Different Approaches to Field Work Flow Optimization with a Mob App Part 1 of 2

Every day, more Operational Technology (OT) is used to optimize field operational and engineering work flows, especially around providing field operators, vendors, and key resources, with a focal mobile app, to manage and execute their work flows, in the field.

The supply of qualified field operators is a constrained labour pool.

We need to help operators continue to increase their efficiency, with better optimized work flows, and a single focal mobile interface/application.

 This single field operator app can help drive and monitor field work flows and provide the operator with all the information they need to execute their work flows, make decisions, see schedules, enter notes and field data capture items, and provide near real time feedback from the field.

Helping operators work more effectively, balancing required regulatory and compliance tasks, with preventative and corrective maintenance, while integrating well test, process optimization tasks, and incorporating alarm call outs, is the key to increasing your field operations.

Oil and gas work flows are common, however, each company’s formations, facilities, culture, lifting costs, opex budget status, regulatory requirements, and acceptable rate of change, result in different approaches on how to execute and manage these work flows.

All oil and as companies have the same general field operational goals, significantly driven by ESG, regulatory, maintenance, process optimization, and operations by exception goals, but each company tends to require different specifics, to execute their work flows, based on the formation(s) they are in, the build of their facilities, historical merger and acquisition activity, their field operational culture, and current use of operational technology (OT).

Let’s dig into the different approaches we have been involved in, comparing three different customer approaches, we have been part of developing, with various customers.

Let’s label these approaches as:

• Left (Directed Work / Master Work Scheduling)
• Middle (Guided Work),
• Right (Presented Work)

Left and Right are essentially opposite approaches, and Middle is the hybrid or transition state between Left and Right.

These three approaches are the high-level approach options to optimizing field operations and work flows.

We typically see our clients either start on the Right and move towards the Middle, or clients start on the Left and either stay there, sometimes ease off to the Middle.

Here is a high-level summary of each work approach and their key characteristics:

 

• Left = Directed Work / Master Work Scheduling
  • real time master scheduling of visits and work orders, based on a defined typical day for an operator, coordinated by a centralized remote operation center (ROC), with operations by exception (OBE) / alarm call outs
  • most of the actual visit and work scheduling is automated and done at night, with a “master scheduler” reviewing the outcome early in the morning, and “tuning” the day visits and work orders. Throughout the day, the work coordinator, incorporates any operational exceptions, alarm call outs, or staff and work priority changes
  • All work flows and data flows are near real time, and tightly integrated for maximum efficiency, and a high-level use of automation, to reach the highest levels of efficiency improvements
  • The level of work flow and data integration is high
  • The goal here is to get the highest levels of work flow optimization, and recurring annual OPEX savings, by assuring each visit is focused on and contains targeted work orders, to be done, and incorporating any operating exceptions/alarms that are occurring
  • It also includes a strong focus on preventative and conditional maintenance, to keep visits down, and prevent outages by using “smart” alarms and smart events. This means the operator mobile app is tightly integrated in near real time, with your field SCADA systems, via an enterprise historian/consolidate field data store, Master SCADA system or ROCR (Remote Operations and Collaboration Room, also known as Integrated Operating Centers / IOCs)

 

• Middle = Guided Work
  • The focus is on managing and scheduling selected key, high value, troublesome, and regulatory/compliance work flows
  • The goal is not to direct, schedule, optimize most of the work flows, but target the work flows that drive the highest level of recurring OPEX savings, regulatory/compliance, and most “troublesome” work flows
  • The work is scheduled by a system, not a person, but there is no master scheduling, and each work flow is scheduled independently of the other work flows, and the operator uses their experience and discretion to get the monthly work in their operation area complete
  • Work flow and data integrations are only done on “one work flow at a time” and “as needed”
  • Key information and schedules are presented to the operator; and the operator determines what specific work to do, each day, assuring that all work over a period of a month is done
  • Some forms and field data capture tasks are done
  • The level of work flow and data flow integration is low to medium
  • This is the hybrid mix between “Directed” and “Presented”

 

• Right = Presented Work
  • The focus is to primarily show and present operators work and schedules, based on a typical monthly work load, needed to be done in their operating area/run
  • This also includes presenting them with information and statuses, such as recommended chemical application rates based on recent production and past/current well tests
  • This is a work flow by work flow approach with little integration between the work flows
  • The focus is usually on regulatory and compliance work flows such as pigging, well testing, and related tasks such as inspection forms, or key field data capture tasks
  • Operations by exception are not integrated into this approach, and managed strictly as call outs, and managed by discretion, in the field or by ROC (remote operations center) that focus on alarm management and process optimization
  • There is little to no automation involved in scheduling the work, other than presenting “due dates” and when things are “late”

 

Now, let’s look at the Approach Factors you need to consider when determining if you want the left, middle, or right approach.

 

[1] the Number of Work Flows to Optimize, Manage, and Automate

• Majority of Work Flows
  • optimizing and automating almost all your work flows to create a complete “Typical Day for an Operator”
• High Value / Regulatory / Key Work Flows
  • These are work flows specific to your current needs, usually compromising the primary and key focus of your operators in a typical month
• Base Work Flows
  • These are a small / minimum number of work flows usually required regulatory and compliance in nature
  • By nature, they are key work flows needing weekly and monthly reporting to verify compliance

You can find a list of common oil and gas work flows and solutions on our web site at:

https://www.qt-ot.com/workflows

 

[2] the Level of Operations by Exception Integration

• High
  • Real time “exceptions” (alarms and predictive events) are tightly integrated into daily work flows for scheduling, call out, and resolution, usually via a centralized ROC (Remote Operations Center)
  • This usually involved the use of “Smart” multi-variable equation and function-based alarms and predictive events to eliminate nuisance alarm and events, to minimize impact on daily work flows
  • Exceptions tend to have the most significant impact on scheduled and known work, so quick and efficient handling and incorporation into daily work flows, minimizes the impact of these exceptions
• Medium
  • Alarm and event management is done independently of work flow management, usually by one or more Remote Operations Centers (ROCs or IOCs)
  • These are usually either basic single variable set point alarms or some “Smart” alarms and Predictive Events
  • The response to the alarm and events is done via person to person communication, and not integrated into scheduled and known work flows
  • Alarms and predictive events are handled primarily as independent events to normal operator work flows
• Low / Independent
  • Alarm and event management is done independently of work flow management, usually by one or more Remote Operations Centers
  • These alarms are primarily single variable set point alarms, then triaged and responded to remotely by Remote Operations Centers or called out directly to operators
  • the response to the alarm and events is done via person to person communication and not integrated into scheduled work flows

 

[3] Field Data Consolidation and Data Integrations

• High
  • All work flows and supporting data flows are tightly integrated
  • There is a consolidated store of ALL field data such as an enterprise historian and/or OT Data Warehouse
  • The OT Data Warehouse is also used to integrate all SCADA systems and multiple cloud-based field automation solutions (such as XSPOC, ZEDI, AFTI Watchdogs, Detechtion, or any other cloud automation data source)
  • This data is available near real time for use by the Operator Mobile App, all SCADA/automation systems, and Corporate maintenance, field data capture/volumetric, and BI reporting and analytic solutions, like MS Power BI or Tableau
  • It’s important to note here, that our clients do have “have to turn off or abandon” any existing systems used in their corporate or regional field offices; instead, we recommend the DATA from all these systems is integrated into the focal operator mobile app, so the operator remains in their focal work flow app. We don’t want operators losing time and efficiency bouncing between numerous mobile apps, we want them “getting the job done!”
• Medium
  • This state is a result of moving from “Low” towards “High”, driven by introducing more work flows and tasks to operators. As that happens a natural required level of data and work flow integration will occur, as the facilities and work flows are integrated by nature, and as you increase work flows, you typically do that to increase efficiency and automation, and that requires MORE INTEGRATION
• Low
  • Each work flow has its own independent “data model” and there is no deliberate integration, unless needed to execute any one specific work flow
  • Any needed data integrations are very specific A to B solutions, point to point solutions
  • Any reporting is also very focused and targeted on individual work flows, and most reports are strictly focused on non compliance, late, and exceptions

 

[4] Number and Nature of Facilities and Formations

• High
  • e.g. Southern Sask = High Number of Facilities, Focus on Downtime and Maintenance, Operator Intensive Operating Areas

• • • 10,000s of facilities
    • Not many multiple well pads
    • Lower flowing wells, many more wells and batteries
    • Operator intensive operations with many third party contractors involved and needing direction and coordination
    • Strong focus on preventative and predictive maintenance
    • Do not want to go to each well each day

• Medium
  • This would simply be defined as a mid point step between High and Low, which could be a result of having some operating areas in both types of formations, or
  • a result of historic merger and acquisition activities, which have created an inconsistent diversity in the set up of your fields and facilities
• Low
  • g. AB Montney and AB Duvernay = Lower Number of Facilities, High Flowing Wells, Pad based Wells, Focused on Process Optimization

• • • 100s or 1000’s of facilities
    • Lots of multi well pads, less batteries
    • More focus on well to pad to battery process optimization due to high well flow rates
    • Frequent continuous well tests help better watch and optimize these high pad flow rates
    • You go to each well/pad each day due to high flow rates, process risk, tighter geography, and frequent continuous well testing
    • Stronger focus on regulatory and compliance and process optimization work flows

 

[5] Operators Current Experience and Use of Mobile Apps / OT

• Low
  • Use one of two mobile applications every day
• Medium
  • Use two to five mobile applications every day
• High
  • Use greater than five mobile applications each day

 

[6] Desired Level of Efficiency Improvement / Reduced Recurring Annual OPEX Goals

• High
  • Tens of Millions! = $10,000,000
• Medium
  • $4,000,000 to $8,000,000
• Low
  • $1,000,000’s to $4,000,000

 

[7] Time to Execute

• Fast Pace
  • 3 to 6 months
• Moderate Pace
  • 6 to 9 months
• Longer Pace
  • 9 to 12 months

 

Soon, we will be publishing the second part of this article to connect high level approach options, with approach factors.

We will describe how we have seen each approach get executed, high level results, and the types of solutions we have seen used to achieve results.

At QT OT, our experience has show us, using a custom developed Mobile App as your operators primary interface to do their work, is the best answer to assure the approach you select works and you get the results you want that matches your company’s current operational goals.

A custom developed mobile app also allows for the greatest flexibility and change for you.  If circumstances, the economy, or other goals change, by definition, making change in a reasonable time frame to adapt to other factors is also an option!   No vendor or other customer is going to stop you from making the changes you want to make.

The use of a company-focused and specific mobile app, incorporating only the specific work flows you want to optimize, allows you to manage and define the adoption of work flow optimization in your field.

Please contact us at shane.yamkowy@qtltd.ca if you would like to meet and discuss our services, see examples of the Left, Middle, and Right approach of custom developed operator mobile applications, or to ask us any questions!

There is also more info and answers on our web site at www.qt-ot.com

Please forward the link to this article to others who may be interested or benefit from our extensive OT and IT experience; we also assist companies with most defined OT projects.

Also, watch for our upcoming article on enterprise historians and advanced OT analytics / data modeling and virtualization tool kits.