Reliability Assessment

1. Asset Criticality Assessments

Description:
Develop and implement asset criticality assessment methodology in accordance with industry standards like Norsok Z-008.

What we can do for you ?
– Develop Asset criticality standards and procedures with defined roles and responsibilities
– Facilitation and execution of asset criticality assessment
– Establish criteria and measurements for asset criticality review

Case study:
Developed a template and scoring criteria to determine asset criticality of an upstream oil and gas major in Canada. This was followed by development of asset criticality standards and execution of the criticality assessment process as defined in the standards. This resulted in 72% of all assets critically assessed. This provided our client with the basis of performing critical spares review and developing rigorous asset care strategies.

2. RAM Modeling

Description:
RAM Modeling is a computer simulation exercise (Monte Carlo) to test the reliability/availability of a system under design or in operation. It evaluates the relationships between all of the system’s process equipment, makes Maintainability predictions and test design’s effects on production efficiency and on stream factors.
Tools used: MAROS,

What we can do for you ?
– Create a predictive model of the processing site using system logic, configuration information, PFD’s and P&ID’s.
– Use unit and equipment reliability information and repair and maintenance data from the project team, industry databases, and Fidelis Group, LLC reliability database.
– Validate the reliability model performance and data assumptions with the project team.
– Explore the impact on system reliability for the base case model and alternative studies.
– Communicate results orally and in a written report.

3. FMEA

4. Critical Spare Parts Analysis

Description:
Many industries depend on the availability of high-value capital assets to provide their services or to manufacture their products. Companies in these industries use capital assets in their primary processes and hence downtime can among others result in (i) lost revenues (e.g. standstill of machines in a production environment), (ii) customer dissatisfaction and possible associated claims (e.g. for airlines and public transportation) or (iii) public safety hazard (e.g. military settings and power plants). Usually the consequences of downtime are very costly

What we can do for you ?
– Develop processes, tools and methodology to evaluate critical spares
– Link the Asset master data and materials inventory to criticality and consumption
– Write reports and present results for high risk gaps in critical spares

Case Study:
For large U.S based operator, developed a critical sparing strategy, process and tools to evaluate the critical spares. The tool was linked directly to the clients SAP system to extract the Equipment and Materials Master data. The result of this exercise was:
– a standardized methodology to complete spares analysis
– A “live” tool that can be provide on demand results
– Identification of $4M work gaps in critical spares
– Initiation of a warehouse management strategy

5. Defect Elimination Processes and Root Cause Failure Analysis

Description:
The goal of the Defect Elimination program is to minimize losses – be they environmental, safety or production – to the largest extent possible by identifying the causes of those losses, and taking the appropriate action to permanently remove them. sense, whenever an asset is observed to be in a potentially failed or functionally failed state, some sort of defect elimination should be initiated. It falls upon every member of the Husky Sunrise team to determine the cause of every such failure (defect) to ensure a remedy is identified and applied to permanently remove the cause of the defect. This is part of the culture that Husky Sunrise wishes to instill.

What we can do for you ?
– Root cause failure investigations
– Bad Actor analysis
– Development of template RCFA logic trees for future failures

Case Study:
By applying systematic approach and using failure data from the work orders, production loss systems and other ERP systems, we were able to pin point 3 bad actors (Mechanical seals on a production unit and operational procedures on sulphur recovery unit) that led to savings of over $20M/year.