Considering the Asset Strategy during the Design Phases of a Mega Project

Transcription

1 Considering the Asset Strategy during the Design Phases of a Mega Project Presented by: Jason Ballentine jballentine@armsreliability.com

2 Stages of Influence

3 Project Questions to Answer Will the design meet the objectives over the lifetime? Is there enough redundancy? Are stockpiles and surge capacities correctly sized? What maintenance budget will be required? How many resources will be required? What spares will be required? How do maintenance plans get developed for new equipment?

4 Reliability Tools FMEA RBD RCM HAZOP LCC FTA MTA RCS RBI

5 What Tool When?

6 Reliability in Prefeasibility Studies Available Information Preliminary Process Flow Diagrams Preliminary Equipment Type Selection Deliverables Performance Prediction of Proposed Design Identification of capacity bottlenecks Identification of assets impacting production Estimate of Maintenance Budget (±30%) Estimate of Labour Requirement (±30%)

7 Methods to Apply Asset Level Reliability Block Diagram Desktop RCM based on Equipment Types

8 Prefeasibility Study Scope All major operational equipment Equipment type failure modes identified Major scheduled maintenance included Generic maintenance tasks allocated Storage and surge buffers considered

9 Prefeasibility Methodology Data Collection Simulation Model Development Capture Project Team Experience Test and Validate Results Final Simulations

10 Data Collection

11 Simulation Model Development Project Size - Total Assets ~ Total Failure Modes 10,000 - Maintenance Tasks 14,000 Prefeasibility RAM Project Duration - 6 months

12 Results Mean System and Sub-System Availability Mean System and Sub-System Capacity Expected number of Outages Expected Mean Time Between Outages Expected Mean Time to Repair Equipment Maintenance Budget Resource Requirement Equipment Importance Ranking

13 Capacity Profile Annual Outages

14 Capacity Losses Surface w/o Scheduled Maintenance Description Capacity importance (%) Total down time importance (Hours/Year) COOLER N COOLER NO DRYER PUMPBOX VALVE TAILS PUMPBOX VALUE CLEANER NO CLEANER NO CONDITIONING DRUM SALT TAILS PUMPBOX WEAROUT CONCENTRATE PUMPBOX WEAROUT

15 Cost Profile

16 Prefeasibility Process Plant High Cost Assets

17 Labour Profile

18 Stockpile Assessment 12 hour storage Surge Capacity Location Surge Capacity Exceeded (hours per year) Number of Occurrences per year Average Duration of Exceedance (hours) 12 HOUR STORAGE

19 Benefits of Modeling in Prefeasibility Confirms that the production targets can be met Provides indication as to the excess capacity in the design Provides the project team with quantified information which will assist in the justification of design changes before extensive engineering work is completed Provides a documented based upon which performance predictions were generated Assists to support project team through the peer review process by having predicted performance information available for systems, sub-systems and assets

20 Reliability in Feasibility Available Information Revised Process Flow Diagrams Equipment Selection Detail Specified Preferred Equipment Vendors Selected Deliverables Performance Prediction of Revised Design Identification of capacity bottlenecks Identification of assets impacting production Estimate of Maintenance Budget (±15%) Estimate of Labour Requirement (±15%)

21 Methods to Apply Dominant Failure Mode Reliability Block Diagram Dominant Mode RCM for Specific Equipment Design

22 Cost Saving Comparison ASSET PREFEASIBILITY COST FEASIBILITY COST COST SAVINGS SCRUBBER $4,000,000 $3,800,000 $200,000 REGRIND MILL $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $500,000 DRYER $1,000,000 $900,000 $100,000 $800,000

23 Benefits in Feasibility Modeling Adds an additional level of detail and support to the work that was performed in the prefeasibility study Predictions in line with specific equipment which has been selected Ability to quantify improvements in cost and production due to equipment layout and process modifications when compared to prefeasibility study Recommendations on the assets for which detailed maintenance strategy development should be performed during detailed design Provides the project team with quantified information which will assist in the justification of the proposed design to the peer review committee Provides a documented based upon which performance predictions were generated Assists to support project team through the peer review process by having predicted performance information available for systems, sub-systems and assets

24 Reliability in Detailed Design Develop justified optimal asset strategies Develop preventive maintenance instructions Define BOM s Determine spare part requirements Prepare for implementation into CMMS

25 Value in Approach The structured process and documented asset data will support project team at the peer review committee. Support for design, budget and labor predictions presented to the peer review committee. Ability to evaluate alternative design scenarios and quantify impact on predicted production Ability to evaluate stockpile sizes and run what-if scenarios Generation of baseline maintenance budget, labour usage and capacity upon which improvements can be measured Enabled the impact of maintenance outages to be assessed. Highlighted those assets where high reliability is desired

26 Questions? JASON BALLENTINE Engineering Manager