I have long-believed there must be a better way to revalidate P&IDs - at costs averaging $1,500 per P&ID, owner-operators are paying Lamborghini prices for a work product riddled with more problems than a broke-down Mitsubishi Lancer.
“Think about it: A facility with 1,000 P&IDs pays the equivalent of $1,500,000 (yes, 1.5-MILLI) every 5 years to trust a ‘qualified’ contractor to manually field-walk and redline its P&IDs in potentially hazardous environments.”
A standard P&ID redline workflow looks something like this:
Contractor prints off P&IDs onto 11x17” paper.
Contractor organizes P&IDs into process units and spends the equivalent of thousands -or tens of thousands- of hours exposed to the elements using a red ink pen to notate additions/deletions on paper.
Contractor stacks redlined papers, often torn, tattered and spotted with ink-smears from rain and/or condensate, into a backlog of updates for CAD to update.
Contract drafter updates the field redlines into the master set of P&IDs to be submitted to owner-operator (this, of course, assumes the drafter can legibly read all redlines without the need to revisit the field and incur re-work).
Contractor submits redlined P&IDs to owner-operator, who engages Operations, Engineering and/or CAD staff to validate the revalidation.
Operations, Engineering or CAD staff field-walk the proposed P&ID changes to either accept or reject redlines. Rejected redlines are returned to the contractor and steps #1-5 are repeated (incurring more costs and worker exposure risk).
Does the above sound like the process at your plant? If so, there are opportunities every year to implement better technology to improve the P&ID revalidation process while reducing worker exposure hours by 50% or more.
What if I told you the team at Ei can deliver on these promises? Would you consider a better way to revalidate your P&IDs? Would you break-away from a broken process at the risk of fear of change?