Labeling Heat Electrical Trace Circuits in a Chemical Plan?

[muckmail]

I am doing some electrical heat trace in a chemical plan for a huge project.
There are many pipes in the project with different names. I have located my power
modules but they are not near any vessels and my heat trace goes across serveral pipe
line names.
Is there a standard way to label my electric heat trace circuits? If there
is a website that dicusses electrical heat trace labeling in a chemical plan
please let me know. If there is no stardard naming sytem. What is the
best way to label them? Please give an example.

Thank you,

 

[weressl]

I am doing some electrical heat trace in a chemical plan for a huge project.
There are many pipes in the project with different names. I have located my power
modules but they are not near any vessels and my heat trace goes across serveral pipe
line names.
Is there a standard way to label my electric heat trace circuits? If there
is a website that dicusses electrical heat trace labeling in a chemical plan
please let me know. If there is no stardard naming sytem. What is the
best way to label them? Please give an example.

Thank you,

The main issue with designation and identification structures is that those should be a comprehensive system. Your piping itself is a system and the tracing installed on it is part of the electrical system. Piping identification itself is often derived from the P&ID structure and in that system the complete number often contains an identifier suffix to indicate electric heat tracing.

Heat tracing panels and circuits are part of your electrical numbering system.

When you deal with HT manufacturers and they perform the design they will create a list that enumerates each circuit. Each circuit in turn is tied to a pipe number or piping ISO number that often derived/linked from/with the pipe designation. Each HT circuit will have a unique designation comprising the panel number and circuit number. Using this designation on the power feed junction boxes should allow you easy ID without creating anything additional.

So whatever system you have make these part of it, if you don't have one, you got more problems than to worry about this miniscule part of the system.:happysad:

 

[gadfly56]

The main issue with designation and identification structures is that those should be a comprehensive system. Your piping itself is a system and the tracing installed on it is part of the electrical system. Piping identification itself is often derived from the P&ID structure and in that system the complete number often contains an identifier suffix to indicate electric heat tracing.

Heat tracing panels and circuits are part of your electrical numbering system.

When you deal with HT manufacturers and they perform the design they will create a list that enumerates each circuit. Each circuit in turn is tied to a pipe number or piping ISO number that often derived/linked from/with the pipe designation. Each HT circuit will have a unique designation comprising the panel number and circuit number. Using this designation on the power feed junction boxes should allow you easy ID without creating anything additional.

So whatever system you have make these part of it, if you don't have one, you got more problems than to worry about this miniscule part of the system.:happysad:

I think his point is that one heat trace circuit may be covering the sulfuric, nitric, and hydrochloric acid lines (say) and is there a standard method to deal with this one-to-many mapping.

 

[weressl]

I think his point is that one heat trace circuit may be covering the sulfuric, nitric, and hydrochloric acid lines (say) and is there a standard method to deal with this one-to-many mapping.

Unlikely scenario. Each of those needs a different maintenance temperature and thus wold be controlled by separate thermostats/RTD's. Not to mention that differing pipe sizes also need separate circuits.

 

[gadfly56]

Unlikely scenario. Each of those needs a different maintenance temperature and thus wold be controlled by separate thermostats/RTD's. Not to mention that differing pipe sizes also need separate circuits.

I based my comment on this from the OP "...and my heat trace goes across serveral pipe line names." Not saying that's the right way to do it, but it looks like that's what he has.

 

[nollij]

You could get away with an ambient controlled system on multiple lines... granted this would be prone to failure without alarming. (edit: well... depends what type of controller you are using)

Labeling the controllers with a number and having a seperate drawing/documentation for each works well. For some lines, we have many controllers due to length, flow paths, etc. This method works quite well.

 

[weressl]

You could get away with an ambient controlled system on multiple lines... granted this would be prone to failure without alarming..

Correct, not necessarily. Ambient controlled system would have many circuits, but you would not mix heater sizes on a single circuit. You still could have ground fault alarms and circuit alarms on current, depends on the type tracer you use. on slef-limiting you can have broken wire detection, not much else, but even with electronic controllers you wouldn't get much feedback on 'circuit health' on these type tracers.

Labeling the controllers with a number and having a seperate drawing/documentation for each works well. For some lines, we have many controllers due to length, flow paths, etc. This method works quite well.

Panel/Circuit number id is probably the simplest with a crossreference to pipe line-designations. Remember to keep your field lableing MaNAGABLE, something that one can remember when troubleshooting.

 

[petersonra]

Every time I have run across heat tracing of any kind in a refinery or a chemical plant it is been identified on the P&ID.

 

[weressl]

Every time I have run across heat tracing of any kind in a refinery or a chemical plant it is been identified on the P&ID.

Correct. In what sense does this address the OP, or what is the point you're trying to make here?

 

[petersonra]

Correct. In what sense does this address the OP, or what is the point you're trying to make here?

Is there a standard way to label my electric heat trace circuits? If there
is a website that dicusses electrical heat trace labeling in a chemical plan
please let me know. If there is no stardard naming sytem.

he seemed to be asking what they should be named. That name is already on the P&ID.

 

[weressl]

he seemed to be asking what they should be named. That name is already on the P&ID.

The pipe number is unique, but it is not primarily relevant from the electrical viewpoint. He is asking for labeling 'electric heat trace circuits' numbering. The panel designation and circuit number is relevant from the troubleshooting viewpoint and (hopefully) conscise enough for troubleshooting. Crossreference to the pipe designation - as I pointed out before - is helpful. I have not seen, and I have seen enough, lineunbers used as an ID in any physical location, it is used on P&ID's, linelists, ISO's and very rarely on 3D models.