Modular Processing Plant Layout for Faster Liquid Plant Reconfiguration

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Designing and modifying complex liquid processing plants is time-consuming and error-prone due to the need for manual configuration of numerous controllable components, requiring extensive knowledge of the existing plant and often necessitating extensive redesign when changes are needed, such as adding new products or functionalities.

Innovation Solution

A module-based approach using a platform database and design element database to represent processing plants by functionality rather than physical structure, allowing for intelligent selection and modular addition of design elements with defined relationships, facilitating efficient design and redesign by converting functional representations into control logic.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If a processing plant is designed to handle multiple liquid products with various processing routes, then the plant's versatility and adaptability are improved, but the device complexity and control scheme complexity increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveplant versatilityVSAvoidcontrol scheme complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The processing plant is divided into modular functional units (e.g., heating unit, cooling unit, mixing unit, separation unit), each with standardized interfaces. This segmentation allows versatile configuration for different products while keeping individual module complexity manageable.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Standardized functional units are designed to perform multiple operations across different product lines. For example, a heating unit can serve multiple processing routes for different liquid products, reducing overall system complexity while maintaining versatility.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

2Reliability

If each controllable component is programmed individually to ensure proper operation, then the reliability and operational precision are improved, but the design time and manual configuration effort increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveoperational reliabilityVSAvoiddesign time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

Control logic for functional units is pre-configured and validated during module design. This preliminary action ensures operational reliability is built-in from the start, eliminating the need for extensive individual programming and testing during plant design and commissioning.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

Multiple control functions are merged into integrated control modules that manage coordinated operation of equipment within functional units. This reduces the number of individual programming tasks while maintaining comprehensive control and reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

3Adaptability or versatility

If a processing plant is designed with comprehensive functionality to handle various products, then the plant's adaptability is improved, but the ease of manufacture and implementation of changes deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveproduct adaptabilityVSAvoidease of implementation
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The plant is constructed from standardized functional modules that can be independently manufactured, tested, and assembled. This segmentation enables easy implementation of changes by simply replacing or reconfiguring specific modules without affecting the entire system.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The modular architecture allows dynamic reconfiguration of processing routes and functional unit assignments based on product requirements. Changes can be implemented by reprogramming control logic and reconfiguring module connections rather than physical redesign.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

4Productivity

If design tools are used to facilitate the design procedure, then the productivity is improved, but the ease of operation and difficulty of implementing changes worsen due to excessive work and complex configurations

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedesign productivityVSAvoidease of design operation
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

Design tools are structured to work with modular functional units rather than requiring comprehensive plant-wide configuration. This segmentation simplifies the design operation by allowing designers to work with individual modules and their standardized interfaces.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Standardized functional modules serve as reusable templates that can be copied and instantiated multiple times throughout the plant design. This copying approach maintains design productivity while reducing operational complexity through consistency and reusability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

Data Source

PatentEP3058426B1A method for designing a processing plant
Publication Date: 2021.07.28 TETRA LAVAL HOLDINGS & FINANCE SA
  • EP3058426B1 patent drawingFigure 1a
  • EP3058426B1 patent drawingFigure 1b
  • EP3058426B1 patent drawingFigure 2

AI summary

A method for a processing system is provided. The method comprises the steps of identifying at least one specific functionality of the processing plant, creating at least one design elements, each design element being associated with a specific functionality of the processing plant, and storing each design element as an item in a design element database, wherein each design element item comprises one or more attributes defining the relationship between the particular design element and other design elements.