27909e01 3D Model Review Procedure

eni spa
COMPANY TECHNICAL STANDARD
3D MODEL REVIEW PROCEDURE
27909.VAR.LCI.STD
Rev.01 - June 2016
Previous identification code

27909.COO.GEN.SDS
Rev.01 – June 2016
GENERAL NOTE This Re-coding does not affect the document content.
TO THE Documents traceability is guaranteed by the unchanged document
DOCUMENT RE-
number.
CODING
Any cross-reference between documents remains unaffected.
/
La presente ricodifica non ha effetto sul contenuto del documento.
NOTA
GENERALE
La rintracciabilità dei documenti è garantita dal numero di documento
ALLA che resta immodificato.
RICODIFICA I riferimenti incrociati fra i vari documenti rimangono validi.
ENGINEERING COMPANY STANDARD

Documento riservato di proprietà di Eni spa. Esso non sarà mostrato a terzi né utilizzato per scopi diversi da quelli per i quali è stato inviato.
This document is property of Eni spa. It shall neither be shown to third parties nor used for purposes other than those for which it has been sent.
eni spa 27909.CAE.GEN.SDS.
Rev 01 – June 2016
Pag. 3 of 23
REVISION TRACKING
Rev 00: Actual revision is of 23 pages

Date April 2015
Rev 01: Actual revision is of 23 pages

Date June 2016
INFORMATION REQUEST
eni personnel can access company standard repository at:

http://wwweandp.eni.it/TSServices/ITEM/Standards-/Normalizat/Documents-/index.asp
External user shall refer to the Project Engineer Manager.
For information about the content of this standard, please refer to responsible and accountable
person as per above RACIE table or to Technical Authority coordinator (COETA).

This document is property of eni spa. It shall neither be shown to third parties nor used for purposes other than those for which it has been sent.
Rev 01 – June 2016
Pag. 4 of 23
Table of Contents
1. GENERAL ............................................................................................................. 5
1.1 SCOPE ............................................................................................................................................................... 5
1.2 DEFINITIONS .................................................................................................................................................... 6
1.3 ACRONYMS .......................................................................................................................................................... 6
1.4 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ................................................................................................................................... 7
2. REFERENCE DOCUMENTS AND PROGRAMS .......................................................... 7

3. ACTIVITIES DESCRIPTION .................................................................................. 8
4. 3D MODEL REVIEW – PREPARATORY ACTIVITIES ............................................... 8
4.1 3D MODEL STRUCTURE & DEVELOPMENT CHECK ............................................................................................ 8
4.2 3D MODEL DOCUMENTATION ......................................................................................................................... 8
4.3 CONTRACTOR’S INTERNAL MODEL REVIEW ..................................................................................................... 9
4.4 MODEL REVIEW DOCUMENTATION ................................................................................................................. 9
4.5 PROGRESS MEASUREMENT ........................................................................................................................... 10
4.6 REVIEW AGENDA/TOR ................................................................................................................................... 10
5. 3D MODEL REVIEWS ......................................................................................... 11
5.1 REVIEW PARTICIPANTS .................................................................................................................................. 11
5.2 3D MODEL ...................................................................................................................................................... 11
5.2.1 Initial session: reach 30% completion .................................................................................................... 12
5.2.2 Intermediate session: reach 60% completion ........................................................................................ 12
5.2.3 Final session: reach 90% completion ..................................................................................................... 12
5.3 REVIEW WORKFLOW ...................................................................................................................................... 13
5.4 COMMENTS RECORDING ............................................................................................................................... 14
6. 3D MODEL REVIEW REPORTING AND CLOSE-OUT ............................................. 15
6.1 COMMENTS MANAGEMENT .......................................................................................................................... 15
7. ANNEXES .......................................................................................................... 16

Rev 01 – June 2016
Pag. 5 of 23
1. GENERAL
In order to ensure efficient management and monitoring of 3D Models produced by different
CONTRACTORs, it is necessary to have a clear and shared procedure.
During design process, CONTRACTORs will produce 3D Models, whose progress shall be
monitored and reviewed at times defined by Company to verify technical content and formal
compliance with Project schedule.
The deliverables required to CONTRACTOR for each engineering department and for each
review session (30%, 60% and 90%) shall be clearly defined.
It is also required to CONTRACTORs the full compliance with eni spa methodologies contained
in the “Interdisciplinary Documents” (including items and components coding, piping classes
production, etc.).
On projects of large complexity involving more CONTRACTORs, it is also necessary to monitor
the interfaces among the 3D Models produced by all CONTRACTORs.
This document defines a series of activities and guidelines to properly manage the 3D Model
monitoring before, during and after the reviews between Company and CONTRACTORs.
1.1 SCOPE
The 3D CAD model development is a Project activity of utter importance and periodical reviews
have to be considered as Project milestones for proceeding with the engineering activities.
The scope of this document is to report the work process to be followed in order to ensure a
proper review of the 3D Model developed by CONTRACTORs during the Project Execution Phase.
It consists in several activities and guidelines to be actuated before, during and after the 3D
Model reviews in order to maximize the review efficiency and identify in advance potential
criticalities along the Project execution.
In addition, the deliverables and status of the engineering activities requested for calling a 3D
Model review are clearly explained.
The instructions to CONTRACTORs about how to develop the 3D Model are out of the scope of
this document and reported in [1], [2] and [3] depending upon the software defined Project-
wise.
Operability and Maintainability requirements defined in [5] are assumed already acknowledged
by CONTRACTOR at the beginning of design process. 3D Model Review session aims,
furthermore, to verify the compliance in terms of operability, ergonomics, maintainability of
the asset.

Rev 01 – June 2016
Pag. 6 of 23
1.2 DEFINITIONS
Hereinafter definitions of terms used in the best practice are shown:
Term Definition
Company (Eni) The party that initiates the project and ultimately pays for its design
and construction. The Company will generally specify technical
requirements. The term “Company” may also include agents or
consultants authorized to act for, and on behalf of, the Company.
Contractor A person or organisation that undertakes responsibility for the
performance of a contract.
Contract An acceptance of legal relations between two or more parties for the
transfer of goods or services for value.
Sub-Contractor Any supplier, distributor, vendor, or firm that furnishes supplies or
services to or for a prime contractor or another subcontractor.
Vendor A supplier of material or services offered from a catalogue or price list
and purchased by issue of a purchase order.
Project Unique process, consisting of a set of coordinated and controlled
activities with start and finish dates, undertaken to achieve an objective
conforming to specific requirements, including the constraints of time,
cost and resources.
CS Independent Classification Society whose scope is to verify/certify that
the design is in accordance with the appropriate Class rules and
regulations.
WORK All the works and services required to be performed by CONTRACTOR
under the CONTRACT.
1.3 ACRONYMS
Hereinafter the definition of the acronyms used in this document:
ACRONYM DEFINITION
ADM (CONTRACTOR) System Administrator/Coordinator
AFC Approved for Construction
CAD Computer Aided Design
FDM Facility Data Management (c/o Company)
FP Focal Point
IFA Issued for Approval
IFC Issued for Construction
IFR Issued for Review
MODEL 3D CAD Model
P&ID Piping/Process and Instrumentation Diagram
RDB Reference DataBase SPCPuma\Elena
SOP (CONTRACTOR) System Operator
Tag Method to identify a specific comment made in a Design Review
ToR Terms of Reference

Rev 01 – June 2016
Pag. 7 of 23
1.4 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

CONTRACTOR is liable for the implementation of this procedure. CONTRACTOR shall develop
appropriate documentation as described in the present procedure as well as align all the SUB-
CONTRACTORs or VENDORs as applicable to follow this procedure.
CONTRACTOR is liable for organizing and planning MODEL implementation, as well as carrying
out the necessary checks to confirm the fulfillment of the targets required at the different steps
relevant to the various MODEL review sessions as described on this document.
As part of MODEL implementation, CONTRACTOR may refer to the appointed FDM team to get
support on COMPANY documents application, with particular reference to [1], [2] and [3].
2. REFERENCE DOCUMENTS AND PROGRAMS

DOC. NUMBER TITLE
[1] 20205.CAE.GEN.SDS General procedure for preparation of 3D CAD models and

deliverables production.
[2] 27913.CAE.GEN.SDS Standard Rules For Data Preparation And Deliverables
Production By Using Intergraph Tools
[3] 27914.CAE.GEN.SDS Standard Rules For Data Preparation And Deliverables
Production By Using Aveva Tools
[4] 06219.CAE.GEN.SDS LCI Information Submission
[5] 20667.MAN.GEN.SDS Operability and Maintainability review
[5] Bp dev-dms 001 eni e&p Acronyms & definitions

Rev 01 – June 2016
Pag. 8 of 23
3. ACTIVITIES DESCRIPTION
The activities below described are intended to ensure proper implementation and model review
management along the Project execution.
These activities refer to a Project in Execution Phase where the objective of the MODEL review
is to progressively “freeze” the design, i.e. once comments from a specific review are resolved,
the scope of the facilities/activities covered in such review will be frozen so that relevant
deliverables can be generated and released.
CONTRACTOR is called to organize 3 (three) MODEL review along the WORK execution, namely
at 30%, 60% and 90% of the engineering progress.
CONTRACTOR shall perform several activities before, during and after the MODEL review in
order to properly explain the status of the MODEL and demonstrate it to COMPANY.
4. 3D MODEL REVIEW – PREPARATORY ACTIVITIES
4.1 3D MODEL STRUCTURE & DEVELOPMENT CHECK

At the beginning of the Project COMPANY will appoint a Facility Data Management Focal Point
(FDM FP) having the role to support CONTRACTOR in the development of the MODEL and to
check whether the requirements contained in [1] are followed. In particular FDM FP will be
responsible for item/component coding verification, for “Interdisciplinary Documents”
applications and for MODEL management in the different design sessions.
At the beginning of the Project CONTRACTOR is asked to organize a dedicated meeting with
the FDM FP should any explanation or clarification on [1] is requested.
Before any 3D MODEL review with COMPANY, CONTRACTOR is requested to organize a

dedicated session with the FDM FP in order to verify the compliance of the MODEL with the
procedures listed in [1]. During the meeting, which is expected lasting 1 or 2 days depending
upon the Project complexity and the stage, the adherence of the MODEL with the tagging
procedure, the RDB implementation and the structure of the Model (coding of MODEL elements
structured in levels) will be investigated.
CONTRACTOR is hence requested to issue a report of Compliance (i.e. MoM of the meeting
reporting the open actions, signed by COMPANY FDM FP) to be included in the 3D MODEL ToR
of the relevant session
4.2 3D MODEL DOCUMENTATION

CONTRACTOR shall submit for COMPANY review early in the project execution phase the
detailed schedule of the 3D CAD model review sessions.
There shall be Project specific Procedures, to be provided by CONTRACTOR and submitted for
COMPANY review early in the project execution phase, for:
• Specifying the CONTRACTOR’s Engineering Design Workflow including Procedures for the
development of Issued for Construction Drawings up to isometrics emission and the
provisions for direct electronic input to the weight control and Material-Take-Off (MTO)
systems from the 3D CAD Model;
• Clash checking and resolution, i.e. Model Clash Check Procedure;
• Isometric Follow-up procedure;
• Isometric Check Procedure;
• 3D Model regular updates (i.e. reports on a monthly basis) to verify if all disciplines use the
3D CAD system and ensure that all disciplines or different engineering subCONTRACTORs
operate on the same database;

Rev 01 – June 2016
Pag. 9 of 23
• If not provided by COMPANY, Project Specific Checklists, split for each phase (30-60-90),
developed on the basis of the checklist reported in attachment to this document and issued
to COMPANY for approval.
The above documents shall be part of the Project MDR and issued for COMPANY approval. In
addition to the above documents CONTRACTOR shall develop and apply a clear Management
of Change Procedure as well as a Design Change Note procedure with the final scope to ensure
that what has been defined/frozen on the MODEL will not be affected by other
changes/modifications, as well as to drive the isometric definition and issuance.
4.3 CONTRACTOR’S INTERNAL MODEL REVIEW

CONTRACTOR shall conduct sufficient Internal Model Reviews during the performance of the
WORK in order to monitor, assess the progress and appraise the WORK itself to confirm
conformance to the Job Specifications. Reviews of this nature are considered “internal” in the
sense that they shall be led by CONTRACTOR’s personnel who are intrinsic (i.e., specifically
dedicated and assigned) members of the Project team.
CONTRACTOR’s internal reviews shall be performed with the involvement of engineering
disciplines part of the CONTRACTOR’s Project Team to provide input for the MODEL
development and verify the MODEL.
CONTRACTOR will organize the above reviews at its discretion but shall mandatorily organize
one internal 3D CAD Model review in preparation of each 3D CAD Model reviews at 30%, 60%
and 90% of engineering progress with Company. In this perspective, CONTRACTOR shall
execute a multidisciplinary review to evaluate and measure the MODEL completion degree to
fulfill the intended purpose for each modeling session.
COMPANY shall be advised in advance of and may participate in all such reviews to the extent
they deem necessary. All Internal Project Reviews shall be properly documented, findings
logged and resolutions appropriately tracked and recorded. CONTRACTOR shall afford
COMPANY the option to review all findings related to internal Project reviews.
Multidisciplinary review aims to ensure that completeness, quality and progress of MODEL to
be submitted to COMPANY are in line with the expectations defined for each review session.
4.4 MODEL REVIEW DOCUMENTATION

During MODEL review sessions, latest revision of key documentation shall be available (in A3
paper format) to the review team members:
 Process and Utilities P&IDs (IFR for 30%, IFA for 60%, AFC for 90%);
 Distribution P&IDs (IFR for 30%, IFA for 60%, AFC for 90%
 Escape routes layout (IFR mandatory at 30%);
 Process & Utility Flow Diagrams;
 Mechanical Handling philosophy (IFR mandatory at 30%);
 Mechanical Handling Report (IFR mandatory at 60%);
 Plot plans (IFR at 30%, AFC for 90%);
 Comments resolution of previous model review session (a specific document shall be
issued to properly close-out the identified actions);
 CONTRACTOR Data sheets/equipment drawings (preliminary for 30%, IFA for 60%, AFC
for 90%);
 Line List (AFC for 90%);
 Safety studies, with particular reference to EERA, ESSA, FERA and QRA (60%
mandatory);
 Vendor Drawings when available in accordance with checklist.
 Equipment list (IFR for 30%, IFA for 60%, AFC for 90%);
 Critical line list (AFC for 90%);

Rev 01 – June 2016
Pag. 10 of 23
This list is not exhaustive and it could be integrated with additional list of documents identified
by each engineering department, or modified in agreement with COMPANY on the basis of the
Project specific requirements and schedule of the Work.
Specific documents (regarding equipment, machinery, instrumentation, etc.), such as process

specifications, data sheets, detail drawings, vendors diagrams, etc., will be available in
electronic format (and also in paper format, if specifically requested by COMPANY), according
to the needs highlighted during the review.
CONTRACTOR shall assemble the documentation two weeks in advance of all the External
Project Reviews. The documentation shall already be approved by COMPANY or by CS if
applicable. Resolution of discrepancies, deficits, non-conformances shall be highlighted to
COMPANY in the ToR and approved by COMPANY before proceeding.
4.5 PROGRESS MEASUREMENT

CONTRACTOR shall produce a number of documents in which the status in terms of progress
for each discipline is presented. These documents shall be developed based a proper Progress
Measurement Procedure developed by CONTRACTOR and previously submitted to COMPANY
for comments and Approval.
4.6 REVIEW AGENDA/TOR

Before each review session, CONTRACTOR shall send to COMPANY an agenda with the following
indications:
 Review session (30-60-90);
 Review dates, venue and location;
 Facilities involved;
 Detailed agenda developed in accordance with the expected workload.
Before each review session, CONTRACTOR shall send to COMPANY a ToR with following
indications/attachments:
 Review session (30-60-90);

 Review dates, venue and location;
 Review participants and role;
 Methodology of the review, developed based on the indications reported in Section 8.0
of this document;
 checklist as per Annex A of this document; a Project specific checklist may be used if
agreed with COMPANY. The checklist shall be populated clearly showing that all the
activities have been completed, depending upon MODEL completion degree;
 Detailed Progress Status of the MODEL supporting the completion level of the design
activities as per the agreed Progress Measurement Procedure.
 Documentation to be used during the MODEL review as per Section 7.4.
 Report of Compliance as per Section 7.1 issued by CONTRACTOR and signed by
COMPANY FDM FP.
CONTRACTOR shall state that the facilities dedicated for the MODEL review are adequate for
the scope both in terms of space in the room as well as hardware used to navigate the MODEL.
In such perspective, CONTRACTOR shall provide a computer station powerful enough to
navigate the model in a fluid and handy way as well as at least 2 (two) projectors to show the
MODEL and any documentation available in electronic format that may be needed during the
review session.

Rev 01 – June 2016
Pag. 11 of 23
Both the Agenda and the ToR shall be sent to COMPANY 2 (two) weeks in advance and shall be
issued for COMPANY approval.
5. 3D MODEL REVIEWS
Review session with COMPANY is formally executed, after CONTRACTOR internal
multidisciplinary review, in three different sessions (30%, 60%, 90%) corresponding to the
targets indicated in the Project schedule.
Upon completion of each session, MODEL will be verified to allow subsequent activities
development.
5.1 REVIEW PARTICIPANTS

COMPANY will appoint one Focal Point (FP), who will verify MODEL technical content supported
by engineering departments; COMPANY will attend the MODEL review with all the technical
disciplines as deemed appropriate considering the MODEL type, complexity and stage.
CONTRACTOR shall appoint an ADM, who will coordinate the review team and shall have a
thorough knowledge of the Project, of the MODEL and computer systems used in the review
sessions, with the support of a system operator.
ADM is responsible for the review process efficiency, for the proper reporting of comments and
their implementation.
In reviews with COMPANY and according to each stage of MODEL completion, representatives
from all engineering departments involved shall compose CONTRACTOR’s team assigned to the
review. CONTRACTOR shall program possible presence of various specialists needed for a
deeper understanding of specific topics.
The attendance of the following figures is mandatory:
- CONTRACTOR’s Technical Manager or appointed deputy;

- ADM;
- System Operator;
- Process;
- Piping and Layout;
- HSE/Technical Safety;
- Operations and Maintenance;
- Construction.
The attendance of the following roles may be required part time or on call depending on the
review needs. CONTRACTOR is requested to evaluate the need of having them on a continuous
basis and to justify to COMPANY their absence:
- Naval / Marine if applicable;

- Structural / Architectural;
- Civil;
- Mechanical (rotating and static equipment);
- Electrical;
- Instrumentation;
- Commissioning.
5.2 3D MODEL
MODEL content evaluation as a basis for measuring the progress shall be executed at each
review and shall be performed by CONTRACTOR, as here below defined.
The following paragraphs summarize contents and goals for each phase.

Rev 01 – June 2016
Pag. 12 of 23
5.2.1 Initial session: reach 30% completion

Preparation of MODEL shall include positioning of all equipment and buildings, main structures,
roads, paved areas, escape routes, major equipment laydown and maintenance areas, major
large bore and any critical piping line affecting equipment location.
Packages and Auxiliary Services units are modeled as "box", in order to verify packages
positioning.
Main underground systems, if applicable (distribution manifolds, primary sewers, conduits,
electrical cables and instrumental tracks), are modeled in order to check impact on the paths.
All areas for future expansion shall be included.
Interference among systems shall be eliminated.
Goal of this phase is to verify and confirm Plot Plan and to set the basis for the overall safety
level of the plant.
According to CONTRACTOR’s planning, first AFC deliverables may be issued for basic elements
(e.g. primary structures, major equipment foundation, etc.).
The checklist reported in attachment of this document reports the list of items expected to be
modeled in this session.
5.2.2 Intermediate session: reach 60% completion

MODEL is implemented on the basis of the information available in P&IDs, on the results of
HAZOP analysis and in accordance with the requirements of operability and maintenance
criteria defined in [5].
All comments generated during first review (30%) with COMPANY are incorporated.
All underground piping, piping above ground with a diameter greater than or equal to 2",
manual valves and instrumentation are modeled. A yellow line check of the model against
P&IDs shall take place.
For all equipment, related nozzles (and orientation), ladders and service walkways are
incorporated.
Valves, instrumentation and permanent access structures (vertical ladders and platform) are
modeled with respect of the minimum requirement of ergonomics and safety defined in [5].
Structures are implemented according to civil/structural engineering department
documentation, including platforms for valves and instrumentation maintenance.
Underground, if applicable, and/or above ground routes for electrical and instrumentation
cables are designed, as well as foundations, based on detailed engineering available.
At this session there is a seamless integration between the various engineering departments
involved in order to resolve issues related to correct P&IDs interpretation, eliminating any
interferences between engineering systems and optimize detail engineering.
Goal of this phase is to ensure layout solutions adopted meet both technical and contractual
requirements related to accessibility, operability, maintenance; areas for future expansion
match as well the above requirements.
According to CONTRACTOR’s planning, AFC deliverables may be issued for most elements (e.g.
secondary structures, equipment foundation, isometrics for piping prefabrication, main
supports, etc.).
5.2.3 Final session: reach 90% completion

The model is completed with the inclusion of all comments raised during intermediate session
(60%) of review with COMPANY, as well as the remaining elements of the Plant, including:
 All piping shown in P&IDs and Process Auxiliary Services, Pipe supports and In-line and
on-equipment instruments;

Rev 01 – June 2016
Pag. 13 of 23
 Equipment and both electrical and instrumental components, including supports for
cable trays;
 Safety features, such as emergency showers, eye washers, fire protection, lighting and
communication devices;
 Vendors GA drawings for all Equipment and Instruments are Approved for Construction
(AFC).
Goal of this phase is to verify that MODEL contains enough details to let the extraction of final
count of required materials (NOT including allowance for prefabrication nor contingencies) and
to allow the completion of issuance of deliverables Approved for Construction (AFC).
5.3 REVIEW WORKFLOW

MODEL Reviews verification process will be performed in compliance with the following
guidelines:
3D-CAD Design Review model presentation will be performed using a large screen having a
high resolution. Naviswork (or equivalent) software will be used to 'Walkthrough' the model.
The review session will be driven by the CONTRACTOR ADM, who is normally a member of the
Layout and Piping group, assisted by the CAD coordinator. In case SUB-CONTRACTORs are part
of the Project, the role of ADM can be delegated to SUB-CONTRACTOR group having the same
know-how and knowledge of its own part of WORK. In order to guarantee the integrity of the
design CONTRACTOR ADM shall always be present in order to comment if necessary what
presented by Sub-CONTRACTORs.
Plot plan drawings, PFDs, P&IDs and any documentation useful for explaining or navigating the
MODEL shall be present in the room in paper copy, as previously agreed between Parties in the
3D MODEL ToR (see Section 7.3). Each participant should have a set of such documentation.
Any other documentation that may be required to ease the review shall be available in
electronic format and promptly projected upon request on the second screen.
The review shall mandatorily start with a presentation of CONTRACTOR in which the status of
the activities is shown and the non-compliances, if any, discussed and motivated against the
review team.
During the presentation, the same files attached to the ToR shall be displayed and discussed,
highlighting the critical items that may constitute a risk for the Project schedule and/or
construction activities.
The check list, already populated as attached to the ToR shall be discussed highlighting the
items that have not been modeled, if any. Any non-conformity to the check list shall be
presented, motivated, discussed and minuted.
In case any action coming from previous 3D MODEL session is not finalized, a general review
of the open actions shall be performed. CONTRACTOR shall clarify the reason why the actions
have not been closed. All the outstanding actions, once clarified, shall be reported as actions
on the review report.
Should any SUB-CONTRACTOR be present on the Project, the above steps shall be repeated.
As soon as the above preliminary steps have been done, the 3D Model review will start by
navigating through the 3D Model, starting from the escape/handling ways and generally
starting from the upper deck and moving downward.
While navigating through the escape ways, each discipline is responsible for reviewing the area,
highlighting potential non conformities with the Project requirements with particular attention

Rev 01 – June 2016
Pag. 14 of 23
to safety, operability and maintainability aspects (ref. [5]). For this scope a dedicated screening
focused on operable and maintainable items (vent valve, drain valve, spectacle blind, manual
valve, filters, Valve Control Panel etc,) can be required by the COMPANY.
Every time an equipment is met, vendor drawing (if available) has to be asked, showed on a
second screen and checked whether in line with the model (with particular attention to the
nozzle position and orientation).
As soon as the module by module/area by area activity has been carried out as above,
depending upon the review stage, complexity and type COMPANY will decide to perform a
partial or complete review of the plant piping by following the P&IDs. Each time a line is checked
and comments/recommendations duly recorded, the line shall be yellow highlighted on the
relevant P&ID(s).
The meeting will be closed after a complete review of the recorded actions, in order to double
check that the comments have been recorded in a clear way and that every team member
agree with the actions.
5.4 COMMENTS RECORDING

The ADM is responsible to record the actions by logging all comments and creating snapshots
illustrating the comments in a clear way.
Each point generating comments during the review shall be recorded by color views extracted
from MODEL (screen dumps). Each comment will have a color screen dump with a full and
unambiguous description to avoid confusion in later review session process, explicitly reporting
the plant coordinates.
Each comment shall be recorded in a form developed for the specific project on the basis of
the template as reported in ANNEX “B”. CONTRACTOR shall include all information’s required
to ensure comment intent is uniquely defined.
To ensure traceability of points, following information shall be printed on the form:
1. Review identification code (30%, 60%, 90%);
2. Serial number (tag);
3. Facility or project code;
4. Line number or reference equipment;
5. P&ID number on which lines or equipment in question are represented;
6. Note on action to be taken;
7. State of analyzed point;
8. Explanatory note if point resolution is different from what was agreed during review;
9. Engineering department involved;
10. Review date;
11. Date for comment implementation;
12. Signatures of approval for completion point under consideration;
Form shall be constantly updated until resolution of all comments, classifying analyzed points
according to following codes:
A (Open): no action has yet been taken;

S (Solved): Tag updated as required;
R (Reviewed): point implemented differently from what agreed during review;
C (Closed): point resolution approved by COMPANY;

Rev 01 – June 2016
Pag. 15 of 23
6. 3D MODEL REVIEW REPORTING AND CLOSE-OUT
6.1 COMMENTS MANAGEMENT

Within ten days after review completion, ADM prepares a report including a form (properly
filled in) to be sent to COMPANY for approval and signature. This shall include a list of attendees.
Review form shall be constantly updated and sent to COMPANY on a monthly basis.
ADM, supported by focal point personnel from the involved engineering department, is
responsible for coordination and verification of implemented points. A 3D MODEL action has to
be intended as closed only when the change proposed is approved by COMPANY.
6.2 3D MODEL REVIEW DELIVERABLES
Within ten days after review completion, ADM prepares a design review file and 3D model
backup complete.
The expectation of COMPANY is that CONTRACTOR performs the design review archive to
COMPANY ensuring that all the information included and the deliverable produced are updated
according to design review report.
The Design review format required are below listed:
System File estention

Naviswork .FBX and .NWD
PDS all files with extension .DRI .DGN .PRP .DRV, not only one of them
SP3D all files with extension .VUE .XML .SAT .DGN, not only one of them
PDMS all files extension .RVM (in text format only, not BINARY) and .ATT (in
text format only)
The expectation of COMPANY is that CONTRACTOR performs the Final Handover of the system
to COMPANY ensuring that all the information included and the deliverable produced are in As-
Built status.

Rev 01 – June 2016
Pag. 16 of 23
7. ANNEXES
ANNEX A: TYPICAL CHECK-LISTS FOR 3D MODEL REVIEW

Following checklists are provided as a "typical" to be adapted to the needs of the Project specific
model review.
Three (3) checklists have been developed reporting the details and minimum requirements of
what has to be implemented in the model (30, 60 and 90%)
Based on the model progress, a brief and not exhaustive list on the operability and
maintainability topics is provided for each checklist to guarantee the compliance with the
Operability and Maintainability requirement defined in [5].
It is reminded that Project specific checklists shall be developed by CONTRACTOR based on the
below checklists, and issued for COMPANY approval as per Section 7.2. It is also highlighted
that the below checklists have been generated considering both offshore (floaters & platforms)
and onshore developments; as a consequence CONTRACTOR shall remove, when developing
the Project specific checklists, all the rows when not applicable (e.g. civil works for offshore
applications).
Section Check list topic

1 General
2 Piping & Layout
3 Mechanical
4 Civil Works
5 HSE/ Technical Safety
6 Instrumentation & Electrical
7 HVAC
8 Structural
9 Operation & Maintenance
10 Others

Rev 01 – June 2016
Pag. 17 of 23
30% Review
No. Item
1.0 General
Documentation status
Plot Plan issued and in line with the 3D Model. Extent of Module/Plant and Direction Check against Plot
1.1
Plan/Ship’s GA
1.2 Process & Utility Flow Diagrams issued
1.3 Process and Utilities P&IDs issued IFR at least
1.4 Escape routes layout issued IFR at least and in line with the model
1.5 Drainage philosophy issued and main headers/lines modeled.
1.6 Mechanical Handling philosophy issued
1.7 Other documentation as per ToR agreed with Company
Other
1.8 Space for future construction and erection access – General overview
1.9 Major Interference and clash check performed
2.0 Piping & Layout

2.1 Piping 6” and above modeled
2.2 Definition of pipelines within plant area
2.3 Definition of underground systems (cooling water, fire ring, closed drain, drinking water, etc.)
2.4 Preliminary piping supports modeled and space for piping supports allocated and defined in the model
2.5 Open and Closed Drain points defined (location)
Critical piping requiring slopes and no pockets as per process requirements modeled. Flare blowdown
2.6
header and main process lines modeled and in line with P&IDs. Yellow line check completed.
3.0 Mechanical
Equipment
All equipment on equipment list modeled (as per data sheet/preliminary vendor drawings). Packages
3.1
modeled as boxes.
3.2 Nozzles, Manholes & associated platforms for static equipment (orientations and Location)
3.3 Equipment Check – Location correct for Erection / Removal
Handling
3.4 Obstruction Volumes of Handling ways & handling
3.5 Obstruction Volumes of davits/etc. modeled
4.0 Civil Works

4.1 Concrete slabs, fences and perimeter walls, paving and roads modeled.
Underground sewer networks by gravity and collecting and separation systems volumes outlined. Oily
4.2
sewers and accidentally oily sewers including wells modeled
4.3 Preliminary representation of buildings e.g. control rooms, switch rooms, electrical substations outlined
4.4 Main foundations, represented as a volume, for machinery, equipment and piperacks
4.5 Access road for maintenance and firefighting vehicles
4.6 Definition of rainwater collection system (roadside)
5.0 HSE/ Technical Safety

Primary Access, Escape and Stairs & Ladders Check against Plot Plan / Equipment Layout, including
5.1
elevated equipment/platforms; volumes modeled. No obstructions allowed
5.2 Allocation for spray water rings on equipment/plant modeled
5.3 Side access of escape ladders modeled
5.4 Showers / Eyebaths Location, (only access and location)
5.5 Fire Hydrant, Monitors (only access and location )
5.6 Fire Protection Equipment Volume allocated
5.7 Remote shutdown devices (emergency shutdown valve) at safe place
6.0 Instrumentation & Electrical

6.1 Location and size of Electrical Rooms defined
6.2 Location and size of Control Rooms defined

Rev 01 – June 2016
Pag. 18 of 23
6.3 Main Electrical cable routes volumes defined

6.4 Preliminary representation of underground electrical and instrumentation trenches volumes modeled
6.5 Main Electrical equipment volumes defined (transformers, etc.)
6.6 Cable Trays Locations / Separation / Segregation (volumes reserved)
6.7 Marshaling Panel / Junction Box Locations
6.8 Analysis cabinet volumes
6.9 Local Control Stations (pumps, etc.) locations defined
7.0 HVAC
7.1 Main HVAC system routes and rooms positioned.
8.0 Structural
Primary structure modeled (including pipe racks, and main structures modeled as single-line typical profiles
8.1
with main cable tray supports, monorails, main entrances, platforms)
8.2 Preliminary representation of secondary structures outlined
8.3 Stairs for primary escape modeled
8.4 All the connections likely to create clashes modeled (gussets, stiffeners, pad-eyes, bracing etc.)
9.0 Operation & Maintenance

9.1 Static equipment accessibility preliminary check
9.2 Nozzle and manhole accessibility verification
9.3 Lifting Beams Required and Location
9.4 Crane Access and maneuver
9.5 Crane Reach – lifting operation from/to the ship/platform considered
9.6 Laydown & Dropout Areas defined
9.7 Disposal Areas / Equipment for Filters/ TOTE Tanks etc. Space allocated.
10.0 Others

Rev 01 – June 2016
Pag. 19 of 23
60% Review
No. Item
1.0 General
1.1 Tags of 30% model review closed
Safety studies issued and recommendations implemented into the design, with particular attention to FERA,
1.2
QRA and noise assessment
Vendor Data for key equipment available at least in first revision. Main equipment modeled according to
1.3
Vendor data, including nozzle orientation, size and utilities connection
1.4 Plot Plan in line with the 3D Model. Extent of Module/Plant and Direction Check against Plot Plan/Ship’s GA
1.5 Process & Utility Flow Diagrams in final revision
Process and Utilities P&IDs issued IFD at least, in line with HAZOP recommendations (i.e. HAZOP shall be
1.6
performed before 3D Model 60% and all the actions shall be closed)
1.7 Escape routes layout issued IFA at least and in line with the model
1.8 Drainage philosophy finalized. Drainage report issued and headers/lines modeled (above 2”).
1.9 Mechanical Handling philosophy finalized. Mechanical Handling report(s) issued.
1.11 Other
Space for future construction and erection access – Detailed analysis available guaranteeing no impacts on
1.12
the design due to installation and management of future equipment
1.13 Interference and clash check performed
2.0 Piping & Layout

2.1 Above ground piping 2” and above modeled
Pipe Support Location & Type for all pipes 6” and above (or lower size if Project specific) and for all stress
critical piping (information from stress analysis verification), for small bore branches with long run. Stress
2.2
analysis performed for all the critical lines. Particular attention to compressor inlet & outlet piping, turbines,
etc.
Piping is modeled considering requested insulation and/or personal protection near passing zones when
2.3
requested.
2.4 Utility Stations Required and Location (volume allocated, position and size)/access
2.5 Drainage – Equipment Bunds / Drip Trays and relevant pipes modeled
2.6 Drainage – Open and Closed Drains modeled with relevant pipe network
2.7 Yellow line check of P&IDs against the model
3.0 Mechanical
Equipment
All equipment on equipment list modeled as per Vendor data (first revision acceptable for minor equipment).
3.1 Size (and weight) in line with Vendor feedback. Equipment have been modeled complete with all components
and accessories, including insulation when required
3.2 Nozzles, Manholes & associated platforms for static equipment modeled as per Vendor drawings
3.3 Equipment Check – Location correct for Erection / Removal
Handling
Mechanical Handling Equipment (Crane, Monorail, Davit, Pad Eye, EOT etc.) all modeled and with clear
3.4
identification of handling routes and handling obstruction volumes
3.5 Projection of monorails for loading/ unloading/ dropout area
4.0 Civil Works

4.1 Concrete slabs, paving and roads modeled
4.2 Duct banks definition
4.3 Definition of concrete tunnels for underground electric and instrumental cables;
4.4 Underground systems modeled and completely defined, both pressure and gravity systems
4.5 Underground sewer networks by gravity and collecting and separation systems modeled
4.6 Upgrade of buildings external shapes, control rooms, switch rooms, electrical substations. Internals modeled.
Main foundations update for equipment, machinery and packages (vendors IFA drawings), pipe racks and
4.7
structures
4.8 Rainwater collection systems modeled, separation tanks, sewage collecting and wells reported in the model

Rev 01 – June 2016
Pag. 20 of 23

Primary Access, Escape and Stairs & Ladders finalized, including elevated equipment/platforms; volumes
5.1
modeled. No obstructions allowed
5.2 Side access of escape ladders modeled
5.3 Showers / Eyebaths Location (only access and location)
5.4 Fire Hydrant, Monitors, deluge system modeled
5.5 Fire Protection Space Required
5.6 Remote shutdown devices (emergency shutdown valve) at safe place
5.7 Passive fire protection modeled

6.1 Upgrade of Electrical Rooms with internals
6.2 Upgrade of Control Rooms with internals
Electrical & Instrumentation Cable Trays Locations / Separation / Segregation. Trays modeled 150 mm and
6.3
above
6.4 Primary electrical cables trays underground
6.5 Definition of cable tray supports for electrical and instrumentation cables
6.6 Main electrical/ instrumentation equipment modeled (Vendor IFA drawings)
6.7 Lights modeled (based on preliminary lighting study)
6.8 Valves, actuators, local panel modeled based on Vendor drawings
6.9 Definition of F&G detection
6.10 In-line instruments, JB racks modeled
6.11 Instruments on static equipment modeled
7.0 HVAC
7.1 Secondary HVAC routes modeled
8.0 Structural
Primary structure modeled and finalized. Beams, columns, braces and main connections, stairs and accesses
8.1
modeled.
Definition of Secondary structures based on Vendor equipment data including monorails, davits, overhead
8.2
travelling cranes, etc. as per single-line drawings
8.3 Pipe racks as per single-line drawings finalized
8.4 Stairs and walkways as per single-line drawings finalized
8.5 Cable trays supports for electrical and instrumentation cables defined

9.1 Accessiblity around the equipments upgraded and finalized
Operability and maintainability for instrumentation and line items (manual valve, blinds, spacers, spectacle
9.2
blinds, etc.) verified
9.3 Lifting Beams, davits and all the handling items finalized.
9.4 Crane Access and maneuver finalized
Laydown & Dropout Areas defined. Space for long lasting equipment (e.g. food storage containers, items to
9.5
be continuously store on the main laydown etc.) modeled
9.6 Disposal Areas / Equipment for Filters/ TOTE Tanks etc. Space finalized and modeled
10.0 Others

Rev 01 – June 2016
Pag. 21 of 23
90% Review
No. Item
1.0 General
1.1 Tags of 60% model review closed
1.2 Safety studies completely finalized
1.3 Vendor Data for key equipment all available in final revision.
1.4 Process and Utilities P&IDs issued IFC
1.5 Escape routes layout issued IFC
1.6 Mechanical Handling report(s) issued IFC
1.8 Other
Space for future construction and erection access – Detailed analysis available guaranteeing no impacts on
1.9
the design due to installation and management of future equipment
1.10 Interference and clash check performed
2.0 Piping & Layout

2.1 Completion modeling of all lines in AFC P&IDs (including piping below 2”)
2.2 Pipe Support Location & Type for all pipes. Stress analysis completely finalized for all lines.
2.3 Utility Stations finalized
2.4 Steam tracking stations placement
Yellow line check (final), to ensure any changes or additions from the 30% and 60% model reviews are
2.5
captured
3.0 Mechanical
Equipment
3.1 Equipment upgrade (based on Vendor IFC drawings).
3.2 Nozzles, Manholes & associated platforms for static equipment modeled as per Vendor drawings
3.3 Machinery and packages upgrade (final Vendor data)
4.0 Civil Works

Completion of all underground systems. Underground systems modeled and completely defined, both
4.1
pressure and gravity systems
Foundations completed (final vendor drawings) and concrete products (tanks, conduits for electrical &
4.2
Instrumentation cables etc.)
4.3 External shape of buildings finalized with all ancillaries. Internals completion

Primary Access, Escape and Stairs & Ladders finalized, including elevated equipment/platforms; volumes
5.1
modeled. No obstructions allowed
5.2 Completion of fire & security systems (deluge, eyewash etc.)
5.3 Passive fire protection modeled

6.1 Upgrade of Electrical Rooms with internals
6.2 Upgrade of Control Rooms with internals
Electrical & Instrumentation Cable Trays Locations / Separation / Segregation. All secondary Trays modeled
6.3
100 mm and above
6.4 Upgrade and finalization of cable tray supports for electrical and instrumentation cables
6.5 Main electrical/ instrumentation equipment upgraded and finalized (Vendor IFC drawings)
6.6 Lights upgraded and finalized. Lightning fixture power outlets, JB, motor control post etc. finalized
6.7 Electrical Panel Boards (Lightning & small power and local boards)
6.8 Gas Detection finalization, smoke and H2S, emergency telephones update
6.9 Valves, actuators, local panel modeled based on Vendor drawings
6.10 Definition of F&G detection
6.11 In-line instruments, JB racks modeled
6.12 Instruments on static equipment upgraded and completely modeled

Rev 01 – June 2016
Pag. 22 of 23
7.0 HVAC
7.1 Fire and gas/ESD devices modeled
8.0 Structural
Secondary structures finalized including monorails, davits, overhead travelling cranes, etc. as per single-line
8.1
drawings
8.2 Tertiary structures finalized
8.3 Cable trays supports for electrical and instrumentation cables upgrade and finalized

9.1 Operability/Maintainability requirements fully finalized
10.0 Others

Rev 01 – June 2016
Pag 23 di/of 23
ANNEX B: MODEL REVIEW FORM
PROJECT: Project description- JOB n° 000000

3D Model Review – ……% of completion
Comment approval
Line nr. COMMENT Action DATE
Tag n° Unit P&ID nr. CONTRACTOR COMPANY
Item nr.
Description By Reply Status (1) Dept. Placed Due Date/Sign. Date/Sign.
(1) Status code legend:

O (Open): Tag with comments, but actions not yet taken
S (Solved): Tag updated as required;
R (Reviewed): Comments implemented in a way different from what agreed during the review;
C (Closed): The modified tag has been approved by COMPANY

Documento riservato di proprietà di eni spa. Esso non sarà mostrato a terzi né utilizzato per scopi diversi da quelli per i quali è stato inviato.
This document is property of eni spa. It shall neither be shown to third parties not used for purposes other than those for which it has been sent.

27909e01 3D Model Review Procedure

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

27909e01 3D Model Review Procedure

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

27909e01 3D Model Review Procedure

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

eni spa

COMPANY TECHNICAL STANDARD

3D MODEL REVIEW PROCEDURE

Previous identification code

ENGINEERING COMPANY STANDARD

Rev 00: Actual revision is of 23 pages

Rev 01: Actual revision is of 23 pages

eni personnel can access company standard repository at:

External user shall refer to the Project Engineer Manager.

ENGINEERING COMPANY STANDARD

2. REFERENCE DOCUMENTS AND PROGRAMS .......................................................... 7

ENGINEERING COMPANY STANDARD

ENGINEERING COMPANY STANDARD

ENGINEERING COMPANY STANDARD

1.4 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2. REFERENCE DOCUMENTS AND PROGRAMS

[1] 20205.CAE.GEN.SDS General procedure for preparation of 3D CAD models and

[5] 20667.MAN.GEN.SDS Operability and Maintainability review

[5] Bp dev-dms 001 eni e&p Acronyms & definitions

ENGINEERING COMPANY STANDARD

4. 3D MODEL REVIEW – PREPARATORY ACTIVITIES

4.1 3D MODEL STRUCTURE & DEVELOPMENT CHECK

Before any 3D MODEL review with COMPANY, CONTRACTOR is requested to organize a

4.2 3D MODEL DOCUMENTATION

ENGINEERING COMPANY STANDARD

4.3 CONTRACTOR’S INTERNAL MODEL REVIEW

4.4 MODEL REVIEW DOCUMENTATION

ENGINEERING COMPANY STANDARD

Specific documents (regarding equipment, machinery, instrumentation, etc.), such as process

4.5 PROGRESS MEASUREMENT

4.6 REVIEW AGENDA/TOR

 Review session (30-60-90);

ENGINEERING COMPANY STANDARD

5.1 REVIEW PARTICIPANTS

- CONTRACTOR’s Technical Manager or appointed deputy;

- Naval / Marine if applicable;

ENGINEERING COMPANY STANDARD

5.2.1 Initial session: reach 30% completion

5.2.2 Intermediate session: reach 60% completion

5.2.3 Final session: reach 90% completion

ENGINEERING COMPANY STANDARD

5.3 REVIEW WORKFLOW

ENGINEERING COMPANY STANDARD

5.4 COMMENTS RECORDING

A (Open): no action has yet been taken;

ENGINEERING COMPANY STANDARD

6. 3D MODEL REVIEW REPORTING AND CLOSE-OUT

6.1 COMMENTS MANAGEMENT

6.2 3D MODEL REVIEW DELIVERABLES

The Design review format required are below listed:

System File estention

ENGINEERING COMPANY STANDARD

ANNEX A: TYPICAL CHECK-LISTS FOR 3D MODEL REVIEW

Section Check list topic

ENGINEERING COMPANY STANDARD

2.0 Piping & Layout

4.0 Civil Works

5.0 HSE/ Technical Safety

6.0 Instrumentation & Electrical