How to Resolve Conflicting Process Data in a Packed-Tower RFQ Before Equipment Selection

Packed-tower projects rarely arrive as one perfectly organized engineering package.

A supplier may receive:

• an RFQ by email;
• a process datasheet;
• a vessel drawing;
• a previous quotation;
• several WhatsApp messages;
• a revised spreadsheet.

The problem begins when the numbers do not agree.

One document may show a gas flow of 5,000 m³/h while another shows 5,500 m³/h. A drawing may indicate a 1,200 mm tower while the specification says 1,250 mm. One file may call for PP internals while another lists SS316L.

The first task is therefore not equipment selection.

It is design-basis control.

Why Conflicting Data Is Dangerous

A difference that looks small can change:

• gas velocity;
• hydraulic loading;
• internal diameter;
• pressure drop;
• material choice;
• packing quantity;
• fabricated dimensions.

If a supplier silently selects one value and continues, the project may later appear technically inconsistent.

The issue becomes particularly serious when custom internals have already entered production.

Do Not Assume the Newest Email Is Automatically Correct

Email chronology is useful, but it is not always a reliable engineering document-control system.

A later message may contain:

• a typo;
• an approximate value;
• an informal estimate;
• information for a different operating case.

Therefore, the supplier should identify the conflict explicitly rather than guessing which number controls.

Separate Process Data from Mechanical Data

Conflicts are easier to manage when information is divided into categories.

Process data

Examples include:

• gas flow;
• liquid flow;
• temperature;
• pressure;
• concentration;
• required outlet performance.

Mechanical data

Examples include:

• tower diameter;
• manway size;
• nozzle orientation;
• support-ring elevation;
• internal clearances.

Material requirements

Examples include:

• PP;
• PVDF;
• SS304;
• SS316L;
• ceramic.

The source of authority may differ for each category.

A process datasheet may control flow conditions, while an approved vessel GA controls nozzle and manway dimensions.

Create a Design-Basis Summary

Before final selection, summarize the values that will be used.

A simple table can include:

• parameter;
• value received;
• source document;
• conflict;
• proposed controlling value;
• client confirmation.

This prevents hidden assumptions.

Prioritize Conflicts by Engineering Impact

Not every discrepancy requires the same urgency.

A spelling difference in the equipment tag may have little impact.

A difference in tower diameter can be critical.

High-priority conflicts usually include:

• vessel internal diameter;
• gas flow;
• liquid flow;
• packed height;
• operating temperature;
• material grade;
• manway dimensions.

These should be resolved before final engineering.

Use an Explicit Assumption When Immediate Progress Is Necessary

Sometimes the client cannot answer immediately but still wants preliminary pricing.

In that case, the supplier can proceed with a clearly stated assumption.

For example:

Preliminary quotation based on tower ID 1,200 mm as shown on drawing Rev. B. Final dimensions subject to client confirmation.

This is different from silently treating the value as final.

Do Not Mix Design Cases

Many towers have more than one operating condition:

• normal;
• maximum;
• startup;
• turndown;
• upset.

Confusion occurs when one document lists normal flow and another lists maximum flow.

Both values may be correct.

The supplier should determine what each value represents before declaring them inconsistent.

Revision Numbers Matter

A revised drawing can supersede an earlier document.

However, suppliers should verify:

• revision number;
• revision date;
• approval status.

A newer file that has not been approved may not yet be the governing document.

Freeze the Design Basis Before Production

Preliminary quotation can tolerate some assumptions.

Production cannot.

Before custom internals enter fabrication, the project should have a frozen basis for:

• final dimensions;
• material;
• segmentation;
• connection points;
• quantity.

If the client later changes a governing parameter, the impact should be reviewed formally.

Why This Matters for AI and Engineering Procurement

Many industrial problems do not result from incorrect engineering formulas.

They result from different teams using different input data.

Controlling the information basis is therefore a genuine engineering function.

Final Engineering Principle

When RFQ documents conflict, the supplier should not choose whichever value appears most convenient.

Conflicts should be identified, classified, documented, and resolved before final equipment selection or fabrication.