Smart, Modular Sample Systems What’s in it for us

1. Smart, Modular Sample Systems What’s in it for us Dan Podkulski

2. Value Propositions • What we know today • 90% of components necessary for sample systems are available in down mount configuration • Cost of down mount components are higher than traditional design • Construction costs are lower for down mount systems – fewer workforce hours • Typical issues with traditional systems • Over tightening of fittings • Improper connections to major components making removal difficult, leak sources • Variations in layout making standardization difficult • Construction errors lower with down mount systems • Sample system layout is more predictable with down mount systems CPAC Meeting - Seattle, WA

3. EM Installed Base • Sarnia • Fifteen systems on aromatics, diesel, effluent water, gas streams • Most standardized systems in EM • Enclosures, heating systems, Valco valve bypasses • Source of standard designs for other plant sites • BOP • Twelve systems on olefins plant gas streams • First attempts at HMI via GC • BTCP • Seven systems on aromatics plant streams • One with GE Panametrics probe incorporated • No leaks • No complaints from techs • BMCP • Six systems on similar streams as BTCP CPAC Meeting - Seattle, WA

4. Value Propositions - Cost Saving Items • Design and Construction • Engineering time reduction • Layout design and drawings for traditional systems take a week • Layout design and drawings for modular complete in three days • Net savings of two days per system • Partially completed as part of configurator • Assembly time reduction • Traditional system takes one week to layout and assemble • Modular system takes two days to layout and assemble, • Net savings of three days per system • More standard designs • With 90% of components on the stick design is already significantly constrained – in a good way • Save checkout time – two hours for each sample system • Electrical power and signal bus installation • Traditional sample system – a week to connect to different form factor sensors • Modular sample systems – 1-2 days to connect up a bus • Projected time savings since experience level is low here CPAC Meeting - Seattle, WA

5. Value Propositions - Cost Saving Items • Field • Reliability of installations • Traditional sample system can be installed incorrectly (fittings over tightened, inaccessible components for filter replacement, etc.) • Modular sample systems will have less than 10% of these errors than traditional systems since so much of the design is constrained by form factor • Fewer leaks • Field modifications (different manufacturer’s component being used) • Traditional system – One day for a simple component replacement • Modular system – ½ hour, most of this time for depressuring and venting sample system • Savings of at last seven hours per modification • Lower activation energy to make a change CPAC Meeting - Seattle, WA

6. Value Propositions - Cost Saving Items • Analytical Performance • Lower surface area • Less than ½ of comparable traditional systems • This equipment is set down in a laydown area with dirt, sand, other stuff • Lower internal volume • Less than ½ of comparable traditional systems • Faster turnover of sample • Dead spots still possible if design isn't done well • Unintended consequences • Revised designs with improvements • Improvements in double block and bleed technology • Remote discrete sampling may occur before my career ends • CFD and other tools • Configurators, tools that save time • Standard designs actually get talked about CPAC Meeting - Seattle, WA