ONEIA 2009 LAE Prepared by: @ SINTEF PTS RR Mec Lo BP Exploration Operating Company Ltd errr aU SS Le Wun Cty Eni S.p.A. Exploration & Production Division ee CUCM Co mel) EL esr R Retna mUL Iu Lag) UCI CL OL ELIT eels eae) ¢ BIEL EAwLy Licey Offshore Reliability Data 5th Edition Volume 1 — Topside EquipmentOREDA Offshore Reliability Data Handbook Volume i - Topside Equipment Sth Edition, 2009 Published by: OREDA Participants Prepared by: SINTEF Distributed by: Det Norske Veritas (DNV)olin OREDA-200! Equipme Copyright © 2009 by the OREDA® Participants ‘The OREDA Participants in 2009 are BP Exploration Operating Company Ltd ConocoPhillips Skandinavia AS Eni S.p.A. Exploration & Production Division ExxonMobil Production Company Gassco" Shell Global Solutions UK Statoil ASA. Total S.A. All rights reserved, No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in any retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical Photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the copyright holders. Comments or questions to the book can be directed to: Postal adress: SINTEF Technology and Society Safety Research 1N-7465 Trondheim NORWAY Phone: +47 73592756 e-mail: oredahandbook@sintef.no hetp: yaw, sinteno/oredaband book ‘Copies of the book may be ordered from: Postal address: Det Norske Veritas N-1363 Hovik NORWAY Att: ENENOTS3 +47 675799 00 distritutiongénv.com htip://webshop.dav.com/slobal jasp00=2631 ISBN 978-82-14-04830-8 (OREDA = Registered trade mark name of OREDA (Offshore Reliability Data) ' Associated OREDA Participant ~ Topside equipment only @OREDAOREDA-2008 3 ‘Volume 1 - Topside Equipment DISCLAIMER Information in this document is intended to permit data utilisation in the interests of evaluating and improving reliability, availablity, maintenance and safety in the oil & gas industries (exploration & production). Publication of said information does not imply Verification or endorsement of the information. Neither the publishers nor the originators of data included in this document assume any liability to parties adopting any product process, or practice based upon the usage of the information, The correctness of the data listed in this document is assured only to the limits that the producers of each individual chapter, and their sources. can ensure correctness. A Fisting, description, or definition of any item in this document is not to be regarded, by implication or otherwise, as in any manner licensing any person or corporation, or conveying any rights or permission to manufacture, use, or sell any device or item that may any way be related thereto, This document may not be employed in any manner that might be construed as endorsement or censure of any item isted herein, and should only be used within the scope of the intent stated above, ‘The existence of this document does not imply’ that there are no other ways to present the offshore reliabitity data compiled in this book. Furthermore, the viewpoint ot technical perspective expressed in this publication is subject to changes brought about by technological developments and comments received from users of the former OREDA Reliability Data Handbooks. Requests for interpretation may arise regarding the meaning of parts of the handbook as they relate to specific applications. Those requests should be directed to SINTEF at the addresses given. As publications issued by the OREDA project represent a consensus of all participating companies, it is important to ensure that any interpretation has also received the joint agreement of those companies. For this reason, it may in some cases be necessary to consult the OREDA Steering Committee. In these cases it will not be possible to provide fan instant response to interpretation requests, except in those cases where the mafter has previously received formal consideration, © OREDAVolume 1 Topside Equipment 4 OREDA-2009 (Fh page nara la ak) 2 OREDAOREDA-2009 5 Volume 1 Topside Equipment PREFACE The reliability, availability, maintenance and safety (RAMS) of petroleum, natural gas, and petrochemical industries are of considerable concern to employees, companies and authorities, RAMS analyses are carried aut to provide a basis for decisions in engineering, fabrication and operations. In order to allow these analyses to be conducted, a source of reliability and maintenance (RM) data is required, OREDA is a project organisation sponsored by oil and gas companies with world-wide operations. OREDA's main purpase is to collect and exchange reliability data among the participating companies and act as The Forum for co-ordination and management of reliability data collection within the oil and gas industry. OREDA has established 4 comprehensive databank with reliability and maintenance data for exploration and production equipment from a wide variety of geographic. areas, installations, equipment types and operating conditions. Offshore subsea and topside equipment are primarily covered, but onshore equipment is also included. Five reliability and maintenance data handbooks, including the 2009 edition, have been published. The previous editions of the OREDA handbook were published in 1984, 1992, 1997 and 2002. As decided by OREDA project Steering Committee, the current 2009 edition has been split in two volumes, one for topside equipment (this volume) and one for subsea equipment. Compared to earlier editioas, there are only minor changes in the reliability dats presentation. The topside and subsea handbooks are both divided into two parts, Part I describes the OREDA project, different data collection phases and the estimation procedures used 10 generate the data tables presented in Part II of the handbook. To ensure adequate interpretation and application ofthe data tables given in Past I, itis highly recommended 10 read Part I before using data in Pars I. ‘While each new edition of the handbook is considered to be a step forward, it is realised that the quality and the quantity of the daca presented in the handbooks may be inadequate for certain applications. The OREDA Steering Committee wants to continuously improve the reliability data handbook and request users Lo wive feedback as to content an layout. ‘The OREDA project Steering Committee has decided to include data collected in the phases VI and VII (project period 2000-2003) in the eurrent 2009 handbooks (see Table 2, p. 14), As focus in OREDA has been on collecting subsea data in these phases, less topsi data have been collected than in past OREDA phases. To oblain a reasonable population for presenting reliability data for topside equipment in the 2009 edition, some data issued in the previous 2002 handbook have been included. The 2002 edition included data collected during OREDA phase IV and V (1993-2000). OREDAVolume 4 - Topside Equipment 6 OREDA-2008. Data collected are in general not covering the whole lifetime of equipment, but typically a time window of 2-4 years of operation, Infant mortality failures are as a rule not collected for topside equipment; hence, the data collected are from the normal steady-state operating, time period. The source dats for this book are stored in a computer database. The database and the associated software are available for the companies participating in the OREDA project only, The data presented in this handbook are extracted and compiled from this database and presented as generic reliability data tables. The daiahase does, however, contain additional and more detailed information. For those who want to exploit this possibility, one of the participating oil companies needs to be contacted. (See OREDA Homepage hnnp:/Avwrw oreda.com) Equipment for which reliability data are missing or additional data desirable should be ‘vesponded to either the OREDA Project Memager or one of the participating OREDA oil and gax companies, as this will enable better quality and priority in future reliability dara collection, (See hntp://wvww,oreds. com} ©-OREDAOREDA-2008 z Volume 1 - Topside Equipment CONTENTS INTRODUCTION crnsrntnnsinreninnnnanrtmare inne ‘THE OREDA PraJect PROMEGE PHASES... Parrmicipanrs, ORGANISATION... EQUIPMENT CATEGORIES COVERED IN OREDA Hanno0ok co ‘ScoPe OF OREDA HANDBOOK, mid Limrarions: vn OREDA TOPSIDE DATA STRUCTURE. Main DATA CATEGORIES... SYSTEM HIERARCHY... Eoupwent BOUNDARIES. ESTIMATION PROCEDURES. FAILURE RATE ESTIMATORS AND CCNFIDENCE INTERVALS FOR AHOMOGENEOUS SAMPLE. ovgcoornnne MULTSAMPLE PROBLEMS... : - concern BE ESTIMATION OF DEMAND PROBABILTIES...,..., acer oenast ESTIMATION OF REPAIR TIMES... co tne WEIGHTING OREDA-2008 DATA With OTHER DxTA SOURCES eee ‘TOPSIDE DATA TABLE FORMATS. DATATABLE, RELIABILITY DATA. os DATA TABLE, MAINTAINABLE ITEM VERSUS FAILURE MODE. sist aa DATA TABLE, FAILURE MECHANISM VERSUS FAILURE MODE «..00.05r nomenon 38 REFERENCES. PARTI. RELIABILITY DATA PRESENTATION vers orrnntsrrnnsin PREFACE MACHINERY Evectric EQuwenr. i Electric Ganerators. a Blectrie Motor... an ©OREDA,Volume 1 - Topside Equipment a OREDA-2009 MECHANICAL EQUIPHENT.... ‘CONTROL AND SAFETY EQUIPMENT ne Fite and Gas Detectors Process Sensors Control Logie Units Vali (COREDAOREDA-2009 9 Volume 1 = Topside Equipment PARTI S.OREDAVolume 4 - Topside Equipment 10 OREDA-2009 (is page itaricnally lef Har) oREDAOREDA-2008 4 Volume 1 = Topside Equipment INTRODUCTION THE OREDA ProJect The Offshore Reliability Data (OREDA) project was established in 1981 in co-operation with the Norwegian Petroleum Directorate”, The initial objective of OREDA was to collect telinbility data for safety equipment. The current organisation, as @ co-operating group of several oi! companies, was established in 1983, and at the same time the scope of OREDA \was extended to cover teliability data from a wide range of equipment used in oil and gas, exploration and production (E&P). Offshore topside and subsea equipment are primarily covered, but some onshore E&P equipment is also included and data collection is currently being extended for this industry. The main objective of the OREDA project is to contribute to an improved safety and cost- effectiveness in design and operation of oil and gas E&P facilities; through collection and analysis of maintenance and operational data, establishment of a high quality reliability databese, and exchange of reliability, availability, maintenance and safety (RAMS) technology among the participating companies. PROJECT PHASES Phase I (1983 - 1985) The purpose of phase I was to collect and compile data from offshore drilling and pro- duction operations. The data were published in the OREDA-84 handbook. An objective of the handbook was to demonstrate the ability of the eight participating oil companies to co ‘on this issue and create a forum for a common co-operative process in this field. Data was collected on wide area of equipment (large population) but not with as much etailed information as in later phases. Dats from this phase is not included in the OREDA computerised database. Phase [1 (1987 - 1990) The scape was adjusted to only collect data on production critical equipment, to improve the quality of the dsta, and to store the data in a PC database format. A tailor-made PC program (called the OREDA software) was developed to aid the collection and analysis of the data. The data were published in the OREDA-92 handbook. This handbook also contains the data collected in phase I. Phrase 111 (1990-1992) The number of equipment categories was increased, and mote data on maintenance programs were collected. The data quality was improved by means of the comprehensive “Guidelines for Data Collection” and through quality control. The OREDA, software was modified into a more general-purpase dats collection tool, and. its user interface was improved. The data collected in this phase are published in the OREDA.97 handbook. * Has since then changed organization and name to Petroleum Safety Autosity Narway © OREDAVolume 1 - Topside Equipment 2 OREDA-2009 Phase IV (1993 - 1996) New software fer data collection and analysis was developed, plus specific software and procedures for automatic data import and conversion. Data were collected mainly for the same equipment as in phase IT, and the data collection was « to a greater extent - carried out by the companies themselves, Data on planned maintenance were included. The data collected in this phase are published in the ORED.A-O2 handbook. Phase V (1997 - 2000) Some new equipment classes were included and more focus was given on collecting subsea data, As a parallel activity, the ISO standard 14 224: “Perroleum and natural gas industries = Collection and exchange af retiability and maimenance daca for équipmem" was developed and issued in July 1999. The data collected in this phase aré published in the OREDA-02 handbook. Phase VI (2000 - 2001) Data collection on subsea equipment and new equipment classes were prioritised. A forum for co-operation between major subsea manufacturers was formed, Phase VIE (2002 - 2003) Priority was given on safety and subsea equipment, A revision of ISO 14224 was started with important contribution from members of the OREDA project. The final version was issued in December 2006. ‘The OREDA project has since continued and is currently (2000) in its tenth phase, Up-to-date information on the QREDA project is available on the Intemet address: http: fiwww.oreda.com PARTICIPANTS: During phase Vi and VII there have been several changes among OREDA participants, ‘Table | summarises the companies that have contributed with data in these phases. @OREDAOREDA-2008 13 Volume 1 = Topside Equipment ‘Table 1 - Companies that have Contributed with Data in Phase Vi and VII Companion nase vi_| Phase vi_| Commante | entrap oi Z [ae a sl acon ’ Taegu wh Tora an OREDA pane Enoraibe 4 [ern enc ob merged nce Nok yo d [Merged wh Sinton 2007 CnnccPalips Param < {] Patns and Conoco merged in prase Vi angen, nny Sates ee Sha A y Tem i Tieged wih Ghanot and WA OREDA nase [rat 4 TT erged oth Ef ating pes OncamisaTion OREDA is managed by 2 Steering Committee with one member and one deputy member from each of the participating oil companies. The Steering Committee elects one of its members as chairman and appoints a Project Manager. The Project Manager co-ordinates the setivities approved by the Steering Committee, and also performs data quality assurance. Det Norske Veritas (DNV) served as Project Manager during phases | and Il and SINTEF during phases II IX. DNV is the current Project Manager of phase X which was started in 2009. The preparation of the OREDA handbooks has been carried aut as separate projects in agreement and consuitation with the OREDA Sieering Committee. The current version has been prepared by SINTEF and is marketed by DNV. Equipment CATEGORIES COVERED INOREDA HANDBOOK Table 2 shows the equipment population that has been included fn the 2009 handbooks. As focus in OREDA phases VI and VII has been on collecting subsea data, there are some topside equipment classes for which new data have not been collected. To obtain a reasonable population for presenting reliability data for topside equipment in the 2009 edition, some data issued in the previous 2002 handbook have been included (see Table 2), For topside equipment, where no reliability data have been collected in phases VI and VII, the 2009 edition corresponds to the 2002 edition; however, reliability data is presented at a ‘more coarse taxonomy level than in the 2002 edition. Most of the equipment derives from offshore facilities, but a few equipment units from onshore E&P have also been included. ©.OREDAVolume 1 - Topside Equipment 14 OREDA-2009 ‘Table 2 ~ Equipment Population in the 2009 OREDA Handbooks “Topeide Handbook (Velums 4) Data rom 2062 edilon | New detain | Tota Boe included in 2000-edtion | 2008 eatton | ation system ——_|equirwenrcuass panei oeevelimac ye ui Ns efunis | Ne afonte | Wa of wrts_| Rov ofunte {Machinery | 7 Compressor 78 6 va 12.608 Turbines % 2 8 13 Puma 10 2 m2 1.4 Comin Eran 75 a 8 1. Turbosspancers 8 2 20 @ectie [2.1 Elst Geraratns a 6 2 Equipment 22 Elecre Motors 128 1s vet ST iechanical—|3.1 Heat Exctanges 7 4 21 Equipment |32 Vesa ue 0 ‘a 33 Heaters and Bolles 0 1: 2 1 Other Tope [41 Fre & Gas Ootctrs 77 0 a8 Eaulpment [42 Process Sensors © 8 4.3 Control Logic Units” 19 10 448 aves" a 70 sor SOM TORSIOE | Lo 7132 war a0 Suboas Hondbook (Volume 2} S Subes —|1 Cane Stas 7 1 3 52 Fowinae "8 251 310 53 Manos 2 7 108 54 Poaines 88) 5 4 20 55 Risen 2 10 ‘M6 36 Running Toot 5 ’ 7 Teriate 1s 6 28 Wheads B Xa Toes 85 170 ze Sun SUBSEA aan 735 055 Tie? Data trom phase Visued inthe 2002 handboak Nave been inckused in the population wf this handbook. Fo lequipment where no new data have been colected since the 2002 ese. data rom phase IW ana phase [previously issued in the 2002 issue have been included. Sinca he 2002 laaue some changes i the equipment [Population fr phase IV and V data has been made ue to aciional new sas, removal of aUbdated Saupe tc. Note 2 The equement ponvtion for phasssfV and V shove in above tate ony represent the population Wat have bean Incidedn te 2008 hancoook Issue, not Be tal popwation ithe OREDA database. > Control logic wats ware aot included inthe 2002 edition * Valves ate described in two different ways, i, ky application code (44) and by’ usononsy code (4.5) I sould be noted that the corresponding usapomy umber for valves in the 2002 etiion were 4.8 and 43 respectively ®OREDAOREDA-2008 15 Volume 1 - Topside Equipment ‘Scope oF OREDA HANDBOOK For each fopside equipment unit, the following information is presented: A drawing illustrating the boundary of the equipment unit and specification of subunits and maintainable items that are part of the various subunits. © Allisting of all failure modes, classified as Critical, Degraded, Incipient or Uiaknown. ‘+ The aggregated observed time in service for the equipment uni, classified as Calendar time, Operational time and Number of demande. ‘© The observed number of failures fer each failure mode. ‘© An estimate of the constant failure rate for each failure mode with associated uncertainty intervals. = Mean and maximum values of the repair time, i. the number of man-hours required to ‘the failure and restore the function, «Mean and maximum values of the active repair time, ic. the elapsed time in hours to repair the failure and restore the function (time when actual repair work was being done) Supportive information, e.g. equipment population and number of installations. * Across-tabulation off 1) Failure mechanismicmuse versus Failure mode 'b) Failure mechanism/cause versus Severity LIMITATIONS Information released from cach participating company has been kept confidential by rendering it anonymous. Only generic data are published. Failure and maintenance data are in most cases gathered from two or more installations, and consequently the figures in the handbook reflect a weighted average of the experience. ‘The OREDA project is so far restricted to failure data collected on hardware equipment. Failures initiated by humans are, implicitly, included in the failure rate estimates. ‘All data shown in the -09 edition are extracted from the OREDA database before the ‘OREDA taxonomies were updated to comply with ISQ 14224 (phases > WII). Details and imitations of the methods used are described in the section “ESTIMATION PROCEDURES", p. 23, ;OREDAVolume 4 Topside Equipment 16 OREDA-2008 (Tris pone tentionasy tet back) oREDAOREDA-2009 7 Volume 4 = Topside Equipment OREDA TOPSIDE DATA STRUCTURE ‘The structure of the OREDA topside database is described to better understand how the reliability data presented in this handbook are extracted and compiled. MAIN DATA CATEGORIES For each equipment category the database is split into three separate database files: an hwentory part, a Failure part, and a Maintenance part. ‘The Inventory part contains a description of each Equipment amit for which data have been collected. This description contains technical data (e.g. capacity. size) as well as some operating and environmental data (e.g. operating mode, vibrations). The inventory deseription for each equipment unit is stored in an Jnvemory record in the database. ‘The Failure part contains information about the failures recorded for the equipment unit (inventory) during the period of surveillance; one record for each failure event. The failure ‘events are always related to one equipment unit. In OREDA 2 failure event is defined as. piy-ical failure of equipment. This implies that all events where a work order is issued, and some maintenance action carried out, would be considered as failure (see the definitions on page 41) ‘The Maintenance part contains information about corrective and scheduled preventive maintenance program for each equipment unit (e.g, maintenance action, interval, man- hours). Data on correetive maintenance is related to its preceding failure, while data an preventive maintenance is related to the equipment unit. ‘The information recorded in the OREDA database is partly based on numeric data, partly on codes selected from a predefined menu, and partly on free text (sce Table 3) © OREDAVolume 4 - Topside Equipment 18 OREDA-2009 Table 3 ~ Failure and Maintenance Data Collected in OREDA Database FAILURE [MAINTENANCE Descrintion Format _| Description Format Wentification | Failure record Riumesic | Maintenance record nario Numeric at rmiber Equipment unt name | Text Cotresponsing tau recor no, amen Werk order number | Numeric | Equipment unit name Text Status Coco ist _| Stans Codie it Evert dota | Fature Satecion ote | Date ‘Maintenance date Date Faure mode CCose ist | staitenance category Coe it Severity class ‘Dede fist | Sub maintained Code it Fanure mechanism — | Cove tst | hems maintained Coe at Fture cause Coo ist | blaitensnes sezon Col ist Subunit fies ode ist ndenance interval (ero umes ‘atnienance ony) Maintainable tems) | Code ist | Maintenance manhaus, per daespine and | Numaie fale ‘otal Elure detection | Code lst | Active maintenance time Nunc ‘mated Faure consequence | Code tst | Downtime Numeric ‘Awaitonal | Spocsicremarke | Coc ist | Gpecife remanee coae ‘Cae at nfermaton | ede Aional este | Tex ‘Acktional roe wt ni Test ‘SYSTEM HIERARCHY ‘The topside system hierarchy is ilustrated in Figure 1, p. 20. © Equipment Category: Items are grouped into Equipment Class according to main function of the item (e.g. pumps, compressors, valves etc.), Items of an Equipment Class are further classified according to design characteristics and type of service. Table 4 gives an example for the equipment class Pumps and ite corresponding Design Class and Service (system) (e2, pump, centrifugal, combined function) with taxonomy no, © Equipment Unit: Each individual item within an Equipmen Class (e.g a pump) + Subunit: An item required for the Egniament Unit to perform its main function (e.g. power transmission, Iubriestion, control and monitoring). The subunits may be redundant, eg, two independent start units ‘+ Maintainable Item (MI): A subset of each Subst that will typically consist of the lowest level items that are due for preventive maintenance. ‘DOREDAOREDA-2009 18 Volume 4 ~ Topside Equipment Table 4 - Equipment Categories (Example) anaes cmaoncase al meraten | Tamm | aeipion | Remy | etn be Awe a oma ie a nr Corian cing | 1302 7 re Gude stern [tan eemenmeann [rate aiicoaaas 1a mare ‘any [ithe [4a aieen = [oicnee vats [ewemmeaae — cant aor ai Wate aheeg | tani Reciprocating 4.3.2 | Chemical injection 1324 cemes ae anaes 1388 enor fais ‘Water fire fighting 1325 al] tae [earner ‘Game equipmentcasses (ag Eictnc generar) are forher Gassiied acconing to fe siz of he enue) BOREOAVolume 4 = Topside Equipment 20 OREDA-2009 = ————— i Subunit 72 — _ a] Eee " * Subunit nd --[egeipment wait J fT satenitn2] | Wainainaie em nm __ | iaiainabie ear ” | nm? Figure 1 — Equipment hierarchy ‘Some subunits (e:2. Lubrication system) may be relevant for several equipment classes. In these ‘eases the subunits are given the same name and the same set of Mls. This is done in order to standandise the subunits/Mls as much as possible, although some of the Mis in these subunits may not apply for all equipment classes. EQUIPMENT BOUNDARIES For cach Equipment Class, an Exuipmons Boundary: has been defined to identify items that are part of the Equipment Class and to show the interface between these ftems and their surroundings. Items within Equjpment Boundary are considered ta be essential for the function Of the Equipment Unit and/or they are typically part of the Equipment Unit as-sold by the manufacturer. For example, the power transmission (e.g. gear) is included within the boundary for a pump, while the driver (eg. electric motor} is not. The boundary is normally sufficiently determined by a boundary diagram as illuswated in Figure 2, p. 21. Purther, a tabular description as shown in Table 5 lists those subunits and Mls that are included within the boundary, When establishing the boundaries, considerations were given to tag number principles used by the participating oil companies, Generally, equipinent \nits correspond to the companies' main tag level, while subunits. comespond to sub-tag levels. The following principles have been applied: 9. OREDAOREDA-2009 21 Volume 1 = Topside Equipment ‘© Connected units are genefafly not considered to be part of the equipment unit. Failures dat ‘occur int a conection (e.g. leak) are included vnless it is Imown specifically thot it bas ‘occurred on the connected item outside the boundary. ‘+ When a driver and the driven unit we common subunits (e.g, lubrication), feilures of the subunit are generally related to the driver unit. © Failures on drivers (e.g. gas turbine) and driven units (eg. compressars) are seconded for each equipment class separately. When e-2, 4 failure rate for a combination of driver and driven units is needed (e.g. compressors driven by gas turbines) the combined vatues from those two equipment classes should be used. ‘Failures on instrumentation ste only included if the instrumentation has specific control and/or monitoring finction for the equipment unit and/or is locally mounted (e.g. sensors). Instrumentation of & mere general use, such as supervisory system (SCADA) is not ila sate one wa Yen |mnm | mee | | ewe, Figure 2 — Boundary definition for pumps (example) eOREDAVolume 4 - Topside Equipment 22 OREDA-2009 ‘Table 5 - Maintainable Items for Pumps (Example) EQUIPMENT ae Puues ‘Subunt Power ‘Gantt ant | Lubriestion ‘eanamiasion | _Puneuit rmortoring pum | Mecetancom Mainiainable | Searing casing ‘Acuatna device | Cooter ‘Coolingteating on Ceuping ta [Cynder iner | Contos Fits eset rwaniet | apmeage | ‘Cyclone separator Coursna to ie supply lon Flange joins em re Rtonacing Puleation dames Geatow | PRiNE Piping variable cove | Piston Bees Pump ifn Lubrication —|aciatbearng [S208 Reser tne. a es Senso heating system) ‘sae Valves Seats roel Wiring \vawes, Thea bearing |vakes Tvs olinatumertsensor, «9, presse, temperature, level ete BOREDAOREDA-2009 2 Volume 1 Topside Equipment ESTIMATION PROCEDURES ‘The main purpose of the OREDA-2009 handhook is to present average failure rate estimates together with repair time estimates. This section presents a brief description of the statistical methods that are used FAILURE RATE ‘The failure rate function expresses how likely itis that an item that has survived +, will fail during the next unit of time. If the item is deteriorating, this likelihood will increase with the age «A man who has reached the age of 95 years will obviously have a higher probability of dying during the next year than a 20 years old man. The function will therefore usually be a function of the time - or, the age of the item. To give a mathematical definition of the failure rate function, we start with the time to failure, 7, of the iteta, Le. the time from the item is put into operation until the first failure ‘occurs. It is generally impossible to predict the exact value of the time to failure, and T will therefore be a randem variable with an associated distribution, The failure rate fonction, Af), may now be defined mathematically as: 1 2(f)= lim —P(t

re oo Tb ee ee re i Figure 5- julti-sample problem ‘To mesge ail the samples, and estimate the “average” fatlure rate as the total number of failures divided by the aggregated time in service will not always give an adequate result, ‘The ‘eonfidence’ interval will especially be unrealistically short, as illustrated iat Figure 5. We therefore need a more advanced estimation procedure to take carc of the multi-sample problem. Below, the so-called OREDA-cstimator of the “average” failure rate in a multi-sample situation is presented together with a 90% uncertainty interval. Spjotvoll (1985) gives rationale for the estimation procedure, ‘The OREDA-estimator is based on the following assumptions; © We have k different samples. A sample may e.g. correspond to an installation (facility), and we may have data ftom similar items used on k different installations, © In sample no. # we have observed n, failures during a total time in service 1, for PDs k Satnple no. j has a constant failure rate 2, f0F 1=1,2e 00k: Due te different operational and environmental conditions, the failure rate 2, may vary between the samples “The variation of the failure rate between samples may be modelled by assuming thatthe failure rate is a random variable with some distribution given by a probability density funetion 2). The mean, of “average” failure rate is then: @= [4-a() da and the varianee is: o* = [(a-By' (A) da 2 OREDAVolume 1 - Topside Equipment 28 OREDA-2009 ‘To calculate the multi-sample OREDA-cstimator, the following procedure is used: 1. Calculate an initial estimate @ of the mean (“average”) failure rate @ by pooling the data: Tonal noo files _ 2" ‘Total time in service “GS goat hd, r XS; when greater than 0, else 4, Calculate the final estimate # of the mean (“average”) failure rate @by: 5, Let SD= 6 Jn the data tables in Part IL of the handbook @ corresponds to the mean (column 4), and SD corresponds to the standard deviation (column 6). ©. OREDAOREDA-2009 28 Volume 4 ~ Topside Equipment “The Jower and upper “uncertainty” values are given by: oer J 704) d4=90% Since the distribution a4) is not known in advance, the following pragmatic approach is used: 6. (A) is assumed to be the probability density function of a Gamma distribution with parameters crand 7. The parameters cand are estimated by: B a@ 8 where cosjy aNd coos, denote the upper 95% and 5% percentiles, respectively, of the 7f-istribution with wdegrees of freedom, see Table 6, page 33. In situations where vis ‘not an integer, an interpolation in the z*-distribution is performed, Wore 1 More detailed analysis of the OREDA data (see Vatn 1993) has indicated that there may be 8 large variation between installations. The multi-sample OREDA estimator should therefore as a rule be used instead of the m/z estimator which assumes a homogeneous sample. The variation between the samples (installations) is measured by the standard deviation SD. Both the standard deviation atid the lower and upper uncertainty values describe the distribution over the failure rate, i.e. a2), The uncertainty interval should not be mixed up with a confidence interval. A confidence interval decreases with more data, ‘which is not the case for the uncertainty intervals given in this procedure, oREDAVolume 1 - Topside Equipment 0 OREDA-2009 Note 2, In the case of &~ 1, the procedure cannot be used. In this case the n/restimate is given for the mean, and the Jower and upper valves should be interprcied as a traditional 90% confidence interval Nowe 3: ‘The subdivision of the equipment in detailed taxonomy classes as shown in the data tables Will in several cases result in a very low population and/or no. of installations. In these cases it is obvious that the confidence in the data will be very low, The cimalyst must therefore examine the trade-off between data relevance and population size. We therefore recommend in these cases to use the given data with caution and find additional means to verify the confidence of the data, Some ways this can be done are by using/comparing data from a higher taxonomy level, checking other reliability data sources andor using expert judgement, Note 4: If no failures are observed for an item, the following approach is used to obtain lower, ‘mean and upper values for “All failure modes”: 1 Let 4, denote the failure rate estimate (“mean”) one level up in the wxonomy: hierarchy 2. Lot rdenote the total time in service (operational or calendar) for the item of interest 3, Let 4. 5. The standard deviation is given by 6. A 90% uncertainty interval is given by © OREDA3a Volum Altematively, the term “All failure modes" can be replaced with the failure mode of interest. ESTIMATION OF DEMAND PROBABILITIES If information about “number of demands” is given (see Section “Data Table, Reliability Data”, page 35) itis possible to estimate the demand probability, The demand probability is always related to one specific failure mode, for example critical fail to start. The maximum likelihood estimator of the demand rate 0 p= where » is the number of failures with the appropriate failure mode, and dis the number of demands, Note that in the data table presentations the demand probabilities may apparently look different, The teason for this is that in some cases there are registered “demand failures”, but the number of demands is not recorded for one or more inventories. For these inventories, the demand failures are not included in the total number of demand failures for rat data table. a ESTIMATION OF REPAIR TIMES Ih OREDA, data on three maintenance related ‘times’ are collected, ie. dows tinte, active repair time and restoration man-hours. The difference between the first two measures is illustrated in Figure 6. Figure 6 = Maintenance times (ISO 14224) Down rime includes the calendar time trom the equipment is being stopped until itis tested after a repair and ready for being reconnected to its intended service. This parameter is not included in the handbook, only in the OREDA database. @OREDAVolume 4 = Topsic ment OREDA-2009 Active maintemance’rematr time is the calendar time during which maintenance work is actually performed on the item, irrespective of the number of persons that may work in parallel. Data on this is scarce in the OREDA database and should therefore be used with, same caution in reliability analysis, The active repair time is estimated as the mean (average) af the available active repair times, Together with the mean, also the maximum value is presented, giving an indication of an upper limit of the active repair time, It should ‘be noted that this value becomes more robust as the sample size increases. In situations With few observation (times), @.g. less than 10, the maximum value should be applied with carefulness. Restoration man-howrs are the total man-hours used to restore an item to operational status after failure. These data do normally have a high fill-in degree in OREDA and estimates are given by mean (average) and maximum values. Note that an alternative presentation of repair data is by parameters in the lognormal distribution, which is commonly used as a distribution for repair time, ref. e.g. Rausand and. Hoyland (2004) ‘WeicuTinc OREDA-2009 Dara wiTH OTHER DATA Sources Ip many RAMS analyses, data may also be available from other sources than this hhandbook. For offshore RAMS analyses, the most obvious data source in addition to this book, is the previous handbooks. A method for weighting data from e.g. OREDA-2002 and OREDA-2009 is given below, The method is based on an approach suggested in the OREDA Dats Analysis Guidelines (Vain 1993), The calculations are repeated for all failure modes of interest. Let Ay denote the mean failure rate for Phase VI and VII data (column 4 of the data table) in the OREDA-2009 handbook. Further, let SDy denote the standard deviation ($D) in column 6 of the data table. do is the corresponding mean in the OREDA-2002 handbook. A weighted failure rate ‘estimate is given by: _asa(g se Ale, 4orag(¥f, seals, . SD, ) where [s| dehotes the absolute value of x. BOREDAOREDA-2008 33 Volume 4 = Topside Equipment PERCENTAGE POINTS OF THE CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION ‘Table 6 —Percentage Points of the Chi-square (f') Distribution FIZ > Fay) Via 0.995 0.990 0.975 0. 005 025 1 0.00 0.00 000 3S. 2 O01 0.02 00S O10 599 738 10.60 3 007 O11 022 035 781 935 4 021 030 048 O71 949 1114 14.86 5 O41 055 O83 LIS ILO? 1238 16.75 6 O68 087 124 164 1259 1445 18.55 7 099 124 169 217 1407 16.01 20.28 8 134 Les 218 1351 17.583 21.96 9 173 200 2.70 1692 19,02 23.59 1 216 256 325 394 1831 20.48 235.19 1 260 3.05 457 19.68 21.92 26.76 12 «307 357 523 2103 23.34 28.30 30437 41 589 2236 24,74 29.82 4 407 4.66 657 23,68 26.12 3132 IS 4.60 5.23 726 25.00 27.49 32.80 6 514 5.81 796 26.30 28.85 34.27 17 570 641 867 2759 30.19 35,72 18 626 7.01 823 930 2887 31.53 37.16 19 684 7.63 891 1012 3014 32.85 38.58 20 743 (826 959 1085 SL4l 34.17 40.00 21-803 8.90 1028 1159 3267 35.48 41.40 22 8G 954 1098 1234 33.92 36.78 42.80 23° 926 10.20 1169 13.09 3517 3808 4164 44.18 24 989 10.86 1240 1385 3642 39.36 42.98 45.56 25 1052 11.82 1312 1461 37.65 40.65 4431 46.93 26 11.16 12.20 1384 1538 3889 41.92 45.64 48.20 27 1181 1288 1457 1615 40.11 43.19 46.96 49.64 28 1246 13.56 1531 16.93 41.34 44.46 48.28 50.99 29 1312 14.26 1605 17.71 42:56 45.72 49.59 52.34 30 13.79 14.95 16.79 1849 43.77 46.98 50.89 53.67 40 20.71 2216 2443 2651 55.76 59.34 63.69 66.77 $0 27.99 29.71 3236 34.76 67.50 71.42 76.15 79.49 60 35.53 3748 4048 4319 79.08 83.30 8838 91.95 10 43.28 45.44 48.76 S174 90.53 95.02 10042 104.22 80 S117 S354 STIS 60.39 101.88 106.63 112.33 11632 90 $9.20 61.75 65.65 69.13 113.14 T1814 12412 12830 1006733 70,06 74.22 7793 124.34 129.56 _135.81_140.17 ooREDAVolume 4 - Topside Equipment 34 ‘OREDA-2009 (This page ineetionaty ben bari ORENOREDA-2008 35. ‘Volume 4 - Topside Equipment TOPSIDE DATA TABLE FORMATS: Dara TaBLe, RELIABILITY DATA Each data table contains an identification of the item and the estimated reliability Parameters. The figures provided should be intespreted on the basis of the assumptions specified in the boundary definition for cach equipment category and the estimation method applied. The format of the data tables is shown in Figure 7. Taaanamy ee Te Popaston | Wailnions “Ragas a nar PA Wao domanee ‘alongs ree Tale med Toot Tal ab ee 1 Rou Teiverep as | Wana tauree|Cowar [ Wan [Upper [80 [ahr | Moan [ Mx [Ween [ee Figure 7 - Fos of the reliability data tables ‘The various entries of the data table are explained in the following: Taxonomy nuinber and Hei Numerical identification of the equipment unit. The taxonomy number has. been chosen to comply with previous handbooks. Population Tota] number of equipment units forming the basis for the reliability estimates. Installations ‘Total number of installations (facilities) covered by the data surveillance for the equipment unit. OREDAVolume 1 - Topside Equipment 6 OREDA-2008 Axgregated tine In service ‘Two types of time scales are presented as the basis for the failure rate estimates; Calendar ime anc Operational time. The aggregated time in service for the total population is given for both time scales. Note that while the calendar time is given with high certainty, the operational time has in many cases to be based on estimates (by the data collector), Tt will also be noted that for some equipment there is great differences between calendar time and operational time. This is typical for equipmient being oceasionally started and operated for some time only (e.g. fre pumps) Equipment being tainly used for on/off functions (e.g. valves) are considered to be in an operational state as long as they are in a status ready to be used on demand. Number of demands The accumulated number of demands/cycles for the total population is given when available. In several cases these numbers. are based on estimates and not accurate measurements. Failure mode / Severity class ‘This column contains a brief description of the manner in which the failure occurred, when such information is available. The failure modes are given for each Severity class, i.¢, Critical, Degraded, Tacipient and Unknown. Number of failures Total number of recorded failures for each faiture mode. The accumulated number of failures is presented as “All modes”, Failure rate Estimated failure rate is given both under the “multi-sample” assumption, and the assumption of homogeneous data sets. In the “multi-sample” situation the failure rate is assumed to vary between installations, and cach installation represents one sample. Assuming homogenous data sets, the failure rites of various installations are identical. The following entries are incinded: Mean ‘The failure rate obtained by the OREDA estimator, i.¢. the mean failure rate among the installations for which data have been collected, dower, Upper) A 90% uncertainty interval for the failure rate, ie. an interval covering ‘90% of the variation between the multiple samples. SD A standard deviation indicating the variation between the multiple sampies. we ‘The total number of failures divided by the total time in serviee, ie, the failure rate estimate we would use for a homogeneous sample. All the entries are measured per 10° hours and refer to calendar time. e-OREDAOREDA-2008 a ‘Volume 1 = Topside Equipment Note: Failire rate values greater than or equal to 0,01 (per 10° hour) are given with two decimals places and failure rate values less then 0.01 (per 10° hour) and equal to or greater than 0.0001 (per 10° hour) are given on “E-* format, ¢.g. 1E-4 means 1.010" = 0.0001, For very. small failure rates, there is little meaning in presenting exact estimates. Therefore failure rates less than 1E-1 (per 10° hour), ie. failure rates with magnitude 10" or less are marked with Aesive repatr time (hours) ‘The active repair time columns present the mean and maximum calendar time (hours) required to repair and retum the item to a state where it is ready to resume its functions, Active repair time is the time when actual repair work is being done, It does not include time to shut down the unit, issue work order, wait for spare pars, start-up after repair etc. The active repair time is therefore normally shorter than the dawatime Whee some of the activities indicated bove may be included. Repair values that are estimated from 10 or less observations are marked with “+ Note. During the data collection exercises it has been very difficult to obtain data regarding active repair times, In the OREDA database there is @ good coverage of “restoration man-hours” data, whereas the data for “active repair time” is rather sparsc. It should also be noted that active repair hours are highly influenced by how maintenance is organised an the facility. ‘The figures for active repair times should therefore only be used as an indication of what the actual active repair times would be. It is highly recommended to use some kind of ‘expert judgement in addition to the values given in the handbook. ‘Manhours (repair) ‘The repair columns present the mean (average) value and the maximum value of the total repair times (manhours). The repair manhours represent the total sum of manhours spent by the maintenance personnel for the repair work. Repair manhours that are estimated from 10 or less observations are marked with "+", Note: Repair values are given with one decimal (for values < 10) or as integers (for values 2 10). ‘This has been found to be the most readable format the space limitation of the columns being considered. Comments When data have been available, the on-demand failure probability is given in the Comment field, DATA TABLE, MAINTAINABLE ITEM VERSUS FAILURE MODE The reliability data presented in the data table in Figure 7 p. 35, does not give information on which part of the equipment that bas failed, In the Motntainable item versus Failure ‘mode listing the relative contribution from each maintainable item to the total failure rate may be obtsined, The figures in the table represent percentages of occurrence for cach ©OREDAVolume 4 = Topside Equipment 38 OREDA-2009 combination of failure mode and maintainable item. The row sum represents the total percentage of failures that are related to the actual maintainable item. Note that several maintainable items might be assigned to each failure record, In such situations, the “score” for the actual maintainable itemfailure mode combination is set to U/n, where m is the number of maintainable items listed for that failure record. The column sum represents the Contribution for each failure mode in percentages. ‘This information is valuable input to an FMEA‘FMECA analysis. The FMEA/FMECA analysis is further a major part ofa reliability centred maintenance (RCM) analysis. As the RCM methodology focuses on failure causes, it is also important to have information regarding failure causes as discussed in the next section. Note that several maintainable items might be assigned to each failure reeard. Note 1 ‘The data tables ‘only those failure modes where failures ate registered Note 2: For some of the equipment classes the tables Mainiainable items versus Failure mode are split on two or more tables depending on the number of different failure modes. The column Maintainable item is then repeated after each split. Note 3: ‘The values in the tables are given with two decimals, This is done in order to present data in a. common format. It should be kept in mind that such accursey in the figures result from the calculated percentage distribution in the collected data, and do not reflect the real accuray in the collected data, DATA TABLE, FAILURE MECHANISM VERSUS FAILURE MODE In the Failure Mechanism versus Failure Mode listing, the relative contribution from each Failure Mechanism (cause) to the total failure rate may be obtained, The figures in the table represent percentages of occurrence for each combination of Failure Mechanism and. Failure Mode, The row sum represents the total percentage of fallures that are related to the actual Failure Mechanism. The column sum represents the contribution for each Failure Mode in percent. ‘As mentioned above, the information about failure causes is essential in an RCM analysis. For example scheduled replacement of units is only applicable if one or more failure causes may be related to ageing, wear, corrasion etc. Note “The data tables list only those failure modes where failures are registered. Note 2: For some of the equipment classes the tubles Failure mechanism versus Failure mode ate split on two or more tables depending on the number of different failure modes. The ‘column Failure mechanism is then repeated after each split, BOREDAOREDA-2009 39 Volume 1 - Topside Equipment Note 3: ‘The values in the tables are given with two decimals. This is done in order to present data in 4 comirion forntat, It should be kept in mind that such accuracy in the figures result from the calemlared percentage distribution in the collected data, and do not reflect the real accuracy inthe collected data. ‘BoREDAVolume 1 - Topside Equipment 40. OREDA-2009 (This page interionaly let ian). BOREDAOREDA-2009 4 ‘Volume 1 - Topside Equipment DEFINITIONS® The main terminology used in the OREDA-2009 handbook is defined in this section. The specific definitions of the terminology and parameters used in the statistical estimation procedures are included in the section "ESTIMATION PROCEDURES" p, 23. Terms marked with (C) are categorised in pre-defined codes. Active repair time ‘That part of the maintenance time during which a maintenance action is performed on an item, either automatically or manually, excluding logistic delays. This excludes the time to detect the failure, time to isolate the equipment from the process before repair, delay and waiting for spare parts or tools, and any time after the repair has been completed ifthe item isnot put into service immediately. Tinie for testing is included when such testing is an integrated part of the repair activity. For a more detailed description and interpretation of maintenance times, see Figure 6,p.31 Boundary ‘The interface between an item and its surroundings. Catendar time ‘The interval of time between the start and end of data collection for a particular item. Equipment unit ‘The highest indenture level including subunits and smaller entities belonging to that equipment nit, Fallure The termination or the degradation of the ability of an item to perform its re function(s) (see below). It inetudes: © Complete failure ofthe item. © Failure of part of the item that causes unavailability of the item for corrective action. © Failure discovered during inspection, testing, or preventive maintenance that requires repair, = Failure on safety devices or control/monitoring devices that necessitates shutdown, or reduction of the items capability below specified limits, ‘The following outages are not considered as faites: © Unavailability due to preventive.or planned maintenance, ‘© Shutdown of the item due to extemal conditions, or where no physical failure condition of the item is revealed. A shutdown is not to be considered a failure unless there is some recorded maintenance activity. ‘Defiitons related to this Handbook: wil also be found in the standards ISO 14224 and ISO .20815, ©OREDAVolume 1 - Topside Equipment 42 OREDA-2009 ‘A required function is defined as any fimction necessary to maintain the item's capability of providing its output at specified capacity and quality. Note that a failure could be either Complete loss of function or function degradation below an azceptable limit. A filure will normally require a work order and involvement by maintenance person. Failure mechanisnt (C) ‘An attribute of the failure event that can be easily deduced technically. The failure mechanism is the apparent, immediate cauve of the failure and is related to the fowest level in the hierarchy where it can be identified. Failure mode () ‘The effect by which a failure is observed on the failed unit. The failure modes describe the loss of required system function(s) that result from failures, or an undesired change in state or condition. The failure made is related to the equipment unit level. The failure mede is a description of the various abnormal stotes/conditions of an equipment unit, and the possible transition from correct to incorrect state. Note that the failure mode can be grouped in three main categories (ref. ISO 14224): 4) desited function is nor obrained (e.g. fail to stan): bb) specified function fost or outside accepted operational limits (@.. spurious stop, high output); ) 1 failwre indication is observed, but there is no immediate and critical impact on equipment unit function. These are typical non-eritical failures related to some degradation or ineipient fault condition (e.g, initial wear). Hem A common term used to denote any level of hardware assembly; Le. equipment unit, subunit, maintainable items and parts. Maintainabte trem (C) -An item that constitutes an assembly of parts that are normally the lowest indenture level during maintenance, Number of demands ‘The total number of times an item is required to perform its specified function(s) during the calendar time. The number of demands shall include beth test demands and demands from safety or process activation ‘Operational time The period of time during which a particular item performs its required function(s) between, the start and end of deta surveillance, Equipment being mainly used for ov/off functions (e.g. valves) are considered to be in’ an ‘operational state as long as they are in a status ready to be used on demand. @OREDAOREDA-2008 43 Volume 1 — Topside Equipment Population The total number of items of one particular type im service during the period of the event data surveillance. ‘Sample ‘The group of items of one particular type in service - described by its taxonomy code - on one instaltation during the period of the event data surveillance. ‘Severity Class Fypes (C) Each failure is categorised within one out of the four following severity classes: CRITICAL FAILURE: & failure which emuses immediate and complete loss of an equipment unit's capability of providing its output. DEGRADED FAILURE: A failure which is not critical, bur it prevents an equipment unit from providing its output within specifications, Such a failure would usually, but not necessarily, be ‘gradual or partial, and may’ develop into a critical faihure in time, INCIPIENT FAILURE: A failure which does not immediately cause loss of a unit's capability of providing its output, but which, if not attended to, could result in a critical or degraded failure in the near future. UNKNOWN; Failure severity was not recorded or could not be deduced. ‘The severity class is used to describe effect ion operational status and the severity of loss of output froin the unit, Each failure has been associated with only one severity class, critical, degraded, incipient or unknown, independently of the failure mode and failure cause. The severity classification is confined to the lacation and use of the equipment wait that has failed. Subunis (C) An assembly of items that provides a specific function that is required for the equipment Lunt to achieve its intended performance. Corresponds frequently with sub-tag number(s). Taxonomy (C) A systematic classification of items into generic groups based on factors possibly common to several of the items. e.g. functional type or medium handled, OREDA