I’ll throw in my $0.02, mostly to air personal grievances more than actual useful information I’ve mostly dealt with GE, Siemens, and Emerson OEMs, but I’ve been to ~100 plants and played with just about every combination out there. With maybe one exception, the hardware and software capabilities of all of them are perfectly fine for 99% of applications. I’m partial to MKV(I[e]) for gas turbines, generator controls, and LCIs; Siemens for steamers; and Emerson for DCS/BOP. The MKVIe, if it’s engineered and installed by a team that knows what they’re doing, is incredibly robust for turbine controls. Emerson’s DCS systems are almost idiot proof and easy to integrate with a whole host of other OEM equipment.

The issue across the board (not exclusively GE, but they are one of the worst offenders) is hardware and software packages making it to site with issues to be commissioned by field engineers without the knowledge, tools, experience, or engineering support they need to really get things right. Compounding that is the fact that most engineers with 15+ years experience doing things the right way are often given senior positions where they don’t get involved until a problem has already had some sort of significant negative impact. You also need to understand that most components are executed by different teams--the turbine controls is one team, generator controls is another, BOP is another, DCS is another, etc. These people don't always talk to eachother. One of my biggest pet peeves is when the AGC and turbine droop/speed control/whatever we're calling it now are not properly coordinated. The way it is supposed to work is the turbine responds grid frequency fluctuations outside of the deadband. This can also be done with the AGC. Way, way too often I've found plants where these two control loops are totally divorced. The AGC in the normal mode of operation will either squelch the response from the turbine controls, negating the entire thing, which is bad. Or worse, you get a response from the AGC on top of the response from the turbine controller, and the real power response is double what it should be in proportion to the grid frequency. These are stupid problems with potentially catastrophic consequences and really, really easy solutions. Compounding that again is the fact that really good field engineers are a dying breed. It’s hard work and way too often people take a field position just as a stepping stone to a desk job. Compound that one more time with plants that lack the technical resources to really and truly understand and review the work being done. Working with customers who double check every detail is tedious, but there is significant value added.

I don’t care which OEM you use, the products are all good. The team working on it will absolutely make or break the entire experience. And, unfortunately, there’s no line item for “give me a team that doesn’t suck.”

 

PungentReindeerKing, et al,

"... The team working on it [the project--from configuration to programming to installation to commissioning to check-out] will absolutely make or break the entire experience. ... "

That's exactly the point I am trying to make--it's the experience and knowledge of the people working with the hardware and software that really matters. EVERY turbine/plant controls job I know that went well did so because knowledgeable and experienced people were assigned to the job. And, every turbine/plant controls job I know that didn't go well didn't because the people assigned to the job were not knowledgeable about the application or the sequences or the field devices.

Commissioning & check-out personnel are extremely key to a successful project. As you say, problems that make it through the FAT (Factory Acceptance Test) and/or SAT (Software Acceptance Test)--and there will ALWAYS be problems that make it through these simulations!--have to be caught and corrected by commissioning & check-out personnel. Whether they can recognize a problem and solve it themselves or get help from "the factory" (configuration and programming personnel) will absolutely make or break a schedule and leave people feeling good about the job or unhappy with the job. It's really the demolition, installation, commissioning & check-out that determine how satisfied the Customer and operators and technicians at the plant will be. And, if that part (the part "in the field") doesn't go well, then the whole project is usually considered not to have gone well. (No matter how much fun people who attended the FAT/SAT had!)

No matter what the cost of the project was. Period. Full Stop.

"The bitterness of low quality will remains long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten."

The proper criteria for evaluating suppliers is NOT the hardware, or the software, or the initial cost of the equipment and installation and commissioning. It MUST include considerations for past performance by the supplier, which is the best indicator of future performance. AND, it MUST include considerations for the experience of the people configuring and programming the equipment to be supplied, AS WELL AS the people performing the demolition & installation and commissioning & check-out. Simple price considerations without taking into account past performance (ability to complete on time and within budget; lack of punch-list items; attention to detail and time to resolve any punch-list items) is almost always going to lead to a less than desirable outcome. Yes; some sites have been lucky basing their decision on price--but I would venture to say those sites probably had experienced people working on the project at some point, and most likely doing the commissioning & check-out.

And, price doesn't just include the purchase price. It should also include any lost generation and/or revenue because of schedule over-runs, etc.

[NOTE: I am adding "check-out" to the work to be done during the start-up or re-start of a plant. I consider check-out to be confirming every sequence and process works as it should. STARTing; synchronizing; loading; unloading; shutdown; water-washing; fuel transfers; remote control/operation; etc. This is more than just commissioning--which primarily means to most people verifying inputs and outputs (so-called "loop-checking").

Thanks for your input! Experience and knowledge are definitely key to a successful outcome. It's NOT just price.