Web-based outage planning and knowledge management systems built around an off-theshelf software product have yielded impressive

results for three power generators. Since the East Coast blackout of August 2003, every aspect of a utilitys power generation business is under internal scrutiny and plant personnel are being pressured to increase reliability. With limited capital and operation and maintenance (O&M) dollars, keeping the plants operating reliably and efficiently is a big challenge for the technical and management teams. Boilers, steam and gas turbines, high-energy piping and pulverizers are some of the most critical pieces of equipment in a power station. The ability to track, trend and report the condition of these critical pieces of equipment has proven cost effective in reducing outage incidences while maintaining reliable and efficient operation. An important goal for most utilities is to safely extend the duration between overhauls, based on accurate history and data analysis to support run/repair/replace recommendations. TexasGenco, Georgia Power Co. and Dominion Generation have successfully implemented a Web-based centralized inspection, repair and analysis program built with an off-the-shelf software product called Aware, available from Automation Technology Inc. (ATI). Each utilitys implementation includes component level details, which are not included within their computerized maintenance management systems (CMMS) and enterprise asset management (EAM) systems. This is due to the nature of highly engineered pieces of equipment and the complexity of the large volume of components that make up the equipment. CMMS and EAM implementations are not populated with this component detail (such as blades, tubing, burners, etc.), whereas in equipment outage planning, the details of all components are required to determine reliability. Inspection and repair procedures, manuals, pictures and drawings are also available to provide users complete instructions on how to perform specific jobs, which tools are required, what to report and how to diagnose equipment conditions for making run/repair/replace decisions. The systems built with the Aware software product have yielded impressive results for all three generators: Increased reliability because more accurate decisions are made regarding what needs to be done during an outage Improved condition assessments by making past history and asset specific information available at all times Reduced report writing time at the conclusion of the outage.

Program Goals
Traditional methods of condition assessments and documenting component failures involved many paper-based processes. The common goal of the three generators previously mentioned has been to automate and improve the processes used for recording, managing and consolidating technical maintenance data on critical equipment to achieve the following: 1. Avoid outage cost escalations and delays by properly planning outage repair needs. 2. Reduce outage incidences and extend the duration between outages by increasing equipment reliability with credible documentation of equipment conditions and trends. 3. Streamline coordination among technical staff in supporting overhauls, inspections and testing to increase personnel productivity.

Outage Planning Process

Click here to enlarge image

Outage planning is a critical process aimed at ensuring that unanticipated maintenance or repair activities are avoided during an overhaul. It is designed to eliminate two critical business challenges: outage extension and outage cost overrun. Figure 1 illustrates the major functional steps taken to implement an effective outage planning process. While CMMS and EAM systems are widely used in managing work orders, once a work scope or work package is established, the true challenge in effective outage planning is determining what repairs or replacements will have the greatest impact on plant reliability. This iterative process involves looking at work recommendations from previous years and building a business case for performing the task (Figure 1). In instances where a business case can be made to perform the work, the work is added to the overall outage plan and the necessary work orders are created. Obviously, there are cases where current business drivers do not allow the cost for a repair to be justified. These recommendations, which do not get approved, must be managed in a bucket and reassessed at the next opportunity against the then-current business drivers until that recommendation is closed (Figure 2). This iterative process requires access to much of the technical data and equipment knowledge that has been collected during previous outages, and through the collaboration of plant engineers, maintenance supervisors, nondestructive evaluation (NDE) vendors and inspectors. The three generators implemented the Aware software product and are using it to manage this process. Once the work analysis establishes a clear justification, work orders are created in the CMMS for parts ordering and work scheduling.

Click here to enlarge image

Key Components An effective outage planning process has four fundamental steps that are repeated through every outage cycle (Figure 3). These steps can be broken down into:

Click here to enlarge image

1. Pre-outage work and preparation for an upcoming outage 2. Outage execution and knowledge capture 3. Post-outage analysis 4. Reliability centered maintenance (RCM) activities between outages.

Pre-outage
Technical planning is important prior to an outage. The Aware product allows the maintenance support staff to review previously documented outage work history and related inspection results. Based on reviews of historical data and the latest inspection results, engineering and planning personnel provide recommendations and generate necessary work orders for work that needs to be performed during the outage. During this phase of the process, it is important for the past history to be reviewed, not just from the last outage, but also from any open recommendations from previous outages (items remaining in the bucket). Activities completed during previous outages are associated with specific equipment as well as a virtual group or event. The Aware software feature allows users to easily review past information for a particular outage across all equipment, or focus on a specific piece of equipment and review its history. Typically, engineers look initially at a list of recommendations, but while determining whether to act on them, they also view such things as online condition assessment results, visual inspection findings, and recent photographs; the items that led to the initial recommendation. Having this information available through the Web-based application allows data to be found rapidly and facilitates collaboration among the groups involved in the decision making.

mmendations in the bucket

Click here to enlarge image

While reviewing individual recommendations (Figure 4), decisions on whether an item should be added to the upcoming outage are documented, and the list is narrowed to the items that must be implemented during the outage being planned. By assigning these items to an upcoming outage, the recommendations are removed from the bucket, whereas recommendations that arent assigned remain in the bucket to be evaluated again prior to subsequent outages.

This same system provides all the essential technical data needed to facilitate coordination between the planning department, technical support groups and the maintenance department, including the machine shop. As users continue to build the knowledge base, they can more accurately determine equipment condition and estimate remaining life, and thus more confidently plan work scopes and/or extend the duration between outages based on critical equipment condition. The same information and data about components or systems that need service during an outage is now available to the machine shop. Shop personnel review the maintenance and repair history of a particular component, its mode of failure and the failure analysis results. They can also consider the manufacturers recommendations and similar repairs to determine the best course of action. Planners review the items that have been recommended for inclusion in the upcoming outage, include those items in the outage schedule and create work orders in the CMMS system. The remaining items stay in the bucket to be evaluated again prior to the next outage. This figurative bucket then becomes the container for the knowledge that has been collected. It also aids the staff in sharing why a recommendation may or may not have been implemented.

Outage
As the outage begins, maintenance and engineering staff use this system to access all equipment and systems information, which may include manufacturers specifications, inspection/failure records and trends. This capability is essential once a work order is issued because all outage staff have access to all relevant information needed to make run/repair/replace decisions reliably and quickly. Close technical coordination is required to ensure, where possible, that outage times are not extended.

ed system allows inspectors to document findings that need immediate attention and assign the appropriate priority.

Click here to enlarge image

The daily outage punch list is created as a result of visual inspections and is a key component to daily collaboration during an outage. In the past, punch lists varied from formal memos to notes scratched on a napkin and handed to the planner. With the computerized system in place, inspectors document findings that need immediate attention and assign the appropriate priority (Figure 5). The appropriate manager views the list on his screen and notes agreement or disagreement with the urgency, thus creating a list of items that must be completed prior to

startup. The planner views the abbreviated list on his screen, which enables him to add the work to existing work orders or create new work orders and add them to the schedule. The root cause of failures on critical equipment can be determined more precisely because of the availability of system-specific information. The maintenance crew uses this system to record and report all observations and findings, such as wear rates, clearances and other critical parameters for each component. Entering the data in parallel with the work makes it easier to ensure that facts get reported correctly and timely. Similarly, machine shop personnel use the same system to fully document repairs or refurbishment activities, including the extent of the damage, parts exchanged, repair procedures and tests performed. This helps to ensure the components readiness for service.

Post-outage
The important task following an outage is to make sure all the inspections and assessments are properly documented so that the knowledge gained during the outage can be easily reused in the future. Ordinarily, this task is time consuming and monotonous for plant engineers. With this system in place, however, users save substantial time by automating the outage reporting process. In the past, the outage report often took months to finish but with this system, findings and data collected are documented during the outage. All the information, which may include pictures, charts and graphs, is automatically collated, formatted and printed by the report generator. The outage report is essentially finished when the outage is complete. On average, users save at least two man-weeks per outage report. Outage reports can be viewed by anyone who has access to the program over the network.

Between Outages
Each staff member works with the information gathered during a planned outage, routine maintenance event or forced outage, as well as periodically entering readings, measurements and other data collected throughout the year. By using the same computerized system, the technical staff members document their findings and analyses to support recommendations for future outages. Integration with third-party systems and analysis tools ensures a comprehensive approach to proactive maintenance deployment. All findings and reports are intended to support the technical staffs rationale for: identifying existing or potential problems observing emerging trends making decisions and recommendations for future outages. The key element from all this is that the recommendation is captured and the basis for the recommendation is documented in the central repository or bucket. This is true no matter if the basis comes from an inspection or NDE during an outage, an analysis of tube failure trends, or from the results of predictive maintenance activities between outages.

Conclusion
Consolidating and automating equipment condition data collection, documentation, reporting and technical coordination result in personnel productivity gains as well as equipment reliability improvements. Undoubtedly, the ability to have the equipment history, inspection data, periodic test data, conditions assessments, wear rates, vendor equipment design parameters, CAD drawings and photos of previous problems at the engineers finger tips saves hours of information hunting, and facilitates timely decision making. This is particularly crucial for troubleshooting during an outage when accurate information and diagnostic tools are paramount.

Authors

Rana Ghosh is Automation Technology Inc.s (ATIs) customer solutions director. Mr. Ghosh has more than 20 years experience in all aspects of the power industry. During his tenure at ATI, Mr. Ghosh has managed dozens of projects for utility customers to enable them to increase asset reliability through process and software initiatives. Mr. Ghosh can be reached at ranag@atinet.com or 408-350-7020. Scott C. McQueen is TexasGencos turbines and central shop division manager in Houston, Texas. He is responsible for all maintenance activities associated with steam turbines and combustion turbines in Reliant Energys regulated division. He is also responsible for Reliant Energys EDC Central Repair Shop. Over the years, Mr. McQueen has contributed a number of papers to various utility organizations including EPRI, the ASME IJPGC, Westinghouse Users Group Conference, and others. He is also a member of the EPRI utility advisory committee for steam turbine outage interval extension. Mr. McQueen is a 1985 graduate of The University of Texas at El Paso with a bachelor of science degree in mechanical engineer. Kenny Chambers has been with Georgia Power for 38 years, where he has held various positions during his long tenure. For the past six years, he has been a boiler analyst and system owner and has been involved in all aspects of boiler operations and maintenance analysis. Previous to this, he worked in boiler inspection and layout of work for outages, as an operations supervisor and as an operator.

Georgia Power Improves Outage Efficiency and Budging

By Kenny Chambers, Georgia Power Co., a Southern Company The key to effective outage planning is knowledge, knowledge about plant components and their operation and maintenance history. Georgia Power has developed a Web-based outage planning and knowledge process around Automation Technology Inc.s Aware software. The system helps Georgia Powers outage management team better determine which maintenance activities need to be included in an outage and which activities are not worth the time and expense, and are best left off the schedule. Historical data about complex plant components also helps outage management accurately estimate the cost of the requested maintenance. We all know something unexpected can occur or be found during an outage, but it should be the exception rather than the normal event. Traditionally unknown pots of money have been put into budgets to cover either lack of good planning or failure to recognize major problems, but we are trying to get away from that. For example, there are items that must be estimated-such as how many tube shields on the hot reheat assemblies will need to be repaired or replaced. Based on the estimate, a specific amount is budgeted, and at the next outage, we are expected to be within 5% of our estimate. This means that if there are 500 shields on the reheat assemblies and its been estimated that 20 shields will need to be replaced, then during the outage between 19 and 21 shields should be replaced. In reality, however, the spread has been substantially more at times, which is what we are reducing by applying our outage planning process. We track the current and past conditions that have been identified during inspections in the Aware boiler module software, and using this information allows us to better forecast repairs and replacements, and keep the unexpected to a minimum.