02 Asset Management Decision Making

Traditional asset management historically prioritized infrastructure over the natural environment. This approach has led to many conflicts between the natural and built environment (e.g., flooding, pipeline exposures, property loss, etc.). As we respond to these conflicts and experience new weather patterns related to climate change, the design approaches of the past are transitioning to techniques that re-frame water and natural systems as valuable assets. Natural systems provide value to communities through the provision of ecosystem services. The realm of ecosystem services is diverse and includes flood mitigation, mental well-being, wildlife habitat, and pollution control. Understanding these services and systems allows proponents to manage and maximize the value of their natural assets. This presentation will describe two types of approach for managing natural systems as assets. The natural system type used for this discussion will be surface water drainage systems (creeks, channels, rivers, or ditches). The first approach to management is using proactive planning around natural systems to prevent conflicts between watercourses and infrastructure from occurring in the future. The second approach is used to manage existing conflicts in and around watercourses when built infrastructure cannot be relocated according to the recommended planning measures. In this case, existing conflicts can be resolved through applying knowledge of natural system function and design. Examples will be used to explore how these approaches benefit communities and project proponents alike.

Organizations are observing the change in the maintenance landscape with the use of data-driven analytics for decision-making. Underpinning these analytics is Machine Learning. The algorithms form the model that ingests data to represent the system and predict its future state. While this method has found rapid applicability in other sectors, the field of Reliability & Maintenance Engineering is still exploring ways to adapt this idea to its conventional Asset Management programs. The objective of this paper is to explain the predictive power of machine learning by wrapping it around a prevalent reliability tool: the P-F Curve. Initially proposed in the Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM) framework, the P-F Curve is ubiquitous and the practitioners understand its simple and elegant description of the failure behavior. In spite of its understanding, the use of the P-F Curve has been minimal in everyday analysis to estimate when and how soon the failure will occur. Predictive Maintenance (PdM) Tools such as Vibration Analysis, Ultrasound, and Thermography have made the P-F Curve more accessible. Adding Machine Learning to these PdM tools, with a real-time data stream, will amplify the value of this analysis with better detection of Potential Failure (Pf) and forewarning of Functional Failure (Ff). Having real-time data and a real-time P-F Curve plot will enable the users to capture the changing conditions. We define this new curve as the Dynamic P-F Curve™. Dynamic P-F Curve™ Machine Learning models will estimate the time available (P- F Interval) for the maintenance team to respond to an asset before catastrophic failure. This interval will change if the asset experiences an external force causing it to wear out sooner. Thus, a dynamic curve makes the maintenance plan itself changeable and agile, improving the plan's efficiency. The final part of the presentation will showcase an example of how a Dynamic P-F Curve™ is calculated and represented by using an open-source data set. The resulting change in the maintenance plan actions is also prescribed to fully explain this idea, concluding with the list of use cases.    

Asset management focuses on adding value as a form of an investment in the physical preservation of the asset, financial stewardship, and data analytics. We will share experiences and best practices in evidence-based asset management that strengthens smart outcomes and strategies. Gain insights and knowledge of successful strategies to ascertain owner support

Asset Managers understand that the best way to achieve success with their strategy is to have executive sponsor support. Unfortunately, many Asset Managers are frustrated because they cannot get senior leadership to pay attention to the importance of the company's assets. Asset management goals and objectives should align with corporate strategies, but often, there is a disconnect. Some of the gaps are: •    Corporate strategy vs. asset management strategy; do you have a line of sight?•    What Asset Managers say vs. what executives hear; are you speaking the same language? •    Operations production targets vs. asset lifecycle value; do these conflict?•    Executive education; can you help senior leaders who don't know the difference between their assets and their asses?•    Executive decisions; are you in the loop on this secret process? •    Corporate performance vs. asset management measures; do your KPIs align?•    Managing up; are you providing executives solutions or problems?Understanding what executives are thinking and how they make decisions is crucial to an Asset Manager's success. Ron Bettin has spent many years guiding operational and project success by bridging the gap between executives and asset management. This presentation explores why executives often don't appear to care about critical assets and what Asset Managers can do about it 

Within our toolbox of best practices, the concept of Operational Readiness (OR) has been discussed, strategized, budgeted, and engaged, to prepare the asset(s) in transition from OEM to start-up, whether for the construction of a single asset such as a mine haul truck, or unique piece of manufacturing equipment, or for multiple assets within an infrastructure such as a hospital, or rail transit line to create the smoothest, "turn key" process for the newly acquired asset, prior to deployment into operations.Through the many global industries, we have been blessed with a very holistic view of what Operational Readiness should look like. However, the process can be seen as a high level strategy, which fails to incorporate the depth and breadth required to ensure all steps of the plan will engage tactics which align with corporate vision and mission, supporting critical aspects of readiness; the tracking platform, communications, and follow up methods used to ensure we engage stakeholders as "partners" in our journey, rather than captives in a process to ensure the asset is truly "Operationally Ready", before we sign off with the asset owners.As a result, tactics used are many time absence of an accurate tracking process to ensure the highest level of QA/QC. What better time to achieve this accuracy then at the inception of the new asset, just like we do when we welcome a new baby into our family. But can we honestly say we plan everything for our new addition? Definitely not.  We can agree, that we are not all aligned in how or what we will feed our child when they turn 2 years old, rather we commit to the short term plan and move forward.Why? Simply put, it takes a lot of effort to "sweat the small stuff", however the tactics used for Operational Readiness, it is critical we "sweat the small stuff" as we build a platform that will support the process, while focusing on reduction of the 7 + 1 types of waste, and by making the process simple and attractive to the ones responsible for getting the process steps completed in our journey.An OR report study from Deloitte (2012) revealed that if a company can achieve OR process effectively, they would have an opportunity to reduce the risk of loosing 30% of their capital value. In addition, the severe detrimental impact on Capex and initial operational capacity, ongoing operations and maintenance costs over an asset’s lifecycle are typically 1 – 2% higher, year-on-year and for the entire life of the asset, where operational readiness was not sufficiently achieved at the outset.  And then there is value add for safety and employee morale.Everyone’s best intentions are traditionally met with the reality of how many small, yet critical alignment steps there are to truly set up the asset to be resilient and sustainable within the lifecycle and within the desired Asset Management Landscape within your organization.Chaos usually rears its ugly head at a period after the asset has been commissioned and signed off with the asset owner. Normally the front end of design for reliability, need vs. want, master maintenance plans, parts and operations, maintenance and training strategies are set well.  However, are they truly measured by the organization, in a way that supports the quality of work to manage QA/QC performance and excellence of each process step?  Many stakeholders will have touch points in the process; either one time, or many times well past the commissioning stage, right to the end of asset life; retire, restore or renewal process, which is all part of the OR.  In this presentation for the Operational Readiness (OR) Global Approach to Asset Management Landscape & Best Practices, the information will address how Agnico Eagle Mining Ltd., has taken the opportunity within the Nunavut Division,  Asset Management group to enhance the tracking performance and following up with every stakeholder to ensure the actual work is being performed, at the right time, for the right reasons and the completion of each of the hundreds of secondary and tertiary steps are properly aligning with the timing to bring the asset into operational state.The presentation will discuss the practice and "out of the box" applications readily available using the Microsoft 365 suite of programs, such as SharePoint and the supporting applications available, without engaging in complex processes, spreadsheets or software tracking, workflow, and communication platforms.  It is challenging to keep everything tracked and packaged in one system available to everyone when having to apply multiple CMMS, EAM, ERP, or other 3rd party application systems help to support the management of assets. 

The energy landscape is shifting with the rise in electrification of transit and the rise of renewable energy shaping a new energy era that is changing the way we think about infrastructure decision making. This presentation will articulate how electrification of transit and an increase in renewables will impact medium and long-term infrastructure planning by providing examples and a practical perspective (case study) to demonstrate how Asset Management decision-making played a vital role in a utility company’s response to this change. This utility company is a key contributor to several electrification initiatives. They recognized the challenge associated with these initiatives and the overall success of the first implementation phase with minimal disruption to current operations. They are also preparing for electrification of the government transit’s first all-electric bus garage to support future procurements of battery-electric buses (eBuses) and will be working on the design and implementation of charging systems infrastructure across the city(?). Over the past 20 years, more than 50 renewable energy systems have been installed on City buildings and properties. In 2020, the city developed recommendations for the utility to achieve greater outcomes for energy efficiency, demand management, and renewable energy. The city also mandated installation of renewable energy systems on all buildings, where feasible, by 2020. The rate of development in electrification and technology in the transit sector is faster than implementation of major infrastructure developments; changes in demand patterns impact everything from the transmission and distribution networks to generation, dispatch and peak-load system capacity design; so it is not possible to “wait and see” before committing to infrastructure investment decisions. This presentation will cover how the utility is dealing with these changes by ensuring an appropriate long-term decision-making framework is in place to assure business continuity and reduce the impact on climate because it poses a particular risk for asset owners and operators. AMCL will present best practices for long-term decision-making and how the impact of change should be taken into account during the development of long-term infrastructure planning processes, in the context of a public utility.

Asset Criticality is an important input to production system design, maintenance strategy definition and short term work execution management processes. The value the supporting FEMA exercises provide in determining these categorizations is well understood in the Reliability Community. Less common is the extension of this analytical rigor to the spare parts required to maintain equipment. Establishing and maintaining robust part criticality values can be an invaluable link between operations and the supporting supply chain, helping to set stocking strategies, inform alternative material management approaches and quickly flag when expediting is required. Despite the value, part criticality values (or Risk Priority Numbers) are rarely objectively derived and even less frequently maintained. This presentation is intended to: 1. Establish the link between asset health and spare part availability 2. Illustrate common item criticality practices 3. Provide an overview of a robust item criticality assessment approach 4. Highlight the benefits to be gained from an enhanced approach to item criticality determination.

Business improvements require changes. In reliability and maintenance, some of the change factors are within our control, but many are not. If we stick with small changes, they can often happen but they often fail to achieve their full potential. Why? The short answer is that there are many factors we can’t control and usually we have limited influence. Some of those are related to people and are dealt with by “change management”, but others are related to how our businesses are structured and organized. If we want to make big changes we need to get past that! This presentation will give you something to think about and share with your senior management. If they want miracles from you, then they will need to make it possible!

We know that reliability has value to your business, but many of us with technical backgrounds struggle to present a good business case to decision-makers. We are very often held back by budget constraints and we are not in a position to make decisions involving financial risk-taking. Most of us don't have a business background, nor do we speak "finance". It is a whole different language than maintenance and reliability, yet we all want the same things for our business. This presentation will give you some ideas on what you will need to determine in order to show what reliability is worth, and how to present that to decision-makers.

Formal asset management has a relevancy problem when it comes to practical application in operations-heavy industrial sectors. It is a major reason the uptake of holistic and strategic formal asset management has been so slow in North America. As asset management practitioners we are failing to offer and deliver AM in a way that is aligned to and integrated with the incumbent operational management system. To have utility and add value we must see the challenges from the senior operational leaders' perspective and offer AM in a practical way that is seen as the solution to their problems. Join Paul Daoust as he threads the needle and binds great asset management into great operational management.