Starting on a reliability improvement journey is many times done using a “Bad Actor” list, improving root cause analysis program and buying spares.  While this can work, another approach may be more successful.  Learning whether the unit is capable of reaching the desired performance is necessary.

The best performance level equipment will ever reach is set at the design and installation phase of its lifetime.  It is possible to retain that performance level, but eventually equipment will decay and not perform to the level possible when newly installed.  Performance will decay even faster when maintenance is insufficient or poorly done complicating efforts to improve because the entire unit is not capable.

The Importance of Asset Condition Evaluation (ACE):

One of the first activities I take when developing a reliability plan is to conduct a field walk to observe equipment condition.  A lot can be understood from the visual condition of the equipment providing an indication where a reliability improvement project should start.  Evidence that equipment has decayed or looks well maintained tells you how to structure an improvement plan.  Unfortunately, by the time Becht is contacted to assist with a reliability assessment, the client probably has experienced significant downtime and determined the chaos created by this downtime is unacceptable.  The initial field walk provides an impression whether decapitalization has occurred and where to start.

When the field observations suggest equipment has decayed, the reliability improvement program is structured to start with an evaluation of the equipment condition and supporting structures which is known as an Asset Condition Evaluation, ACE.

Scoring and Analysis:

The ACE process begins by defining the unit to be evaluated and its replacement asset value.  Field observations are made of each equipment type (i.e. rotating, piping, fixed, instrument, electrical, civil/structural, insulation & paint, etc.).  The field observations provide insight into the historical maintenance investment as well as external equipment condition.  Obsolescence can be judged.  Next, maintenance and performance history are queried to learn the information that can’t be seen.  All of this information is turned into a score between zero and 100.  The score can loosely be viewed as a percentage of life remaining with 100 aligning with the term “brand new” and zero indicating “it doesn’t operate”.

The data becomes accumulated in several ways to provide maximum information about the unit or equipment type and what can be expected of its performance.  The data is also used to identify individual equipment that must be addressed or have become an anomaly.  For example, instruments may be new (score near 100), but the infrastructure supporting their proper functioning into the DCS may be near end of life (score nearer zero).  The result of investing in instrumentation probably did not produce the improvement because the supporting equipment was not capable.  The ACE score would show this.

It is possible to illustrate many other points from the aggregate data.  Scores can be used to indicate where over-maintenance may be occurring, equipment types that have been neglected, and support systems generating higher risk than originally understood.  The information can be turned into a multi-year capital improvement plan addressing equipment condition.  Targeting maintenance capital replacement or overhauls that will raise the asset score would be a great place to start.

Equipment categories involved

• Pressure Vessels
• Storage Tanks
• Process piping including valves
• General piping including valves
• Instruments including automated valves
• Relief Devices
• Civil and Structural (concrete, structural steel)
• Buildings
• Process Control System
• General rotating equipment
• Critical rotating equipment
• Paint and insulation
• Electrical (infrastructure and general)
• Refrigeration and HVAC
• Other support equipment

The ACE Process:

The general project process will have the following activities completed:

• Identification of unit operations
• Determination of equipment and structures to be evaluated in each unit operation. This may be done by using expert opinion, Process Flow Diagrams, criticality analysis, work order history, or another prioritization mechanism.
• Evaluation of equipment history (from SAP or another data source).
• Field verification of equipment condition visually or with standard technology.
• Scoring of equipment
  • 100 = New equipment
  • 0 = Does not operate
  • 50 = Not reliable and should be replaced
  • 85 = Sweet spot for reliable operation without overspending on maintenance
• Evaluation of scores
• Determination of equipment, technology and unit operation recommendations
• Capital and expense project definition.
• Review with leaders to develop strategy closing gaps from desired condition.

An Asset Condition Evaluation (ACE) provides invaluable insights into the current health of your equipment and its capacity to perform reliably. By systematically assessing and scoring assets, organizations can strategically prioritize maintenance and capital investments, optimizing resources while enhancing overall reliability. Incorporating ACE into your reliability improvement strategy enables more informed, targeted actions that minimize unexpected downtime and support sustainable, long-term operational success.