•Maintenance workflow and productivity
•Contractor management
•Equipment data
•Risk-based inspection
The prototyping approach to system development can provide a flexible way of creating systems. It assumes that change is inevitable and uses software which produces working systems quickly, but with an inefficient use of computer resources. It does this by its approach (see Figure 6-A.4) and through the use of a 4th or 5th generation language.
The steps in the approach and time scale for developing a typical small system are shown in Figure 6-A.5
Figure 6-A.4 Prototyping Approach to Application Development
Figure 6-A.5 Prototyping Development Time Scale
6-A.6 Training
People need familiarity and confidence in the work flow, new business processes, procedures, and the new computer systems which are supporting them. We found that it is not effective to leave all this to the vendor.
A coordinated approach was found to be a winner, where the vendor acted as the technical expert training IT people; and site personnel were taught by the site’s focal points.
Notes:
1.Site focal points were chosen because of commitment to the cause and interest in success. They were usually people of stature and informal leaders in their groups. There would be a focal point in each geographical and discipline area. We did not choose those who were computer geeks.
2.IT personnel received extensive training on hardware, software, back ups, software, and language from the vendor. This could take a month depending on prior knowledge.
3.The system administrator had a week of intensive training at the vendor’s office on configuration and optimization.
4.User focal points had a week of on-site training by the vendor.
5.Managers and supervision had a day learning how to use the system and a day on how to extract benefits.
6.Technicians, operators. etc., were trained by focal points. The amount of training for an individual varied with the number of functions she or he used, and could vary from two hours to a week. We found we needed to allow one hour of training for each piece of functionality used and then allow for another hour of practice.
It is important to focus training on the specific needs of the group. It is not cost effective to try to train everyone to do everything. If the function is not practiced within a few weeks (or, in all likelihood, days!), the learning is lost. Several training packages, each focused on particular user types, should be made up from combinations of basic modules. For example, for a CMMS, you might select
•Work request creation, scheduling, executing
•Updating history
•Equipment register
•Getting material
•Getting permits
•Queries and reports
A mix of classroom training (maximum 6 participants) plus guided self-learning
•Training (rather than practice) should not be programmed for more than three hours a day
•Put a training system (simulator) filled with relevant data on site for users to practice on
•Training sessions to be “just in time” and no more than three weeks before hands-on opportunity
•Concentrate on core users at first
•Don’t just explain how to use the computer system. Explain in simple language the cultural and work practice changes to be expected.
6-A.7 Lessons
1.The traditional approach to systems development seems to be a recipe for failure and produces systems bringing little business benefit.
2.The unconventional use of prototyping produced effective systems quickly.
3.The result was cheap, simple, quickly implemented systems which were dynamic, living, and relevant.
Evaluate Contractors’ Unit Rates
A cynic is a man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
Oscar Wilde
Author: Mahen Das
Location:2.2.1 Liquified Natural Gas Plant
7.1 Background
In my capacity as an internal maintenance and reliability consultant, I visited this LNG plant to review their performance. Contracting efficiency and value for money obtained was one of the items reviewed. The company was a fairly mature operation and had a number of contract companies for maintenance work. These contractors had been established during the construction of the facility and had grown with it.
The company had set up norms for the effort required to carry out various types of maintenance work. These included man-hours required for or cost of:
•Manual excavation of 1 m3 of earth
•Thermal insulation of 1 m of 4” pipe at ground level
•Building tubular scaffolding from ground level, per m3
•Inserting a 4” 150# spade
•Grit blasting per m2 of steel surface at ground level
•Painting per m2 of steel surface at ground level
There was a tiered quantity-discount scheme in place for all types of work. They also had agreed rates per man-hour for different trades, including
•Pipe-fitters
•Welders
•Scaffolders
•Grit-blasters/Painters/Insulators
The unit-work rates had been established some years earlier. These had never been reviewed. The man-hour rates had also been established some years ago and regularly increased, based on inflation. For the past two years, however, the contractors had voluntarily foregone inflation correction, claiming that inflation would be
