10 factors to generate a successful

Oilseeds Process Revamping Project

Mauro Tognocchi 30/09/2016 Tech Paper # 3

Introduction.
Achieving
As margins in our oilseeds industry rise and fall, a well-known
effect, the decision to revamp existing plants versus building a outstanding results
new one changes. When margins are high, new Greenfield for a Revamping
plants are built. When margins are lower, revamps of existing
Project requires
plants may be the preferred option to increase current
profitability.
special attention to
certain critical
details.
A critical evaluation of your process plant will
enable you to turn up capacity and improve
performance without incurring in a heavy,
difficult to approve, capital cost. This Technical Paper
by MT-consultor
The revamp of an oilseeds processing plant (solvent extractions,
oil refineries) can be initiated due to a number of reasons. In presents ten factors
general, the goal of the revamping is to optimize present to be investigated in
operations by utilizing personnel and technology to improve order to help you
yields (recoveries), reduce utilities consumption or improve
find revamp
products quality, but at the same time it could include a
combination of health, safety and environmental requirements, opportunities in
as well as an expansion of nameplate capacity. your Process Plant.
A critical evaluation of your process plant will enable you to
turn up capacity and improve performance without incurring in
a heavy, difficult to approve, capital cost. This article presents
ten factors to be investigated in order to help you find those
revamp opportunities.
FACTOR 1: A common Scenario
You are a process plant manager or process engineer with the modest assignment to debottleneck your
plant to boost production. The approach to solution seems direct and obvious: assess current capacity,
determine output limitations, and then employ a combination of experience and engineering
techniques to upgrade or replace equipment. Perhaps you find 20% reserve capacity, eliminating the
need for major investment.

Not every plant can be revamped to gain such improvements. However, many
plants can operate much more efficiently or at a substantially higher capacity
than a routine analysis might suggest.

Now, consider a different assignment: expand the plant capacity by 100%, reduce the specific utilities
consumption by 20%, increase the oil yield by 2% - and, do not forget, do it within an acceptable low
budget and keeping surgical control on the shutdown timeline -. This presents an interesting challenge
and definitely requires a different, more creative approach to the problem.

Not every plant can be revamped to gain such improvements. However, many plants can operate much
more efficiently or at a substantially higher capacity than a routine analysis might suggest.

Any exceptional plant revamping will require, in one way or another, a thorough consideration of the
following elements:

1. Deep knowledge of process fundamentals;

2. A critical analysis of the original design;

3. Proper approach to the problem;

4. Creative and talented people;

5. Emphasis on developing the simplest solution; and

6. Excellent access to suppliers, original or alternative.

FACTOR 2: Debottlenecking. Revamping. Troubleshooting. What

do I do, if anything?
These are all emblematic North American terms used in common engineering language. All of them
have already made an entry into the technical literature in our industry and some engineering books.
Our interpretation of each, in the context of the present article, is as follows.

Debottlenecking: This is a term used to describe the act of removing the constraints within a piece of
equipment or a process. It is taken from the shape of a bottle with a narrow neck that serves as a
constraint or resistance to the pouring out of the content. To debottleneck is to remove obstacles that
are preventing a process from being more efficient or from producing at a higher rate.

Troubleshooting: This is a term used to describe the process of diagnosing the source of a problem. It is
used when fixing problems with equipment or processes. The basic theory of troubleshooting is that
you start with the most general (and often most obvious) possible problems, and then narrow it down
to more specific issues. Many equipment or process manuals have a "Troubleshooting" section in the
back of the manual. This section contains a list of potential problems, which are often phrased in the
form of a question.

Revamping: This is a term used to describe the act of improving, modifying, or re-structuring a process
in order to obtain improved (or increased) production from it. It also can mean changes made to a
process for the purpose of changing the operation or production of other products. Sometimes, it is
used as a synonym of upgrading, especially when talking about old process plants in need of
equipment replacement or overhaul.

When oilseeds processing plants have reached a steady-state operation after being commissioned,
usually after the first year of operation, it is common not to make any major adjustments in the process
for some time.

However, during their life cycle, such plants generally go through at least one revamp to increase
operating capacity and take advantage of market opportunities. The revamp scope depends on the
desired increase in production capacity.

Some limited revamps (between 10 and 20% increase in capacity) include using excess capacity (over
design margins) by adopting more aggressive plant operation using advance process control together
with some minor update or modification of equipment.

Sometimes, a much higher increase in capacity (say 50% or higher) is required to produce an acceptable
return over investment. In general, in these cases, major capital investments are required as
conventional revamp strategies separately address each equipment item that limits capacity, and
modify or replace them by larger equipment. Often, through that strategy, the resulting high
investment cost and/or lengthy downtime required for project implementation can render the proposed
revamp unattractive.

Revamping project feasibility studies done to define the scope and capital cost of the revamp have to
simultaneously include process design, equipment design and operational changes in order to reduce
investment and operating costs. To capture these opportunities, it is important that the feasibility study
focuses on:

Defining the optimum capacity, scope, investment cost, design and operating changes,

Reducing investment cost (USD/Mton) and utilities usage (Hexane Lt/Mton, Energy KWh/Mton, etc.),

Improving the likelihood of revamp approval by minimizing risks and improving financial
justification.
Factor 3: Objectives of the Revamping Project
As previously mentioned, the driving forces behind a revamp exercise may be a combination of the
following items: safety and/or legislation requirements, expansion of nameplate capacity, process
improvements and deviation from original design basis. Lets have some insight into each,

Health, Safety and Environmental Requirements:

In many countries around South America, Asia and Africa, Governments are passing laws comparable
in content to the American Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) as well as Environmental
Quality Acts (EQAs). Health, safety and environmental concerns should always be regarded equal to
any economic consideration, if not of a higher priority. Certain aspects of safety and operability that
have been overlooked during original design should be addressed seriously and immediately. The use
of a Hazard and Operability Study (HAZOP) is a common tool now broadly used to re-engineer plants
that have been running for some time. The required changes may be small but sometimes a re-
engineering of a certain equipment or process is required.

Expansion of nameplate capacity:

As international players expand into smaller marginal businesses and countries, in some cases through
acquisition of existing plants, the average nameplate capacity continue to escalate everywhere. This is
also a huge incentive for smaller processors to expand their nameplate capacity in order not to lose out
in the race. Building a new crushing plant or refinery will require massive initial capital, which may not
be a feasible option in some countries, as it is the case in some of the African continent still recovering
from several crises. Revamping the existing unit becomes the most viable option to carry out.

Process improvements:

A good process plant (ex. a refinery) being energy and process -integrated is the fruit of labor of the
process engineers behind the original design. However, when that integration causes a potential limit
to plant load, then, it becomes a necessity to break the original optimization by, for example, buying a
new more efficient piece of process equipment (ex. a deodorizer) to improve the throughput. For such
scenarios, the process engineer has the duty to evaluate if investing on that new piece of equipment
and break the integration is feasible in the long run.

As a process plant ages, it may move to a state where it is so inefficient in energy consumption that it
become uneconomic to keep the plant running. In such revamps, other than just replacing the old
inefficient or worn-out equipment, it becomes critical to test out newer technology that promises better
efficiency.

Deviation from original design basis:

In general, it is the market who drives the need to change. In a crushing plant, it is a common practice
to recycle the gums separated in the water degumming back to plant to add to meal and sell at value of
meal. For example, by adding a lecithin plant to the existing unit helps to add value to the products
stream of the plant. With relatively low utility cost, processing the gums can tremendously increase the
value of them.
Feedstock deviation (or modification) may also be a good reason for a revamp. The ability to process
different seeds in a crushing plant or different crude oils in a refinery as margins change gives the plant
additional flexibility. To process different feedstocks than what was originally considered in the design
will require modification of the plant to absorb the changes.

FACTOR 4: Preliminary Studies

Before embarking into a test to move to unknown territory beyond the perimeter of the original design,
it is important to check the maximum available capacity based on specifications and operating
experiences.

Capacity check for theoretical bottlenecks:

All information of maximum capacity of each equipment in the flow chart such as a flaker or
conditioner, all heat exchanger available heat transfer areas, the flow through control valves etc.,
should be tabulated beforehand to know the available margins. This work can be tedious, but always
brings good results.

Then, as the throughput of the unit is scaled up to 110%, 120% and beyond above the design margins,
theoretical bottlenecks can be identified. Based on this alone, a list of required modifications can be
generated for each overcapacity case. Preliminary cost estimation can also be made at this stage.

Past experiences of reference plant:

More often than not, another process plant that uses the same technology will serve as a good reference
to identify potential bottlenecks. In our experience, this is one of the most complicated stages of the
analysis, as it requires an excellent access to competitors data and a seamless collaboration from OEM
(Original Equipment Manufacturer) companies. It has to be mentioned, sometimes OEM are too
focused on selling new equipment and new processes, and it happens that the revamping project is of
little interest to them. Through building long-term relationships with their technical relevant people,
that information can become accessible.

Acceptance Test Run Data:

If the process plant under investigation is relatively new and the commissioning process was formally
completed at handover from OEM, the Acceptance Test Run data of the process plant might be the best
available baseline data of the unit. Deviations from design parameters that are identified at this stage
should be resolved before proceeding to the load test, what means the process plant should be running
at optimal conditions before load test.

FACTOR 5: Test-run Planning

Test-run, sometimes also called load test, is one of the most important stages of any revamping study
exercise. It consists of gathering specific plant data under planned running conditions (composition,
pressure, temperature of all process streams that have an impact on the plant energy and material
balance, including all data needed to quantify the major process equipment performance) and the
subsequent analysis.

Capacity Target: The revamp exercise requires an incremental change to normal running conditions as
existing equipment performance has to be quantified. Assessment of current equipment performance
allows the revamp project engineer to push the equipment limits further from nameplate capacity. This
minimizes investment for any given revamp objective.

Manpower: Test-run exercise will not be a complete success unless careful and detailed planning and
coordination happen. Cooperative effort of all relevant parties: operators, process engineers,
maintenance personnel, engineering personnel, lab chemists, safety personnel as well as the top
management, will play a crucial role in the success of the load test. Moreover, it is important to have
key experienced people to steer the plant personnel through the load test. A small team of process and
operations engineers with expertise in this kind of analysis will be required.

Plant Pre-conditioning: It is essential to have the complete process plant in as good condition as
possible beforehand or otherwise, a false bottleneck could appear, so obstructing the entire test-run
effort. Common examples of the necessary pre-conditioning required tasks are:

All critical instruments to be zeroed and calibrated. Very often, additional instruments will be
required if this is the first test run the plant will undergo in a long time.

Sufficient laboratory consumables to be made available. Laboratory instruments to be calibrated and

conditioned.

Heat exchangers to be in clean condition.

Filters and strainers to be cleaned or replaced if plugged. Spares to be available in the warehouse.

Sufficient storage spaces need to be made available. As a result of the test-run, some products can be
off-spec. Arrangements have to be made to ensure this production can be sold and shipped.

Data collection: In our experience, manually recording data in log sheets is very time-consuming but
very often the only solution available. If that is not the case and data from the distributed control
system can continuously be recorded, that should be the preferred way, as it allows a real continuous
record and a more accurate analysis. SCADA systems usually allow extraction into a spreadsheet for
easy reference.
Manpower / Who is who

You need to find creative and talented people for this kind of project. Ask yourself some basic questions
to determine whether you need a technology expert or vendor process engineers to help with the revamp
design.

What are the skills needed in the team for this type of revamp?

How will they approach the problem?

Who is proficient with the process engineering?

Certainly, major technology firms in our market have qualified engineers, but that does not mean these
particular firms will have an interest in your project nor that their objectives will not be conflicting with
yours. Exercise your right to select the team and to have the final word regarding the project scope.

Many engineers don't take the trouble to understand the process and instead believe the safe selection is
the original plant manufacturer. Maybe this is the best choice, but it is essential to carry out a thorough
investigation before making that decision. Otherwise, you may find yourself in a competitively difficult
situation against other competitors who have chosen a more creative approach.

Endeavor to put together a team with a variety of skills. As an example, engineers who have worked in
regions where energy costs are high will likely keep energy conservation and process integration clear
in mind. Engineers from relatively "technology-scarce" regions usually have well-developed basic
engineering skills and practical insight. A variety of backgrounds often promote fresh and creative ideas.

FACTOR 6: Data Analysis

All data collected during the test-run must be checked. Any discrepancy observed has to be critically
discussed to determine if the reading is correct. After laboratory analysis data are received, mass and
energy balances across the entire plant must be made.

All analysis at this stage aim to determine if each equipment as a component of the process plant has
indeed hit or exceeded a limitation. A comparison table of expected maximum nameplate capacity vs.
actual load observed is to be made. This helps in evaluating if the equipment has reached its capacity or
how much margin is still available.

All analysis at this stage aim to determine if each equipment as a component of

the process plant has indeed hit or exceeded a limitation.
FACTOR 7: Reduce revamping costs by optimizing design
Competition in our oilseeds marketplace is becoming fierce. Everyone wants to be the "low-cost"
producer. Achieving that is tough if your plant uses the same technology in the exact same way as
everyone else. A competitor taking a more creative approach will beat you. So, spend the time deeply
reviewing the opportunities for improving your plant's design.

A good revamping proposal will have a list of engineering and process changes required. As the cost of
modifying an existing plant can be significant and in some cases comparable to, or even higher than, the
replacement cost (i.e. the cost of a new comparable plant), a critical evaluation of the highest possible
throughput without modifying equipment must be conducted. Several cases of revamps at this feasibility
stage should be proposed for economic evaluation.

The original design should be critically reviewed to address problems and to understand the basis for
significant improvement. In some cases, the original designers used rules of thumb and practical
guesswork. Therefore, designs may appear to work well from the outset but may be on the border of
failure. If possible, and we are not saying this is easy, contact the original designers to evaluate their
methods. Do not automatically assume that the design was done correctly.

Some older plants may have been designed with rudimentary computer equipment. So, the designers
may have missed opportunities for optimization due to the difficulty of reviewing multiple design cases.
In addition, all basic unit operations have benefited from great improvements during the last several
years. If you have an old plant that has not been reviewed recently, chances are that such a review can
uncover cost-effective revamp opportunities.

FACTOR 8: Timeline and cost of no operation

Because profit is lost on days with reduced or no production, special emphasis should be placed on
short revamping project realization periods. In addition, every upgraded plant must be brought into
full operation (ramp-up) in the shortest time possible. That means, plant shutdown is expected to be
short and high in intensity. As down time must be minimized maximum construction work in the
operating plant prior to the shutdown is required, which in tum involves numerous daily work permits
and thorough monitoring to ensure safe work practices. The result of this is increased construction
costs.

The senior management teams first task is to determine when to schedule the plant shutdown. To
minimize the negative cash flow, the marketing department must be able to provide a market
projection so that the timing of the shutdown corresponds to a low market demand for the products or
lowest operational margin period. This is a good time to be off-line. Additional input will always be
required from Accounting, Maintenance, Engineering and Operations. This information is analyzed
and incorporated into the business plan.

Plant shutdown for the planned revamping will be by far more complex than those scheduled for major
maintenance work, and carry the risks associated to a plant modification.
Revamping projects can be complex, but their project management process is in general standard,
involving a project team, work breakdown structure, cost control structure, organizational breakdown
structure, finalized schedule, detailed cost estimate, and plant shutdown dates. After the plant
shutdown and with commissioning complete, it should include an evaluation of the project, completion
of reports, documents and drawing updates, etc.

FACTOR 9: The role of automation/process control in a

revamping project
In old oilseeds processing plants built in the 80s or before there was an almost complete absence of
process automation, then plant operators had to physically monitor performance values and the quality
of outputs to determine the best settings on which to run the production equipment. This generally
resulted in operational inefficiency, poor quality and unsafe operating conditions.

Many oilseed processing plants that were one day the most automated plants of its type in the 90s or
early 2000s had control consisting of pneumatic valves with very simple, outdated PLCs operating a
Distributed Control System (DCS). In these, dozens or even hundreds of control loops were responsible
for controlling one part of the process, such as maintaining a temperature, level, or flow.

As a DCS reaches the end of its useful life, an upgrade to a new automation system is required.
Upgrade of old DCS will bring superior performance resulting in lower overall plant operating costs,
less downtime and lower maintenance costs.

The automation upgrade must guarantee the following:

The new automation system has to be stable, easy to implement and maintain.

Start-up after upgrade must be easy.

The solution must not create an additional cost to keep the plant running.

It must bring an improved Process Control.

It has to provide superior alarm and event handling.

It must bring more reporting options with easier implementation.

It has to provide easier integration with smart instruments, analyzers and valves.

Personnel familiar with the system must be easy to be found.

Todays plant automation systems do not just start and stop equipment to maintain set points. With
variable speed drives, the automation can select the right speed at which to operate pumps and tower
fans. Automation systems enhance plant efficiency further with tuning algorithms that continually
adjust control routines based on system dynamics and seasonal changes (room temperature, seed
moisture, etc).
Beyond the above, there is a tremendous potential, not yet completely explored, in the Internet of
Things (IoT) where a wireless network of sensors and gateways are designed to send notifications
(text, email, phone, etc) if user defined conditions are met or exceeded.

FACTOR 10: Project Presentation. Where do we go from here?

Implementing a successful revamping project requires selling it to others, either inside or outside the
company. We engineers are proud of our technical skills, but many brilliant ideas go unrealized
because of poor selling. The reason for revamping the plant may be as strong as the Board of Directors
declining the proposal because it looks too complicated or not well justified. In general, the revamping
proposal should be packaged and presented to be no more complex than what the least technically
skilled person in the decision-making chain can understand. The technical solution itself does not have
to be simplistic, but the presentation must be simple and clear.

In a few words, project will never happen if you cannot convince people of its value. Preparing for this
presentation is worth the time you invest in it.

At the end of the feasibility analysis, it is usual to develop a Front End Engineering (FEED) through a
contractor or with in-house resources to get certainty on the scope and costs. The FEED team will
prepare a functional specification for what could be an EPC contract in case that is the chosen option.

The following summarizes the direction for the project team and management to proceed.

FEED and Costing

Approval

Detailed Engineering

Procurement

Tie-ins

Implementation
 PRELIMINARY REVAMPING OBJECTIVES
Business Objectives (Top Management) Process Plant Improvements (Plant Staff)

FIELD REVIEW - PREPARATION

Revamping Engineers Plant Staff

TEST RUN
Revamping Engineers Plant Staff

TEST RUN DATA EVALUATION

Revamping Engineers Plant Staff

PLANT/EQUIPMENT CONDITION REVIEW

Revamping Engineers

REVAMPING SCOPE REVIEW

Revamping Engineers

REVAMPING OBJECTIVES FINALIZATION

Revamping Engineers

FINAL DESIGN PACKAGE

Revamping Engineers

TIME PLANNING AND COST ESTIMATION

Cost Estimators Project Planners

REVAMPING PROJECT SIMPLIFIED FLOW DIAGRAM

Conclusions

Conceptual process design must explore the practical alternatives to

eliminate major unit equipment bottlenecks.

Achieving outstanding results for a revamping project requires special

attention to certain critical details. Accurately defining the frontend scope
will result in a revamping project that is technically correct with a high
probability of achieving schedule and budget goals.

A test run with focus in a revamping project is not a simple exercise. The
people involved in the revamping study must begin with an objective.
Planning and coordination work has to start well ahead of the intended
test run. If necessary, and in general it is, equipment preconditioning must
be carried out in advance.

Maximum utilization of the existing equipment is critical to minimizing

investment costs. While a Greenfield Oilseeds Processing Unit design is a
linear process, the revamp process design is not.
About the author:

Mauro Tognocchi is a consultant for Projects Engineering & Management,

Maintenance Engineering and Operational Improvements having over 20 years of experience in
industrial operations with international exposure. His main specialty is the handling, processing
and distribution of grains and oilseeds.

He worked for over fourteen years in Louis Dreyfus Commodities and in several locations in
South America, Africa and Middle East.

He is also one of the founders and director of an engineering consulting company with main
focus on Africa and Middle East (www.twpint.com).

Direct Line: + 54 9341 3381 775

Email: mauro@mtconsultor.com

www.mtconsultor.com