Reader feedback: editorial comment September

News

IBG - SA Instrumentation & Control Buyers' Guide

November 2007 News

You are right: there has been huge progress in fields like wireless networking and other technologies. Many employers no longer give sufficient prominence to developing and maintaining I&C competence; nor do they prepare these people adequately for their supervisory roles. The reports about fires and explosions in the process industry (eg the recent Island View incident) only serve to demonstrate this. Whilst the incidents enjoy spectacular coverage, little attention is given to the outcome of the enquiry that follows. Employers hide behind veils of secrecy. These reported incidents, unreported incidents and near misses cause an enormous and unnecessary loss of resources.

The current generation of managers, engineers and technicians, many of whom have evolved in 'the computer age', seem to have lost sight of their responsibilities. I&C departments have all but disappeared in 're-engineering' exercises, and yet the plethora of control loops has expanded dramatically as automation has penetrated ever deeper into most processes.

For a control loop to function in a system, it requires two fundamentals; the alarm and trip settings must be correct and there must be someone on hand who knows what to do when a loop component malfunctions. System documentation has become all but submerged in computers and more attention is given to the computer than to sensors, calibration and loop tuning.

The breakdown seems to have started right at the design stage. We used to have a Hazop study, where design and operations personnel would sit together and in groups, thrashing out as many 'what ifs' as they could dream up. This process produced invaluable documents like P&IDs, A&T tables and inputs to HR where organisation charts, man specs and the like were drawn up. Participants accepted responsibility for these decisions and were accountable for the outcomes. I suspect that we I&C end-users are the ones who have allowed the control of this important aspect of safety engineering to slip away. The result is that alarm and trip settings, interlocks and over-rides are no longer protected territory.

Institutions such as the SAIMC should be at the forefront of a drive to put formal and documented engineering standards and practices back in their rightful place. A route should be forged through ECSA, where a formal link must function to the SETAs, education and training. To hide behind transformation and the skills shortages in the field of instrumentation and control in South Africa is downright irresponsible.

John R. Crossland

Fellow SAIMC

(Letter shortened)

Share this article:

News

Reader feedback: editorial comment September

Further reading:

Published by Technews