1. 2II6LWH 5HPRWH 2SHUDWLRQV
:KLFK 2QH ,V IRU RX
% -2+1 %/$1+$5' 6(037(0%(5 $5 ,16,*+76 0+ 03
.(:25'6
Remote Operations, Remote Maintenance, Remote Engineering, Remote Monitoring,
Remote Operations Supervision, Remote Operations Control
6800$5
Users, suppliers, and service providers are increasingly deploying various types of off-
site remote operations to their economic advantage, with most seeing dramatic im-
provements in their operations. Some of these remote operations include maintenance,
engineering, monitoring, operations supervision, and operations control. Remote opera-
tions supervision includes both direct and indirect supervisory con-
7KH PDMRU EHQHILWV RI UHPRWH
trol, while remote operations control includes both staffed and un-
RSHUDWLRQV DUH WKH DELOLW WR
staffed operations. While one of the driving forces is to maximize
GHYHORS EHVW SUDFWLFHV PD[LPL]H
WKH XWLOL]DWLRQ RI DVVHWV UHGXFH the utilization of limited technical resources, the major benefits of
WRWDO FRVW RI RZQHUVKLS DQG remote operations are the ability to develop best practices, maximize
GHFUHDVH SURGXFW YDULDELOLW asset utilization, reduce total cost of ownership (TCO), and decrease
product variability across the entire enterprise. In the case of engi-
neering services, the benefits are manifested in reduced project execution time and cost,
as labor savings is usually a relatively small part of the economic equation.
People and cultural issues, rather than technology, are the primary limiting factor in the
rate of remote operations deployment. The most often sited issues that need to be over-
come are safety and the requirement for changes in employee job functions and
organizational structures.
$1$/6,6
Although offshore oil and gas platforms and segments of the utility industries have been
deploying remote operations control for more than a decade, most process industry
automation suppliers and engineering firms have only recently begun to utilize remote
technology to gain economic advantages. Many manufacturing end users have only re-
cently begun to seek out automation suppliers, OEMs, and service providers who are
advanced in their use of remote technologies.
A recent ARC survey showed some clear remote operations trends based on user indus-
tries, suppliers, and types of remote operations. It also identified some of the best
implementation practices to achieve optimum benefits. In all cases, each of the leading
@IU@SQSDT@Ã6I9ÃH6IVA68UVSDIBÃTUS6U@BD@TÃAPSÃDI9VTUS`Ã@Y@8VUDW@TÃ

2. 6S8ÃD†vtu‡†ÃQhtrÃ!Ã
companies considered remote operations a business necessity. These companies re-
aligned their organizations as necessary, justified all projects based on lowest total cost
of ownership to the business, and conducted post-project audits.
5HPRWH 0DLQWHQDQFH
It is estimated that 15-40 percent of manufacturing indirect costs are associated with
maintenance. About 50 percent of this maintenance is corrective, which is ten times
more expensive than predictive. Over 25 percent of this maintenance is preventive,
which is five times more expensive than
5HPRWH 2SHUDWLRQ 7SHV 3ULPDU $UHDV RI 'HSORPHQW
predictive. In addition, it is estimated that
0DLQWHQDQFH 6XSSOLHUV (QG8VHUV 60 percent of preventive maintenance is
(QJLQHHULQJ 7KLUG 3DUW 6HUYLFHV 3URYLGHUV not necessary. To address this issue, end
0RQLWRULQJ 9HQGRU 0DQDJHG ,QYHQWRU users are continuing to improve their local
on-site maintenance programs. However,
2SHUDWLRQV 6XSHUYLVLRQ 3HWURFKHPLFDO KHPLFDO DQG
)RRG %HYHUDJH ,QGXVWULHV the problem is that equipment and sys-
tems have become more automated and
2SHUDWLRQV RQWURO 6WDIIHG 2IIVKRUH 3ODWIRUPV 8WLOLWLHV DQG
8QVWDIIHG 0LQLQJ ,QGXVWULHV complex, making them difficult for end
5HPRWH 2SHUDWLRQV 'HSORPHQW users to maintain or maximize their utili-
zation. Part of the solution is expansion of
predictive maintenance programs. Unfortunately, predictive maintenance is limited by
the visibility of current automation systems. Future autonomous publish and subscribe
automation systems will provide this visibility.
Suppliers are increasingly taking on responsibility for remote preventive and predictive
maintenance of their products in response to end user needs to reduce downtime, im-
prove asset utilization, and maximize product recovery. In fact, industry surveys have
shown that less than 30 percent of end users feel they are obtaining the full benefits pos-
sible with their current automation systems.
This supplier deployed remote maintenance trend can be expected to grow even more
rapidly as embedded controllers become common in all types of equipment. This tech-
nology will allow equipment to monitor itself and be proactive in predicting and
reporting required maintenance. Although there are aspects of maintenance in other end
user deployed remote operations, end user based remote maintenance is growing at
roughly the same rate as deployment of remote operations control.
5HPRWH (QJLQHHULQJ
Systems integrators and other third party engineering firms do the primary deployment
of off-site remote engineering. While virtual engineering is not new, the tools to accom-
plish it have become significantly easier to use and less costly. However, learning and
applying these tools still takes considerable training, often requiring a dedicated person
‹Ã! ÇÃ6S8Ã6q‰v†‚…’ÃB…‚ˆƒÃ‡ÃÃ6yyvrqÃ9…v‰rÇÃ9rquh€ÃH6Ã!!%ÃVT6ÇÃ' # ÇÃ6S8rip‚€Ã
VT6ÇÃVFÇÃBr…€h’ÇÃEhƒhÃ‡ÃDqvhÃ

3. 6S8ÃD†vtu‡†ÃQhtrÃÃ
to develop and retain proficiency in their use. While large manufacturing companies can
afford to dedicate an individual to such a single function, most manufacturers cannot.
Engineering firms are responding by adopting these easier to use and less costly state of
the art collaborative engineering tools for remote design, implementation, and execution.
Some of these tools include virtual office technology, three-dimensional design and
process simulation, and true virtual reality simulators for many types of operations. End
users no longer have to spend days reviewing and approving engineering documents
that are often difficult to understand. These tools are reducing end user approval time
and simplifying the process of making changes, which results in a greater ability to dis-
cover design flaws before construction, installation, or start up, and helps with the
design of re-usable engineering. Engineering companies that have flexible, agile opera-
tions that easily and quickly adopt this technology are the most successful at leveraging
it to their economic advantage.
5HPRWH 0RQLWRULQJ
Many manufacturing operations have some form of off-site remote monitoring, but one
area that is seeing significant benefits from its use is vendor-managed inventory. One
example is Cenex, a manufacturer of fuels for farm equipment. Cenex began deploying
radar level sensors with battery powered RF telemetry designed by Barton Instruments
on over 500,000 remote fuel storage tanks serviced by their distributors. This capability
enabled Cenex to reduce their product transportation costs over 25 percent, lower their
distributor inventory, and change billing procedures from on-delivery to monthly usage.
This increased value to both their distributors and end users resulted in Cenex increasing
both their market share and profitability.
5HPRWH 2SHUDWLRQV 6XSHUYLVLRQ
In many of the process industries remote operations supervision provides substantial
economic benefits. These industries include petrochemical, chemical, food, beverage,
and similar industries where a significant number of process operations are required to
produce a finished product. There are three major types of remote operations supervi-
sion. The first is supervision with direct control remaining at the plant level. The second
is supervision with direct control from a remote location. The third, which is a relatively
new method, is supervision with direct control by remote optimizing software packages.
Successful companies in these industries have found that the benefits of remote opera-
tions supervision are significantly greater than remote operations control. These
companies are focused on redefining the role of their technical experts to giving them
economic responsibility for specific processes in multiple plants. In fact, some of these
technical experts have been given global responsibility for those processes. By utilizing
one or two centralized experts in each technology rather than multiple experts or an ex-
‹Ã! ÇÃ6S8Ã6q‰v†‚…’ÃB…‚ˆƒÃ‡ÃÃ6yyvrqÃ9…v‰rÇÃ9rquh€ÃH6Ã!!%ÃVT6ÇÃ' # ÇÃ6S8rip‚€Ã
VT6ÇÃVFÇÃBr…€h’ÇÃEhƒhÃ‡ÃDqvhÃ

4. 6S8ÃD†vtu‡†ÃQhtrÃ#Ã
pert at each plant, these companies have been able to develop and deploy common best
practices. This methodology has helped manufacturers achieved significant improve-
ment in asset utilization, reduction in total cost of ownership, and minimization of
product variability from plant to plant, all while providing the resources necessary to
enhance customer service. Examples of typical results derived include staff reductions, a
20 percent increase in production capacity each year for multiple years with the same
equipment, and a reduction in transportation costs because of the capability to quickly
produce consistent quality from any plant location.
5HPRWH 2SHUDWLRQV RQWURO
Remote operations control has become commonplace in offshore platforms, gas and pet-
rochemical pipelines, electric utility distribution systems, water and waste distribution
systems, mining, and other less complex manufacturing operations. Geographically,
these operations can be extended from across the street to across the globe.
Most of the companies utilizing remote operations control are primarily involved with
some form of distribution or material handling operation with limited processing. Justi-
fication and economics vary significantly across this diverse group of industries. In
some cases, operator safety translates into significant liability cost savings or even the
ability to operate at all. In cases such as water and waste, typical savings examples have
included a ten-fold reduction in staff, reduced equipment maintenance, and a 20-30 per-
cent increase in delivery capacity.
5(200(1'$7,216
• While technology is not currently the primary limiting factor to the rate of deploy-
ment of remote operations, continuing to maintain this rate of deployment into the
next decade will require the widespread development and deployment of autono-
mous publish and subscribe automation products and systems.
• End users should select the proper type of remote application for each project based
on lowest total cost of ownership (TCO) and alignment with business objectives.
• End users should consider a supplier’s flexibility and agility to easily and quickly
adopt new technology as one of their more important selection criteria.
• Suppliers and service providers should enhance their ability to help end users de-
fine, develop, and deploy best in class technology as well as best practices in all of
their operational, managerial, and organizational areas.
For further information, contact your account manager or the author at jblanchard@arcweb.com.
Recommended circulation: All MAS-H and MAS-P clients.
‹Ã! ÇÃ6S8Ã6q‰v†‚…’ÃB…‚ˆƒÃ‡ÃÃ6yyvrqÃ9…v‰rÇÃ9rquh€ÃH6Ã!!%ÃVT6ÇÃ' # ÇÃ6S8rip‚€Ã
VT6ÇÃVFÇÃBr…€h’ÇÃEhƒhÃ‡ÃDqvhÃ