Data Validation: Are We Data-Rich, but Information-Poor?

Introduction

Back in November, Inspectioneering and Pinnacle had the privilege of co-hosting our 10th “Meeting of the Minds” (MOTM) roundtable discussion; this time in one of my favorite cities in the world, New Orleans. This bi-annual meeting has consistently brought together a select group of leading mechanical integrity (MI) experts to discuss pertinent topics related to fixed equipment reliability and share their personal experiences and opinions. As with previous meetings, participants came from various sectors of the industry, including oil refining, petrochemicals, offshore production, and chemical processing.

Over the years, we’ve always tried to share key takeaways from these meetings with our readers because we believe the insights shared could greatly benefit the industry at large. Previous recap articles have summarized discussions on corrosion under insulation (CUI) programs, emerging inspection technologies, integrity operating windows (IOWs), corrosion control documents (CCDs), risk-based inspection (RBI), mechanical integrity project hit lists, and most recently, data collection and analysis.

This discussion focused more on Data Validation and was prompted by the following statement and question: at no point in history have we had access to more data about our assets than we do right now; but is it really helping or are we simply “data rich, information poor?” For over an hour, the participants openly discussed the importance of having clear and consistent definitions of what constitutes “good data,” as well as effective processes for identifying and addressing data that does not meet those standards. Additionally, they discussed the benefits of using automated systems for data validation and the challenges of working with large volumes of data. The participants also emphasized the importance of collaboration and sharing knowledge among industry professionals to drive continuous improvement and advancement in a rapidly changing industry.