Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Life Cycle Analysis

    Uploaded by

    Yip
    6 views25 pages

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    6 views25 pages

    Life Cycle Analysis

    Uploaded by

    Yip

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 25
    ag ScienceDirect Life Cycle Analysis Life cycle analysis (LCA) is a way of quantifying the environmental impact generated by a product or a process [1 From: Recyling of Polyethylene Terephthalate Battles, 2018 Related terms: Life Cycle Analysis Drsduardo Calisto In Gas and Ol Reablty Engineering, 2012 1.1 Quantitative Failure data Analysis Reliability the probability that apiece of equipment, product, or service will be successful fora specie amount atime. To define the reliably of piece of ‘equipment, produc, or service, itis necessary to ellect historia failure data, Therefore, the ‘overtime and to define flue rate, eibilty, avalablty, and me time to failure (MTT) to best ime inspections and maintenance and to see if equipment i 1 step in life yc analysis i to understand how failures occur achieving reliably To conduct lifecycle analysis its necessary to have historical data about filure rmades. The failure mode is the way 8 piece of equipment or product loses part or total capacty to conduct its function Many companies inthe oiland gas industry and other industries do not have historical data for their equipment, and sore equipment suppliers have no historical fllure data for their products. Therefore, the frst step in eiaility applications isto collet data, but in many cases the engineer who needs the data for life cycle analysis isnot the same person who fixes or performs maintenance on the equipment and collects the data, The main point i that some companies have historical data and others do not [An environment fr assessing root cause analysis and soling problems a well = making decisions based on reliable information makes the data clletion process ang the creation of historical data reports very important. For companies that do not have data to make decisions, the fist step is creating historical data reports before carying out ife cycle analysis. When doing so, managers must be aware ofthe importance of collecting equipment lure data and also instructing and supporting employees tod so. Moreover, employees ‘must be trained in collecting data and making decisions based on reliable data This is a big challenge for most companies, because even when procedures and programs are established, itis necessary to collect, assess, and store filure data in files and reports fr access ltr. Depending on the system, collecting failure data depends on maintenance and inspection routines, and this data collection process often competes with other activites. In the ol and gas industry, equipment generally does not havea high frequency offilure, which enables employees to more easily collect and work with ‘equipment failure data For many reliability professionals historical failure data means a celibility index, ‘which includes failure rate, reliably, avalabiltyefcieney, MTTF, or POF (erababilty density Function) parameters, For inspection and professionals, historical fllre data means Ses with services described by type of failure of occurrence, time to repair, date, and recommendations. Infact ifthere are no celiablity index ang POF parameters for canducting reliably analysis, this data must be created by celiabilty specialists based on available data In reality, ‘creating the datas the frst step oflife cycle anasie, and then defining the relabilty index based on this data, The best scenario, of course is that the relabilty index and POF parameters are available for reliability professionals, but this is not usually the ease. tenance ‘Thus, two points of view among reliability profesional ae discussed ll over the world the relibilty index and PDF parameters must be defined in a report to make analysis easier, or index and PDF parameters must be caleulated and updated for specialists. When reliably professionals assess PDF parameters from reports, the chance of eros greater than when comparing them with defined parameters based on historical data. Despite the tie required to asses files creating historical data reports before and crest the PDF parameters and then reliability inde, life cycle analyss based om historical date and failure root are more reliable because they ae better understood and updated more frequenth. [Another important point is that equipment PDF characteristics change overtime land PDFs must be assessed whenever 2 falure occurs, eventhough there's a relabilty index. Thus, the fallure data reports must be updated from time to time. Additionally, new equipment has diferent life cytes overtime, nd this information needs tobe updated, which makes the reliability index cumbersome. To conduct lifecycle analysis the following data, classed by configuration is recuired + Individual or grouped data + Complete data + Right suspension data + Leftsuspension data + Interval data Individual data is data from one piece of equipment only and grouped historical data comes from more than one piece of similar equipment, Inthe first case, the main objective i to assess equipment fr lif cycle analysis and historical falure data from one piece of equipment is enaugh, but uch equipment should have 2 certain quantity of data fr reliable lifecycle analysis. In some cases there's not ‘enough historical data and it is necessary to lok at a similar piece of equipment \ith a similar function and operational condition ta crest the historical allure cata In real life ts not alays easy to find similar equipment, because in many ‘cases maintenance, operational, and process conditions interfere onthe equipment fe eye. ln cases where reliability analysis is conducted during the projet phase, similarity is easier to obtain because operational conditions, pros maintenance procedures are similar to project requirements. However, to increase the relibilty of fe cycle analysis, historical grouped data must be used, and inthis ‘case requites considering more than one piece of similar equipment to create PDFS for the equipment assesse. It is also necessary to validate equipment similar and in projects thsi leo easier. ses, and \When historical data defined when the failure occus, the datas called complete, ‘case tis necessary to establish atime measure (hours, days, months, yeasts esential to know the ial operation time, that is, when the equipment life cyte began, Caution must be used when defining the inital operation time, because in some equinment there ea diferent start time since it has changed over time, Maintenance and operational data in many cases helps to validate the intial ‘operation time. In some cases, equipment has no fllure data reports and it appears that the first failure occured after 5 or 10 years, but in reality no fallures have been reported. Figure 1-1 shows diferent failure modes data for pumps 4 Falure Mose x Tne Sel esonng | +> oe =| i Rotor t + > Ti0.8 FIGURE 1-1, Pump data failure modes Such information is assessed from fallure data reports, which include root cause of failure, repair time, and recommendations, as shown in Figure 1-2. There are mary types of reports, but when failure mades ae defined its easier for everyone to understand what happened, why it happened, and to assess ithe recommendations conducted solved the fallures, When defining failure modes, all ‘employees should understand what each ofthe failure modes mean otherwise, some filure mades will be deserbed incorrectly. Sarnetimes its difficult 1 define the fallure mode, and in this ease itis easier to put the general flure mode as “othe: for the classification. However, that must be avoided whenever possible because it des net help identify and solve problems or improve equipment. Equipment Fallre Report [Baur arrocoor —Equp Tag 6-114001A — wanagenant Dynan arianarce Jeot_ass nal: land Nunes inspect Corectve [Pryarned] —_ Predcive Type tinteenten: |"*°°°" htartenance Marteance] — Nairerance Data citation — 20008 Tne oimrvesion_ 8h Data cf tat service 127072004 Tine cf slat serine: 9b Data oth service: 12/072004 Tinaof sh serie : 10h Flue Mooe Types Ten Rest Cause [f-Beal eae | Purp operation over hat specie rote [p= Bearng [s-Stat I4- Role 5 Eecriemote [- Vraion F-impetr [3- Rings soon [a= Gaskets id Spey afar FIGURE 1-2. Equipment failure report. The ather possibilty sto use electronic failure reports which have the allowing advantages: + Can be consulted for diferent sites; + Can be updated automaticaly, ‘+ Support ie cyle analysis automaticaly + Save maintenance and reliability specialist time in lifecycle analysis Despite those advantages it is necessary to train people to input data in electronic reports. Additionaly, electronic reports often do nt have the same details 25 paper reports and in some cases tis can influence important decisions. Information security is anather concern because electronic reports are easier to access and copy than paper reports The disadvantages of using electron reports include: + Have fewer details, 1+ May have errors because in some cases the person whe inputs the data isnot the one who assessed the equipment failure: +f there isan electronic system fllure the electronic report cannot be accessed; + Depending on the particular case if here isan error in the ines, such 35 failure rate or reliability, itis necessary to check the mathematics used to comple the report. For data configuration, in come cases, when some ofthe equipment used to create the PDFs have nt failed in the observed time it is considered right censured data land must be considered in the analysis. In real lif, in many cases this data is often not taken into account, but it can influence the reliability index. ‘The other type of data configuration is when there's some data that fallure occurred before specific time, and there's no information about when such flure ‘occured, This happens most often when failure reports ae configured after ‘equipment operation start time, While it may seem thatthe equipment had high reliability, in realty there were unreported failures at the beginning ofthe ‘equipment Ife cle. A good example is what happens in one cial equipment life «cycle analyss, coke formation in a furnace expected to happen every 6 months. [ter loking t the failure report, the POF that inciates frequency ofalures over time was concentrated in 4 years, ttally different ftom what project engineers ‘expected. After consulting the operator it was confirmed the equipment filed every ‘6 months, but the falures were not reported 3t the beginning of hele ce Figute 1-3 shows diferent PDFs from reported failures data and real data. The PDF characteristic will be dicussed in the following section, but looking at Figure 2-3 itis possible to see how diferent the POF s and how it cannot be used to make decisions. Probably Density Functon 02 008 04 Tie (9 FIGURE 1-3. Furnace POF (coke formation). [Another hstrial data configuration is when theres no exact information about when equipment failure occurred but the interval ofilure time and tis type of data are called interval data. In many cases this is considered enough information todo lifecycle analysis, but in some other cases isnot. Figure 1-4 shows equipment failure occurences in different intervals overtime Fallure Mode x Time Gas Seal Turbine Electric Motor T1909 Trg? T85 Te98 FIGURE 1-4, Turbine failures in interval data, In many cases that kind of flue data configuration can be obtain fram maintenance and operation specialist opinions even when data isnot reported This is most often the case when equipment fallures are net reported, but when it ‘occurs the impact on the system is great. ‘The big challenge in life cycle analysis is working with data when there's not much wilable, or the data avilable isnot reliable enough to be considered. In this case, specialist opinion ean be used to define the POF parameters, and there ae some techniques ta estimate the variable value fom specialist opinion + Aggregated individual method: In this method, expert do not meet but make ‘estimates individually, These estimates are then aggregated statistically by {aking the geometric mean ofall the individual estimates for each task ‘+ Delphi method: n this method, experts make their assessments individually and then all the assessments are shown to all he experts and then the parameter values are defined forthe group. + Nominal group technique: This method i similar tothe Delphi method, but after the group discussion, each expert makes his or her own assessment ‘These assessments are then statistically aggregated. + Consensus group method: In this methed, each member contributes tothe discussion, but the group a a whole must then arsive tan estimate upon which all members ofthe group agree. + Bayesian inference methodology: This method isa mathematical approach applied to estimating variable values (posterior vaable values) based on prior knowledge (Le. taking into acount ll specialist opinions and prior knowledge to estimate variable values a¢explined below). ‘The aggregated individual method requires mathematic treatment using the ieometric mean to define the final variable vale. In ths way, the weight of each individual opinion will highly influence the results. Such approach is indicated when there is heterogeneous knawledge among specialists about the estimated ‘arable valu. This approach is helpful when ite dificlt to get a value consensus forthe specialist group, but caution is requied when defining specialist opinion weight ‘The Delphi method requires that specialists know other specialists’ opinions and «assess until the ciscussed point is agreed upon (in this case a variable value), With specialists in different places to get opinions, and this process is repeated until consensus is achieved. Tis approach can be difficult because there is na discussion about conflicting opinions, and itis not always clest why a specialist defines a diferent value, Despite this, this method isa good option when its net possible forall specialists to meet. In some cases for example, specialist send back the questionnaires after the third sequence, and is necessary to take into account their opinion and decide the value ofthe variable this approach, files are sent: ‘The nominal group ts nique is similar to the Delphi method but after a group discussion specialists give thelr own opinions about variable values and then those ‘values af statistically assessed, Depending on the variance between variable values there might be a higher or lower eror expectation, When specialists have similar ‘opinions, there's not significant variance inthe variable value resul, ‘The consensus group method requires that specialists discus the values (after their ‘own individual analyses) with other specialists and then come toa conclusion about ideal parameter values. This approach is helpful because all specialist are given the opportunity to discuss their opinion and details can be discussed. This approach i most common when there is known equipment but nofallure data analysis In uch an approach it's necessary to pay attention tothe operational and 1 specialist is basing his or her opinion an. A good ‘example is when one specialist states his opinion about heat exchanger inrustation and says it happens in 3 years with ha-year deviation. ln an effort to better understand his opinion other specialists asked about which period of time he was taking into account, and he describes what he saw inthe lst 5 to 10 years, maintenance conditions But this equipment had been in use for 20 years. Figure 1-5 shows the difference ‘of specialist opinions in terms offequency of incrusation in the heat exchanger. The difference in these results is very influential Probatilly Density Funcion 12 0, OSH eset eee ees 024 1 08 28 ‘ee 282 Ey Tine, FIGURE 1-5. Specialist A (Normal w= 55 (Gumbel y=20;0=0.5, 5) and the other specialist opinion Bayesian inference methodology is 2 mathematical approach applied to defining ‘atable values based on priori knowledge to estimate posterior variable values (all specialist opinions are considered and prior knowledge is used t est ‘arable values), This state i epresented bythe Bayes equation, 2s follows P(aip) = "ee — oer, ‘This equation can aleo be represented as: = FRE) _ PEA) (OE) = Fey = Traian) where: (0B) = Posterior knowledge, which represents uncertainty about 8 after the known Evalue, nO ior knowledge, before the known Evalue. PCB) Applying specials opinion itis possible to estimate the @ value. Such an approach is often used in drilling projects in Brail to define the probability of an event when risk analysis is being conducted. In this case, that approach is adequate because historical failure data from other dil isnot celiable because ofthe existing taxi likelihood of specialist opinion. diferent conditions for each dil After looking at diferent types of data configuration and specialist opinion techniques the next step is to create the PDFs and assess the data characteristics, Thus, data characteristics can be individual, grouped, complete, right suspension, lef suspension in interval ofa combination ofthese configurations, In addition, data can also be multicensored. That happens when due to any reason a ‘component or piece of equipment under lifecycle analysis is censored (maintenance, change in policy, energy breakdown, ete) without the necessary analysis time. This type of dats is eommon for standby equipment where the main ‘equipment i operated fora period oftime and then the standby equipment is thy there will be fllure and suspense data for substituted for operation. Conseque diferent periods oftime. Another important diffrence in data characteristics is between repairable and nonrepaiable equipment. When we're cansiering nanrepairable equipment or ‘components, when such afllure occu, a new piece of equipment is introduced and 4 new inital time has to be established to calculate failure time, This happens ‘only when 2 component or piece of equipment is considered as good as new. Such ‘an assumption is hard to make in rel life, even though when a component is new because processes, maintenance, and operational actions sill afect the equipment Ie ele. When a human error in component assembly accurs, for example it is ‘common to have failure ina couple of hous after replacement even when failure, sed on historical dats, is expect after some years. Such flue times cannot be ‘considered in life cyle analysis, but when a “good as new" assumption is being taking into account, such data wil influence PDF shape. In some cases, equipment that would be tepresented for a POF shape with lure at the end ofthe lifecycle will be represented by 2 POF shape with filure atthe beginning ofthe lifecycle. For repairable equipment or components common in the oil and gas industry, each failure must consider inital ime (70) when the equipment began eperation to

    You might also like