The ARC Advisory Group first reported on the concepts of Collaborative Process Automation Systems (CPAS) in 2002¹. This original report was an effort requested by “several large, well known end user clients that were having difficulty evaluating the capabilities of the then-current Distributed Control Systems (DCS) to meet their evolving business requirements².”  So why is it 10 years later we still find that EPC’s and manufacturers are buying DCS almost exclusively on cost factors instead of CPAS functionality and benefits? Have the evolving business requirements moved away from where the capital investment in a DCS does not have to return real value to the end users? Or perhaps the message never got widely distributed and understood? Maybe it’s both.

CPAS functionality delivers most of its financial benefits to the end users during the operational phase of a project and those 15 or more years of the potential project benefits appear to be mostly ignored in today’s buying decisions. It seems that the focus is on two costs; the upfront capital cost and longer term lifecycle cost. It is a rare occasion when anyone asks about long term benefits. So maybe the evolving business environment has changed. I recall during my 21 years of working for the end users, a project needed to have good financial return over the entire project lifecycle to get approval. Without having a benefit side, projects did not receive funding. There was a responsibility to create a return for the stakeholders. So since we don’t seem to discuss benefits any more, perhaps the business environment has evolved away from that need.

The other realm of possibility is that the message is not well distributed or understood. Maybe the end users do not yet understand the vision of CPAS as it relates to their enterprise and accordingly do not see the need for its benefits. As indicated in the opening, ARC first communicated the vision in 2002. They did an update to the vision in August 2010². ISA tried to help out in 2010 when it published Collaborative Process Automation Systems³ by Martin Hollender. CPAS has also been a subject of this blog on some previous occasions. But maybe all of that is not enough. Perhaps those of us on the vendor side need to be more proactive about making the end users understand the benefits of CPAS.

I know I will keep trying!

By the way, if you should be interested, the two CPAS reports from ARC are available for purchase from the ARC Advisory Group and the ISA CPAS publication is available on the ISA website.

_________________________

¹ Collaborative Process Automation System of the Future, ARC Advisory Group, 2002; Woll, Dave Woll, Dick Caro, and Dick Hill

² Excerpt from online abstract of The Collaborative Process Automation System for the 21^st Century CPAS 2, ARC Advisory Group, August 2010; Dave Woll, Larry O’Brien, and Paul Miller

³ Collaborative Process Automation Systems, ISA publications, copyright 2010, Martin Hollender

****  This is the final posting in a series by Keith Larson at Control Magazine on Operator Effectiveness ****

In order to gauge current industry views on operator effectiveness, Control together with ABB conducted in January 2012 a reader survey across Control’s email database of process automation professionals. Survey respondents acknowledged the potential for operators to significantly influence plant performance, as well as an ongoing need to implement measures that would make them more effective in their jobs. Other data from this exclusive study is included throughout this special report.

When asked to what extent better prepared operators could positively influence key performance metrics, respondents placed significant accountability in the hands of the operators. Operators not only have a big impact on availability, equipment damage and personnel safety, but can play a big role in quality, environmental and economic performance as well (chart), according to survey respondents.



But an overwhelming majority of survey respondents also confirmed the increasing scope of board operator responsibilities, with more than three-fourths indicating a growing workload (chart).

This trend indicates an already urgent and growing need for companies to do all they can to make their operators more effective in their daily tasks. In terms of survey demographics, a total of 123 responses were received from a range of process industry verticals, including chemicals manufacturing (27%), mining, metals and materials (11%), oil and gas production (10%), life sciences and pharmaceuticals (10%), electric power generation (10%), food and beverage manufacturing (9%), pulp and paper manufacturing (8%), petroleum refining (7%) water and wastewater treatment (5%) and engineering services (4%).

**** To download the complete white paper, please visit our Knowledge Center at www.integrateyourinformation.com.  And as always, we look forward to your comments ****

****  This is the forth in a series by Keith Larson at Control Magazine on Operator Effectiveness ****

Human Factors in the Control Room
Instead of being designed with operator performance in mind, many control centers, control rooms and operator stations are designed without respect to human factors. Incorrectly planned environments intended for 24x7 use often are depressing, unwelcoming and uncomfortable at best—and at worst create fatigue and boredom.

Operators’ effectiveness is enhanced by optimal ergonomic and presentation technologies at the control console, including personalized climate controls, advanced keyboards with hotkeys, directional sound systems, integrated and adjustable lighting, and motorized/adjustable workstation configurations.

The larger control room layout should include a dedicated operations space that is free from distractions. A separate area for visitors should be provided so that non-essential personnel are kept out of the control area. A dedicated collaboration space should be provided for meetings and group troubleshooting, with A/V tied to control center visualization. Further, a relaxation area should be provided to help operators not actively engaged in operational duties to recharge without distracting on-duty personnel.

In addition to better decision-making by operators, this attention to human factors in the control room can help attract and retain new operators, reduce turn-over and even reduce workplace health issues.

Simulation Boosts Competence and Confidence

A closely integrated training environment makes it possible to train operators on simulators that behave essentially identically to actual plant systems, instilling confidence that they can respond correctly to abnormal situations when they arise. An integrated simulation environment also provides a platform for optimization studies and knowledge capture.

For a new plant, use of an operator training simulator can contribute to shorter initial start-up, enhanced operator performance as well as trip and incidence avoidance. It also allows the testing of operational procedures and the tweaking of display and control strategies before initial start-up, when changes are always easier and less risky to make.

Operator training simulators also are important to the effective operation of existing plants. Many high-reliability plants are having difficulty maintaining performance during turnarounds because workers deal with these procedures only infrequently. And the ongoing retirement of experienced operators has only made this situation worse. 

While the direct benefit of using a simulator is difficult to quantify, a recent survey by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) indicated an average yearly saving of about $4,500 per megawatt of generating capacity. These savings are attributed to reduced training costs, improvements in plant availability, fewer environmental excursions and reduced damage to equipment. A bit of quick math indicates a three-month payback for a typical power plant, and begs the question: in what situation would you not invest in a training simulator?

**** Check back next week the results of Control’s Operator Effectiveness survey and to download the complete white paper.  And as always, we look forward to your comments ****