reaching level five defining a digital asset strategy by ... · 2 maturity model overview...

Reaching Level FiveDefining a Digital Asset Strategy by Means of a Maturity Model

A Roadmap Tool for Owner Operators

www.aveva.com

WHITE PAPER September 2016

Incomplete, inconsistent and invalidated information being handed over during commissioning and throughout the operational life cycle of a plant leads to inadequate preparation for start-up or restarts and suboptimal asset operation and maintenance.

Reaching Level Five: Defining an Engineering Information Management Strategy by means of a Maturity Model.

1 Introduction

Asset management decisions are made at every phase of the asset life cycle and in every instance there is an opportunity to extract and optimise knowledge. A well designed asset information framework is data driven and supports decision making in the context of asset risks and value opportunities, as well as taking into consideration the short- and long-term impacts of the decisions made throughout a given asset’s life cycle.

In practice, this can only be achieved via a combination of the organisation’s processes, powerful Information Management technology and human resources (people), applied to establish and maintain the digital counterpart of the organisation’s physical facilities, otherwise known as the “Digital Asset.”

The ideal solution addresses these three domains (people, processes and technology) and maintains a centralised repository of fully integrated, consistent, trustworthy and accessible information throughout the asset life cycle.

A Roadmap Tool for Owner Operators

The process domain focuses on how the

organisation maximises the efficiency of how it

plans, collects, organises, uses, controls, stores &

disseminates information and the means by which an organisation ensures

the value of information is identified & exploited to the

great extent possible.

The technology domain refers to the applications and software used to support business processes and to ensure the right information gets to the right people, in the right format, at the right time.

The people domain focuses on the practices of the typical asset information users and how effectively stakeholder level knowledge is managed and maintained.

Digital Asset

AVEVA Digital Asset Maturity Model – Process, Technology and People assessment domains.

03

AVEVA: White Paper

The ideal solution addresses these three domains (people, processes and technology). For each of these domains, the solution shall identify the particular asset information requirements and their impact on the entire asset life cycle.

However, the large number of systems that generate and store engineering information and the many complex business processes that use it, make effective asset Information Management challenging. Among many problems, its absence typically results in the situations below.

• Incomplete, inconsistent and invalidated information being handed over during commissioning and throughout the operational life cycle. This leads to inadequate preparation for start-up or restarts and suboptimal asset operation and maintenance.

• Inadequate access to up-to-date information at shift handover, leading to increased non-productive time, reduced asset performance and significant Health, Safety and Environmental (HSE) risks.

• Limited visibility of up-to-date, valid, as-operating information, which hampers the control and performance of Operations & Maintenance (O&M) activities.

• Inconsistent information sharing between the various stakeholders, creating delays in O&M reviews.

• Productivity losses from time spent locating and verifying required documentation.

Recognising the complexities and challenges that process-intensive organisations face in managing asset information, AVEVA has developed a unique, domain-specific Digital Asset Maturity model. The model is based on AVEVA’s extensive industry experience and engineering and life cycle Information Management subject-matter expertise, combined with industry best practices and standards. Rather than prescribing a one-size-fits-all methodology, AVEVA’s maturity assessment approach helps to break down, assess and solve current asset Information Management challenges in a manageable, stepwise manner. It also encourages the use of existing technology investments to gain early significant benefits.

2 Maturity Model Overview

Successful asset Owner Operators understand the needs and responsibilities of each O&M stakeholder group. To adequately address their respective information requirements, the Digital Asset Maturity model comprises three assessment domains:

• Process• Technology• People

For each of these domains, the model identifies the particular asset information requirements and their impact on the asset life cycle and defines five levels of maturity. The following sections describe:

• the fundamental requirements of each assessment domain

• the characteristics of each maturity level as a basis for self-assessment

• recommendations for progressively moving to the next maturity level

• how a Digital Asset indicative of the actual, physical state of the facility can be created using AVEVA Information Management technologies.

A summary of the maturity model is provided in the table overleaf.

Rather than prescribing a one-size-fits-all methodology, the AVEVA Asset Information Maturity model provides flexibility to ensure the unique requirements of a specific project are met and considered in the overall asset information maturity.

05

AVEVA: White Paper

Maturity Level

Process Technology People

Level 1 – Initial

• Information not kept up to date, causing it to become inaccurate or incomplete.

• No formal processes in place for analysing data quality.• Limited or no formalised, defined, engineering information

standards covering information types including structured and unstructured data and documents.

• Limited or no sharing of engineering data between disciplines and overall lack of awareness of what changes to information have been made. Hence, limited ability to ensure the latest version of content is being referred to.

• Multiple data repositories exist that are not synchronised, or that communicate via bespoke interfaces.

• Information exists in a variety of incompatible formats.• O&M personnel waste considerable effort finding and verifying

information before being able to carry out essential tasks.

• No formalised data governance model in place.• Limited or no awareness of the need to appoint a

member of top management to be responsible for oversight of the asset information strategy.

• Users have a limited understanding of the importance of data quality and its impact on decision making.

Level 2 – Defined

• Processes are defined and enforced for review and approval of Engineering & Design changes, but the communication of design changes is largely manual.

• The organisation is aware of the need for engineering information standards and has started the process for developing such standards. Information standards are defined on an ad hoc basis but are not enforced in a formalised or consistent way.

• Some data quality measures are in place but not consistently applied across disciplines or projects and they do not take into consideration the full asset life cycle.

• Due to the modifications that have taken place throughout the asset’s life cycle, the quality and availability of information is not indicative of the actual as-operated state of the facility.

• The organisation understands the need to ensure that the information acquired across source systems and repositories is maintained, adequately assured and, where appropriate, controlled. It is in the process of determining the appropriate technical capabilities to ensure this is the case.

• The organisation is investigating the potential use of a commercially available software solution for efficiently and effectively capturing, organising and visualising information corresponding to its assets.

• No standardised tools are in place for controlling changes to technical information and synchronising the changes to business systems. Hence there is a risk that, when asset modifications are made, required information updates may be overlooked.

• Top management understands the need to appoint one of its members to be responsible for overseeing the asset information strategy.

• There is some awareness of roles in the context of overall asset Information Management processes to encourage ownership of data quality.

• A data governance model is defined, but is loosely or inconsistently applied across disciplines, or only to a select group of projects or assets.

Level 3 – Proactive

• Baseline standards are defined but may be document-centric (e.g. limited to document naming and numbering standards) or limited to addressing information requirements for regulatory compliance.

• Asset life cycle Information Management processes are established, documented, consistently enforced and maintained across information systems and critical assets to support the asset management strategy and objectives across all life cycle phases.

• Information standards consistently enforced, including specification of acceptance criteria for engineering data, as well as information archiving and retention requirements.

• Capabilities are in place to facilitate automatic analysis of information submitted to the asset information repository to identify any issues affecting its completeness, correctness, or consistency and to report on these issues.

• An integrated, web-based information repository ensures that asset information is accessible when and where required, such that the necessary information is readily available to end-users to effectively support their asset management activities.

• Integration capabilities are in place to establish and maintain logical relationships between the various information types including both data and document centric content.

• As information requirements change and new applications are introduced, the asset information repository can be easily scaled to facilitate integration of the additional information content types.

• Top management has appointed resources to oversee asset information initiatives and has granted these resources sufficient authority to fully execute their responsibilities.

• Stakeholders have a clear picture of the current state of information, including an understanding of the level of data quality required to execute a given process.

Level 4 – Managed

• A class library is formally defined and is aligned with industry best-practice standards (e.g. ISO 15926, ISO 14224, CHIFOS) and includes criteria for compliance and definition of a taxonomy to organise data with respect to classes, attributes, units of measure (UoM) and associations based on the operator’s specific asset information requirements.

• Data conforms to all information standards expected. The accuracy of data is known at all times and there are capabilities to ensure the precision of the data is appropriate for the degree of accuracy required.

• Processes are in place to automatically interlink as-built asset information to provide a single source of organised and up-to-date asset information. Procedures are implemented for quality assurance to ensure data completeness and consistency across various sources and to report on and address the issues impacting information integrity.

• Capabilities are in place to facilitate automatic, proactive validation and bulk data loading of tag and document metadata into a centralised asset information repository. Validation of tag and document metadata is completely class-library driven.

• Any data that fails validation checks is rejected and reported on for further rectification such that only the valid data is loaded to the asset information repository, thus establishing a single source of trusted data.

• A single, integrated asset information repository is optimised via standardised data structures and is configured against a standard set of engineering information standards.

• Functional capabilities are in place to facilitate configuration of metadata templates to support population of operational systems, including filtering of maintenance significant tags from a master tag list and assignment of Functional Location Codes (FLOCs) from the Enterprise Asset Management system or Computerised Maintenance Management System (CMMS).

• Capabilities are provided for automated checking of data consistency across the asset information base as well as highlighting of inconsistencies and selective electronic updating.

• The ability to automatically identify and visualise all information dependencies helps ensure that the necessary information updates are made, in response to minor and major asset modifications.

• Information Quality Dashboard reporting capabilities are in place to allow the current information status and information reliability metrics to be monitored by the data owners and other senior managers.

• A formal data governance strategy is defined and implemented.

• A designated asset Information Management team regularly reviews this data governance strategy, such that it is continuously updated and improved as needed.

• The individuals charged with overseeing the asset information strategy have full responsibility for ensuring that the organisation’s assets deliver the required information to fulfill the asset information strategy, objectives and plans. The appointed individuals have been given the necessary authority to achieve this.

Level 5 – Optimised

• Class-library-based validation rules are defined and implemented to automatically verify that each tag or document is classified, all mandatory attributes are present, UoMs are properly specified and naming/numbering rules are properly adhered to.

• Processes are in place to facilitate controlled information update in response to in-plant modifications and not-in-kind changes.

• Escalation routes are in place to ensure that data quality issues are addressed appropriately when detected by automated validation checks.

• A reliable Digital Asset is available and maintained throughout the life cycle of the operating asset such that there is a sound basis for asset modifications, reduction in the need for site visits and high-fidelity asset information is readily available to support asset management decision making.

• Automated capabilities are provided to create information change working sets comprised of the tag-level data and documents subject to change.

• Whenever asset data is changed, the change data is subject to validation against the asset information standards and a formal approval process, before being synchronised back to the master systems of record.

• A dynamic 3D visualisation environment is provided where every tagged objected is selectable and supported by the full contextualised set of information in the asset information repository.

• Information stakeholders are provided with access to whatever asset information they require including schematics, equipment drawings, single-line diagrams, instrument loops and layout plans, within the context of the 3D model to support activities such as incident investigation, HAZOP studies and Risk Based Inspection and analysis.

• A culture of data quality improvement is promoted which ensures that staff are aware of the importance of good data quality.

• The data governance model has been extended such that the majority of the organisation’s assets and projects are governed in a consistent manner and adhere to a common set of asset information standards.

• Effective governance processes are in place to support new business requirements which may require new or improved data processing activities.

Assessment Domains

06

Reaching Level Five A Roadmap Tool for Owner Operators

2.1 Maturity Level 1 – the Initial stage

Organisations whose asset Information Management practices are at Level 1 incur significant risks in facing regulatory compliance issues and HSE incidents. They suffer O&M inefficiencies, prolonged or unplanned outages and poor productivity, all of which impair profitability.

At this level, there are no formal tag-naming and numbering rules, there is no metadata classification scheme and content is not formally structured. Content may be scattered between multiple storage drives or local workstations, leading to duplicated, inconsistent information. There is no “single source of truth,” so users have no assurance that they are using current, valid, asset information.

2.1.1 Domain-specific maturitycharacteristics

Process domain

At Level 1, there is no formal, enterprise-level asset information strategy in place. Some strategies and semi-formalised processes may have been defined within individual disciplines but, without process integration across disciplines this can actually create information inconsistencies and potential process bottlenecks.

This lack of common data standards across engineering disciplines, coupled with the absence of a formal metadata classification scheme, makes finding and verifying required information difficult. Inconsistent categorisation of data and documents obscures understanding of the hierarchical dependencies between them.

Technology domain

The absence of a formal data model and standards creates significant data incompatibility issues, limiting the ability to populate operational systems with trustworthy information. Information quality is neither assessed nor enhanced. Information does not reflect the true state of the operating environment, so the organisation incurs safety risks, especially where inaccurate engineering or design documentation is used to support operational systems and processes.

Without asset Information Management supporting technologies in place, there is no means to automatically and reliably validate data received from vendors and subcontractors, or to reconcile its format.

People domain

Information ownership is not formalised (for example, no official Document Controller roles are defined), resulting in limited information accountability. Any Document Controllers or information owners that may exist are often self-appointed, driven by the necessity to support specific projects or processes. Their activities are not governed by enterprise-level information standards or requirements; there are no Information Management checks and balances. The lack of an Enterprise Information Management system results in excessive time being spent in locating necessary information, while the inability to validate information and to keep it validated means that, once located, it must be manually verified on every occasion.

Inefficient O&M decision making, unplanned outages and productivity losses

Risk of regulatory non-compliances and HSE incidents

Limited or no asset information supporting infrastructure

Poor information quality, scattered storage and duplication

07

AVEVA: White Paper

Recommendations Description

Compile an initial content inventory of all electronic and hard-copy information necessary for O&M.

Identify and document information sources. These will later serve as asset Information Management solution integration points, once the organisation has reached Level 3.

Examples of content that should be accounted for in the inventory include:

• CAD drawings, P&IDs, electrical schematics

• Operational specifications• Vendor documentation• HSE plans and Environmental Impact

reports• Equipment certifications and material

safety data sheets • Permits• Operating, inspection and

maintenance procedures• Production planning information• Reliability analysis data for all critical

equipment• Maintenance reports• Enterprise Asset Management (EAM)

asset hierarchies• As-built, as-operated drawings and

specifications• Maintenance instructions• Transmittals

Define an asset Information Management strategy.

The asset Information Management strategy should be formally documented and be part of the enterprise-level Information Management strategy.

Secure an executive-level champion.

Executive-level support is essential to ensuring an asset Information Management strategy is fully adopted and communicated and that adequate funding is allocated for supporting technology and resources. Without executive commitment, no asset Information Management program is likely to succeed.

Consult all O&M stakeholders.

Individuals representing every O&M stakeholder group spanning business, IT, engineering and maintenance should be methodically surveyed and interviewed to establish the following:

• information access requirements• current challenges in accessing

information• future wants and needs regarding

access, management and control of engineering information.

2.1.2 Progressing to Level 2 – AVEVA recommendations

Organisations at Level 1 have the greatest opportunity for improvement and the realisation of benefits. To lay the foundation of an effective Digital Asset strategy and progress to Level 2, the model identifies the recommendations below.

2.2 Maturity Level 2 – the Defined stage

At this level, the organisation recognises the need for a defined asset Information Management strategy and supporting IT infrastructure, but operational inefficiencies and risks persist because stored information is not validated. Where attempts are made to validate information and to reconcile its format, these are not adequate to ensure information integrity and its ability to meet operational needs.

2.2.1 Domain-specific maturity characteristics

Process domain

At Level 2, there is an initial degree of senior management support and efforts have begun to identify and define Information Management requirements and use cases. These will, in turn, feed into the definition and documentation of formalised asset Information Management processes, even though these will be basic and largely manual. Limited processes have begun to provide clean, correct, standardised and useful plant operational data, but key deliverables are often overlooked or become incomplete, resulting in rework or poor decisions.

Recognised need for a Digital Asset strategy and supporting infrastructure

Operational inefficiencies and risks due to inability to keep information up to date

Some manual interventions to validate information and reconcile its format

Inconsistently enforced and monitored asset information standards

08


“All offshore oil and gas production projects begin and end with the Operator.”

Stephen Newman CEO, Transocean

Technology domain

A means of categorising information is necessary to enable its efficient search and retrieval.Efforts are being made to define a metadata classification scheme and information breakdown structures. A suitable folder structure has been defined and mandated and the various document types are stored in this structure according to their categorisation. However, information hierarchies and relationships still have inconsistencies; for example, different versions of the same data may exist in different places. The existence of a categorisation structure does not, in itself, ensure the quality of the information.

At this level, information is likely to be stored on a shared drive rather than in an enterprise-level data repository. This usually limits visibility and accessibility of operational information.

Operational data remains largely as received from vendors or subcontractors, with limited means to validate data or reconcile its format. Because of a high dependency on IT and individual application owners, IT department must be involved even to review or change a simple process step, information, or deliverable. The resulting costs and resource limitations hamper efficient operations and attempts to improve the situation.

People domain

Definition of asset Information Management requirements and use cases involves communicating with stakeholders at the discipline level to identify their “pain points” and reveal information deficiencies. These typically include:

• information inconsistencies• duplication and redundant storage of information• information “findability” problems.

This process also establishes the appropriate formal data ownership roles.

09

AVEVA: White Paper


Perhaps as a result of incidents, or of failed regulatory audits due to poor quality or inaccessible information, the Level 2 organisation clearly recognises its current asset Information Management shortcomings and the need for improvement. It has started to define a Digital Asset strategy and may have begun to implement ad hoc technology solutions and processes. However, these are insufficient as long-term measures and there is a significant burden on both IT and process owners. To address the root of the problem and progress to Level 3, the model identifies the recommendations below.


Formally define and implement processes to manage information throughout the asset life cycle.

Once processes are in place, technology solutions can be deployed to make asset information available to improve O&M.

Make full use of existing business systems and technology.

To have a clear picture of all information relevant to operations and to fully utilise existing information sources without increased software licensing costs, the asset information solution must be open, flexible and able to integrate with third-party applications. These will typically include:

• Engineering & Design systems (2D/3D)• document management systems• EAM and Maintenance Management systems• Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems• project management systems.

Provide a web-based tool that enables all O&M stakeholders to search, navigate, access, visualise and collaborate on asset information.

Such a tool should enable stakeholders to access a single, data-rich Digital Asset, in accordance with defined access requirements. It should provide a clear picture of the current state of information, indicative of the as-operating state of the physical facility.Key benefits of a web browser-based tool include:

• it eliminates the safety, security and legal risks arising from users saving data in an uncontrolled manner on individual PCs or storage, or being able to transfer proprietary information outside of the company

• all stakeholders see the same version of information• all data is centralised but is accessible from any computer at any time• secure, password-protected access maintains security.

Collect and present asset data and information in a single place through defined associations.

Stakeholders have a clear understanding of the information dependencies and can rapidly retrieve and navigate between related information items.

Define a formal information classification scheme. This should encompass numbering specifications for engineering items and technical documents, as well as asset information standards.

Ensure there is a common understanding of requirements across the information supply chain, including O&M stakeholders, contractors and vendors.

This is best accomplished via a “top-down,” operator-driven approach whereby the Operations team communicates standards to project teams in the form of Operational Acceptance Requirements for data and document deliverables and the project team communicates the requirements to the contractor via a formal Information Handover Specification.A valuable resource to support definition of such a specification is the Capital Facilities Information Handover Specification (CFIHOS) initiative. CFIHOS provides a sound basis for establishing the operator’s Information Standards and Data Governance strategy because it builds on the way owners and operators specify the information they require for operations and maintenance of their facilities.

Provide customisable reporting facilities. Highly configurable reporting tools enable the creation and running of a wide variety of reports. These should include, not only operational Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), but also indicators of data quality, such as completeness, correctness and consistency.

10


2.3 Maturity Level 3 – the Proactive stage

Below this level, systems may provide awareness of current status in the facility and indicate when preventive maintenance should be performed. But they provide neither an understanding of the many information dependencies nor access to relevant, associated documentation reflecting changes that have been made during operations.

Such capability can only be provided by a software-based asset Information Management solution built upon a solid technology foundation such as AVEVA NET™.


Process domain

At Level 3, processes are defined, documented and implemented to manage engineering information throughout the operational life cycle. The process domain includes the asset information class library, which serves as the formal standard for:

• object class names (location, functional type, physical equipment type, etc.) and their hierarchy

• definition of object attributes, such as UoM, design pressure, etc.

• document class names• tag and document numbering.

A formal class library is fundamental to effective and sustainable asset Information Management. An organisation may develop its own class library or adopt an industry standard such as the ISO 15926 reference data library, which specifies technical class descriptions of all the main equipment items, piping, instruments, buildings, activities and so on, used in engineering, construction, procurement, operations and maintenance. There is no “one-size-fits-all” approach to this; whether for an in-house defined or industry-standard-based class library, the asset information solution must provide flexibility for its definition and configuration.

An object-centric solution enables information objects to be created that represent both physical objects (such as equipment items) and documentary objects such as procedures. These information objects can then be cross-referenced so that they can be organised, viewed and controlled.

Your system shouldn’t just store information. It should share it – at the right time, with the right people.

Defined, documented and implemented processes to manage asset information (class library definition and implementation)

Missing, inconsistent and invalid information can be readily identified

Relevant information from systems of record is captured and made available via a central, collaborative, web-based environment

11

AVEVA: White Paper

The IT infrastructure effectively supports the management of asset information, ensuring effective storage, retrieval and utility capabilities.

Technology domain

At Level 3, an asset Information Management solution is in place that, by capturing information from source systems and making it available, reduces dependence on IT, individual application owners and Document Controllers. The IT infrastructure effectively supports the management of asset information and more flexible use is made of software by the O&M teams.

More importantly, users can view and work with information in a format identical to that in its source application. This is accomplished by extracting information from drawings, models, documents and other sources to compile a repository of information objects, essentially creating an information counterpart of the physical plant; this is the essence of the Digital Asset concept.

Because asset data is collected in one place through defined associations, organisations at Level 3 can readily identify missing, inconsistent and invalid engineering information. This is achieved by validating imported information against criteria for its completeness and attribute validity and by highlighting any discrepancies via configurable reports.

Examples of typical high-value reports and the information they can provide are shown in the table below.

Report Example Data Quality Assurance Checks Provided

Tag master data integrity. • Check integrity of tag master data (e.g. naming and numbering and mandatory attributes) versus information standards defined in the class library.

Tag attributes integrity. • Check integrity of tag attributes (e.g. mandatory attributes) versus information standards defined in the class library.

Document attributes integrity. • Check integrity of document attributes (e.g. mandatory attributes) versus information standards defined in the class library.

Data source completions. • Check integrity of data available by and across sources.

Document source and then document completions. • Check document completeness status by and across sources, based on defined completeness criteria (e.g. number of documents, expected document attributes, etc.).

Contractor or supplier document summary report. • Report indicating contractor or supplier documents received based on what is expected and verification of document naming and numbering attributes versus information standards specified by the class library.

Understanding each domain involved in the information management, including IT and identifying their maturity levels ensure a clear, correct and consistent approach from start to finish.

13

AVEVA: White Paper

People domain

At Level 3, information is readily accessible to all authorised users for meeting O&M requirements. This can include, not only documents, but viewable files, data extracted from structured documents, or other standard formats such as MS Excel® or XML.Access is provided by a web-based user interface through which, subject to access rights, users can perform a range of actions, such as:

• navigating information via intuitive breakdown structures, object-to-object links and hot-spotted documents

• content searching using a range of structured search tools

• retrieval and visualisation of any required content, such as data, documents, drawings, models, process data, or logs

• using built-in reporting tools to identify data quality issues, such as completeness, correctness and consistency

• marking up and annotating content• printing content, with or without mark-ups• outputting reports in a variety of standard formats

(including CSV, XML and MS Excel)• navigating between graphical objects and data

objects.

Importantly, a user can view any information, its current status and all of its associations in their native format without requiring access to the source applications, or the specialist skills to use them.

Criteria have also been defined to assess end-user satisfaction with asset Information Management processes and technologies, enabling informed planning of enhancements.


The Level 3 organisation has a solid Digital Asset foundation in place, built on processes and technology. With minimal effort, stakeholders can obtain all of the information required for O&M activities and can identify any inconsistent and/or missing information.To build on this foundation and progress to Level 4, the model identifies the recommendations below


Enable automatic validation of information / data objects against the asset information class library, prior to making information available.

Information must be accepted in a controlled way and comply with the defined information standards.

This will ensure that information created or updated remains trustworthy to support safe and efficient operation.

Provide full reporting of compliant and non-compliant information. Configurable reports and KPIs should be available for both scheduled and on-demand monitoring of information quality.

Provide a means for validating data from vendors and subcontractors. Automated validation should be implemented to ensure that information received is valid and complete and that it complies with applicable standards, prior to acceptance.

14


AVEVA: White Paper

The problem is an almost infinite degree of complexity. You need a way to file away pertinent emails, drawings and reports where they can be found easily months or even years later. You need to keep track of the life cycle history of every component throughout your plant. Data storage is no longer a problem, but finding the data you need out of the terabytes that you have accumulated is a constant struggle.

Engineer Global EPC

Improved management and efficiency of O&M processes via access to asset information in context

Centralised environment for identifying and highlighting information issues as they arise

Assurance that information remains indicative of the as-operated state throughout the duration of the facility’s operational lifetime

Assurance that asset information fully complies with information standards

2.4 Maturity Level 4 – the Managed stage

Organisations at Level 4 have a high degree of assurance that asset information is compliant with their own information standards and they enjoy significantly reduced safety risks and improved operational efficiency. Automated capabilities enable efficient legacy data clean-up and continuous information improvement throughout the asset life cycle. Level 4 organisations can actively identify deficient technical information, so that the originator can correct it prior to its acceptance into operational systems.

15

16

Asset Information Management processes have been taken a step further by defining programs for continuous improvement.


Process domain

Ready access to trustworthy information enables the Level 4 organisation to better analyse O&M processes to identify productivity bottlenecks and their causes.

Asset Information Management processes have been taken a step further by defining programs for continuous improvement. These are aimed at limiting process variation, eliminating redundant steps and increasing process stakeholder productivity.

Technology domain

Simplified management and control of all documents and data improves operational efficiency and enables regulatory compliance to be achieved and demonstrated at lower cost.Corporate information standards (such as a class library) are managed and maintained effectively.

The technology framework enables asset information quality to be continually assessed and enhanced and ensures that all data generated in house or received from contractors and suppliers accurately represents the build status, so that the plant operates against its original design specifications.

A formal class library and baseline standards are defined, implemented and managed within a single environment.

Specific types of information validation that the asset Information Management solution should perform include those below.

These advanced validation checks mitigate the impact of low-quality data on operational efficiency and safety. The compounding of information errors is essentially eliminated at this stage.

Validation Type Description

Functional class validation. • Checks that a given functional class is defined in the class library.

Attribute class validation. • Checks that a given attribute is defined in the class library.

Functional class attributes dataset validation. • Checks that a given attribute is defined as part of the corresponding functional class in the class library.

Enumeration list validation. • Checks that a given attribute is a valid member of an enumeration list (which can be defined in the class library or in an external system).

Unit of measure validation. • Checks that a given unit of measure is defined in the class library.• Checks that a given unit of measure is defined as part of the corresponding attribute in the class

library.

Attribute data type validation. • Checks that a given attribute has the correct data type defined in the class library.

Attribute existence validation. • Checks that a given attribute value exists, according to whether it is mandatory or not.

The technology framework enables asset information quality to be continually assessed and enhanced.

17

AVEVA: White Paper

Ensuring effective information sharing practices on a large scale between different departments, regions and disciplines is fundamental for an on-time and cost delivery of projects.

People domain

Here, the Level 4 organisation has a collaborative environment for identifying, highlighting and acting upon data issues as they arise.

This is accomplished by validating the integrity of asset tag and documentary information from any source system against configurable standards predefined in the class library. Non-compliant data can be rejected automatically or quarantined for review and resolution. Once imported, information can be used with confidence to support O&M activities.

At this level, the organisation is beginning to develop an engineering information knowledge base and has properly defined, comprehensive KPIs for evaluation of future asset Information Management improvements. Effective information monitoring and reporting to support regulatory compliance purposes has been achieved.


An optimised asset Information Management solution spans information access, integration, visualisation, validation and controlled information update. To reach Level 5, the model indicates the recommendations below.


Enable automatic delivery of the required information about a change to the right individuals at the right time.

The asset Information Management solution should also provide centralised access to change status and history.

Implement functionality to support controlled information update such that the Digital Asset is maintained and remains indicative of the as-operated state of the physical facility over time.

Automated capabilities should be provided to create information change working sets comprised of the tag-level data and documents subject to change.

Whenever asset data is changed, the change data should be subject to automated validation checks against the asset information standards and a formal approval process, prior to being synchronised back to the master systems of record.

Make full use of the power of 3D models to enable exploitation of the asset information.

A dynamic 3D visualisation environment should be provided where every tagged objected is selectable and supported by the full contextualised set of information residing in the asset information repository.

The asset Information Management technology infrastructure should ensure that the relevant people are provided with access to whatever asset information they require at a given time including schematics, equipment drawings, single-line diagrams, instrument loops, layout plans, etc. within the context of the 3D model, to support activities such as incident investigation, HAZOP studies and Risk Based Inspection and analysis.

19

AVEVA: White Paper

16

Throughout the asset life cycle, O&M stakeholders must be able to access and effectively change information derived from multiple sources and in multiple formats.

AVEVA: White Paper

2.5 Maturity Level 5 – the Optimised stage

Throughout the asset life cycle, O&M stakeholders must be able to access and effectively change information derived from multiple sources and in multiple formats. This information must remain accurate and subject to rigorous change control.

An effective Digital Asset strategy enables the rapid identification and assessment of the impact, duration and financial implications of a given change and the communication of its details to all relevant stakeholders. Management of Change (MoC) processes are streamlined and working environments made safer. These are key characteristics of an Optimised Level 5 organisation.


Process domain

At Level 5, an organisation is characterised by having in place efficient, controlled information update processes and supporting technical capabilities. It can more rapidly resolve issues and assess the impact of changes on downstream processes. Formal metrics are in place to identify the root causes of information quality problems, to monitor the effectiveness of change control processes and to facilitate continuous improvement.

This is accomplished using a framework which maintains the integrity of information change processes and provides access to as-built and as-operated data throughout the entire change process. It provides the core capabilities below.

• Formal management of changes to technical information corresponding to O&M work packages.

• Reservation of new tags and documents resulting from a change.

• Validation of all data that is presented for change.• Check-in and check-out control of tags and

documents.• Configurable, best-practice workflows.• Full auditing of all information changes.• Interoperability with industry-standard EAM,

Document Management and ERP systems.

Ability to make full use of the value of 3D models and other information comprising the digital asset to support O&M processes

Rapid identification and determination of change impact, duration and financial implications

Controlled information update processes to support streamlining of MoC processes

21

Technology domain

At this level, the asset Information Management technology infrastructure enables management and control of asset information and is fully utilised by O&M stakeholders to perform their job functions. Contractor- and vendor-specific catalog information can be quickly validated and easily integrated into operational systems as required.

Dashboards and reports are configured to monitor information changes and their change histories. Information changes are withheld from access and use in operations and maintenance until formally approved. This is accomplished by locking information against editing in the master system of record for the duration of a change; available information remains in its as-operating state until the change is completed. Integrity of sequential updates is maintained and a framework is provided for concurrent engineering.

Captured information is exploited across all O&M processes and is regularly evaluated to drive process improvements.

People domain

Associated, dependent and other relevant data is cross-referenced, linked with defined standards and made available to O&M stakeholders. This enables better analysis and more effective planning for plant maintenance and effective management of unforeseen risks. Change Review Boards can more fully understand and evaluate change impact across operations and stakeholder accountability is increased for decisions made.

The organisation can optimise, monitor and control its asset information change-management processes. Information changes are highlighted to O&M stakeholders, enabling more-informed decision making.

O&M stakeholders can validate both new and legacy data against the asset information standards before making any information updates.In general, because information is both trustworthy and readily accessible, more effective and more extensive use is made of it, both on demand for normal operational purposes and to support one-off projects such as revamps or upgrades.

22


Final thoughts:The right technology delivers tangible results

Asset information deteriorates rapidly if it is not rigorously managed and controlled, increasing operating costs and leading to safety hazards. Adopting the asset Information Management recommendations described in this maturity model will enable access to and robust management of, all types of engineering information throughout the entire operational life cycle and will provide the organisation with a Digital Asset replica of its physical assets. The stepwise approach described offers a practical and achievable strategy for implementing a highly functional, collaborative environment for centralising, controlling and managing asset information.

As a direct outcome of implementing these recommendations, the organisation is able to take advantage of the benefits listed in the table opposite.

Contact us today to learn more about tools, support and services available from AVEVA for your Digital Asset Maturity journey. Visit www.aveva.com/offices.

LEARN MORE

23

Benefit Description

Alignment to industry standards and recognised best practices.

The recommendations encompassed in the AVEVA Digital Asset Maturity model are based on relevant industry standards and best practices focused on management of asset information, including the following:

• ISO 55000 Asset Information standards• ISO 15926• ISO 14224• CFIHOS.

By integrating the relevant aspects of these industry standards and best practices into its Digital Asset strategy, the organisation is able to ensure that asset Information Management processes are consistently applied and are as efficient as possible, leading to increased productivity, safety and regulatory compliance.

Improved competitiveness.

The AVEVA Digital Asset Maturity model enables benchmarking against industry peers to facilitate differentiation and process enhancements, driving improved competitiveness.

Prioritisation of technology investments and process improvement initiatives.

Rather than prescribing a one-size-fits-all methodology or solution, the AVEVA Digital Asset Maturity assessment approach helps to identify, break down and solve current asset Information Management challenges in a manageable, stepwise manner. It also encourages the use of existing technology investments to gain early, significant benefits.

About AVEVAAVEVA software and services enable our customers to solve the world’s most complex engineering and design challenges. Discover how we can help you redefine engineering possibilities to successfully create and manage world-class capital-intensive assets. Headquartered in Cambridge, England, AVEVA employs more than 1,600 staff in 50 offices around the world.

For further information

www.aveva.com

@avevagroup

linkedin.com/company/aveva

AVEVA believes the information in this publication is correct as of its publication date. As part of continued product development, such information is subject to change without prior notice and is related to the current software release. AVEVA is not responsible for any inadvertent errors. All product names mentioned are the trademarks of their respective holders. Copyright © 2016 AVEVA Solutions Limited and its subsidiaries. All rights reserved. RLF/WP/16.

reaching level five defining a digital asset strategy by ... · 2 maturity model overview...

Documents