Hello Members, We are currently undergoing a PM optimization process for a 25-year-old gas plant by reviewing existing maintenance procedures. During this process, we have identified minor discrepancies between assets in Maximo and assets in the field due to various upgrades over the years. As part of our PMO process, we have initiated a validation of the Asset Register and Functional Hierarchy in Maximo by comparing them with field data, P&IDs, instrumentation, and electrical documents. While conducting this validation, we have encountered certain challenges due to the absence of specific policies. These challenges include: 1. Asset Registration - determining which equipment/instruments should be added as assets (e.g., block valves, hand valves, interconnecting power cables, DCS cards). Are there any industry guidelines or best practices for asset registration in this sector? 2. Maintainable Equipment - establishing selection criteria for items subject to maintenance. Are there any industry-specific guidelines or best practices in the oil and gas field? Different industries may have varying approaches to selection and registration. Are there any value-added criteria or best practices available for consideration? We appreciate any valuable insights or inputs you can provide on these matters. Thank you, KJAP
Hello KJAP, best of luck with your as-built walkdown! Many companies face configuration management issues similar to yours. It seems like you are working on the as-built plant configuration project alongside your PMO project. To ensure accuracy in the PM program's asset list, every PM/JP should be directly linked to the asset(s) involved in the work or testing, or being monitored for conditions. To achieve this, create dummy Equipment IDs starting with a "+" sign following the existing unit convention. The database administrator can easily identify dummy IDs with this prefix. The new Equipment IDs should follow the same structure as those in Maximo, such as "3ABC-M1A" for a motor related to a pump referenced as "3ABC-P1A." After completing the PMO project, add the newly identified assets to Maximo's equipment list if they require preventive maintenance. Gas and oil industries commonly employ risk-ranking to prioritize failure consequences within each unit. Assets are assigned a risk priority number based on detection, likelihood, and consequences of failure. This process generates a Pareto chart highlighting assets with higher risks for more maintenance attention, while lower ranked assets receive less or none. Various failure effects to consider include personnel hazards, throughput losses, startup delays, quality impacts, process disruptions, and corrective maintenance costs. Thank you, and happy optimizing!
Thank you, Mr. Larry, for your prompt response. I appreciate your feedback on both points, but I require further clarification regarding Item#1. My question pertains to the process of establishing assets in Maximo or registering them within the system. We manage various equipment categories such as pumps, compressors, and heat exchangers, all of which are treated as assets due to our regular maintenance practices. However, there are additional categories like Hand Valves, such as a 5" Manual Gate Valve in a critical heat exchanger inlet line, that are not currently tagged in the P&ID and therefore not registered in Maximo. The absence of this crucial information poses a risk to production output as any issues with these unregistered assets could lead to unplanned downtime. It is essential to establish a clear policy based on business risk to designate such items as assets in the CMMS. I am in search of best practices and guidelines specific to this industry scenario. Regarding Item#2, I agree with your suggestion. Thank you once again for your assistance.
In response to your inquiries, it is crucial to accurately register all equipment in the CMMS system to ensure a comprehensive asset register. At our facility, we have taken the initiative to tag hand/manual/block valves, cables, and DCS cards that are not typically identified in P&IDs. Additionally, we have advised our project team to tag all equipment, such as fans and small motors, that are not typically labeled in P&IDs for maintenance and asset register purposes. Do you have a formal process for requesting changes to the asset register, and is it integrated with the plant change request procedure? Is there a structured equipment hierarchy in your CMMS, linking components like manual valves to their parent equipment tags (e.g., heat exchanger) and DCS cards to their parent tags? Have you included pipings and DCS components in the CMMS database? Secondly, it is imperative to categorize equipment into maintainable groups to streamline maintenance activities when one piece of equipment is offline.
Thank you for your response, Mr. Josh. I agree that labeling all items as assets would be beneficial. However, the definition of what qualifies as an asset can be quite broad, whether it be a 1/2" valve or a 4" valve. It is important to establish a clear policy or guideline to set boundaries for asset selection. Do you have any best practices or a policy template to help with this process? Currently, our CMMS hierarchy is organized based on function, but some disciplines, such as electrical, have their own equipment hierarchy for tracking purposes. It may be a good idea to incorporate an asset register change form into our process.
Apologies for the delay in responding, but I have attached a section of our PMO procedure commonly used in refinery settings. Please let me know if this is the information you were seeking. Thank you. Attached is the file: "Fractal Solutions PMO Guide.pdf" (102 KB, 1 version).
Hello KJAP, I understand your predicament in trying to overhaul the PM process of an aging gas plant, and I appreciate the thoroughness of your approach. In regard to your questions, PM optimization and Asset Registration in the oil and gas sector can indeed be a complex endeavor. API-STD-686 "Recommended Practices for Machinery Installation and Installation Design" is a good starting point for asset registration and maintainable equipment determination. It provides a detailed breakdown of what should be included and how to systematically handle equipment maintenance. For industry-specific guidelines, ISO 55000 series provides a fantastic framework for Asset Management. These standards offer guidance for developing a strategic approach that optimizes performance, minimizes risk, and allows for continuous improvement. Adding to that, always remember that enforceability, traceability, and ease of use should be key criteria in choosing the registers data input and how to maintain it. I hope my pointers help streamline your PMO process.
Hi KJAP, Your initiative to optimize the PM process and validate assets is commendable. In terms of which pieces of equipment should be deemed assets, it often varies by organization and depends on factors like maintenance frequency, equipment complexity, and cost of replacement. However, a general principle is that anything that requires regular maintenance or could significantly impact the operations if it failed is usually considered an asset. As for maintainable equipment, a common method is utilizing a risk-based approach. Equipment with high-risk levels - those that can cause environmental harm, affect safety, or have significant process impact are at the top of the priority list. You might also consider the ISO 14224 standard for oil and gas asset management, which provides guidelines for data collection and usage designed to aid decision-making related to preventive maintenance. Remember that these are just guidelines; the approach should be tailored to the specific needs and context of your plant. Good luck with your project!
Hi KJAP, it sounds like you're tackling a complex but crucial task! For asset registration, I’ve found that it’s helpful to align with industry standards such as ISO 55000, which emphasizes lifecycle management and could give you a solid framework for which components to register. Also, consider industry benchmarking—look into how top-performing plants classify their maintainable assets. When it comes to the criteria for selecting maintainable equipment, focusing on criticality, impact on safety, and operational efficiency can guide your decisions effectively. Engaging with your maintenance team for input can also provide practical insights that might not be evident from just a paper review. Good luck with optimizing your PM process!
Hi KJAP, it sounds like you’re facing quite the challenge with your PM optimization! For asset registration, I recommend looking into the API RP 581 standard, which provides guidelines on risk-based inspection that might help in justifying the inclusion of specific equipment. It emphasizes the importance of considering the safety and environmental impact of your equipment when deciding what to register. As for maintainable equipment, the ISO 55000 series can offer some valuable criteria for determining what should be included based on factors like condition monitoring and criticality to operations. It might also be helpful to engage with your maintenance team to leverage their hands-on experience, as their insights could help tailor your approach to your specific plant needs. Good luck with the validation process!
Hi KJAP, it sounds like you're tackling a significant challenge with the PM optimization! For asset registration, I've found that adopting a risk-based approach can be really beneficial—prioritize registration based on the criticality and impact of failure on operations. The API 570 and API 653 documents can provide some criteria on maintainable equipment and help standardize your selection process. It might also be worth considering asset lifecycle costs, as this can help identify which assets deserve more attention and resources. Collaborating with cross-functional teams can provide different perspectives and ensure all bases are covered. Best of luck with your validation efforts!
âś… Work Order Management
âś… Asset Tracking
âś… Preventive Maintenance
âś… Inspection Report
We have received your information. We will share Schedule Demo details on your Mail Id.
Answer: - Challenges include discrepancies between assets in Maximo and field assets due to upgrades, and the absence of specific policies.
Answer: - Utilizing industry guidelines or best practices for determining which equipment/instruments should be added as assets.
Answer: - Industry-specific guidelines or best practices can help in determining criteria for items subject to maintenance, considering different approaches across industries.
Join hundreds of satisfied customers who have transformed their maintenance processes.
Sign up today and start optimizing your workflow.