W3 (Replacement)_SSG_Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) of Topside of Floating Production Unit for EPCI Contract


PROBLEM DEFINITION

We are now in the end of Concept Definition phase where the contract of EPC-I work will be delivered. One of the contracts requirements in the contract coordination procedure is to develop a structured breakdown of work which is measureable and well organized.

DEVELOPMENT OF FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVES

To accommodate the contract coordination procedure and project controlling purpose, Work Breakdown Structure is developed.

DEVELOPMENT OF OUTCOMES FOR EACH ALTERNATIVE

There is no theoretically WBS level of detail standard. It depends on the project complexity. In this project, WBS will be divided in to 5 levels i.e.

Level 1. Project, overall progress will be on this level

Level 2, Function, To define the phasing of each facilities i.e. Project Management, Engineering, Procurement, Fabrication / Construction, Mechanical Completion, Transportation, Offshore Hook-up and Commissioning, Projects Close Out.

Level 3. Facility, to cover breakdown of project facilities i.e. Topside

Level 4, Component, to define component work of each facility.

Level 5, Component, To cover each discipline applied in each component.

 

SELECTION OF CRITERIA

A well Work Breakdown Structure must include all the work needed to complete the projects. Besides that, It must have, at least, below characteristic.

ü  It is defined output not process.

ü  It is hierarchical, top-down decomposition of output.

ü  It’s lower level output is input to higher Level.

ü  Normally, resources is included in the WBS

ü  Theoretically, NO decomposition limit.

ANALYSIS FOR THE ALTERNATIVES

Above WBS must include all the scope of work in the project, hence:

  1. The WBS must be able to be used as a control to breakdown scope of work.
  2. WBS must cover all the deliverables to complete the the projects.
  3. In the Lumsump contract, WBS is also used as earn value representation breakdown.
  4. One WBS is dedicated to one scope of work.
  5. One WBS is performed by one or more activities.
  6. WBS is part of the contract documents.
  7. For additional scope, dedicated WBS will be developed.

SELECTION ON THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVES

Below are selected alternative for Topside part of FPU Projects:

Figure 1, Project Management Breakdown

Figure 2, Engineering Breakdown

Figure 3, Procurement Breakdown

Figure 4, Fabrication & Mechanical Completion Breakdown

Figure 5, Transportation, Offhshore Installation, and Close Out

PERFORMANCE MONITORING AND POST EVALUATION RESULT

Above Work breakdown structure is consistent until the end of the project unless new additional scope is define. In that case, dedicated WBS will be developed.

 

REFERENCES

Omniclass.(2013).Omniclas Table 23, 31, and 33. Access October 04, 2013 from

http://www.omniclass.org/

Workbreakdown Structure.(2013).Tecnical Synopsis.Access October 04, 2013 from

http://www-ssrl.slac.stanford.edu/lcls/cdr/lcls_cdr-ch15.pdf

Advertisements

6 Comments

Filed under Sutoyo S, Week 03

6 responses to “W3 (Replacement)_SSG_Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) of Topside of Floating Production Unit for EPCI Contract

  1. OK, MUCH better Pak Sutoyo……. Only one question…… For OFFSHORE PLATFORMS, why did you choose OmniClass http://www.omniclass.org/ and not Norzok Z-014? http://www.standard.no/PageFiles/22773/Z-014%20Edition%202%20May%202012.pdf

    The reason the Norwegians created Norzok Z-014 was because the CSI Master and Uniformat didn’t work very well for offshore oil and gas.

    Also not sure why you didn’t cite the work of Jean Yves Moine and his arguments WHY a 3D WBS structure is so important? http://3d-wbs.blogspot.com/

    Bottom line- you are improving and you have picked a GREAT case study, but it seems you are just not doing enough research on Step 2- Feasible Alternatives. Had you done a better job on that step, you should have realized that Norsok Z-014 was designed SPECIFICALLY for your application.

    For your W4 blog, I would like to see you take the same case study and REDO IT but this time, using Norzok Z-014. Then COMPARE Norsok Z-014 vs Omniclass and see which one YOU think works best for your situation?

    Oh, to make this assignment MUCH easier if you go to our War Room and look in the files section, I believe I uploaded Pak Candra’s paper? He wrote his CCC/E paper on that topic.

    BR,
    Dr. PDG, Jakarta

    • Pak paul,
      Thanks for the comments. After I check to Norzok Z-014, it seemed that Norzok Z-014 is applied not only for offshore but onshore as well. Ultimately this Norzok Z-014 is more reliable to oil and gas industry. Even in some cases, I can’t find the exact code for the offshore it self, i.e. in my case (W.4) I find that “Installation Engineer” is not spesifically availalbe in the Norzok, where as in every offshore installation, this engineering dicipline is available. In this case, I need to adjust to the closed code (Multi dicipline) Engineer.
      Overall, I see this Norzok is more suitable for oil and gas industry for both onshore and offshore.

      BTW, in the W4 report, I made 3D WBS point of view as recomended in Norzok, i.e PBS (Product Breakdown Structure), SAB (Standard Activity Breakdown), and COR (Code of Resourse) as well.

      Rgds,
      Sutoyo

      • Yes, if you DO find something that is MISSING, please send an email to Norsok and let them know. I believe on the front cover of the Norsok ..pdf file there is an email address or other contact information?

        ALL these templates are LIVING DOCUMENTS and are updated every 2 years or so…

        BR,
        Dr. PDG, Jakarta

  2. PS Pak Sutoyo, when you are replacing a posting which was REJECTED, you need to rename it W3.1 or W3.2….. This way, it makes it easy to recognize and give you credit for this…..

    REALLY important that you follow the naming conventions we agreed to in our Team Governance Agreement. Otherwise, it makes updating the reports a lot harder and prone to errors.

    BR,
    Dr. PDG, Jakarta

    • Pak Paul,
      Well Noted and thank you, I have applied this on my W4 blog posting.

      Rgds,
      Sutoyo

      • Ya, but how did you miss the fact that you need a MINIMUM of 3 references to support your blog?

        And worst of all, you had another one (Jean Yves 3D Blog) and you never even bothered to cite him!!!

        Ya ampyun!!! You need to do a better job on your quality control!!! Get someone to CRITIQUE your blog BEFORE you submit it, otherwise I will just make you do it over again for what are nothing more than careless reasons….

        BR,
        Dr. PDG, Jakarta

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s