As part of a relief valve study, a competing engineering firm recommended a major United States refinery to replace multiple relief valves and modify the associated piping on a column system in order to mitigate for a higher flare load. The proposed changes would have cost the refinery approximately $300,000. Unsure of the recommendations and associated expenses, the refinery reached out to Smith & Burgess to review the EPC’s findings.
Topics: Pressure Relief Valves, Case Study, Refinery, SIL Design, SIS Design, PRV Study, Third Party Review, Overly Conservative Assumptions
A major US refinery used a competing engineering contractor to perform a flare and relief systems analysis. Upon completion of the project, the refinery was left with a list of facility upgrades that management deemed excessive. Smith & Burgess was hired to review the relief and flare systems documentation and provide engineering solutions that met corporate and industry requirements.
Topics: Pressure Relief Valves, Relief Systems, Flare Mitigation, Action Item Resolution, Case Study, Refinery, Engineering Review, PRV Study, Third Party Review, Overly Conservative Assumptions, PRV, Relief System Design, Relief Systems Revalidation, Relief Valve Mitigation, Mitigation
A major United States refinery was recommended to spend $2 Million on a temporary blast proof tent during turnaround from a facility siting study conducted by a third-party contractor.
Topics: Facility Siting, Case Study, Refinery, Engineering Review, RAGAGEP, Third Party Review, Overly Conservative Assumptions, Engineering Analysis
A major United States refinery worked with an EPC on the site’s action items where they recommended a new flare worth approximately $30 Million. The refinery wanted a third-party review on the EPC’s recommendation and hired Smith & Burgess to verify their results.
Topics: Action Item Resolution, Flare Study, Heat and Material Balance, Case Study, Flare System, Refinery, Flare Load Optimization, Flare Revalidation, Third Party Review, Flare Optimization, Overly Conservative Assumptions
A major United States refinery was recommended by an EPC to install a new flare worth approximately $60 Million. Unsatisfied with the EPC's recommendations, the refinery asked Smith & Burgess to perform a third-party review to verify their results.
Topics: Flare Mitigation, Flare Analysis, Flare Study, Case Study, Flare System, Refinery, Engineering Review, Flare Management, Flare Revalidation, Third Party Review, Flare Optimization, Overly Conservative Assumptions, Engineering Analysis
