• Replies 7 replies
  • Subscribers 26 subscribers
  • Views 102 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

AF hierarchy best practice in Upstream O&G

César_CF_PLU

Good afternoon guys,

 

Just wondering if you are aware of some standards or best practices already defined regarding the most efficient way to structure an upstream asset hierarchy in AF. I mean, we could organize an AF tree by following a "choke model" (4 groups of reservoir, wells, facilities, delivery), or simply following a field's "natural" organisation (field - north/south region - cluster a/b/c - wells/pumps/vessels/etc - pressure/temperature/etc), or even alphabetically (then a naming convention would be a key issue to resolve first)...so just wondering if some arrangement type has already been identified as optimal for our business. Considering the amount of re-work that would be involved in modifying it, it seems no trivial decision...or is it?

 

Thanks and regards.

Parents

  • Hi César,

     

    Like Ian mentioned, your AF approach should be driven by a business issue or use case. What are the problems you are trying to solve? Start small, targeting specific issues, and go from there. Don't try to model the whole plant or enterprise just with the objective of modeling it.

     

    See the PI Square thread linked below, there are some good posts there about the questions you need to ask first when planning your approach.

     

    Re: PI AF

Reply

  • Hi César,

     

    Like Ian mentioned, your AF approach should be driven by a business issue or use case. What are the problems you are trying to solve? Start small, targeting specific issues, and go from there. Don't try to model the whole plant or enterprise just with the objective of modeling it.

     

    See the PI Square thread linked below, there are some good posts there about the questions you need to ask first when planning your approach.

     

    Re: PI AF

Children
No Data