If at first you donāt succeed with your Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) initiative, try, try again. You could also get some helpful insight from those who have already tried, tried again.
If National Oilwell Varco (NOV) had given up after its first go-round (or its second), the oil drilling rig manufacturer would not have the kind of success itās having today. It likely would not have survived the stark downturn in oil prices without its workforce facing the brunt of the cost reductions.
The end results of NOVās IIoT efforts are convincing. Along with the rest of the oil and gas industry, NOVās revenue faced a steep declineĀ when oil prices began fallingĀ in 2014. And yet the rig company not only survived, but fluorished through the reduced costs afforded by connected assets, noted Ashe Menon, senior vice president of global manufacturing for NOV, Grant Prideco.
Most convincing: At a customerās rig in West Texas, its first ever implementation of IIoT led to a reduction in downtime costs of more than 80 percent.
But those successes did not come overnight, and were the result of repeated attempts and reevaluations along the way. There is no easy button for IIoT, Menon said, outlining some key challenges and efforts for attendees of Industry 4.0 ThinkTank, a two-day conference held recently in Chicago.
The challenges for NOVās customers are many, considering their location in what are typically extremely remote, extremely rugged oil drilling locations with a low level of connectivity. Given the remote locations, itās very expensive when something breaks. The industry tends to be very technology-averse, particularly if any projects have failed in the past, Menon explained.
Add to that any trepidation about new technologiesānot to mention skepticism about the hype behind IIoTāand the concept of connected machines predicting failure could be a further challenge.
āForget about all the IoT nomenclature. Itās just machines telling us what to do,ā Menon advised. āWe had to make it simple to make sure weād succeed. Letās not waste our time monitoring things that donāt mean anything.ā
To begin, NOV analyzed data gathered from a very critical piece of equipmentāthe top drive. āWhen it stops working, youāre not drilling,ā Menon explained. āImagine if you had a locomotive engine and stood it on its head; thatās what it is. When it stops working, we have big problems.ā
NOV focused in on risk management, asset management and condition monitoring, analyzing failure data, criticality, probability, consequences, etc. āWithout understanding that data, it wasnāt going to work,ā Menon said.
They started with 10 years worth of data, and finally managed to whittle that down to three years worth of good data. āAnd then we found the one largest cause of downtime,ā Menon said. āOther.ā In other words, after all that effort, they knew pretty much nothing.
So they tried again, going back to the point of data entry. But the results were not much better the second time around, with explanations like ābreak downā or āworn out.ā Menon urged, āIf you donāt pay attention to what youāre doing on the front end, it will mean nothing on the back end.ā
Ultimately, NOV borrowed a lesson from the finance industry, Menon said, describing a call he got from MasterCard while he was on vacation in Las Vegas. They were concerned about his spending habits because it was abnormal activity for him. He explained that it wasnāt normal activity for when he was at home, but it was normal for when heās in Vegas. The next time Menon was in Vegas, MasterCard didnāt call. āBecause now they know the pattern,ā he said.
NOV used the same kind of supervised learning to overcome differences in location for its top drives, which are manufactured in California, but shipped all over the world. How a top drive operates in extreme heat, for example, could be very different from how it operates in cold temperatures. āWe want to make sure the systems are smart enough to know: When Iām doing this in this place, I donāt need an alarm,ā Menon said. āWe knew how every single piece of equipment could break, and what was the criticality of failure. So the first time it sends a notification, we train it to say no, this is normal. So they stop getting false alarms.ā
The system got more sophisticated over time. āThe system could tell you where to look first,ā Menon described. āOnce it learned it, it wouldnāt tell us where to look; it would just tell us weāre going to have a seal failure.ā
They were getting great results, like the savings mentioned earlier in West Texas.
āAnd then 2014 happened and oil prices cratered,ā Menon said. āOh man, we were so ready for this. But we decided hey, weāll just use it ourselves.ā
Cut to two years later, with oil prices still low, and the company facing a 70 percent drop in revenue. But the IIoT initiative was a success, despite the shaky start.Ā The biggest challenges of getting a project started, Menon said, is the fear of failure. āPeople say, āWe donāt understand it. Itās not going to work here,āā he said. āBut the onus is on us. We have to keep on trying.ā