided into Parts 1 through 199. Improved Standard Technical Specifications (STS) were developed based on the criteria in the Final Commission Policy Statement on Technical Specification Improvements for Nuclear Power Reactors, dated Jul. 22, 1993 (58 FR 39132). This policy statement was subsequently codified by changes to Section 36 of Part 50 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR 50.36) (see also 60 FR 36953, Jul. 16, 1995). STS, Revision 3 is continuously modified by NRC incorporating approved generic changes known as “Travelers”. NRC encourages licensees to upgrade their technical specifications consistent with the criteria in the policy statement and conforming, to the practical extent, to Revision 3 with incorporated Travelers to the improved STS.
In order to construct or operate a nuclear power plant, an applicant must submit a Safety Analysis Report. This document contains the design information and criteria for the proposed reactor, and comprehensive data on the proposed site. It also discusses various hypothetical accident situations and the safety features of the plant that would prevent accidents or lessen their effects. In addition, the application must contain a comprehensive assessment of the environmental impact of the proposed plant. A prospective licensee also must submit information for antitrust reviews of the proposed plant.
When an application to construct a nuclear plant is received, the NRC staff determines whether it contains sufficient information to satisfy Commission requirements for a detailed review. The NRC staff then reviews the application to determine whether the plant design meets all applicable regulations (10 CFR Parts 20, 50, 73, and 100).
The NRC may approve and certify a standard nuclear plant design through a rulemaking, independent of a specific site. The design certification is valid for 15 years. An application for a standard design certification must contain proposed inspections, tests, analyses, and acceptance criteria (ITAAC) for the standard design. The application must also demonstrate how the applicant complies with the Commission's relevant regulations.
The safety review of the application is based primarily on the information submitted by the applicant under oath or affirmation. An application must contain a level of design information sufficient to enable the Commission to reach a final conclusion on all safety questions associated with the design. In general terms, a design certification application should provide an essentially complete nuclear plant design, with the exception of some site-specific design features.
The application presents the design basis, the limits on operation, and a safety analysis of structures, systems, and components of the facility as a whole. The scope and contents of the application are equivalent to the level of detail found in a Final Safety Analysis Report for a currently operating plant. The NRC staff prepares a Safety Evaluation Report that describes its review of the plant design and how the design meets applicable regulations.
The review process for new reactor designs involves certifying standard reactor designs, independent of a specific site, through a rulemaking (Subpart B of Part 52). This rulemaking can certify a reactor design for 15 years. Design certification applicants must provide the technical information necessary to demonstrate compliance with the safety standards set forth in applicable NRC regulations (10 CFR Parts 20, 50, 73, and 100).
After the initial license is granted, the license may be amended, renewed, transferred, or otherwise modified, depending on activities that affect the reactor during its operating life.
Furthermore, the licensing process for research and test reactors is conducted in accordance with the requirements in 10 CFR Part 50 for Class 104 licenses.
But traditionally, the licensing and regulatory process involved the use of detailed spreadsheets and divers databases and paper documentation that made it difficult to evaluate various failure scenarios and equipment modifications. The interactions of changes in one part of the cooling or power systems with other parts could not be easily modeled and evaluated. Thus, risk assessment and modification impacts were difficult to conduct, and prone to errors.
However, the use of an evaluation system as disclosed herein, and in particular the use of the iPRSM paradigm, can greatly improve the evaluation of the pressure systems of a nuclear power plant. The impact of modifications and changes in one part of the cooling or power systems can be easily modeled by the software to determine any safety impacts in the overall system. The evaluation system can be used to determine whether proposed designs, or changes to existing designs, meet the required licensing requirements and support the design certification process.
To adapt iPRSM for use in the nuclear industry, the iPRSM equipment databases are populated with the safety and power subsystem devices (and their operational parameters) that are used in these subsystems. In particular, where water is the working fluid, the equipment (piping, safety valves, etc.) that are used for this fluid are provided in the database. Basic computational formulas need not be changed, as the iPRSM software includes those basic physical mathematical formulas necessary to do the basic computation. Safety margins unique to the nuclear industry will also be entered for use in the analysis.
Desired reports specifically adapted to the design, licensing, auditing and certification process are generated using the iPRSM documentation tools. In this manner, the entire process from design to certification to recurring licensing can be supported by iPRSM. Once the database is populated with the appropriate equipment, iPRSM becomes a knowledge capture and evaluation tool for use in nuclear plant design and certification, evaluating rules changes, equipment changes, and other evaluation procedures that can then be accomplished in an economical and practical manner. The use of a tool like iPRSM to capture such information and support such evaluations is likely to become either implicitly, or explicitly, mandatory.
Evaluation System Example Features of the Preferred Embodiment
the Evaluation System's database is designed to be used by many users at once, in some cases over a network connection that cannot be trusted to be available from page to page. These factors make using the Evaluation System database slightly different from using desktop-based databases.
Because the Evaluation System is designed for use in international environments, all dates and times preferably use the ISO-8601 format: yyyy-mm-dd [hh:mm:ss]. Example: 2003-10-31 [17:18:26]
A user points his web browser to the appropriate website URL, enters the appropriate Login ID and Password, and picks the appropriate Login link to access the Evaluation System main page.
On the main page, the user picks the Logout link. Merely closing the browser windows may not provide a secure logout under some operating systems.
Adding a Plant:
On the Evaluation System main page, pick the Add a Plant link and confirm to create a plant and access the add plant view. Enter a new Plant Name, a new Plant Owner, and select a template from the New Plant Template dropdown. Pick the Add Plant link and confirm to access a blank plant view in which to enter detailed plant information. Enter additional plant details as required, then pick Post.
Adding a Unit to the Plant:
In the plant view's Plant Units table, pick the Add Unit link and confirm to create a unit and access a blank unit view in which to enter detailed unit information. Enter a Unit Name, Location, and Contact information. Pick Post.
Adding Equipment to a Unit:
In the unit view, pick the Browse Equipment link to open the equipment browser.
Add One or More Pieces of Equipment:
For each piece of equipment, pick the Add New Equipment link, enter a unique identifying string in the ID# box, then pick OK to create the new piece of equipment and access a blank equipment view in which to enter new equipment information. Select a device type from the Device Type dropdown. A parameter panel appropriate to the device type will open. Enter equipment details and parameters. Pick Add More Equipment from the Other Functions dropdown to refresh the equipment view and add more equipment, or pick Done to return to the equipment browser. A basic protected system requires a relief device, a piece of protected equipment, and an overpressure source.
Adding a Protected System for a Unit:
In the unit view, pick the Protected Systems link to access the protected system browser. Pick the Add System link and confirm to create the protected system and access the protected system view. Enter a System Name and Default OVP Category, and select a value from the Pset Basis dropdown. Pick the Add Equipment link in any of the System Relief Equipment, System Protected Equipment, OVP Sources, or Ancillary Equipment tables to access the link equipment view and select equipment of the appropriate type to link to the protected system. Note that only equipment already added to the unit and not already used in another protected system is available to be linked to a protected system. From the Other Functions dropdown, pick Add New System to refresh the page and add another protected system, or pick Done to return to the protected system browser.
Adding a Contingency Scenario for a Protected System:
From the Contingency Scenario table in the protected system view, pick the Add New Scenario link and confirm to add a scenario and access the contingency scenario view. From the Overpressure Type, Hazard Type and/or Flow Type dropdowns, select OVP type, hazard type, and/or flow type. A parameter panel appropriate to the scenario will open. Enter scenario parameters then pick the Evaluate Scenario link or a Calculator icon. Correct problems described by any warning messages, and repeat evaluation until the scenario is successful. Pick Done to return to the protected system view, or pick Piping Losses to access the piping losses view and proceed with evaluating and signing off piping losses.
Evaluating and Signing Off Piping Losses for a Contingency Scenario:
To access the piping losses view, pick the Piping Losses link in the contingency scenario view or pick a piping losses icon in the Contingency Scenarios table of the protected system view. Pick the Update Piping and Losses link to update piping parameters to current values and open parameter fields for editing. Pick the Evaluate Scenario and Update Piping and Losses link if the scenario has not yet been evaluated to evaluate and open parameter fields for editing. Edit parameter values as required and pick a calculator icon to evaluate piping losses until the result is satisfactory. Pick the Signoff Losses link to sign off on piping losses. Piping status will change to “OK”. Pick Post to post changes or Done to post changes and return to the previous page. Evaluating, signing off, and un-checking a contingency scenario for a protected system. In the contingency scenario view edit parameter values as required.
Checking, Signing Off, and Un-Checking a Protected System in a Unit:
In the protected system view, pick the Check System link to check all contingency scenarios and their piping losses, and all relief devices within the system. If protection is adequate, the system status will change to “System Ok”. Pick the System Signoff link to signoff on the protected system.
Checking Equipment:
Once all protected systems have been checked and are of status “Ok”, pick the Check Equipment link in either the: unit view equipment browser or protected system browser. The status of all equipment within the unit will change to “Checked”.
Signing Off and Un-Checking a Unit:
Once all protected systems within a unit have been checked and are of status “Ok”, and all equipment has been checked and is of status “Checked”, pick the Unit Signoff link in the unit view to signoff on the unit.
Signing Off and Un-Checking a Plant:
Once all units within a plant have been checked and are of status “Ok”, in the plant view, pick the Plant Signoff link to signoff on the plant.
Extra-Workflow Procedures:
Managing unit, equipment, and protected system graphics Process and instrumentation drawings for systems can be uploaded and viewed in the Evaluation System in a number of the following formats: .gif, .jpeg, .png, .tif, pdf, and NCSA image map. An NCSA link map should use the Evaluation System equipment ID#s to identify its components.
Managing Unit, Equipment, and System Documents:
Documents can be uploaded and viewed in the Evaluation System in single or multiple file bundles in one or more of the following formats: .awp, .bkp, .doc, .xls, .pdf, .bmp, .dwg, .gif, .jpeg, .png, .tif, .html, .zip, and .txt. The Evaluation System handles documents for units, equipment, and protected systems in parallel fashion.
Managing Worksheets:
To view a selected worksheet, pick the Worksheet link in one of the plant view, equipment view, protected system view, or contingency scenario view piping losses worksheet. Use the worksheet view to update worksheets individually, or use the worksheet updater to update multiple worksheets at a time. To access the worksheet updater at a selected level, from the Other Functions dropdown, use Update W/Sheets in the plant view to update all worksheets in the plant (available only to System Administrators); use unit view, equipment browser, or protected system browser to update all worksheets in the unit; use equipment view to update all worksheets related to the piece of equipment; use protected system view to update all worksheets related to the system (updating worksheets from the protected system view is the easiest way to update the protected system, its equipment and its piping simultaneously); use contingency scenario view to update all worksheets related to the scenario; use piping losses view to update all worksheets related to the piping losses.
Managing Revisions:
Use the revision browser and revision view to maintain revision control over changes to protected systems. Use the revision browser to view lists of protected systems and their revision numbers for a plant or for a unit within a plant locate protected system revisions by search criteria access the revision view. Use the revision view to: view and update revision details for a protected system; change revision stage; or add a revision to a protected system.
Use the tasks browser and tasks view to manage user assigned tasks. To access the tasks browser, on the main page, pick Tasks Queue from the Other Functions dropdown. Use the tasks browser to: view the tasks queue for a user or all users; download the tasks queue to Excel; locate tasks by search criteria add new tasks; or access the tasks view. Also use the tasks view to view, enter, or edit task details; or email task information to users
Managing Reports:
Use the report browser to locate and generate any report, or use the context-sensitive Report link on any page to access the corresponding reports view. Use the report browser to locate and generate any report without navigating to the relevant application page.
Various online tutorials are provided for guiding a user. The tutorials are described below. These tutorials provide an example of how to utilize the Evaluation System for analyzing a plant design in a simplified manner, the Evaluation System supports the much more complex configurations of actual plant designs, of course, and thus actual capability is not limited by these examples, which are provided for illustrative purposes only.
Creation Tutorial:
This tutorial guides the user through the steps involved in creating and checking a simple one-unit plant containing a compressor, a vessel, and a pressure relief valve.
Mitigation Tutorial:
This tutorial guides the user through the steps involved in changing a compressor and then mitigating the effects of that change throughout a standard demonstration plant.
Fittings Tutorial:
This tutorial guides the user through the steps involved in setting up the inlet and outlet piping and fittings for a pressure relief device. The steps in this tutorial are: create a simple shop air plant; add a relief valve navigate to the piping and fittings editor; add, configure, and evaluate inlet fittings; and add and configure outlet fittings.
User Interface Pages:
User Interface Pages are used for user interaction with the Evaluation System, and such pages include:
Use the login page to: log in to the Evaluation System; log out from the Evaluation System; and for accessing the system administrator login page. A Logout Page is the preferred way to log off the Evaluation System.
The main page is used to locate plants; sort the plant list view; add and delete plants; generate plant and other reports; and provide access to:
The Evaluation System manages unit, equipment, and protected system documents in parallel fashion. The Evaluation System documents can be uploaded, managed and accessed as: awp. bkp. doc. xls. pdf. bmp. dwg. gif. jpeg. png. tif, html, and txt files, for example. Multiple file bundles, such as .zip files, for which a view or launch file can be designated, are also supported. Furthermore, multiple versions of the same document can also be supported.
A Person Browser function is provided for viewing person lists; accessing person details; adding and deleting persons and email users, a Person View function is provided for viewing, entering, or editing person details; and setting access levels and batch email inclusion for a person. A Logins Browser function is provided for viewing and sorting the logins log.
Pipe Fittings List;
ASME Section VIII—Div 1—Pressure Vessels
1910.119—Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals
Flow of Fluids Through Valves, Fittings, and Pipe
<- Previous Patent (Vehicular entertainm...) | Next Patent (Client configuration...) ->