Best Practices for Implementing RBI Programs: A Technical Insight

Introduction

Risk-based inspection (RBI) programs are integral to ensuring the robustness of industrial operations. However, implementing an effective RBI program requires careful planning, consideration of key factors, and adherence to best practices.

Semi-quantitative RBI is the most common approach in industry today. It requires less data and technical expertise than fully quantitative analysis (such as a quantitative risk assessment or QRA), making it more cost-effective to implement and maintain. Most semi-quantitative RBI software available today uses data from Inspection Data Management Systems (IDMS), easing the data requirement efforts. Since the calculations are based on data inputs, semi-quantitative RBI is more consistent than qualitative RBI, which relies heavily on subject matter expertise.

In this article, we delve into the technical nuances one should consider when developing, implementing, or maintaining a robust semi-quantitative RBI program.

The success of an RBI program hinges on several critical factors, with the development of a solid business case serving as the foundational step.

Making a Business Case

The goal of any semi-quantitative RBI program should be to optimize the inspection resources while maintaining asset integrity through effective inspections. Experience has proven that there is no cookie-cutter approach to RBI.

The journey begins with defining the RBI program's objectives, scope, and methodologies. This includes selecting the appropriate software, and considering factors like covered asset types, damage mechanisms, and process streams. It is imperative to align the chosen methodology with industry best practices and local regulatory requirements.

RBI is an investment into a more cost-effective inspection program. The cost-savings occur over the life of the program. Concepts such as postponing physical internal inspections or focusing only on a small group of high-risk, difficult-to-inspect assets should be avoided. While these concepts are often attractive to those funding the program, they are shortsighted and undermine the “relative risk” intent of semi-quantitative RBI. More data points will improve the distribution which helps the user to calibrate the settings, thereby customizing the methodology to the site or company.

A common result of a successful RBI program is the systematic extension or replacement of physical, internal inspections with on-stream techniques. While this should not be the goal, it is a probable output resulting from the detailed review of operating conditions, damage mechanism identification and inspection history of each asset. An often-unexpected result is the shortening of inspection intervals due to unforeseen risks or damage mechanisms not previously considered.

Capturing the costs associated with maintaining the program is important when considering the overall value of an RBI approach. This is a living program that needs continual management and maintenance. Regular assessment updates are necessary to capture process changes and inspection findings. While the software solution may help this effort, each analysis requires skilled resources for review and approval.