Seamgas Inc Case Study
3. STAKEHOLDER EXPECTATIONS
Stakeholders expect improvements be achieved in areas of: Inaccurate asset inventory; lacking asset failure and maintenance history; incomplete GIS and design information; maintenance equipment and tools limitations; aging assets; reduced service levels and availability of assets; and unsatisfied customers. A new strategy is needed to address these issues.
4. ASSETS COVERED
4.1 ASSET LOCATION
Substation yards are co-shared with Powerlink but PowerGenex owns 66kV and 11kV busbars and feeders on the secondary side of power transformers that are owned by Powerlink. These 66kV and 11kV feeders supply power to a small number of farms and Seamgas’s gas wells and processing plants. This SAMP focusses on primary plant assets that are overdue for replacement or require replacement within 10 years. Secondary systems and Telecommunications assets have an expected life of 20 years and the next replacement cycle falls beyond the 10 year period of this SAMP.
4.2 ASSET CONFIGURATION
Single line diagrams in Figures 1 & 2 illustrates the layout of our 66kV and 11kV substations. The configuration indicates only isolators and CBs, with locations of CTs assumed to be …show more content…
Due to inadequate asset information assets are assumed to have been installed in groups of equipment called bays, hence the assumed age of assets per bay is the same. Asset condition is determined based on an Asset Health Index derived from condition assessments and reliability data (MTBF, MTTF, MTTR) which is missing in this case. Typically a Health Index Score between 50% and 60% means an asset needs to be monitored more closely with a potential change in proactive maintenance approach. For 50% lower a risk assessment is required and if it is a high risk assets, it be put on a risk register and managed with additional measures to ensure its integrity. Age profiles for 66kV and 11kV substations are given Table
Stakeholders expect improvements be achieved in areas of: Inaccurate asset inventory; lacking asset failure and maintenance history; incomplete GIS and design information; maintenance equipment and tools limitations; aging assets; reduced service levels and availability of assets; and unsatisfied customers. A new strategy is needed to address these issues.
4. ASSETS COVERED
4.1 ASSET LOCATION
Substation yards are co-shared with Powerlink but PowerGenex owns 66kV and 11kV busbars and feeders on the secondary side of power transformers that are owned by Powerlink. These 66kV and 11kV feeders supply power to a small number of farms and Seamgas’s gas wells and processing plants. This SAMP focusses on primary plant assets that are overdue for replacement or require replacement within 10 years. Secondary systems and Telecommunications assets have an expected life of 20 years and the next replacement cycle falls beyond the 10 year period of this SAMP.
4.2 ASSET CONFIGURATION
Single line diagrams in Figures 1 & 2 illustrates the layout of our 66kV and 11kV substations. The configuration indicates only isolators and CBs, with locations of CTs assumed to be …show more content…
Due to inadequate asset information assets are assumed to have been installed in groups of equipment called bays, hence the assumed age of assets per bay is the same. Asset condition is determined based on an Asset Health Index derived from condition assessments and reliability data (MTBF, MTTF, MTTR) which is missing in this case. Typically a Health Index Score between 50% and 60% means an asset needs to be monitored more closely with a potential change in proactive maintenance approach. For 50% lower a risk assessment is required and if it is a high risk assets, it be put on a risk register and managed with additional measures to ensure its integrity. Age profiles for 66kV and 11kV substations are given Table