Q&A from our optimisation webinar ‘Maintaining control’
Disclaimer: The answers below were given in the context of the webinar and may not address all aspects of the issues discussed. For more comprehensive information or application support, we encourage you to contact us directly
Is there any formula that can be applied to determine the right frequency for the maintenance? e.g. PM, CBM, etc.
There are different formulae used in various tools and digital applications, however, a simple rule of thumb is the intervening maintenance period, also known as the time to maintenance should be between70 to 90% of the P-F Interval of the failure mode.
Inventory optimisation referred to usage rate of parts or risk of the parts?
Inventory optimisation is a focused approach which is tackled and connected to the revision and update of the asset management strategies.
Inventory is considered as it impacts critical equipment and the operations of facilities. To get to a point of optimisation a great deal of effort is put into understanding the usage of materials, criticality of materials, typical procurement lead time and the impact to facility bad actors and safety critical systems.
Can you show the results of the polls?
For results to the poll questions, please refer to the recorded session.
Poll 1: Within your facility where do you see the biggest opportunities to reduce your cost to supply? (see 05:21)
Poll 2: Focusing on data and the information you need to make decisions, what are you biggest priorities? (see 13:13)
Poll 3: Looking through an Asset Health lens which is most important to you? (see 28:46)
What is the average OPEX cost savings that the WOOD team has seen across the globe from the good work done?
Wood have executed optimisation projects around the globe and across multiple industries. It would not be fair to apply or specify an average OPEX saving calculation, as every facility operation and business is different and looking for different results. Our solutions and innovative approach is built on a fit for purpose solution which will achieve predictability and certainty aligned with the stage in the asset lifecycle.
In Wood's opinion, what has been the best implemented maintenance system across the globe and why?
To answer this question, it really depends on the goals and objectives of the organisation and facility operation. There is no one system that is going to improve maintenance, it is all about the business processes which are used in conjunction with the systems. We must also consider the systems that will integrate with the maintenance system such as the integrity and reliability platforms.
Can you please advise how safety critical equipment spare availability and optimisation is being done?
At a high level, spares criticality is based on the impact on the equipment's Safety Critical function, if the material were to be required but is unavailable. Spares optimisation has several value derivatives, one of which is the determination of the spares and their quantities to be held in stock.
What was the duration of these projects and how long did it take the operators to achieve payback?
The payback period varies. For example, for Master Data Integrity and Inventory Optimisation, the payback is immediate as the data is used for decision-making and has an immediate impact on workforce productivity and overall work culture, and of course immediate reduction in inventory holdings.
Over the long run, there is a similar benefit from the inventory inflation avoidance, with strong processes in place. For Strategy Optimisation, the benefits take longer and is dependent on the elimination failures that would have happened if the optimal strategy were not in place. This amounts to cost avoidance.
What benchmarks and reliability libraries do you use?
Wood uses a proprietary set of benchmarks as well as well-known and established industry libraries.
Have you looked at obsolescence and how do you manage the cost associated with it?
Obsolescence is one aspect of the Inventory Optimisation. The cost benefit comes from the right-off if inventory costs associated with holding obsolete spares. There is however value from downtime (MTTR) reduction in having the right spares available.
How does any change relate back to HSE case and performance standards determined via the HSE case studies?
Maintenance and reliability projects are always aligned to the facility safety cases and performance standards. This is fundamental to any initiative undertaken.
At the outset the team works closely with the operator to understand the criteria and ensure the optimisation effort maximising, improvements or enables these standards.
Identifying bad actors - we can build Nested/Packaged maintenance using PM hierarchy function in MAXIMO and use of REVISION Codes in SAP, but have you experience you can share expanding this system/unit type maintenance packaging at a wider level i.e. module or TAG locational / neighboring TAGs within an anticipated isolation boundary?
Yes, we have experience in expanding packaged maintenance to module and tag location. We have done this previously where managing maintenance per module is critical during greenfield project execution. This is a customised approach, which would need further and more detailed discussion.
How does a value-add maintenance optmisation method fit with Performance Standards and regulatory-driven maintenance (that may be poorly defined or inefficient)?
The short answer is it always an aspect of an optimisation project. The key is to understand whether these standards are achieving the desired results. This done by reviewing the standards and then reviewing the actual facility and asset performance to those standards. Often an outcome is a review and update of those processes and procedures. You will not update regulatory driven standards; however, you can mitigate risks in different ways and your asset strategies must take into considerations any gaps in inefficiencies in less than effective standards.
Can you outline what you feel is the key element to enable movement to a Risk Based Maintenance approach for Safety Critical Equipment such as F&G and lighting equipment, where volume of equipment is excessive?
The key element is overall asset risk. The availability and compliance of the Safety Critical Equipment to the respective Performance Standards has a direct impact on live asset risk and the exposure of the asset to the impact of a major accident due to a loss or downgrade of partial, single of multiple barriers. A Risk Based approach assures that these risks of barrier functionality impairment and major hazards are continually mitigated, and integrity validated.
Can you please elaborate on how master data was cleansed in Case Study 2? How many people were involved and how long did this take?
Data Integrity Case Study: The Master Data cleansing involved the review and update of the hierarchy data, maintenance and criticality Master Data characteristics accurately reflect the physical assets and comply with the Master Data Design rules. The project involved teams of pairs of people to review the hierarchy, one person to assess criticality and assign barrier assignments and three people to develop task lists, work instructions and assemble maintenance plans and items. This involved reviews and input by the customer's maintenance and engineering representatives. Overall, the project was executed within 18 months.
Do these reviews/cleansing require Wood's asset management databases or are other CMMS databases etc. supported?
It requires the availability of data from the client's CMMS/ database.
How frequently should maintenance generated data be fed back into the maintenance strategy to achieve continuous improvement loop?
There is no set period, but when there is a sufficient body of meta data accumulated to be statistically significant to make strategy decisions. At a maximum, however a period no longer than 3 years is recommended.
What kind of challenges are faced by Wood when they execute these projects?
Some challenges we are faced with include timely access to the right asset as-built data and meta data, and the availability of the client's Master Data design rules.
When you have a gut feeling that the data you received are not true reflection of the asset health, how do you deal with that at the planning stage?
As a rule of thumb you have to trust the data. If you can’t trust the data, an optimisation project is recommended. Our systems and processes are built to ensure you can trust the data and make the right decisions with that data. If you are at this stage, it is necessary to ask why there is a disconnect with the data.