06 PDP I Guideline Eval Forms Appendices

Appendix II: Sample Title Page
Front/Cover of folder Label (and as the first page in the Folder):
CBB 4013 PLANT DESIGN PROJECT I

SEMESTER MAY 2012
DESIGN OF
MALEIC-ANHYDRIDE PRODUCTION PLANT
GROUP 1
AHMAD FAISAL BIN SAYUTHI
WONG POH KEAN
ARAVIND GOVINDARAJOO
PATRICK SMITH
NATASHA ZVEREVA
10001
10002
10003
10004
10005
CHEMICAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI PETRONAS
May 2012
19
Appendix II: Sample Title Page

Side of folder Label:

SEMESTER MAY 2012
DESIGN OF MALEIC ANHYDRIDE PRODUCTION PLANT
GROUP 19
19
Appendix III: Sample certification of approval

The second page in the folder (before the Executive Summary):
CERTIFICATION OF APPROVAL

SEMESTER MAY 2012
DESIGN OF
MALEIC ANHYDRIDE PRODUCTION PLANT
GROUP 1
AHMAD FAISAL BIN SAYUTHI
WONG POH KEAN
ARAVIND GOVINDARAJOO
PATRICK SMITH
NATASHA ZVEREVA
10001
10002
10003
10004
10005
APPROVED BY:
_______________________
AP DR. CHE MAD CHE RUSLI (Group Supervisor)
DATE:
CHEMICAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI PETRONAS
20
Appendix IV: Assessment Form
Form PDP I-2 Interim Oral Presentation (Group)

Form PDP I-3 Interim Oral Presentation (Individual)
Form PDP I-4 Interim Report
Form PDP I-5 Individual Progress Performance
Form PDP I-6 Peer Review
Form PDP I-7 C-Factor
Doc. Ref. No.
Issue
Version
Date
UTP-ACA-PROGPDP I-2
2.0
Dec.
2011
Form PDP I-2
PDP I EVALUATION OF INTERIM ORAL PRESENTATION (Group)
(To be completed by Internal Examiner)

Programme
: Chemical Engineering
Project title
Group No.
: ________________________
: ______________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Team
Work
(10)
Product market study

Plant location
A to A(12.0 - 15.0)
B+ to B
(9.8 - 11.9)
C+ to C
(7.5-9.6)
D+ to D
(6.0 - 7.4)
F
(0.0-5.9)
Process screening ( selection of the best

process configuration with appropriate
justifications)
(20)
A to A(16.0 - 20.0)
B+ to B
(13.0 - 15.8)
C+ to C
(10.0 12.8)
D+ to D
(8.0 9.8)
F
(0.0-7.8)
Manual mass balance calculation

(15)
A to A(12.0 - 15.0)
B+ to B
(9.8 - 11.9)
C+ to C
(7.5 - 9.6)
D+ to D
(6.0 - 7.4)
F
(0.0-5.9)
Potential economic evaluation

(10)
A to A(8.0 - 10.0)
B+ to B
(6.5 - 7.9)
C+ to C
(5.0 - 6.4)
D+ to D
(4.0 4.9)
F
(0.0-3.9)
PFD before heat integration (A1 paper)

(15)
A to A(12.0 - 15.0)
B+ to B
(9.8 - 11.9)
C+ to C
(7.5 - 9.6)
D+ to D
(6.0 - 7.4)
F
(0.0-5.9)
A to A(12.0 - 15.0)
B+ to B
(9.8 - 11.9)
C+ to C
(7.5 - 9.6)
D+ to D
(6.0 - 7.4)
F
(0.0-5.9)
A to A(8.0 - 10.0)
B+ to B
(6.5 - 7.9)
C+ to C
(5.0 6.4)
D+ to D
(6.0 - 7.4)
F
(0.0-5.9)
Criteria for Judging Quality
PFD after heat integration (A1 paper)

(15)
Note: % deviation between simulation and
manual mass balance calculation should be
<2%
Coordination
Smooth transitions from speaker to speaker
Equal division of labour
Non-speaking partners attentive and not
distracting
Marks
awarded
Failure
Process
Flow
Diagrams
(30)
Below
Average
Conceptual
Design
(45)
Average
Literature
Review
(15)
Good
Category
Excellent
Please allocate the appropriate grade for each category
TOTAL
Comments: _______________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
.
Internal Examiner's signature
Name: ___________________________________
Date: _____________
21
Doc. Ref. No.

UTP-ACA-PROG-PDP I-3
Issue Version
2.0
Date
Dec. 2011
Form PDP I-3

PDP I EVALUATION OF INTERIM ORAL PRESENTATION (Individual)
(To be completed by the internal examiner)
Programme : Chemical Engineering
Group No. : ________________
Project Title ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Student ID.: (1)__________________ (2) __________________ (3) __________________ (4) ___________________ (5) ___________________ (6) __________________
Category
Non verbal communication
(Total marks: 20)
Professionalism: Appearance, confidence, enthusiasm
Gestures: eye contact, pauses
Clarity of presentation
(Total marks: 30)
Vocal clarity and quality: volume, rate, articulation,
pronunciation natural, conversational, emphasis
Fluency and choice of words: (using language clearly and
accurately) pronunciation, articulation
Continuity of presentation
Use of aids (graphs, diagrams, objects etc)
Organization: logical flow, time management
Thoroughness of the subject
(Total marks: 30)
Knowledge of the subject
Technical and factual accuracy; grasp of subject
Q&A
(Total marks: 20)
Creativity use of example(s)
Convincing answer, showing creativity and innovativeness
Ability to anticipate and answer questions
Ability to maintain good relationship with questioners
Excellent
A to A-
Good
Average
B+ to B
(13.0 15.8)
(16.0 20.0)
Below
Average
Failure
C+ to C
D+ to D
(10.0 - 12.8)
(8.0 - 9.8)
(0.0 - 7.8)
A to A-
B+ to B
C+ to C
D+ to D
(24.0 30.0)
(19.5 - 23.8)
(15.0 - 19.3)
(12.0 - 14.8)
(0.0 - 11.8)
A to A-
B+ to B
C+ to C
D+ to D
(24.0 - 30.0)
(19.5 - 23.8)
(15.0 - 19.3)
(12.0 - 14.8)
(0.0 - 11.8)
A to A-
B+ to B
C+ to C
(16.0 20.0)
(13.0 - 15.8)
(10.0 - 12.8)
D+ to D
(8.0 - 9.8)
Marks Awarded to Student No.

2
3
4
5
6
F
(0.0 - 7.8)
TOTAL
Comments: __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Internal examiners signature

Name:
_____________________________________________________
Date
22
: ___________________________
Doc. Ref. No.

Issue Version
2.0
Date
Dec. 2011
Form PDP I-4
PDP I EVALUATION OF INTERIM REPORT

(To be completed by Supervisor & Internal Examiners)
Group No.
Project title
: DESIGN OF MALEIC ANHYDRIDE PRODUCTION PLANT
: ___________
Excellent
Good
Average
Below
Average
Failure
Please award the appropriate mark for each category
A to A(4.0 - 5.0)
B+ to B
(3.3 - 3.9)
C+ to C
(2.5 - 3.2)
D+ to D
(2.0 - 2.4)
F
(0.0 - 1.9)
A to A(8.0 - 10.0)
B+ to B
(6.5 - 7.9)
C+ to C
(5.0 - 6.4)
D+ to D
(4.0 - 4.9)
F
(0.0 - 3.9)
A to A(8.0 - 10.0)
B+ to B
(6.5 - 7.9)
C+ to C
(5.0 - 6.4)
D+ to D
(4.0 - 4.9)
F
(0.0 - 3.9)
A to A(24.0 - 30.0)
B+ to B
(19.5 - 23.8)
C+ to C
(15.0 - 19.3)
D+ to D
(12.0 - 14.8)
F
(0.0 - 11.8)
A to A(16.0 - 20.0)
B+ to B
(13.0 - 15.8)
C+ to C
(10.0 - 12.8)
D+ to D
(8.0 9.8)
F
(0.0 - 7.8)
PFD before and after heat integration
A to A(8.0 - 10.0)
B+ to B
(6.5 - 7.9)
C+ to C
(5.0 - 6.4)
D+ to D
(4.0 - 4.9)
F
(0.0 - 3.9)
Conclusion
and
Recommend
ation
(10)
Relevancy to the objectives

Suggested future works on feasibility of
design
A to A(8.0 - 10.0)
B+ to B
(6.5 - 7.9)
C+ to C
(5.0 - 6.4)
D+ to D
(4.0 - 4.9)
F
(0.0 - 3.9)
Others
(5)
Compliance to standard guideline

Neatness and consistency in formatting
style
References are quoted and listed
appropriately
Proper English Usage and writing style
A to A(4.0 - 5.0)
B+ to B
(3.3 - 3.9)
C+ to C
(2.5 - 3.2)
D+ to D
(2.0 - 2.4)
F
(0.0 - 1.9)
Category
Executive
summary &
Introduction
(5)
Highlight all the important features of the

report from the technical reasons of the
design to the conclusion.
Chapter 1: Inclusion of problem statement
and objective of design project. Highlight
on the scope of work to be carried out and
the plant specification.
Literature
Review (10)
Safety
Preliminary
Hazard
Analysis
(10)
Conceptual
Design (30)
Process
Flow
Diagram
(PFD)
(30)
Chapter 2: The latest information on feed

and product properties and price, possible
site locations, right way of cited references
Chapter 3: Inclusion of previous accidents,
identification of chemical hazards, MSDS
in the appendix session, discussion to
reduce potential consequences of an
accident, local safety regulations and
design guidelines.
Chapter 4: Preliminary reactor
optimization, process screening,
economics evaluation, process flow
sheeting.
Chapter 5: Presentation on energy
optimization and pinch analysis. Inclusion
of manual calculation of mass balance
Marks
Awarded
Programme
TOTAL
Comments:
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
..
Supervisors/Internal Examiners signature
Name
: ___________________________________
Date : _____________
23
Doc. Ref. No.

Issue Version
2.0
Date
Dec. 2011
Form PDP I-5

PDP I EVALUATION OF INDIVIDUAL PROGRESS PERFORMANCE (Overall)
(To be completed by Supervisor)

Student Name
(ID No.)
Criteria for
Judging Quality
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Group
Meetings
Contribution
and progress
on the group
work
Group No.
Excellent
Above Average
Average
Attend all
official group
meetings.
Attend all
official group
meetings.
Attend most of
the official
group
meetings.
Excellent
progress on the
tasks given.
Timely and
correct
completion of
the tasks.
Substantial
progress on the
tasks given
with timely
completion of
the tasks.
Significantly
contribute to
the completion
of project.
(9 - 10)
Contribute to
the completion
of project.
(7 - 8)
Satisfactory
progress on the
tasks given and
timely
completion of
the tasks.
Contribute to
the completion
of project.
(4 - 6)
Below Average
Attend of the
official group
meetings
occasionally.
Minimum
progress on the
tasks given.
Little
contribution to
the completion
of project.
(2 - 3)
: ___________________
Unsatisfactory
Marks
Awarded
Absent from
most of the
official group
meetings.
Very little or
no progress on
the tasks given.
Very little or
no contribution
to the
completion of
project.
(0 - 1)
Comment: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
.
Supervisors Signature
Name:
Date: ____________________
24
Doc. Ref. No.

Issue Version
2.0
Date
Dec. 2011
Form PDP I-6

PDP I PEER REVIEW
Confidential: To be completed by each student and given to the Course Coordinator

Name
: __________________________________________
Group No.
Student ID : __________________________________________
Programme
: ____________
Please allocate score based on the description criteria

Timely and
Contribution
Attending the
Team work
Knowledge
correct
to successful
group
and
input to
completion
completion
meetings
cooperation
project
of project
of project
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
Group Member Name

(ID No.)
Overall Sore
[(a) + (b) + (c)
+ (d) + (e)] / 5
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Description of Assessment Criteria

Tasks
Attending the group meetings
Team work and cooperation
Knowledge input to project

Timely and correct completion
of project
Contribution to successful
completion of project
Above expectation
(7 10)
Attend all the group
meetings.
Very responsible and
committed in completing
the tasks given. Always
assist other members in
their tasks.
Exceptional in giving
relevant ideas and
information
Significant progress of
tasks given and complete
the tasks on time.
Significant contribution in
completing the project.
Scale and Score

Meet expectation
(4 6)
Attend most the group
meetings.
Below expectation
(1 3)
Absent from most of the
group meetings.
Committed in completing
the tasks given. Assist other
members in their tasks.
Very little or no
commitment in completing
the tasks given.
Satisfactory in giving ideas

and information for the
project.
Good progress of tasks
given and complete the
tasks on time.
Very little in contributing

ideas and information for
the project.
Very little or no progress of
tasks given and rarely
complete the tasks on time.
Very little or no
contribution towards the
project.
Satisfactory contribution to
the project.
Students Signature
Name:
Date
25
: __________________
Doc. Ref. No.

Issue Version
2.0
Date
Dec. 2011
Form PDP I-7

PDP I - C-FACTOR
(To be completed by Supervisor)

Group No.
: ____________
Project title: ____________________________________________________________________________________

Group Member Name
(ID No.)
Meeting 2
(Week 3)
Meeting 3
(Week 5)
Please allocate C-Factor

Meeting 4 Meeting 5 Meeting 6
(Week 7)
(Week 9) (Week 11)
Meeting 7
(Week 13)
Average
Mark
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
C-Factors Assessment Scheme
Assessment Scale
Description of Assessment Criteria
C-Factors
Meet Expectation
Satisfactory contribution to the group work

Satisfactory progress on the group work
Attend the official meeting
1.0
Below Expectation
Very little contribution to the group work

Very little progress on the group work
Attend the official meeting
0.7
Unsatisfactory
No contribution to the group work

No progress on the group work
Absent from the official meeting
0.0
Supervisors Signature
Name:
Date: __________________
26
Appendix V : Description of Assessment
Description of Assessment Criteria for Interim Oral Presentation (Group)

Description of Assessment Criteria for Interim Oral Presentation (Individual)
Description of Assessment Criteria for Interim Report
DESCRIPTION OF ASSESSMENT CRITERIA FOR PDP I EVALUATION OF INTERIM ORAL PRESENTATION (Group)
Category
Literature Review (15)
Identification and evaluation of
information required for plant
design. To include - process route
variation, product market study,
plant location.
Excellent
(A to A-)
Good
(B+ to B)
Average
(C+ to C)
Below Average
(D+ to D)
Failure
(F)
Provide latest (sources from

the last 4 years) and relevant
information.
Provide up-to-date
(sources from the last 4 7
years) and relevant
information.
Provide relevant information

(sources from the last 7-10
years).
Provide relevant
information (sources from
more than the last 10
years)
Lack or provide very

minimum information
or/and provide non-relevant
information.
Provide/quote six or more

relevant references
Show good evaluation on
information that lead to a
feasible and profitable
design.
Provide/quote five to six

relevant references
Show good evaluation on
feasible and profitable
design.
rovide/quote three to four

relevant references
Show some evaluation on
feasible design.
Provide/quote one to two

relevant references
Show evaluation on
feasible design.
No provision of relevant
references
No evaluation conducted on
the information available.
(Marks: 12.0-15.0)
(Marks: 9.8-11.9)
(Marks: 7.5-9.6)
(Marks: 6.0-7.4)
Propose two or more

process route alternatives
with clearly marked
differences. Show clear
justification and evaluation
on the route selected.
Propose two or more

process routes. Show clear
justification on the route
selected.
Propose only two process

routes. Show justification for
route selected.
Propose only one process

route. Provide justification
on the route selected but
not significant/relevant.
Propose only one process

route. No evaluation
conducted for selecting the
final route.
Produce clearly-marked
block diagrams with
sufficient and relevant mass
balance calculation/data.
Provide latest raw material
costs and selling price of
products.
Provide good evaluation
between all the costs (annual
or per weight unit of
products) and the expected
revenue from sales of the
products.
Produce clearly- marked

block diagrams with
relevant mass balance
calculation/data.
Provide raw material costs
and selling price of
products.
Provide good evaluation
between all the costs
(annual or per weight unit
of products) and the
expected revenue from sales
of the products.
Produce block diagrams with

mass balance data or
information.
Produce block diagrams

without mass balance
data.
Provide raw material costs

and selling price of products.
No provision of clear
pricing on raw materials
and products.
Minimum information on
all the costs (annual or per
weight unit of products)
involved. Minimum
information on the expected
products.
No block diagram or produce

block diagrams with
insufficient or no mass
balance data.
No provision of clear pricing
for raw materials and
products.
Insufficient information on
weight unit of products)
involved. Insufficient
information on the expected
products.
(Marks: 36.0-45.0)
(Marks: 29.3-35.6)
(Marks: 22.5-28.8)
(Marks: 18.0-22.0)
(Marks: 0.0-17.7)
(Marks: 0.0-5.9)
Conceptual Design (45)
Development of process route
alternatives. Selection of the best
route configuration.
Perform preliminary mass and/or
energy balance
Establish initial economic
feasibility of the process route
selected.
27
Provide acceptable
evaluation between all the
costs (annual or per weight
unit of products) and the
expected revenue from sales
of the products.
DESCRIPTION OF ASSESSMENT CRITERIA FOR PDP I EVALUATION OF INTERIM ORAL PRESENTATION (Group)
Category
Process Flow Diagrams (30)
Performing the detailed process
flow sheet based on the selected
process with their
interconnections (involving the
reaction, separation, and
temperature and pressure-change
operations).
Provide information and
evaluation on the implementation
of heat integration.
Team Work (10)

Ability to work with others in order
to provide best
performance/presentation.
Excellent
(A to A-)
Good
(B+ to B)
Average
(C+ to C)
Provide clearly-marked
PFD generated by ICON
on A1 paper. All streams
are clearly numbered and
all the process units are
clearly labelled.
Provide clearly-marked
PFD generated by ICON
on A1 paper. All streams
are clearly numbered and
the important process units
are clearly labelled.
Provide PFD generated by

ICON on A1 paper.
Streams are numbered and
the some process units are
labelled.

software other than ICON.
Streams are insufficiently
numbered and the main
units are not labelled.
No provision of PFD. If PFD

is available, the streams are
not properly numbered
and units are not properly
labelled.
Provide a table showing for

each numbered stream:
Total flow rate
Flow rate of each
chemical species
Temperature & Pressure

each numbered stream:
Total flow rate
Flow rate of each
chemical species

each numbered stream
(only):
Total flow rate
Provide a table showing

minimum data for (only
few) streams.
No provision of a table that

provide relevant data for
each numbered stream.
Provide accurate information

of heat integration
implementation. Provide
two PFDs which clearly
show the differences on the
implementation of heat
integration.
Provide information of heat

integration implementation.
Provide two PFDs which
clearly show the differences
on the implementation of
heat integration.
Provide information (with

minor error) on the
integration. Provide only
one PFD but correctly
show all the
integration.
Provide minimum
information (but no
comparison) on the
integration. Provide only
one PFD but with errors
on the implementation of
heat integration.
No information on the
integration.
(Marks: 24-30)
(Marks: 19.5-23.7)
Completed the presentation

within the time given. Show
high coordination of tasks
and smooth transition
between members.
Completed the presentation

within the time given. Show
good coordination of tasks
and good/smooth transition
between members.
(Marks: 15.0-19.2)
Exceed the time given to
complete the presentation (12 minutes). Show moderate
coordination of tasks and
smooth transition between
members.
(Marks: 0.0-11.8)
Did not complete the
presentation within the time
given (more than 5
minutes). No clear division
or coordination of tasks
among members.
Highly awareness
/attentiveness between
members.
(Marks: 8-10)
Good awareness
/attentiveness between
members.
(Marks: 6.5-7.9)
Members are aware and

focus with other members
tasks.
(Marks: 5.0-6.4)
(Marks: 12.0-14.8)
Exceed the time given to
complete the presentation (34 minutes). Show no
coordination of tasks and
irregular/unsmooth
transition between
members.
Low focus /attentiveness
between members.
28
Below Average
(D+ to D)
(Marks: 4.0-4.9)
Failure
(F)
Members are not focus and

attentive towards other
members.
(Marks: 0.0-3.9)
DESCRIPTION OF ASSESSMENT CRITERIA FOR PDP I---INTERIM ORAL PRESENTATION (Individual)
Excellent
(A to A-)
Category
Non verbal communication

(Total marks: 20)
Professionalism: Appearance, confidence,
enthusiasm
Gestures: eye contact, pauses
Clarity of presentation
(Total marks: 30)
Vocal clarity and quality: volume, rate,
articulation, pronunciation natural,
conversational, emphasis
Fluency and choice of words: (using language
clearly and accurately) pronunciation,
articulation
Continuity of presentation
Use of aids (graphs, diagrams, objects etc)
Organization: logical flow, time mgmt
Thoroughness of the subject
(Total marks: 30)
Knowledge of the subject
Technical and factual accuracy; grasp of
subject
Q&A
(Total marks: 20)
Creativity use of example(s)
Convincing answer, showing creativity and
innovativeness
Ability to anticipate and answer questions
Ability to maintain good relationship with
questioners
High confidence level.

Neatly dressed.
Sufficient eye contact.
Good pace of
presentation.
(Marks: 16.0 20.0)

Very clear voice
projection and very easy
to understand.
Very smooth in
presenting the materials
Very efficient by
finishing the whole
presentation earlier than
the time given.
Good
(B to B+)
(Marks: 24.0 30.0)

Able to answer all the
question given correctly
and accurately.
Provide relevant examples
to clarify the answers.
Able to answer question on
behalf of other members.
Good conduct in handling
the Q&A session.
(Marks: 16.0 20.0)
Below Average
(D to D+)
Good confidence level.

Neatly dressed.
Good eye contact (read
from the slides
occasionally).
Good pace of
presentation.
(Marks: 13.0 - 15.8)
Confident (nervousness
is seen occasionally).
Neatly dressed.
Good eye contact (read
from the slides often).
Presentation tends to be a
bit faster occasionally.
(Marks: 10.0 - 12.8)
Nervous.
Very minimum eye
contact (read from the
slides most of the time).
Presentation is either too
fast or too slow.
Nervous voice projection

in presenting the
materials.
Take longer time to
finish the presentation
than the time given
(within additional 2-3
minutes of the time
given).
(Marks: 12.0 - 14.8)
Clear voice projection

and easy to understand.
Smooth in presenting
the materials
Efficient by finishing
the presentation within
time given.
(Marks: 19.5 - 23.8)

(Marks: 24.0 30.0)
Good understanding on the
materials presented.
Present materials
accurately.
Average
(C to C+)
Clear voice projection

with some difficulty to
understand.
Manage to finish the
presentation within
additional of 1-2 minutes
of the time given.
(Marks: 15.0 - 19.3)
Good understanding on
the materials presented.
Some information
presented is not accurate
(but non-important
information).
(Marks: 19.5 - 23.8)
Able to answer most of
the question given
correctly.
Show effort to answer
questions on behalf of
other members.
Good conduct in handling
the Q&A session.
Understand the materials

being presented.
Some important
information presented is not
accurate.
(Marks: 13.0 - 15.8)
(Marks: 10.0 - 12.8)
29
Failure
(F)
Nervous.
Wearing in-appropriate
dress for presentation.
Reading from the
slides/notes throughout.
No eye contact.
(Marks: 8.0 - 9.8)
Minimum understanding
on the materials presented.
Many of the information
presented are not accurate.
(Marks: 12.0 - 14.8)
(Marks: 0.0 - 7.8)

No or lack of ability to
conduct the presentation
clearly.
Could not finish the
presentation within the
time given (more than
additional 3 minutes of
the time given)
(Marks: 0.0 - 11.8)

No or lack of understanding
on the materials presented.
(Marks: 0.0 - 11.8)

(Marks: 15.0 - 19.3)
Able to answer some of the
question given correctly.
Show some effort to answer
questions on behalf of other
members.
Able to answer the

question given though the
answer is not accurate.
Could not answer any

question given.
Do not try to answer at all.
(Marks: 8.0 - 9.8)
(Marks: 0.0 - 7.8)
DESCRIPTION OF ASSESSMENT CRITERIA FOR PDP I - INTERIM REPORT

Category
Executive summary (5)
Chapter 1: Introduction and Objectives
Inclusion of :
- Background of the design project which stated the problem
statement and project specifications.
- Objectives and scope of the design work required.
Literature Review (10)

Chapter 2: Identification and Evaluation of
Design Information
Provision of:
The latest information on feed and product properties and
price
The important information on the process route for selection
of feasible design
Possible site locations
Safety (10)
Chapter 3: Preliminary Hazards Analysis
Consideration of:
Previous similar accidents
Identification of chemical hazards and provision of MSDS in the
appendix
Loss prevention strategies to provide anticipatory safety
measures for the accidents prevention
Inclusion of relevant local safety regulations and design
guidelines
Excellent
Good
Average
Below Average
Failure
State clearly all the important

and relevant specifications for
the design problem
Specify the work performed and
all major decisions made
throughout the design project
tasks
State clearly the capacity of the
plant and its feedstock
State clearly all the relevant

specifications for the design
problem
Specify the work performed and
decisions made while carrying out
the design project tasks.
State specifications for the

design problem
Specify the work performed
while carrying out the design
project tasks.
State specifications for the

design problem
State insufficient or nonrelevant specifications for the

design problem



No statement on the capacity of

the plant and its feedstock
Provide the latest (sources from

the last 4 years) and relevant
information for design
consideration
Provide at least 15 references
titles
Provide important and relevant
specification for plant location
selection including potential sites
and available size
Provide good evaluation on
information and clear
justification that lead to a
feasible design
Provide the latest (sources from

the last 4-7 years) and relevant
information for design
consideration
Provide 12-15 references titles
Provide relevant information for

design consideration (sources
from the last 7-10 years)
Provide relevant information

(sources from more than the last
10 years) for design consideration
Provide only 5 (or less) references

for design consideration
Provide important specification

for plant location including
potential sites
Provide information for plant

location selection including
potential sites
Provide minimum input on the

information required for plat
location
Lack of information or provide

non-relevant information for
plant location
Provide good evaluation on

information and clear
justification that lead to a
feasible design
Provide justification on
information that lead to a feasible
design
Show minimum evaluation on

information that lead to a feasible
design
No evaluation conducted on the

information available
Perform preliminary hazard and

operability study around the
entire plant and develop the
correct overall plant control
scheme
Highlight important possible
hazards and indicate relevant
loss prevention strategies on the
hazards specified
Provide correct MSDS for all
chemical involved in the
appendix
Describe two specific local
government safety regulations
for design consideration

operability study for all major
plant items and develop the
correct control scheme
Highlight important possible
hazards and indicate relevant
loss prevention strategies on the
hazards identified

operability study for some of the
major plant items and develop
the control scheme (with
minimum error)
Highlight possible hazards and
provide general loss prevention
strategies

operability study on the plant
items but develop wrong control
scheme
Identify possible hazards and
provide general loss prevention
strategies
No preliminary hazard and

operability study
No provision of possible hazards
and loss prevention strategies or
irrelevant hazards and prevention
strategies
Provide correct MSDS for the

main raw materials, products
and by-products involved in the
appendix
Describe at least one specific
safety regulations for design
consideration
Provide MSDS only for the raw

material and product in the
appendix
Indicate safety regulations for
design consideration
Provide correct MSDS only for

the main raw material and
product in the appendix
Indicate safety regulations for
design consideration
No provision of MSDS in the

appendix
Indicate safety regulations but
non-related with design
consideration
30
Conceptual Design (30)

Chapter 4: Conceptual Design Analysis
The technical and economic evaluations of the design which consider
the options and alternatives and then elimination of those which are
not feasible or not required.
To include:
Preliminary reactor optimization
Process route screening
Process flow sheeting
Economics evaluation
State clearly the selected reactor

type and the mode of operation
and types of phases present
Provide complete evaluation on
the type of reactor selected and
justify its advantage over the
non-selected type
Propose two or more process
route alternatives with clearly
marked differences.
Show good evaluation on the
process route selected and
non-selected route
Provide latest raw material costs
and selling price of products.
Provide good evaluation between
all the costs (annual or per weight
unit of products) and the expected
products.
State clearly the selected

reactor type and the mode of
operation present
Provide good evaluation and
justification on the type of
reactor selected
State the type of reactor selected

and the mode of operation
present
Provide justification on the type
of reactor selected
State the type of reactor selected

Provide minimum evaluation on
the type of reactor selected
No statement on the mode of

reactor operation and type of
reactor
No evaluation on the type of
reactor selected
Propose two or more process

routes
Show good evaluation on the
process route selected and
non-selected route
Propose two process routes

Show evaluation and
justification on the route selected
Propose two process routes

No clear justification on the
route selected
Propose only one process route.

No evaluation conducted for
selecting the final route
Provide good evaluation between

weight unit of products) and the
expected revenue from sales of
the products.
Provide the costs (annual or per

weight unit of products) and the
the products.
Minimum information on all the

costs (annual or per weight unit of
products) involved
Minimum information on the
the products.
Insufficient information on all

the costs (annual or per weight
unit of products) involved.
Insufficient information on the
the products.
30
Category
Process Flow Diagram (PFD)(30)

Chapter 5: Heat Integration
Specification of performance for each plant unit in terms of flow
rates, operating temperature etc. for efficient plant operation.
Consideration of appropriate energy conservation and/or integration
schemes to minimize the energy requirement for the plant.
Inclusion of:
- Manual calculation of mass balance
- Energy optimization through pinch analysis
- PFD before and after heat integration
Conclusion and Recommendation (10)

Effective ending of the project: relate directly between the objectives
and the contents of the project as stated in the introduction and sum
up the essential features of the design work. To show:
Relevancy to the objectives
Suggestion of future works on feasibility of design
Others (5)
Proper presentation and format of report which ensure the:
- Compliance to standard guideline
- Neatness and consistency in formatting style
- References are quoted and listed appropriately
- Usage of proper English
- Implementation of correct writing style/skill
Excellent
Good
Average
Produce a clearly-marked block

diagram with sufficient and
relevant/important mass
balance calculation
Produce a clearly- marked block

diagram with
relevant/important mass
balance calculation
Produce a block diagram with

important mass balance data
Produce block diagram with

minimum mass balance data
No block diagram or produce

block diagrams with no mass
balance data
Provide clearly-marked PFD

generated by ICON on A1
paper. All streams are
numbered and the units are
labelled.
Provide a table showing for each
numbered stream:
- Total flow rate
- Flow rate of each chemical
species
- Temperature & Pressure
Provide clearly-marked PFD

generated by ICON on A1
paper. All streams are numbered
and the units are labelled.
numbered stream:
- Total flow rate
- Flow rate of each chemical
species

ICON on A1 paper.
Streams are numbered and the
units are acceptably labelled.
numbered stream (at least):
- Total flow rate

software other than ICON.
Streams are insufficiently
numbered and the process units
are unclearly labelled
Provide a table showing
minimum data for (only few)
streams
No provision of PFD. If PFD is

available, the streams are not
properly numbered and units
are not properly labelled
No provision of a table that
provide relevant data for each
numbered stream
Show the concise and correct

heat integration analysis
Provide two PFDs which clearly
show the differences by the
integration (before and after the
implementation)
Show the correct heat integration

analysis
Provide good information with
comparison on the
implementation)
Show the heat integration

analysis (with minor error)
Provide minimum information
with minimum comparison on
the implementation of heat
implementation)
Provide minimum information

on the implementation of heat
integration
No information on the
integration
Provide summary of the process

plant that have been designed
Show clearly that objectives
have been achieved
Suggested two or more potential
and feasible improvement on the
design
Provide summary of the process

plant that have been designed
Show clearly that objectives
have been achieved
Suggested one or two potential
improvement on the design
Show that objectives have been

achieved
Suggested possible improvement
on the design
Show that objectives have been

achieved
No suggestion on potential
improvement of the design.
Not clear whether objectives

have been achieved
No suggestion on potential
improvement of the design
Follows directly the formatting

style stated by the guidelines
provided
Follows directly the method of
referencing stated by the
guidelines provided
The report is very well
structured and provides good
flow of information
Very easy to read and to
understand the contents of the
reports with very minimum
spelling or grammatical error
Follows the formatting style

stated by the guidelines provided
Follows the method of
referencing stated by the
guidelines provided
The report is well structured and
provides good flow of
information (with very minimum
disorganization)
Easy to read and understand the
contents of the reports with very
minimum spelling and
grammar error
Follows an acceptable
formatting style though not fully
as per the guidelines provided
Follows the method of
referencing though not fully as
stated by the guidelines provided
The report is well structured with
minimum disorganization
Easy to read and understand the
contents of the reports with error
in terms of spelling and
grammar.
Provide an acceptable
formatting style but did not
follow as what have been stated
in the guidelines provided
Provide a proper method of
referencing but not as per the
guidelines provided
The report is not structured with
obvious disorganization
Can be read to understand the
reports contents. Too many
spelling and grammatical errors
No formatting at all
31
Below Average
Failure
No proper method of referencing.
Difficult to read and to

understand the contents of the
reports

06 PDP I Guideline Eval Forms Appendices

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

06 PDP I Guideline Eval Forms Appendices

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Appendix II: Sample Title Page

Front/Cover of folder Label (and as the first page in the Folder):

CBB 4013 PLANT DESIGN PROJECT I

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

Appendix II: Sample Title Page

CBB 4013 PLANT DESIGN PROJECT I

Appendix III: Sample certification of approval

CBB 4013 PLANT DESIGN PROJECT I

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

Appendix IV: Assessment Form

Form PDP I-2 Interim Oral Presentation (Group)

Doc. Ref. No.

Form PDP I-2

PDP I EVALUATION OF INTERIM ORAL PRESENTATION (Group)

(To be completed by Internal Examiner)

Product market study

Process screening ( selection of the best

Manual mass balance calculation

Potential economic evaluation

PFD before heat integration (A1 paper)

Criteria for Judging Quality

PFD after heat integration (A1 paper)

Please allocate the appropriate grade for each category

Doc. Ref. No.

Form PDP I-3

Marks Awarded to Student No.

Internal examiners signature

Doc. Ref. No.

Form PDP I-4

PDP I EVALUATION OF INTERIM REPORT

: DESIGN OF MALEIC ANHYDRIDE PRODUCTION PLANT

Please award the appropriate mark for each category

PFD before and after heat integration

Relevancy to the objectives

Compliance to standard guideline

Criteria for Judging Quality

Highlight all the important features of the

Chapter 2: The latest information on feed

Doc. Ref. No.

Form PDP I-5

(To be completed by Supervisor)

Doc. Ref. No.

Form PDP I-6

Confidential: To be completed by each student and given to the Course Coordinator

Please allocate score based on the description criteria

Group Member Name

Description of Assessment Criteria

Team work and cooperation

Knowledge input to project

Scale and Score

Satisfactory in giving ideas

Very little in contributing

Doc. Ref. No.

Form PDP I-7

(To be completed by Supervisor)

Project title: ____________________________________________________________________________________

Please allocate C-Factor

C-Factors Assessment Scheme

Description of Assessment Criteria

Satisfactory contribution to the group work

Very little contribution to the group work

No contribution to the group work

Appendix V : Description of Assessment