assessing and sustaining asset integrity_fair

7/21/2019 Assessing and Sustaining Asset Integrity_fair

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/assessing-and-sustaining-asset-integrityfair 1/5

PETROTECH – 200911 - 15 JANUARY 2009, NEW DELHI, INDIA

of 5

P09-828

ASSESSING AND SUSTAINING ASSET INTEGRITY

Neil WilcockShell Global Solutions (UK)Shell Technology Centre ThorntonPO Box 1,Chester CH1 3SH,UKEmail: mailto:[email protected]

ABSTRACTIn this paper, two related methodologies for a consistent approach to assessing asset integrityand sustaining asset integrity are outlined. These methodologies are widely used within theShell Group and form part of a range of measures, practices and procedures that are thebackbone of the commitment to the “Must Win” approach to Asset Integrity

Introduction As part of a drive to assess and improve the integrity status of Exploration and Productionfacilities, a Global Technical Integrity Review and Improvement program was initiated in 2006.The program commenced with an “Assess” phase carried out by Shell Global SolutionsInternational (Shell GSI) leading teams of Regional discipline engineers. The objective of theprogram being to enable Exploration and Production Operations to attain a comprehensiveunderstanding of, and identify and implement improvements to, the Technical Integrity ofFacilities in their Operating Units from Well Bore to point of Hydrocarbon sale.

The integrity of an asset can deteriorate over time for a number of reasons, Figure 1 illustrates this and shows the methodologies described in this paper in context.

Figure 1.

The two methodologies employed are called Focused Asset integrity Reviews. The first to bedescribed will be the equipment review (FAIR

+ER) which assesses the current status of

equipment and the second will be the management system review (FAIR+MS

) which addressesthe efficiency of management systems governing the inspection and maintenance activities

Integrity

Complacency

Changes in Process Envelope

Turnover of Skilled Staff

Ageing Equipment

FAIR+

Asset Integrity Review

Integrity Improvement

Plan“Hardware Fixes”

FAIR+

Integrity Management SystemReview “Process Fixes”

ASSESS FIX SUSTAIN

Formatted: English (U.S.)

Formatted




of 5

required to maintain the functionality of equipment. Figure 2 shows what the FAIRmethodologies specifically assess.

Figure 2. What FAIR Assesses.

Assessment Methodology

Focused Asset Integrity Review: Equipment Review (FAIR+ER

): In order to carry out anassessment of equipment condition it is necessary first to define its purpose and functionality.In order to do this in a consistent and repeatable way that could be applied to a variety ofassets throughout Shells’ global operations, reference was made to the Integrity Barriermodel also often referred to as the “Swiss cheese” model. This model is illustrated in Figure 3 below.

Figure 3: Integrity Barrier Model

Electrical

Rotating eqt

D i s c i p l i n e s

Instrument

Static

Lifesaving

Emergency response

T I B a r r i e r s

Protection

Shutdown

Pipeline Structural Integrity

Sub sea Process containment

Wells Ignition control

Civil Detection

FAIR+MS

FAIR+ER




of 5

Based upon a completed FAIR+ER

review producing a set of CSRs for an asset, an operatingunit can move forward to define the specific actions required to restore integrity where it hasbeen found to be not demonstrated. CSRs offer detailed evidence supporting the conclusionon the status of their subject SCE and clear recommendations (and prioritization), which canform the basis of a recovery program.

Focused Asset Integrity Review: Management Systems (FAIR+MS

): FAIR+MS

is astructured review of asset integrity management systems. Integrity Management systems arenecessary to control the activities, practices and procedures that are required to monitor andmaintain the integrity of facilities. FAIR

+MS has been developed as a series of modules

focused on specific asset types such as static equipment (which includes vessels and piping),instrumentation, rotating equipment, wells, pipelines, and offshore structures. Aspects ofmanagement systems reviewed are detailed:

• Organisation and Administration

• Skill resources, Training and Certification

• Procedure and Practices

• Quality Assurance and quality control

• Maintenance Plans

• Module specific aspects

Corrosion prevention and control Inspection and fitness for purpose assessments Testing programs

• Data, Integrity records, Tools and References etc.

The FAIR process is illustrated in Figure 5 and begins with a preliminary self-assessmentperformed by staff from the site being reviewed using FAIR software that guides them througha thorough series of questions about all aspects of the asset integrity systems. In this way thesite staff reach a conclusion about the effectiveness of their management systems.

Figure 5. The FAIR+MS

Process

The FAIR+MS team then interviews site staff from all levels and functions (technical andoperating). A review of record systems and procedures is carried out. Using the informationgathered the review team then reaches their own conclusion about the management systemsand (again using the supporting software) based on the gap analysis between the site self-assessment and the FAIR

+MS team findings a list of strengths and weaknesses and key

findings is produced jointly, leading to a prioritized list of improvements to managementsystems.

The review also produces a point score (Figure 6.) (on a scale 0 – 1,000) that is useful todefine the level of effectiveness of management systems and to monitor progress towards theaspired target level.

Prioritised

list of

improvements

Prioritised

list of

improvements

Site Reviews by FAIR+MS team

Presentation

of strengths and

weaknesses

and/ or

key findings

Presentation

of strengths and

weaknesses

and/ or

key findings

Verify

Observation

Interviews

Review Records

Observation

Interviews

Review Records Analysis Analysis

Prelim Review

by site staff

And/ or

Pre-visit data

Prelim Review

by site staff

And/ or

Pre-visit data




of 5

Figure 6. FAIR+MS

Points Score

Through consistent application of the FAIR+MS

methodology within our own operating units

and a number of third party operators we have found that FAIR +MS offers several benefits. Itallows you to measure the effectiveness of your asset integrity management systems, bothquantitatively and qualitatively, and enables you to demonstrate that effectiveness to keyconstituents. It provides detailed and practical recommendations aimed at enhancingprofitability through improved reliability, reduced deferment of production, extended asset life,and maximized payback on operating expenditures. The score provides a basis forbenchmarking and a baseline against which to measure improvement. The FAIR

+MS process

also offers excellent best practice sharing opportunities.

ConclusionsThe FAIR+ methodologies outlined are complementary and key processes for assessingintegrity status and the capability of operating units to sustain integrity. Applying themtogether enables a holistic view to be obtained by the reviewing team, thus deriving themaximum benefit. They are tried and tested both within the Shell Group and a number of thirdparty operators where the accuracy and consistency of the methodologies has enabled a

clear focus on the prioritization and allocation of resources towards maintaining assets thatare safe and can be demonstrated as such.

Active and passive

resistance to asset integrity

issues and needs

Support for

asset integrity

issues and needs

Proactive to asset integrity

issues and needs

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

FAIR+MS

Score

assessing and sustaining asset integrity_fair

Documents