Customer Project Delivery SOP: Instrumentation & Automation Solution
A customer project delivery SOP for a full instrumentation and automation solution: engineering, instrument selection, customer approval, procurement, FAT, installation, commissioning, documentation and operator training.
How it works
Replace the lanes with your actual project roles
This chart uses Project Manager, Engineering, Procurement, Field Service and Customer. If Insatech splits panel build from field commissioning, or has a dedicated documentation role separate from QA, give that role its own lane rather than folding it into Field Service, the handoff is usually where a step gets assumed done by someone who assumed someone else did it.
Put your own sign-off criteria on both decisions
"Customer approves design and scope?" and "FAT passed?" both need a stated standard, not just "looked fine", the specific drawings and datasheets the customer is approving against, and the specific acceptance criteria the FAT is scored against. Write the actual criteria into the row's comment field so nobody is relying on memory of what was promised.
Keep the instrument-selection and installation rows as handoffs, not rewrites
"Select instruments per New Instrument Selection & Specification SOP" and "Install system on site per Process Instrument Installation & Commissioning SOP" are deliberately one row each. Link to those SOPs rather than re-describing their steps here, so the project chart and the specialist charts don't drift out of sync with each other.
Set People and Workload on every row before you rely on the BI panel
The workload panel can only total hours for rows that carry them. Fill in People and Workload for each step as you adapt the chart, using realistic effort hours rather than elapsed time, so a project with a failed FAT and a retest actually shows up as more hours than one that passed first time.
Don't let training become an afterthought row
"Train customer operators and maintenance staff" is what makes this SOP different from every other Insatech SOP in the set. Treat it as a scheduled, resourced step with its own hours and owner, not something squeezed into the last afternoon of commissioning, because it's what the customer actually remembers about the handover.
Frequently asked questions
What triggers the start of the project delivery process?
The process starts at "Customer inquiry received": a request for a full solution, multiple instruments plus a control system and integration, rather than a single instrument. Everything downstream, the engineering, the FAT, the training, keys off the record captured at "Requirements analysis with customer", so a gap there surfaces as a scope disagreement much later in the project.
How is this different from the New Instrument Selection & Specification SOP?
That SOP covers choosing and dimensioning a single instrument for a customer's process conditions. This chart absorbs that whole decision into one row, "Select instruments per New Instrument Selection & Specification SOP", because a project-scale delivery needs it as one input among many: architecture, panel design, procurement and FAT all sit around it. Use the standalone SOP when a customer needs one instrument specified; use this chart when they need a system delivered.
What happens if the customer doesn't approve the design?
The "Customer approves design and scope?" decision routes a No to "Revise design per customer feedback", which loops back to the same decision rather than forcing a single approve-or-lose-the-project call. Nothing moves to procurement until the customer has actually signed off against the P&IDs, loop drawings and panel layout produced at "Mechanical and electrical design (P&ID, loop drawings, panel layout)", not a verbal description of the solution.
What happens if the system fails its factory acceptance test?
The "FAT passed?" decision sends a fail to "Correct FAT punch-list items, retest", which loops back to "Factory acceptance test (FAT) with customer witness" rather than letting the system ship anyway. Catching a fault in the shop, with the customer witnessing the retest, is deliberately earlier and cheaper than catching the same fault after the system is installed on site.
Why does this SOP include customer training when the others don't?
The other nine SOPs are all things Insatech does to or for a customer's existing instrumentation, calibrate it, repair it, maintain it, and Insatech's own staff keep the knowledge. This SOP delivers a system the customer has to operate themselves once Insatech leaves, so "Train customer operators and maintenance staff" is a required step before "Customer final walkthrough and sign-off" closes the project, not an optional add-on.
Does this SOP replace the Process Instrument Installation & Commissioning SOP for a project?
No. "Install system on site per Process Instrument Installation & Commissioning SOP" hands that work to the specialist chart by name rather than repeating its equipment checks, loop testing and calibration steps. This chart is responsible for the project structure around that work, the approval gate before it starts and the documentation and training after it finishes, not the technical detail of the install itself.