Hi, my name is Dhruvil Gajera.
I am an Engineer-in-Training with
over three years of process and operations engineering experience
across refinery, petrochemical, and manufacturing operations.
My background is mainly in production-facing process engineering,
where I have supported operating processes with a strong focus on
process safety, reliability, energy performance, cost efficiency, and
production delivery. At Reliance Industries, I supported refinery and
petrochemical operations through unit performance monitoring,
operating constraint analysis, process troubleshooting, root-cause
investigations, turnaround support, shutdown and startup planning,
and operational readiness activities such as MOC, PSSR, risk reviews,
and operating procedure updates.
More recently, at Mondelez International in Canada, I supported
capital engineering and reliability improvement projects involving
design reviews, vendor coordination, commissioning readiness,
startup-shutdown support, and punch list closure. This helped me
strengthen my ability to work across disciplines and deliver practical
engineering solutions in live production environments.
Through these experiences, I have learned how important it is to make
engineering decisions that are fact-based and practical for operations.
I am comfortable working with cross-functional teams, understanding
field realities, and supporting actions that improve both reliability and
operating performance.
Along with my plant experience, I bring strong technical skills in
process simulation, PFD and P&ID review, data analysis, supporting
turnaround planning &execution and process documentation. What
makes me a strong fit for an Operations Support Engineer role is my
ability to combine process engineering fundamentals with practical
plant execution, technical assurance, and a clear focus on safe,
reliable, and efficient production performance.
I am interested in Shell because this Operations Support Engineer role
aligns very closely with the type of operations engineering career I
want to build. The role is close to the production team and directly
connected to continuous operations, process safety, reliability, energy
optimization, cost management, margin improvement, turnaround
support, and production plan delivery.
What attracts me most to Shell is the opportunity to work in a
complex operating environment where engineering decisions directly
impact safe, reliable, and efficient unit performance. I want to be in a
role where I can provide technical assurance to operations, support
daily production challenges, analyze unit performance, identify
constraints, and help improve reliability and operating discipline.
Shell also stands out to me because of its strong safety culture, high
technical standards, and disciplined approach to continuous
improvement. I want to grow in an environment where safety,
reliability, and performance are managed together through strong
engineering judgment, teamwork, and practical execution.
This connects well with my background in refinery and petrochemical
operations, troubleshooting, root-cause analysis, process safety
activities, turnaround planning and execution, shutdown and startup
support, commissioning readiness, and simulation using Aspen
HYSYS and Aspen Plus.
Overall, I see Shell as the right environment to contribute my
operations engineering experience while continuing to develop into a
stronger engineer who can support production teams, improve asset
performance, and contribute to safe, reliable, and efficient operations.
During a major turnaround at Reliance Industries, I was assigned to
support a refinery furnace optimization project plan. My initial focus
was on reviewing operating data, equipment performance, and the
main causes of unstable furnace operation.
When I discussed my initial findings with a senior operations
engineer, I received feedback that my analysis was good, but I needed
to validate it more closely with the field team before finalizing any
recommendations. That feedback was important because, in refinery
operations, a recommendation has to be technically correct, but also
safe, practical, and aligned with how the unit is actually operated.
I took that feedback seriously and changed my approach in a
structured way. First, I completed a field validation with operators to
compare the operating data with actual furnace behaviour, including
flame stability, burner condition, draft balance, and excess air levels.
During that review, we identified that part of the instability was
linked to uneven air distribution and inconsistent burner performance,
which was causing higher fuel consumption and less stable operation.
Second, I reviewed the findings with operations and maintenance to
understand what could realistically be corrected during the turnaround
and what needed to be controlled during startup. Third, I helped refine
the recommendations into practical actions, including burner
inspection and correction, operating parameter adjustments, and
follow-up checks during startup. Finally, I improved the
communication format by clearly presenting the issue, risk, proposed
action, expected benefit, and owner for each recommendation.
As a result, the final recommendations were better aligned with field
conditions and were more easily accepted by the operations team. The
actions helped improve furnace stability, supported safer startup
readiness, and reduced fuel gas consumption by up to 7%,
contributing to approximately $850,000 in annual fuel cost savings.
The main lesson I learned was that feedback is an important part of
technical assurance. Since then, I try to ask for feedback earlier from
operations, maintenance, and senior engineers so that my
recommendations are more practical, risk-aware, and effective.