In this article:
Recently, at Maximo World, I delivered a presentation to more than 1,000 asset management professionals on digital transformation. Specifically, I discussed things to consider when adding advanced capabilities such as digital twins, machine learning, and artificial intelligence to a comprehensive asset performance management (APM) program in the pursuit of enhancing failure elimination, identifying and mitigating risk, and improving safety.
In this new digital world, advanced methods are being used to better understand asset health in real time, predict failures, and (using AI) prescribe required corrective actions. By using new risk and reliability methodologies, failure data libraries, modeling tools, and advanced analytics to process vast amounts of inspection and maintenance data, modern facilities are obtaining actionable insights that pinpoint risk and enhance asset and plant performance and reliability.
It’s about results at the end of the day, and through industry collaborations with their digital partners, operators I have observed have realized up to 20% gains in overall production using these technologies with failure risk reduced by 80% and cost savings of up to 50% achieved. More important, all of these projects across multiple industries continually add to the ever-growing knowledge base and library of failure and risk data.
So what’s next? How do we move our organizations to the next level? The next frontier of failure elimination is maturing your asset management program from the advanced analytics of predictive APM methodologies to the artificial intelligence/Industry 4.0 world of prescriptive recommendations. But it is clear that the speed of change in the digital age has brought with it a new set of challenges for business leaders: namely, how to ensure that AI recommendations and model simulations aren’t biased and that the results are verifiable.
Governance requirements and decision assurance in the digital age
The concept of digital twins is predicated on a real-time data connection; without this connection, digital twin technology would not exist. This connectivity is created by sensors on the physical asset that obtain data and communicate it back to the system. Digital twin technology strictly depends on monitoring the physical twin and how the environment and people interact with it – in other words, it is theoretically failure-proof from the moment it is built, but only if the data integrity has gone through a diligent validation process.
New governance requirements are emerging around data integrity and decision validation with these new technologies. As artificial intelligence, machine learning, and digital twin modeling are introduced in Industry 4.0 applications, we now must have a process for how these advanced technologies and their technical integrity are being assured to deliver the right answers. This is not a tomorrow concern. Governance of digital is a current and pressing problem that demands immediate and substantive efforts to address.
Operating plants, especially in the oil & gas and chemical processing industries, for example, is a dynamic and continuous endeavor where operating conditions continually change. For a digital twin model to be a true reflection of the physical asset, an entirely new set of processes is required, with each new process delivering new data, insights, and actions.
Asset health requires digital health management
All of these new activities require validation to confirm the accuracy of the models, and this new area of governance requirements is earning a name: digital health management, or DHM. This new term encompasses all of the digital technologies and systems that are used to gather data and insights on an asset’s health, which incorporates digital twin technology.