As a first step, it is important to properly define the roots of the PIM approach chosen. Local constraints, in-house specific requirements, international guidelines and adequacy will help set up the basis of the methodology to be developed.
The most appropriate approach will be found by referencing the local regulatory body’s policy (safety/inspections-oriented or risk/threat mitigation-oriented) along with common practices and existing procedures, the assets’ typology and age, the existing international best practices, and the level of in-house expertise. Several approaches may be considered, such as qualitative versus quantitative, threat-based versus damage-based, and probabilistic versus deterministic.
The identification of expected results (primary target) should be properly specified: restricted impact on the environment, corrosion-related failure prevention, inspection strategy, and means of mitigation. This will ensure that the PIM is set up in-line with the project targets.
The PIM methodology can then be chosen and tailored to the specific case.
A PIM approach that may be suitable for one operator may not be acceptable for another operator.
Only once the methodology is developed and understood by all project stakeholders can the data and tool issues be properly addressed.
Data and tools: you don’t need a video game
Data management is a crucial task within the PIM process. It should provide a complete system capable of delivering the right data in the right shape, at the right place and for the right purpose. This requires very organised and step-wise work.