Gulf of Mexico

Deepwater Development Program

FACTORY TESTING GUIDELINE

DOCUMENT NUMBER: 1400-20-CO-RP-8008

0 02/21/02 Approved for Design ABT

B 11/28/01 General Revisions ABT/RP
A 10/04/01 Draft for Initial Review ABT
REV DATE DOCUMENT STATUS ORIGINATOR CHECKED APPROVED

Job Area/Unit Discipline Document Sequence Document

Document Control Number Number Designation Code Type Number Revision
1400 20 CO RP 8008 0
Factory Test Guideline 1400-20-CO-RP-8008
BP – Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Development Program Revision 0

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 SCOPE........................................................................................................................................ 3

2.0 OBJECTIVES AND DELIVERABLES OF FACTORY TESTING..................................................4

2.1 Functional Testing (FT) – definition and examples.......................................................................5
2.2 Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT) – definition and examples......................................................5
2.3 System Integration Testing (SIT) – definition and examples........................................................6
2.4 Punchlist Guideline...................................................................................................................... 7
3.0 PREPARATION FOR FACTORY TESTING.................................................................................8

4.0 PROCEDURE FOR CARRY-OVER OF FACTORY WORKSCOPE TO FABRICATION SITE......8

5.0 PACKAGING AND TRANSPORTATION FROM FACTORY TO FABRICATION SITE..................9

Page 2 of 9
Factory Test Guideline 1400-20-CO-RP-8008
BP – Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Development Program Revision 0

1.0 SCOPE
This guideline covers the range of testing activities performed on project equipment at vendor
factories.
Project equipment will include vendor-packaged equipment, skidded equipment and systems.
The extent of testing of each equipment item at vendor factory will be determined by the
project, in accordance with that projects’ requirements. Document 1400-20-CO-RP-8006
“Topsides Hook-Up and Commissioning Guideline” (in particular the flowchart in section 4.5
‘Early Commissioning Workscope and Prioritization’) provides guidance on how this testing
workscope can be determined in each case.
Each project will develop a factory testing program, covering the extent of testing to be
performed on each equipment item. The basis of this information is contained in the purchase
order placed with equipment vendors. The factory testing program will also detail project
inspection activities, and will list required project and Operations participants.
In general, factory testing activities will be structured to maximize the likelihood of a trouble-free
offshore start-up, through uncovering problems sufficiently early in the project cycle that they
are resolved without impacting overall schedule.
This document is intended to help each project maximize the value of their factory testing
through having agreed objectives and deliverables for each test, consistent conduct by all
projects at each vendor factory, and appropriate preparation and participation in the testing
activity.
This document describes the approach to be taken to factory testing, in terms of:
 timing
 objectives
 participation
 structure
The document recognizes the program-environment, in which:
 several projects will procure similar pieces of equipment from the same manufacturer, and
therefore have the opportunity to
 rationalize testing workscope across projects (so the maximum assurance of equipment
function is gained through the minimum aggregate testing across the projects)
 combine attendance at factory tests (so the maximum familiarity and competence can
be gained through cross-project participation in a rationalized workscope)
 several key contracts have already been structured in a cross-project fashion, including
engineering design fabrication, and installation; providing the opportunity to
 share cost and benefit of provision of (for example) temporary utilities and connections
at fabrication site to facilitate onshore commissioning, thereby providing a mitigation for
factory test workscope which is not completed prior to equipment shipment to
fabrication site

Page 3 of 9
Factory Test Guideline 1400-20-CO-RP-8008
BP – Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Development Program Revision 0

This document relates to other documents as follows:

1400-20-CO-RP-8006 Topsides Hook-Up and Commissioning Guideline
for definitions of each project phase, and the conditions required to progress through these
1400-20-CO-RP-8016 System Turnover Guideline
for description of how to move the facilities through successive project phases
1400-20-CO-RP-8014 Dimensional Control Design Guideline
for awareness of the efforts ongoing around factory testing stage to eliminate fabrication re-
work from factory to fabrication site
1400-20-CO-RP-8009 Leak-Test Guideline
for guidance on conducting any leak-tests required as part of the package-vendor’s workscope,
and which will be included in the factory test
1400-20-CO-RP-8017 Guideline for Commissioning-Certification and Progress-Tracking
for description of the system through which punchlists will be managed from factory test
onwards

2.0 OBJECTIVES AND DELIVERABLES OF FACTORY TESTING

The purpose of factory testing is to assure and document the equipment’s mechanical
completion, controls functionality, and performance, in accordance with the specific project’s
execution plan. In most cases the factory testing will confirm the completion of the equipment
manufacturer’s workscope, with the result that the test is of contractual significance. Where
appropriate, formal project acceptance of the equipment will take place on completion of factory
testing, and this will be documented as required.
Specific objectives of the factory testing are:
 to test the equipment (with all auxiliary systems, as feasible) to a required specification or
standard, as agreed between project and vendor
 to ensure operability and maintainability of the equipment
 to enhance information gathering and familiarity for use in preparation of commissioning
and operating procedures
Any leak-tests required as part of the package-vendor’s workscope, will be included in the
factory test, and will be performed in accordance with 1400-CO-RP-20-8009 Leak-Test
Guideline.
The key deliverables from the factory test are:
 an auditable record that the equipment has been tested as agreed
 a single punchlist, with clear categorization of items to be resolved prior to shipment from
vendor factory, and items to be completed prior to onshore commissioning. All punchlist
items will have remedial actions and resource-provision for clearance explicitly detailed.
The ‘responsible’ party for each item is also listed to ensure correct cost-recovery. The
punchlist will be agreed with the vendor prior to conclusion of the factory visit, along with a
plan for managing progress of the punchlist items. The punchlist will also be entered into
the Commissioning-Certification and Progress-Tracking system (see 1400-20-CO-RP-8017
Guideline for Commissioning-Certification and Progress-Tracking). Prompts for punchlisting
are listed in Section 2.4.

Page 4 of 9
Factory Test Guideline 1400-20-CO-RP-8008
BP – Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Development Program Revision 0

Further deliverables are:

 preparation of a draft commissioning procedure, including the provision of appropriate
vendor data (in a format usable by COMPANY documentation systems)
 the development and demonstration of competence by the Operations team in familiarity
with each equipment package. Operations attendance at each test will be planned
accordingly, to ensure the required competence is developed by each team, and the
necessary evidence will be gathered consistent with COMPANY competence management
assurance system. This does not imply that Operations personnel will actually run the
equipment at the factory; as equipment status, previous training, and the prior availability of
vendor data may be insufficient to allow safe and productive hands-on activity at factory
testing stage
2.1 Functional Testing (FT) – definition and examples
For skidded or packaged equipment it is common to perform Functional Testing (FT) of major
components, prior to the final Factory Acceptance Test (FAT). This is done to assure
construction/assembly integrity and proper operation of the components (i.e. mechanical-
completion and control-functionality).
All agreed to tests and inspections are performed, utilizing temporary test panels as required.
An example of where FT’s would be utilized is with power generator supply. Multiple skidded
units are to be supplied, and each unit is composed of a gas turbine driver and ancillaries,
generator, turbine control panel and generator control panel. Prior to final FAT of the skidded
unit, each individual turbine, each generator, and each control panel would be individually
function tested.
A smaller example of a FT would be a bulk separator or regen. skid, on which pressure-integrity
tests would be carried out, and instrumentation such as level gauges and transmitters would be
tested.
2.2 Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT) – definition and examples
The FAT will go beyond FT workscope (as described above), to also prove the entire package’s
ability to meet pressure, flowrate, temperature or other performance requirements specified in
the purchase order or contract for equipment provision.
FAT is concerned with the aspects of Mechanical Completion, which can be reached for a
discrete vendor package prior to its release from the shop to the fabrication site, for integration
into the topsides. In addition, the FAT is intended to prove the performance of the vendor unit.
Typically this would include running the package around a significant portion of its operating
envelope, and making necessary corrections for the use of non-field fluids (e.g. water instead
of methanol in chemical pumps), in order to confirm the package will meet duty conditions
required in the field. The actual extent of this functional testing will be influenced by the Control
Philosophy implemented on vendor packages.
An example of a FAT would be a compressor package assembled with gearbox and driver and
test-run to compress gas within a closed-loop piping system. The FAT workscope may include
putting the compressor into surge. This type of ‘string-test’ is an example of an activity where
multi-project participation in the FAT for the first in a series of standardized units being provided
to several projects, may yield some savings whilst maintaining the assurance that all such units
will start-up and operate effectively in the field.

Page 5 of 9
Factory Test Guideline 1400-20-CO-RP-8008
BP – Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Development Program Revision 0

2.3 System Integration Testing (SIT) – definition and examples

The SIT will go beyond FAT workscope (as described above), to also include full testing of all
systems components, especially including interactions of multiple component systems to
assure functionality and performance of all system components.
An example of an SIT would be a subsea Christmas tree connected to the host platform control
system and operated (valve stroking, etc.), or an ‘automation-trailer’ used to provide a
temporary control room to run major equipment items remotely.

Page 6 of 9
Factory Test Guideline 1400-20-CO-RP-8008
BP – Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Development Program Revision 0

2.4 Punchlist Guideline

THESE GUIDELINES SHOULD BE FOLLOWED BY ALL THOSE INVOLVED IN PUNCHLISTING; TO ENSURE THAT THE SINGLE
INTEGRATED-DISCIPLINE PUNCHLIST RAISED FOR EACH SYSTEM IS OF CONSISTENT HIGH QUALITY. THE PUNCHLIST WILL BE
GENERATED AND UPDATED THROUGHOUT THE PROGRAM OF FACTORY INSPECTIONS, TO FACILITATE EARLY IDENTIFICATION AND
RECTIFICATION OF PACKAGE PROBLEMS. PUNCHLISTING WILL BE COMPLETED BEFORE EQUIPMENT IS MADE LIVE OR ACCEPTED,
WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST.

THE OBJECTIVE OF THE PUNCHLIST IS TO IDENTIFY REMEDIAL WORKS NECESSARY FOR EQUIPMENT TO BE OF FIT-FOR-PURPOSE
STANDARD OF CONSTRUCTION, AND TO BE SAFELY OPERABLE (INCLUDING CONSISTENCY OF PAPERWORK).

 Liaise with other Completions Team members to arrange time for punchlisting.
 Obtain latest revisions of system P&ID’s (as-builts if possible), line drawings, & electrical diagrams.
 Check area on PDMS model, if necessary/available.
 Inform the area authority (if appropriate) that you will be in the area.
 Check local permit boards for ongoing work, and maintain good housekeeping in the area
 Ensure that the safety of yourself and others in the area is not compromised by the actions you carry
out
Walk through the system and note any remedials arising from the following checks:
1) Check all documentation is correct and available (e.g. instrument calibrations and general readiness of
equipment).
2) Check equipment is clean.
3) Check tagging/setting of equipment is correct and that it corresponds to nameplate and drawings.
4) Check all indication is of correct color protocol.
5) Check access/egress provision (allow for temporary factory set-up).
6) Check that all shipping stops, bracing and packaging materials have been removed and that all sliding feet are
free.
7) Check equipment for damage to painting or coating, check condition of insulation.
8) Check all threads and faces (e.g. mechanical fasteners, JB’s, TX lids) are adequately lubricated to prevent
corrosion.
9) Check pipework orientation does not facilitate corrosion (dead-legs, etc.).
10) Ensure all interlocks and mechanical locking/isolating devices are functioning.
11) Check mechanical operation of all push buttons.
12) Check for internal damage to equipment.
13) Check bolts and gaskets are installed at all joints, and that studbolts are correct spec, length and tightness.
14) Check jointing is to correct spec and all flanges are correctly aligned.
15) Check that temporary equipment, e.g. strainer, is installed and identified as temporary, and meets all system
specifications
16) Check pipework for adequate supports and brackets.
17) Check operability and accessibility of valves.
18) Check orientation of NRV’s, control valves, and flow orifices.
19) Check local PI’s and TI’s are in place and are of the required range and rating.
20) Check all instrumentation for correct connection to process, electrical, pneumatic and hydraulic supplies.
21) Check control, electrical and earthing cables are terminated.
22) Check integrity of all Ex. equipment.
23) Check terminations and connections are secure.
24) Check all electrical supplies/temporary supplies are correctly fused and rated.
25) Check integrity of earthing system.
26) Check operation of stop/start stations.
27) Check there are no exposed contacts/terminals inside cubicles, which remain accessible when live.
28) Check gaskets and seals are not damaged.
29) Check all test equipment is in good working order, and correctly calibrated.
30) Check use of correct glands and glandplates: check tightness of glands.
31) Check all cables are in good condition and correctly fixed and identified.
32) Check mechanical-handling equipment is in place and adequate.
33) Confirm rotating equipment alignments are complete, and suitable adjustment is achievable in field (shim packs,
etc).
34) Confirm lubrication and seal systems are flushed to correct specification prior to equipment use.

Page 7 of 9
Factory Test Guideline 1400-20-CO-RP-8008
BP – Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Development Program Revision 0

CATEGORIZE EACH DEFECT AS LISTED BELOW. MARK UP P&ID’s WITH ALL DEFECTS, LABEL IN FIELD.

Category A: Items to be repaired/completed/corrected before the equipment can be safely powered-up and
commissioned.
Category B: Items that can be repaired/completed/corrected at a later date and which do not stop the
equipment from being safely commissioned/operated.

3.0 PREPARATION FOR FACTORY TESTING

Each test will be led by the appropriate Package Engineer or Operations System Owner, who
will ensure the following preparatory actions are in place:
 Timing and location agreed (Project, Vendor)
 Attendance agreed (Project, Vendor, Operations – including discipline specialists)
 Test objectives agreed and documented in procedure (Project, Vendor, and Operations). This
includes a consideration of planned testing workscope at fabrication site, to ensure the total
testing/commissioning workscope is being performed at the most appropriate location and time,
and that no duplication of testing is being undertaken; nor workscope “falling through the gaps”
such that reliable offshore start-up is not assured
 Test procedure written and approved, including requirement for data-collection into Maximo, and
for preparation of commissioning procedures (Project, Vendor, and Operations). This will include
specifying to the vendor the format in which data must be provided for migration into Maximo (e.g.
MSExcel, MSWord, MSAccess)
 Minimum conditions for equipment release from factory, and conditions which will require repeat of
factory test, agreed and documented in test procedure (Project, Vendor, Operations)
 BP and Mustang networks (e.g. Rotating Equipment Network, Operations Community, and Dare-to-
Share lessons-learned database) interrogated for applicable lessons and expertise to be applied in
advance of and during factory test. Responses from network to be documented in test procedure
(Project, Operations)
 Cross-project communication (via cross-project functional/discipline teams) to determine whether
any other project (i.e. not the project whose equipment is being subjected to factory test at this
time) can rationalize their testing requirement through participation in this test; either by reducing
the requirement to subsequently test their own similar equipment, and/or by having appropriate
members of their team attend this test in preference to later test on their own equipment. Outcome
of this cross-project communication to be documented in test procedure (Project, Operations)

4.0 PROCEDURE FOR CARRY-OVER OF FACTORY WORKSCOPE TO FABRICATION

SITE
Transfer of factory test workscope to fabrication site will in most cases increase cost and
schedule. Where the deliverables listed in section 2.0 cannot be met without delaying the
shipment of an equipment item forward to the fabrication site, the following process should be
followed by those participating in the factory test:
1. Document the outstanding workscope
2. Define how this missing workscope increases risk (and cost) to reliable start-up
3. Develop a plan for testing activities at fabrication site, which can mitigate this increased
risk

Page 8 of 9
Factory Test Guideline 1400-20-CO-RP-8008
BP – Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Development Program Revision 0

4. Liaise with Construction/Commissioning Manager at fabrication site to confirm whether

these activities can be accommodated within the constraints of site schedule, budget,
and facilities (including availability of temporary utilities at fabrication site, and impact of
the carried-over workscope on other fabrication site activities)
5. Decide whether to delay equipment release from factory to complete factory test
workscope, or to carry-over workscope to fabrication site
6. Document and agree (Project, Operations, Vendor) the above, and add to system
punchlist

5.0 PACKAGING AND TRANSPORTATION FROM FACTORY TO FABRICATION SITE

The Package Engineer or Operations System Owner will ensure the package is adequately
prepared for transport from vendor facility and receipt at site. This activity will be completed by
inspectors, and will cover:
 protection for equipment items
 provision for labeling, retention and re-assembly of any shipped-loose items (including availability
of any tools required for re-assembly)
 transport and identification of any ‘special tools’ or spares associated with the Package (noting that
spares may be routed to the Operations warehouse, depending on the Logistics & Services
strategy being employed)
 compliance with all project guidelines relating to transportation of equipment and materials. This
includes preservation of equipment, and use of packaging which allows access for preservation
activities, e.g. hatches to allow shaft-rotation on pumps without requirement to destroy entire
packaging crate
The testing workscope at fabrication site must be confirmed as addressing any risks to integrity
or functionality, which arise due to disassembly for transport (for example, the requirement to
re-test a connection due to its removal for transportation). This workscope must also be
confirmed in advance with Commissioning Manager at fabrication site as being achievable
within the site schedule, budget and facilities constraints (as described in section 4.0, item 4).
The Package Engineer or Operations System Owner will undertake a final review at completion
of factory test to ensure that any test workscope being carried over to fabrication site is fully
understood in terms of it’s impact on the requirements for packaging and transportation. For
example, where original plan was to disassemble items from a package for shipment, following
factory test completion, but the test workscope is being transferred to fabrication site, it may be
beneficial to leave items in-situ to facilitate this testing, and use appropriate additional
measures to protect the package during transfer. The opposite situation may also apply in
particular cases.

Page 9 of 9