Best practices for fieldbus and hart project implementation and lifecycle benefits realization lo brien arc orlando 2008
Best PB t Practices for Fieldbus & HART ti f Fi ldbProject Implementation & Lifecycle Benefits Realization ARC Forum February 2008 By Larry O’Brien O Brien firstname.lastname@example.org
Outline♦ The Future Potential for Fieldbus and HART♦ What are the Installed Cost Benefits? h h ll d fi♦ What are the Lifecycle Cost Benefits?♦ What are Best Practices for Project Success?♦ What are Best Practices for Lifecycle Success?♦ Panel Discussion/Q&A
Fieldbus & HART are a Permanent Fixture on theAutomation Landscape♦ Market for Fieldbus Products and Services for the Process Industry (Profibus PA and Foundation Fieldbus) is growing rapidly and there is already a large installed base.♦ Installed base of HART devices is already in the tens of millions and growing.♦ Fieldbus and HART are both part of the purchase specifications of most major companies in the oil and gas, chemical, and other industries.♦ Anyone who is still “Waiting to see” what happens in this market is already missing out on big p potential.
Installed Base of HART Devices 55 Million Devices in 2005 35% 13% 11% 2% 39% HART Fieldbus Proprietary 4-20mA + Pneumatic Smart Non - Smart Only Ab t T O l About Ten Percent of HART Devices Installed are Working P t f D i I t ll d W ki To their Full Operating Potential
What are the Benefits? Installed Cost Remote I/O Cost Fieldbus Percent System Cost Differential System Cost Difference Electrical 140,000€ 0€ 140,000€ 0.0% Analyzers 140,000€ 0€ 140,000€ 0.0% Project Management 280,000€ 280 000€ 0€ 280,000€ 280 000€ 0.0% 0 0% Field Devices 770,000€ 4,489€ 774,489€ 0.6% I/O System 420,000€ -76,212€ 343,788€ -18.1% DCS Incl. Engineering 525,000€ -24,795€ 500,205€ -4.7% Installation 700,000€ -10,732€ 689,268€ -1.5% Calibration/Quality 140,000€ -5,976€ 134,024€ -4.3% Commissioning (IBS) 105,000€ -2,400€ 102,600€ -2.3% Engineering 280,000€ -9,076€ 270,924€ -3.2% Total All Process I&C 3,500,000€ -124,702€ 3,375,298€ -3.6%
What are the Benefits? Installed CostAbility to Replicate Common Applications Cost was Additional No Savings Project Overheads Little Savings Medium Savings Project Management Significant Savings Easier P&ID Diagrams Reduced System Complexity Reduced Hardw are Footprint Documentation Costs System Costs Maintenance Personnel Training Costs Operator Training Costs Wiring Costs Device/Instrumentation Costs FAT or SAT Time to CompletionFront End Engineering and Design Costs Commissioning Costs and Checkout Reduced Overall Time to Startup 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38
Real Advantages of Fieldbus & HART are inLifecycle & Operational Costs 100% 80% 60% 40% Initial Costs Maintenance & 20% Operation Costs 0% Initial Costs Represent Only 20% of Total Cost of Ownership
What are the Primary Lifecycle Cost Benefits? Cost was Additional Tighter Control of the Process No Savings Little Savings Medium Savings Increased Accuracy of Devices Significant SavingsIncreased Interoperability and Ability to Choose Devices from Different Suppliers Increased System Availability y y Increased Return on Installed Assets Prolonged Asset Life Incident Avoidance or Avoidance of Unplanned Dow ntime Better Process Visibility Improved Response Times Enhanced Effectiveness of the Automation System 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26
Lifecycle Cost Benefits Continued: Maintenance Cost Benefits Cost was Additional Reductions in Fixed Maintenance Costs No Savings Little Savings Medium Savings Reduction in Variable Maintenance Costs Significant Savings Increased Efficiency and Ease of Change Management Easier and Faster De ice Replacement Upgrade Device Replacement,Identify Problems Before they Happen, Predictive Maintenance Strategy Reduced Spare Parts Inventory Reduced Number of Unnecessary Trips to the Field by a Technician Enhanced Process Diagnostics Enhanced Device Diagnostics 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26
The Maintenance Opportunity Should not beUnderestimated 35% 63% of maintenance labor 35% results in no action!! 30% 28% 25% 20% 20% 15% 10% 6% 6% 4% 5% 0% Routine No Calibration Zero Off Plugged Failed check Problem shift lines Source: Shell Global Solutions
Who is Realizing the Benefits? 5 Very High Return on Investment 14 Achieved Return on Investment 24 Not Sure 6 Did Not Y t A hi N t Yet Achieve Return on Investment B t E R t I t t But Expect T t To 25.5 % 6 Did Not Achieve Return on Investment and Do Not Expect To 9.1 % 10.9 %43.6 % 10.9 % Most Are Unclear on the Long Term Economic Benefits They Are Achieving
How Long Did It Take to Achieve Full Return onInvestment? 2 0-3 Months 3 4-6 Months 5 7-9 Months 5 10-12 Months 3 12-18 Months 14.3 % 0 19-24 Months 23.8 % 3 Over two years 9.5 % 14.3 %23.8 % 0.0 % 14.3 % Almost Half of Respondents Achieved a Full Return in Under a Year
Best Practices for Project Success:Why Do Fieldbus Projects Fail?♦ Poor Planning/Pre FEED Stage Involvement♦ Lack of Employee Buy In k f l♦ Lack of Management Buy In♦ Lack of PAM Solution Deployment♦ Lack of an Experienced Engineering Partner♦ Lack of an Experienced Supplier Partner♦ Lack of Proper Training
Proper Training & Education is essential No single standard available Lack of management buy-in Lack of employee buy-in Lack of field workforce knowledge Increased training costs Strongly Agree Agree Insufficient host system functionality Neutral Disagree Multivendor interoperability issues Strongly Disagree Not proven in mission critical apps Initial cost is too high Lack of supplier support/commitment Not enough products available 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Lack of field workforce knowledge is key limiting factor in fieldbus implementation
Up Front Planning is Essential to Success♦ Get the Involvement of the Supplier and Partners ASAP♦ Avoid the “Now that it’s Installed, What do we do Now?” Syndrome♦ Lifecycle Benefits are Determined in the Planning Stage♦ Need to rethink worker roles
Employee & Management Buy In♦ Employee buy in must reach from maintenance to operations and engineering♦ Management buy in is essential, justification of the technology must match overall corporate objectives♦ This is where training and education begins. Maintenance personnel could view fieldbus/HART as a threat. Show them how it will make them do their jobs better!
Why is PAM so Important to HART & Fieldbus? 74 I plan to use PAM applications with fieldbus 64 No plans to use PAM applications 55 Currently use PAM with fieldbus 34.1 % 24 Would like to deploy PAM, but cannot 29.5 % 11.1 % 25.3 % Percent of Total Respondents Planning to Use PAM In their Fieldbus Projects
Implementation of a PAM Solution in Conjunctionwith HART and Fieldbus % Improvement vs Traditional Maintenance Equipment Productivity Workforce Efficiency Equipment Life Defects Downtime Inventory Costs y Unplanned Breakdowns -60 -40 -20 0 20 40
Impact of Fieldbus on Standard Work Processes and Procedures – 1=No Benefit at All; 5=Greatest Benefit N/A 1 2 3 Operations 4 5 PurchasingEngineeringMaintenance 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Maintenance and Operations Are Getting the Most Benefit
How Has Fieldbus Changed Responsibilities and Work Processes? Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Fieldbus has improved the productivity of the process engineer Disagree Strongly Disagree gy g Fieldbus results in enhanced operator effectivenessFieldbus has improved the productivity of the maintenance technician Fieldbus has improved the productivity of the board operator Fieldbus has improved the productivity of the field operator 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Users Believe the Biggest Impact Is on Maintenance Technician and Process Engineer
Finding the Right Partner Services & Project Coordination Registered Partner Successful Fieldbus Devices & Products Partners Systems Industry Expertise
Conclusions and Recommendations♦ There remains a substantial installed cost benefit to fieldbus technologies, but the real value lies in the operational and lifecycle cost phase♦ Many end users are not realizing the optimum benefit that fieldbus and HART technology can provide♦ Training and education are essential. Applying essential fieldbus as a mere replacement for 4-20 mA guarantees project failure and zero ROI.