Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Current State of Assets
GCWW’s Approach to
Asset Inventory and Condition Assessment
Agenda
• Asset Management Framework/Approach
• Drivers for the Project
• Applying Risk for Capital Planning• Focus on Probability of Failure
EPA / WERF/ WaterRF Framework
DetermineAsset Risk
OptimizeO&M
Investment
OptimizeCapital
Investment
DetermineFundingStrategy
Build AMPlan
Developasset registry
Assess Condition andfailure modes
Determineresidual
life
Determine lifecycle and
replacement costs
Set targetLevels of
Service (LoS)
Root cause analysisReliability centered andPredictive maintenance
Optimized decision-making
Confidence level ratingStrategic validationOptimized decision
making
System layoutData hierarchy
Standards inventory
Demand analysisBalanced scorecardPerformance metric
Valuation, lifecycle costing
Expected lifetables,
decay curves
Condition assessmentProtocol
Rating methodologies
Failure mode and effects analysisBusiness Risk
Desktop / Interviews
Renewal annuity
Asset management plan
Policies and strategiesAnnual budget
1. What is the current state of my assets? 2. What is the required LOS?
3. Which assets are critical? 4. What are my best CIP and O&M strategies?
5. What is my best funding strategy?
What is an asset?• The following three questions can be
used as a guide in defining assets:
1. Will a work order be written to this specific item?
2. Will a separate condition assessment need to be performed on this item?
3. Will depreciation or costs need to be tracked separately on this item?
4
Typical “Parent-Child” Asset HierarchyVirtual Levels - Level 1 to Level 6:▪ Performance Centers for rolling-up
costs and other data required for reporting.
▪ Maintenance Work Orders –generally NOT written here
▪ Other Work Order Types can be tracked here
Real Assets - Level 7 to Level 8:▪ Maintenance work orders are
written here.Important to Note:▪ A good asset hierarchy is
performance driven rather than location driven.
▪ Components: optional - depends on
CMMS capabilities.
1. Utility
2. Division
3. Facility
4. Area
5. Process
6. Group
7. Asset
8. Component
Virtual
Assets
Real
Assets
Asset Attribute Data Categories
Asset Management Attributes:
▪ Physical Condition
▪ Performance Condition
▪ Consequence of Failure
▪ Risk
Financial Attributes:
▪ Install Date
▪ Install Cost
▪ Replace Cost
▪ Estimated Useful Life
▪ Physical Attributes:
▪ Facility ID
▪ Asset ID
▪ Asset Name
▪ Asset Type
▪ Capacity/Size
▪ Etc.Location Attributes:
▪ Asset Location
▪ Community
▪ Watershed
Maintaining Asset Inventory
Group Info collect/format Who collectsWhere does
Information go?
Supply CMMS Support -Retire Asset
Hard copy scrap asset form filled out by Project Manager. Asset is then made 'inactive' in Maximo. Form sent to Acct.
Project Manager
Maximo, Accounting
Leading Practice Asset Management Should Be Risk-Based
• Probability of Failure• Based on asset condition and
performance standards
• Consequence of Failure• Based on Triple Bottom Line principles:
• Economic
• Environmental
• Social
Probability ConsequencexRedundancy/
Mitigationx =
Asset
Risk Score
Risk-Based Approach and CIP Planning Evaluates All Potential Failure Modes
Condition Type
Failure Mode
DescriptionTypical Assessment
Method
Performance
CapacityDoes not meet demand (flow, loading,
storage volume, etc.)Test or Desktop
Level of
Service
Does not meet functional needs
(permits, levels of service)Desktop
Efficiency
Not lowest cost alternative (chemicals,
power, labor, availability,
obsolescence)
Desktop
Physical
Mortality
Current state of repair and operation
as influenced by age, historical
maintenance and operating
environment
Test, Visual, Desktop
Condition Assessment Key Success Factors
• Simple scoring for performance and physical condition ratings
• Establish various assessment classes and frequencies based on COF
• Incorporate maintenance work history & predictive programs for performance scoring
10
DESCRIPTION OF CONDITION
RA
NK
Figure 3.3.4: Condition Rating Model
1 VERY GOOD CONDITION
Only normal maintenance required
2MINOR DEFECTS ONLY
Minor maintenance required (5%)
3MAINTENANCE REQUIRED TO RETURN TO
ACCEPTED LEVEL OF SERVICE
Significant maintenance required (10-20%)
4REQUIRES RENEWAL
Significant renewal/upgrade required (20-40%)
5ASSET UNSERVICEABLE
Over 50% of asset requires replacement
IIMM Provides Concepts for Standardized Condition Scoring
Condition Assessment Methods:
• Desktop Assessment: Considers operating data, maintenance history, staff knowledge, current needs, future needs and industry standards.
• Visual Assessment: Uses a set of standard criteria specific to the type of asset. Results in a comparative ranking of assets on a standard scale (e.g. 1-best to 5-worst). Most effective when applied against a broad asset base with a large quantity of assets.
• Testing: Uses industry accepted methods. Examples include: capacity test and advanced condition testing. Performed on individual assets. Provides an absolute ranking for asset condition. Results can be expressed on a standard scale. Some tests are “failure finding” – not condition assessment.
12 12
Site Assessment
Visual Assessment by Assessment Type• Define Condition Scoring Criteria for Physical and Performance
• Electrical
• Structural
• HVAC
• Mechanical
13 13
Visual Condition – Score 1
• Equipment & Ancillary Items• Like new with tag
14
Condition Assessment Tools
Performance Assessment• Capacity
• Ability to meet current and future needs
• Regulatory• Ability to meet current and future needs
• Availability• Work Orders
• Obsolescence• Spare Parts
• Testing (High CoF Assets)• PdM Testing
• Oil Analysis, Pump Efficiency, Thermography
1 to 5 Scoring Criteria
through Staff Interviews
1616
Current PdM Testing for Condition Assessment
Failure Mode VibrationOil
AnalysisThermography
UltrasonicMotorCircuit
Analysis
Pump Efficiency
Maintenance Rounds (visual)
Mortality X X X X X
Level of Service X
Capacity X X
Efficiency X X X X
Maintenance Program
X X X X X X X
17
Normalized PdM Test Results• Highest Assessment Class Received Testing
Test Result versus% of Expected
Score Definition
>= 90% 1 Very Good
80% to 89% 2 Good
70% to 79% 3 Fair
60% to 69% 4 Poor
< 60% 5 Very Poor
Normalized PdM Test ResultsPredictive Tests Scoring Criteria
Evaluation 1 2 3 4 5
Motor Circuit Analysis
Good Warning Alarm
Oil Analysis (Mech) Severity = 0 Severity = 1 Severity = 2 Severity = 3 Severity = 4
Oil Analysis (Elec) Acceptable Questionable Unacceptable
Pump EfficiencyPE loss < 5% from previous year or
pump curve-
PE loss >= 5% from previous year or
pump curve-
PE Loss >= 10% from previous year or pump
curve
Ultrasonic 0 leaks - 1 leak - > 1 leaks
Thermography No hot spots found -
Temperature increase since last
test, but no hot spots
-Hot spot detected or
indication of equipment damage
Combining Results from Multiple Assessments: Worst Score Wins
20 20
Methods Criteria Score
Field Test Vibration 3
Visual Corrosion 2
Desktop Capacity 4
Overall Score 4
Condition AssessmentGuidelines
21
• Asset Definition
• Scoring Definitions
• Scoring Criteria/Sheets
• Condition Assessment Procedures
Risk Assessment Results: Greater Cincinnati Water Works
Summary Results of Condition Scoring
23
• 685 Total Assets
Scored
• Processes
Evaluated at
Richard Miller
• Lamella
• ORP
• Mt Wash PS
• Chem E
• Chem W
• PCF
Summary Results of Condition ScoringBy Assessment Type
24
Summary Results of Condition Scoring By Process
25
Results of Condition Scoring By Assessment Type by Criteria – Excel
26
Results of Mechanical AssessmentsCorrosion & Leakage Most Common Mode of Failure (4 and 5)
Assets Scoring 4 & 5 From Desktop Analysis: Availability and Testing
27
Asset NameCorrective
Hours
Corrective
Work Orders
Reactive
Hours
Reactive
Work Orders
Corrective
Hours
Corrective
Work Orders
Reactive
Hours
Reactive
Work Orders
Availability
Score
PdM Testing
ScoreType of Test
CBE LIME SLAKER 2 44.5 2 35.5 5 45.5 3 35.5 5 4 x
CBE LIME SLAKER 3 21 1 74.5 8 21 1 74.5 8 5 x
CBW CARBON FEEDER-1 S60" 34 1 34 1 4 x
CL2 INJBLDG-CL2 INJECTOR 1-RCM 9 2 9 2 4 x
CL2 INJECTBLDG-PRESS REG 1-RCM 76 1 76 1 4 x
CL2INJECT BLDG-CALI SUPPLY-RCM 35 1 35 1 4 x
MWPS PUMP MOTOR NO.3 79 3 309.5 4 79 3 309.5 5 4 1 MCA, Thermo
MWPS PUMP NO 3 152 2 32 3 152 2 32 3 4 x
MWPS PUMP NO 4 16 3 16 3 4 x
ORP BATTERY CHARGER 0 1 5 5 0 1 5 5 4 1 Thermo
ORP INSTRUMENTATION 34 1 34 1 4 x
ORP PUMP 1 20 1 22 3 29.5 2 22 3 4 x
ORP PUMP 2 13 2 37.5 4 13 2 37.5 4 4 x
ORP PUMP 3 702.5 3 394.5 4 702.5 3 394.5 4 4 x
ORP PUMP 4 55.5 4 63 7 55.5 4 63 7 5 x
ORP PUMP MOTOR 3 51 2 26 2 51 2 30.5 3 4 1 Thermo
ORP PUMP MOTOR 4 60 2 60 2 3 5 Thermo
PCF CHLORINATOR 3 12 2 12 2 4 1 Ultrasonic
PCF DRY CHLORINE SCRUBBER-RCM 6 2 6 2 6 2 6 2 4 1 Ultrasonic
PCF VACUUM REG 2-RCM 23 1 23 1 4 1 Ultrasonic
PCF VACUUM REG 4-RCM 25 1 25 1 4 1 Ultrasonic
2012 2012 & 2013 (through 8/19)
Risk Score Matrix – Chem East
28
0 Assets 0 Assets 2 Assets 0 Assets 0 Assets
0 Assets 0 Assets 1 Asset 0 Assets 2 Assets
0 Assets 0 Assets 13 Assets 0 Assets 0 Assets
0 Assets 0 Assets 11 Assets 0 Assets 0 Assets
0 Assets 0 Assets 0 Assets 0 Assets 0 Assets
1 2 3 4 5
Co
nd
itio
n S
core
Pro
bab
ilit
y o
f Fa
ilu
re
GCWW CHEM EAST ASSETS
4
3
2
1
5
Future Steps• Integrate Resiliency and Contingency Planning to
Risk Evaluation
• Data based decisions for maintenance and operation strategies, capital planning to reduce risk
ALEX SCHMITZ, P.E.Supervising Engineer, Greater Cincinnati Water Works
[email protected], (513) 624-5836
30
Questions?
KEVIN SLAVENAsset Management Practice Leader, Arcadis
[email protected], (330) 990-2726