Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
75%
success stories in this uncertain environment.
counts by
2 Ways to Improve the Bid and FEED Phases of Capital Projects ©2015 Aspen Technology Inc. 11-7047-0715
Alignment on Project Scope and Risk
While a number of factors have driven many this topic was extensively discussed. In a mid-
recent capital projects to run overbudget conference audience poll, involving an even split
and behind schedule, let’s focus on one of of executives representing owners and EPCs,
the current issues that is most frequently lack of communication regarding project scope
discussed, namely project scope definition. during bidding and FEED, was identified as a
EPCs are broadly concerned about their ability key issue. A Fall 2014 EY report (1) provided an
to gain alignment, with respect to project analysis that conveyed contributing issues such
scope, with their clients; and at the same time as “over-optimistic” capital estimates, lack of
with the level of corporate risk imposed by the agreement on project scope during Front End
owners pressure to bid lower, perform more Loading (FEL), rushed Front End Design (FEED),
engineering during bidding, and towards lump and proceeding with detailed design without
sum contracting. Owners also recognize this full access to FEED deliverables (see Figure 1).
issue. The September 2014 ECC (Engineering During the winter of 2014 – 15, individual global
Construction Contractors) Forum, consequently, EPCs confirmed with AspenTech that these
had as a theme, “Aligning the Stars,” (4) in which issues are all recognized as key concerns.
Inadequate
JV Conflictand Ineffective P
roject HSE Risk and Local Diplomatic and
Planning Overly
Relationship Challenges Management Content Security Issues
Aggressive Forecast
JV Conflict
PoorProcurement Regulatory D
elay And Financial and Supplier
Access to F unding and Relationship
of Contractors PolicyUncertainty Market Uncertainty
Challenges
Poor Portfolio
AggressiveEstimates JV Conflict and Inadequate Civil andWork Force
Management and
and Optimism Bias RelationshipChallenges Infrastructure Disruption
hanging Risk Appetite
C
3 Ways to Improve the Bid and FEED Phases of Capital Projects ©2015 Aspen Technology Inc. 11-7047-0715
Project Scope
What Do We Mean When We Say Align on Project Scope?
It is generally agreed that the process flow diagram (PFD) and the associated supporting items,
the utilities flow diagram (UFD) and materials selection diagram (MSD), are at the core of
understanding, reviewing and agreeing on project scope. These documents both serve as a key
handover point between the process engineering function and other engineering disciplines, and as
a key communication point between the lead designers, the project managers, the estimators, and
the clients. Complementing this key deliverable are equipment lists and line lists. The equipment
list represents the key designed elements at enough detail to fully represent what the process
engineer has in mind, allowing the estimator to turn the concept into a deliverable, costable plant.
The equipment list is also a key communication point between the estimator and the engineering
disciplines to reach agreement on the “estimated scope” and also should be the key communication
point between the EPC and the owner.
It is generally agreed that the process flow diagram (PFD) and associated
supporting items, the utilities flow diagram (UFD) and materials selection
diagram (MSD) are at the core of understanding, reviewing and agreeing
on project scope.
4 Ways to Improve the Bid and FEED Phases of Capital Projects ©2015 Aspen Technology Inc. 11-7047-0715
The issues typically arise in the alignment on project scope when time,
resource constraints (availability of key experts at the right time) and
organizational barriers are put into the equation. Some of the key
issues that the industry is grappling with are:
1
Process Engineering, Modeling and PFDs: Process Engineers who develop the
conceptual design, including the process model and the process schema, are typically
averse to drafting. They need to be able to quickly and effectively produce, and most
importantly change and modify, a PFD under the deadlines of bid and proposal work and early
conceptual design, but without the right tools they are often delegating this PFD task to a drafter.
This causes delays in PFD production, especially when changes are made, and the availability of a
final PFD at times of discussion and negotiations with owners.
2
Dynamic Owner Requirements: With the dynamic economic, business and even political
conditions impacting project goals and definitions, owner requirements are frequently
changing. This requires the process engineering team to make frequent changes and
modifications, which has cascading impacts on deliverables such as PFDs, equipment lists, and
estimates, squeezing timeframes and impacting rigor and quality. The frequent solution, which is to
rush through FEED, is to keep the project schedules intact, which has a negative impact on project
changes during detailed design and ultimately on project cost and schedule. In this environment,
structured and collaborative FEED solutions such as Aspen Basic Engineering are a key tool.
3
Shortages of Key Experts at Crucial Times: Across the process industry, short supply of
experienced technical experts is a growing issue. During the bidding and project definition
phases, experienced process designers and estimators are a critical component on both
the EPC and owner side. Especially with the dynamic nature of projects, with frequent changes,
experienced generalists who can quickly and effectively review the scope, resourcing risk,
constructability, operability and ultimate risk of a project are keys to success. Software tools and
methods, such as Aspen HYSYS® and Aspen Plus®, Increase the productivity and effectiveness of
these experts and are crucial resources for reducing project risk.
4
Transparency and Owner Review: Due to the size and complexity of many current process
industry projects, it is essential that the owners fully understand the project definition, scope,
constraints, cost estimate, and cost risks. This requires complete transparency between the
owner and the EPC concerning the project scope and estimate, as well as software tools that will
enable the owner’s reviewer to understand at a detailed project and discipline level what is contained
in the estimate. A crucial tool for owners to successfully manage their contractor relationships and
projects is a transparent and flexible estimating system, such as the Aspen Capital Cost Estimator
model-based system, which looks at the scope and total installed cost.
5 Ways to Improve the Bid and FEED Phases of Capital Projects ©2015 Aspen Technology Inc. 11-7047-0715
Getting a Handle on the Estimating Process
With the estimate being a critical communication tool, let’s explore the processes typically
employed, the new technologies available, and the improvements that can be achieved. First,
let’s look at the traditional approach and its issues, followed by examples of new approaches and
strategies and how to arrive at them.
Traditional
Traditional estimating processes, namely “bottoms up”, spreadsheet-based approaches and factor-
based or parametric approaches present an organization with some serious deficiencies in light of
the project challenges discussed above. These approaches are highly dependent on assembling a
large team of estimators who are making calls, counting and entering information; are
dependent on the responsiveness and understanding of vendors in supplying cost
quotes, and are also dependent on the ability to reasonably extrapolate from
historical cost files.
6 Ways to Improve the Bid and FEED Phases of Capital Projects ©2015 Aspen Technology Inc. 11-7047-0715
Model-Based
The model-based estimating approach addresses all of these issues by building up a total installed
cost estimate from “engineer-in-a-box” engineering first-principles models, which perform extremely
well when scaling a design, but are not dependent. The model automates the process of applying the
correct engineering standards, factors, sizing rules, and provisions.
Aspen Capital Cost Estimator (ACCE) (originally introduced into the market as “ICARUS”) is the
leading commercially developed, model-based system on the market. It contains a comprehensive
and broad library of equipment and component models, which include all related engineering rules,
material and fabrication costs, and construction resources required to specify and estimate the total
installed cost of that component. Simply by specifying an equipment type, size and materials of
construction, and location, the model will simulate construction of the equipment, and will identify
all associated bulks, instrumentation, civil, electrical, structural, indirects, and construction resources
required (see Figure 2).
Figure 2: From a column to a complete installed cost for the column using model approach
7 Ways to Improve the Bid and FEED Phases of Capital Projects ©2015 Aspen Technology Inc. 11-7047-0715
Time and Consistency are Key Benefits of the Model-Based Approach
The estimating team and the executive details (which are never correct or important
confidence in the estimator and their numbers very early in the proposal process), the user of
are a crucial lynchpin in the bidding process. ACCE focuses instead on getting the project
Experienced estimators are among the scarcest scope correct and aligning the project scope
resources in the process industry today. When with the process definition. This will then place
time is not a critical factor, an E&C can partially the focus on getting major equipment items
substitute manual estimation for experience, and metallurgy correct from a process intent
but this usually only masks the importance and point of view, and determining the bulk details
value of estimating experience. At the bidding through statistical and experienced-based
and early engineering phases of a project, engineering approaches, built into the software.
time is a gating factor, and additionally the
judgement and ability to consider contingencies
of an experienced estimator are crucial.
The model-based approach frees up the
experienced estimator’s time to analyze the
overall project and anticipate issues and risk
factors.
8 Ways to Improve the Bid and FEED Phases of Capital Projects ©2015 Aspen Technology Inc. 11-7047-0715
Proof Points
Over a sustained period of time, the results from using a factor-based estimating approach
demonstrating the value of the ACCE model- to using ACCE. Phillips66 reduced their capital
based estimating, have been reported by several estimating variance (at the FEL 3 stage) from a
global organizations. PEMEX benchmarked 40% variance with factor-based estimating to
30 major refinery capital projects estimated a 12% variance with ACCE. They concurrently
using ACCE. Over those 30 projects, PEMEX’s were able to improve the productivity of their
estimating organization achieved accuracy at estimators by a 10:1 ratio. The estimating
a consistent level of approximately 21% for group at S&B Engineers have used ACCE on a
Class IV estimates and approximately 8 to 16 sustained basis for bidding and project work,
% for Class III estimates. ConocoPhillips, a and have measured a 5:1 estimating productivity
downstream organization (now Phillips66), gain during FEL 1 and 2 and a 2.5:1 productivity
benchmarked their estimating results over a gain on FEL 3 estimates.
five-year period during which they switched
9 Ways to Improve the Bid and FEED Phases of Capital Projects ©2015 Aspen Technology Inc. 11-7047-0715
Breaking Down Business Process Barriers to Effectively
Manage Change and Complexity
The highly structured business processes that are standard within large E&C organizations have not
undergone much change over the past several decades. As global work-sharing and the size and
scope of projects has increased, managers have become paradoxically reticent to change, taking
the conservative position that engineering and approval processes that have worked to achieve
well-functioning plants do not require change. To meaningfully address both the bidding and project
execution challenges and risks in an increasingly global business, these business processes need to
be evaluated and evolve. The powerful capabilities of underlying systems together with wholesale
changes in the engineering workforce presents
the opportunity to conceive, develop, and
execute projects in new ways.
10 Ways to Improve the Bid and FEED Phases of Capital Projects ©2015 Aspen Technology Inc. 11-7047-0715
Incorporating the Concepts of Standardized
and Modular Design
Another key trend that’s driven by oil and gas exploration, production, and midstream organizations,
is the standardization and reuse of designs. The one-of-a-kind engineering approaches, which have
been a given in the process industry for decades, are increasingly being looked at as a problem in a
marketplace where spiralling capital project costs can create significant friction in the global energy
market. Energy firms are looking for E&Cs to lead the way in proposing standardized rather than the
“gold-plated” design.
Using the same integrated solutions, as described above, an engineering team can capture standard
repeatable (or modular) design components as building blocks for projects that can be designed and
engineered more efficiently, and at higher quality. Marcel Eijkenboom of Maturus Optimi (a previous
key estimator in the DSM biochemistry company) has made a compelling case as to how he was
able to effectively capture design building blocks that he was able to rapidly assemble into complete
processes. Accompanying these with accurate preliminary costs and economics, he was able to
credibly use this modular approach with business owners to evaluate the commercial viability of new
chemical and bio products being considered for investment and commercialization. These methods
are based fully on software available commercially today.
E&C companies that adopt integrated, project-modeling techniques and build flexibility into their
risk management or project changes will help oil and gas companies. In doing so, this can provide
enormous value to their clients and support large scale projects more effectively. When an E&C firm
helps reduce the cycle time of an oil and gas well development project by a significant amount (i.e.
20 – 30%), it can help their client deliver results far more quickly.
11 Ways to Improve the Bid and FEED Phases of Capital Projects ©2015 Aspen Technology Inc. 11-7047-0715
Next Step: Effective Decision-Making
The E&C industry is rapidly changing, as is the cycle will help to capitalize on project
nature of complexity within the business. opportunities. By providing cost estimators and
project managers with the right tools, project
For effective bidding, many companies have uncertainty and risk can be reduced and
successfully implemented the aspenONE® capability is enhanced for effective
software suite to help E&Cs deliver project decision-making to control
proposals faster and with less man-hours to industry capital costs. In the
achieve superior process designs. Solutions quest for bid-to-win contracts,
from AspenTech significantly improve the ability better and faster designs mean
to accurately estimate project costs early, bid better value for customers,
faster, achieve better communication between which underpin a successful
E&Cs and owner-operators, apportion risk, and strategy for E&Cs to survive and
improve project workflows. thrive in a rapidly developing market.
References
(1) EY (October, 2014) (Ernst and Young), Spotlight on Oil and Gas Megaprojects
(2) Robertson, Elliott (May 24, 2011), Burns and McDonnell, “FEL-2 Optimization of Capital Cost
of an NGL Revamp Facility,” Public Webinar
(3) R
ichison, Rick (May, 2008), S&B Engineers & Constructors, LTD, “Using ACCE to Cut Estimate
Preparation Costs”
12 Ways to Improve the Bid and FEED Phases of Capital Projects ©2015 Aspen Technology Inc. 11-7047-0715
AspenTech is a leading supplier of software that optimizes process manufacturing—for energy, chemicals, engineering and
construction, and other industries that manufacture and produce products from a chemical process. With integrated aspenONE®
solutions, process manufacturers can implement best practices for optimizing their engineering, manufacturing, and supply chain
operations. As a result, AspenTech customers are better able to increase capacity, improve margins, reduce costs, and become
more energy efficient. To see how the world’s leading process manufacturers rely on AspenTech to achieve their operational
excellence goals, visit www.aspentech.com.
Worldwide Headquarters
Aspen Technology, Inc.
20 Crosby Drive | Bedford, MA 01730 | United States
phone: +1-781-221-6400 | fax: +1-781-221-6410 | info@aspentech.com
Regional Headquarters
Houston, TX | United States
phone: +1-281-584-1000
São Paulo | Brazil
phone: +55-11-3443-6261
Reading | United Kingdom
phone: +44-(0)-1189-226400
Singapore | Republic of Singapore
phone: +65-6395-3900
Manama | Bahrain
phone: +973-13606-400
13 Ways to Improve the Bid and FEED Phases of Capital Projects ©2015 Aspen Technology Inc. 11-7047-0715