2636 MCNULTY CURVES – NEW PERSPECTIVES TO ENABLE TRUST, TRANSFORMATION, AND TECHNOLOGY B. E. MacKinnon1*, P. J. Mackey2, and T. P. McNulty3 1Hatch, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada (*Presenting author: britt.mackinnon@hatch.com) 2P. J. Mackey Technology, Inc., Kirkland, Québec, Canada 3T. P. McNulty and Associates, Inc., Tucson, Arizona, USA ABSTRACT In 1998, Terry McNulty presented a seminal paper surveying 41 metallurgical and chemical processing plant case histories, identifying dominant causes of success and failure [1, 2]. Available data yielded four curves portraying achievement rates of design capacity for projects, from successful to unsuccessful. Identifiable characteristics were tabulated, establishing guidelines for project planning or prioritization of projects competing for capital. Updates were presented in 2004, 2014, 2024, and 2025. The interpretations of success and failure have remained unchanged, i.e., quality of underlying information, development of process design criteria, experience and commitment of the project owner, and avoidance of fast-track schedules that could suppress careful decision making. Today’s project owners face a critical challenge: how to deliver the minerals the world urgently needs, faster, smarter, and more responsibly. To overcome this challenge, we need trust, transformation, and technology. The McNulty curves serve as a valuable tool to help project owners with building trust, supporting transformation and de-risking technology and plant design features. Project owners asking the question “how much can we shorten project timelines without cutting corners?” can draw important lessons from past project case histories and proven strategies to safely accelerate ramp-ups. This paper explores how to apply the McNulty curves to enable trust, transformation, and technology in new projects. KEYWORDS Ramp-ups, Start-ups, McNulty Curves, Risk Reduction, Accelerated Ramp-ups; De-risking Rampups 1. CONTEXT AND PROBLEM STATEMENT In 1998, Terry McNulty presented a seminal paper surveying 41 metallurgical and chemical processing plant case histories of newly operating plants, identifying dominant causes of success and failure [1, 2]. That survey resulted in the creation of four curves, graphically portraying the average rates of achievement of design capacity over time for projects that ranged from very successful to unsuccessful. Identifiable characteristics of those projects were then tabulated, establishing guidelines that could be used in project planning or for prioritization of projects competing for capital. Although slow project ramp-ups had been documented in earlier studies, for instance by Agarwal [3], the 1998 paper by McNulty presented the first clear ranking of project success according to specific criteria. For the first time, the industry had a solid basis to evaluate plant ramp-up by characterizing the maturity of the technology involved as well as the phronesis of the project team. Updates were given by McNulty at SME 2004 in Denver, CO, USA, COM 2014 in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, COM 2024 in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada and Copper 2025 in Phoenix, AZ, USA. Altogether, about 140 case histories have been examined and about half have exhibited Series 1 performance, while the other half have fallen short of reaching design capacity within
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM0Mzk2