Document

Smart Chips Project

Materials and Asset Tracking Using RFID: A Preparatory Field Pilot Study Tulane University

Jasemin Aksoy, Ph.D. ChevronTexaco

Ignatius Chan, Ph.D. Karen Guidry Jeff Jones

FIATECH

Charles R. Wood September 29, 2004

Smart Chips Project These field trails were conducted within the FIATECH Smart Chips project. FIATECH is a member sponsored non-profit industry organization. Anyone interested learning more about the FIATECH Smart Chips Project should contact Charles Wood ([email protected] , 713-523-5380 )

We wish to express our appreciation to the following companies for their support of the Smart Chips Project and many other FIATECH efforts:

Aramco Service Company Bechtel Corporation ChevronTexaco Corporation E. I. duPont de Nemours & Co., Inc. Fluor Corp.

Intel Corporation Jacobs Engineering KBR Procter and Gamble Zachry Construction Corporation

Copyright ©, 2004 by FIATECH on behalf of contributing organizations. All Rights Reserved This report has been developed as a cooperative effort with input and support from the following contributing organizations:

ChevronTexaco Corporation FIATECHTM, a non-profit joint-industry organization affiliated with the University of Texas Phase IV Engineering, Inc. Tulane University Contributing organizations may reproduce and distribute this work, at no cost; and are permitted to revise

and adapt this work for internal use, provided an informational copy is furnished to FIATECH. FIATECH members may reproduce and distribute this work internally at no cost.

This report is available for purchase by non-FIATECH members; however, no copies may be made or distributed and no modifications made without prior written permission from FIATECH. To purchase this or other FIATECH publications, contact FIATECH at www.fiatech.org or 512-232-9600.

Materials and Asset Tracking Using RFID

Smart Chips Project

Acknowledgements

The work described in this report would not have been possible without the contributions of a number of individuals. The authors would like to thank Cheryl Lukehart for initiating the discussion with the ChevronTexaco Gulf of Mexico (CVX-GOM) Transportation Group. Max Ragan and Keith Smith at CVX-GOM for supporting the pilot study. In addition, Jason Rappel, Andy Luther, Ronald Buras, Greg Dinette, Cliff Bernard, Bruce Gerald, Paul Black, Lance Ratcliff, and Ronnie Chambers at the Venice Shorebase and MP41 locations for their enthusiasm and many helpful suggestions. We are also grateful to Rich Pollack and David Kramer at Phase IV Engineering (www.phaseivengr.com) for the RFID technology and technical expertise they supplied to this effort; and to Scott D’Aunoy, Seda Erdem, Tom Wieber at Tulane University.


Smart Chips Project

Executive Summary

The pilot project described in this report was a field trial of RFID technology in logistics operations conducted in response to the ChevronTexaco Marine and Transportation group’s interest in improving the tracking of critical materials and supplies between shore based warehouse operations and offshore field locations. ChevronTexaco operates land-based and offshore exploration and production platforms around the world, including approximately 100 offshore facilities in the Gulf of Mexico (GOM) supported by three major GOM shorebase receiving/warehousing/shipping terminals. RFID technology would potentially enable ChevronTexaco to automatically and accurately track shipping and receiving between shorebase terminals and offshore facilities.

This pilot study focused on shipments between a single GOM shorebase terminal and a large offshore platform. The principal objectives of this pilot study were to: 1) Assess the ability of RFID technology to improve the efficiency, accuracy, and accountability associated with the movement of critical materials and supplies, and 2) Gain knowledge about the practical use of RFID technology and its implementation in a real life industrial application.

The pilot study was a collaboration of the ChevronTexaco Energy Technology Company, the FIATECH Smart Chips Project, Phase IV Engineering, and the Tulane Consortium for Supply Chain Management. Planning for the project began in November 2003 and the field study was conducted in March and April 2004. Due to multiple shift changes both onshore and offshore, a significant amount of training was required during the pilot implementation in order to keep site personnel informed and motivated to use the system properly. In the course of the pilot study, thirteen shipments with a total of 154 specific items were tracked during transport between the shore based terminal and the offshore platform.

The RFID technology was relatively easy to implement and functioned well, even in harsh marine weather conditions. When used in accordance with the relatively straightforward pilot project procedures, the RFID system accurately identified 100% of tagged items in each shipment in which the system was used. Marine weather conditions did not affect performance of the system. In some instances, the highly metallic environment on the offshore platform caused problems reading all RFID signals; this was resolved by changing the position of the reader with respect to the RFID tags. Other less significant technical issues encountered in the pilot could be easily resolved by minor adaptation of the RFID systems or procedures.

Observations from the pilot study indicate that the RFID technology would enable a more stringent, robust and error resistant work process in tracking and documenting offshore shipments. The RFID pilot process itself identified certain work process improvements that could be made with or without the technology. However, RFID technology would allow faster, easier, and more certain accountability while reducing the number of causes for misplaced, misdirected, lost, and stolen items. Benefits of the technology would be even greater if implemented by suppliers upstream of the shorebase terminal.


Smart Chips Project

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction ............................................................................ 1

1.1 Potential Benefits of the RFID Application .............................................................................................................. 2 1.2 Pilot Objectives......................................................................................................................................................... 3

2.0 Pilot Study Plan and Preparation......................................... 4

2.1 Project Team Formation............................................................................................................................................ 4 2.2 Selection of the Shipping Locations.......................................................................................................................... 5 2.3 RFID Technology Immersion ................................................................................................................................... 6 2.4 Venice Shorebase Shipping and Receiving............................................................................................................... 8 2.5 MP41 Shipping and Receiving.................................................................................................................................. 9 2.6 Selection of Items for Tracking................................................................................................................................. 9

3.0 RFID Technology Field Testing.......................................... 11

3.1 Field Pilot Activities and Results ............................................................................................................................ 11 3.2 RFID Technology - Observations ........................................................................................................................... 13 3.3 Implementing RFID Technology ............................................................................................................................ 15 3.4 Work Processes Around RFID................................................................................................................................ 15 3.5 Participant Survey and Results................................................................................................................................ 16

4.0 Lessons Learned................................................................... 18

4.1 RFID Technology ................................................................................................................................................... 18 4.2 Work Processes and RFID Implementation ............................................................................................................ 18 4.3 Potential Benefits of Full Implementation .............................................................................................................. 19

Appendix A – Overview of RFID Technology ................................... 20

Appendix B – Cargo Watch System- Product Information ................ 25

Appendix C- Pilot Study Schedule................................................... 27

Appendix D – Pilot Work Process Flow and Results.......................... 28

Appendix D1 – Shipping from the Venice Shorebase Appendix D2 – Receiving at the Offshore Platform................... 28 Appendix D2 – Receiving at the Offshore Platform ....................................................................................................... 29 Appendix D3 – Shipping from the Offshore Platform .................................................................................................... 30 Appendix D4 – Receiving at the Venice Shorebase........................................................................................................ 31

Appendix F - Feedback from Shipping and Receiving Personnel ....... 32


Smart Chips Project

1.0 Introduction

This report presents a pilot study undertaken by ChevronTexaco Energy Technology Company

to assess the potential application of Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) technology in

ChevronTexaco offshore supply logistics. This pilot study is part of a progressive effort by

ChevronTexaco Energy Technology Company (ETC) to understand potential implications of

RFID for ChevronTexaco. The opportunity to use RFID in this application was first recognized

during site visits to offshore platforms as part of a study of wireless technology within

ChevronTexaco’s “i-Field” development. “i-Field” is a ChevronTexaco effort to deploy

innovative technologies to achieve step change improvements in oilfield operations. The RFID

pilot study reported here was in response to the Chevron Texaco’s Marine and Transportation

group’s interest in improving the tracking of critical materials and supplies between shore based

warehouse operations and offshore field locations.

RFID technology is one of the most promising areas in supply chain management. In October

2003, the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) announced the establishment of an RFID Policy.

This policy requires suppliers to put RFID tags on the lowest possible price part/case/pallet

packaging by January 2005. The expectation is that RFID technology will improve the

management of inventory by providing hands-off processing. The equipment will quickly

account for and identify massive inventories, and enhance the processing of transactions to allow

DoD to realign resources and streamline business processes. Within a month after the DoD

announcement, Wal-Mart followed suit by requiring its Texas distribution center to include 12

products from Wal-Mart suppliers to be tagged. It started as a pilot to track pharmaceutical

products, and Wal-Mart is refining its core RFID strategy in 2004. They will continue to

expand the pilot to three additional distribution centers in 2005, and plan to complete its rollout

for all suppliers by the end of 2006 (Venture Development Corporation, 2003). In recent months

both Target (February 2004) and Albertsons (March 2004) also issued RFID mandates.

Smart Chips Project

1.1 Potential Benefits of the RFID Application

With the persistence of mandates and strong recommendations from the key customers to make a

business case for RFID, a large number of suppliers have started their own RFID initiatives. The

need to test or “pilot” the technology appears to be a consistent theme that runs through every

initiative (Gilmore, 2004). Gilmore (2004) summarizes four drivers in these pilots.

1) Compliance with a key customer mandate

2) Improvements in distribution (inventory tracking, warehouse management)

3) Improvements in design/production processes (integrating with distribution, driving tagging back into manufacturing)

4) Improvements in cargo tracking and security (use of tags with sensors that monitor environmental conditions, providing increased security).

RFID technology potentially would allow ChevronTexaco to automatically and accurately track

the movement of materials and supplies between shorebase warehouse and the offshore facilities.

The key drivers for this pilot are improvements in distribution, cargo tracking, and security, as

opposed to compliance with a customer mandate. The objective is to improve the efficiency,

accuracy, and accountability on the movement of materials. It is believed that implementation of

RFID systems in the ChevronTexaco offshore supply processes would:

1) Accurately track the movement of shipments

2) Reduce existing paperwork and the time it takes to load the boats

3) Reduce time spent on handling error inquiries and error remediation

4) Accurately accounts for all of items moving to and from the platform

Specific potential benefits of RFID systems in this application include:

1) Reduced material loss/misplacement- Equipment, such as drill bits, spare parts, testing or

logging technology, are very expensive. Furthermore, when critical equipment is not

available when needed, it causes a great deal of additional expense and inefficiency.

2) Reduced time spent on error inquires- For each error, the shipping personnel at the

shorebase terminal could spend significant amount of time searching, contacting other

Materials and Asset Tracking Using RFID -2-

Smart Chips Project

offshore facilities, reordering materials, and otherwise resolving questions about missing

materials or supplies.

3) Reduced time receiving urgent material – With cooperation from suppliers, the RFID

system could expedite the receiving of materials at the shorebase warehouse. Time

critical material can be quickly received and placed on boats for shipment offshore.

4) Reduced paperwork – RFID systems can facilitate the automation of record keeping

associated with receiving, tracking, and shipping materials and supplies.

1.2 Pilot Objectives

This pilot study is to explore solutions to practical ChevronTexaco business needs. The principal

objectives of this pilot study are to:

1) Assess the ability of RFID to: a) provide shorebase management with accurate tracking

visibility and accountability for high value items, b) minimize the amount of error and

time spent on error remediation by the shorebase warehouse, and c) reduce time required

on manual paper work to account for assets.

2) Gain knowledge on the practical use of RFID and its implementation in a real operations

environment.

In this report we first present the RFID pilot design, then provide a detailed summary of the

RFID technology field testing and end with conclusions.


Smart Chips Project

2.0 Pilot Study Plan and Preparation The pilot trials described here were a collaboration of the ChevronTexaco Energy Technology

Company (ETC), the FIATECH Smart Chips Project (www.fiatech.org), Phase IV Engineering,

and the Tulane Consortium for Supply Chain Management. ETC has the responsibility of

facilitating the adoption and deployment of relevant new technologies at ChevronTexaco's

Operating Companies (OpCos). FIATECH is an industry research consortium formed by the

National Institute of Standards and Technologies (NIST) and the Construction Industry Institute

(CII) to accelerate the adoption of beneficial new technologies applied to the creation and

operation of capital facilities. Tulane Consortium for Supply Chain Management (TCSCM) was

founded in 1996 within the A.B. Freeman School of Business at Tulane University. Since its

initiation, TCSCM has focused its efforts on serving the supply chain related research needs of

the energy industry, including oil, gas, and electric utility.

ETC has been tracking the developments and applications of the RFID technology for some

time. Among the different RFID applications, materials movement logistics is one of the

application areas of high interest. The opportunity for this pilot arose when the ChevronTexaco

Gulf of Mexico Exploration and Production Company became interested in finding out whether

RFID can help improve the efficiency and accountability of the shipping process supplying

offshore platforms in the Gulf of Mexico.

ChevronTexaco operates land-based and offshore exploration and production platforms around

the world, including approximately 100 offshore facilities in the Gulf of Mexico (GOM)

supported by three GOM shorebase receiving/warehousing/shipping locations. This pilot study

focused on shipments between a particular shorebase terminal (Venice) and a particular offshore

destination (Main Pass 41) in the Gulf of Mexico.

2.1 Project Team Formation

Discussion of current active RFID applications, specifically Phase IV Engineering’s work with

supply logistics for the US military, in the FIATECH Smart Chips Project resonated well with

the ChevronTexaco interests. ChevronTexaco approached FIATECH with an offer to host the

pilot demonstration under the Smart Chips Project. The FIATECH Smart Chips Project has been


Smart Chips Project

conducting pilot demonstrations of commercial ready, chip based technologies that can be easily

adapted help automate and improve facility related processes. It is clear that real-time supply

chain visibility and automated error-free shipping/receiving processes made possible by RFID

systems are potentially very high value to capital facilities related businesses. The FIATECH

role in these pilot demonstrations is to work with interested host companies to: 1) identify areas

where commercially ready technology can significantly improve critical processes, 2) plan pilot

demonstrations to test potential benefit of the technology to the business process, 3) identify and

negotiate technology and support from technology suppliers, 4) engage qualified academics to

observe and report on pilot demonstration results.

FIATECH invited Phase IV Engineering, Inc. to supply RFID technology for the pilot.

FIATECH had successfully worked with Phase IV in an earlier pilot. FIATECH also identified

the Tulane Consortium for Supply Chain Management (TCSCM) as the academic component of

this pilot. TCSCM supported the pilot by staffing with a faculty member and three students for

independent observation, field implementation suggestions, and reporting.

ChevronTexaco provided an IT Project Manager and an IT Analyst to organize and monitor the

field pilot study. The Application Analyst and the Project Manager made several visits to the

shorebase and the offshore platform prior to the pilot in order to familiarize shorebase personnel

and the offshore platform crew with the pilot study process and RFID technology. The entire

project team was on-site for the first shipping and receiving runs. The Application Analyst and

the Project Manager made a number of visits to the sites to assist with the pilot process. They

also worked (in person or by phone) with the local operations personnel prior to each shipment

and receiving cycle at each site locations.

2.2 Selection of the Shipping Locations

In the Gulf of Mexico (GOM) each oil platform is identified with a geographic area prefix and a

sequence number and can be of two types: drilling or production. Oil platforms require a variety

of materials for their operations, including water, fuel, lubricants, equipment, spare parts, and

groceries, among others. Due to the limited storage space on the platform, frequent

replenishments of supplies are necessary. Used parts, trash, and broken tools are transported

back to the shorebase. In general, each major oil production platform supports and controls a


Smart Chips Project

large number of smaller structures. The amount of supplies needed is proportional to the scope

of the operation.

The pilot study followed shipments between Venice shorebase and the offshore platform, Main

Pass 41 (MP41). Venice shorebase is the key terminal in the Eastern Region of the GOM

serving twenty three shipping points that collectively reach hundreds of destinations. The

platform MP41 is one of these shipping points (referred to as a field location in the industry)

which serves the logistics needs of about a hundred destinations, including rigs and structures.

We concentrated on three of these destinations, MP 41 D, L, and M, which are connected by

walkways. The reasons for selecting MP41 were the heavy shipping activity level and the

opportunity for process improvements based on past experience. It was decided to exclude

shipments to drilling facilities for this pilot in order to set aside the issue of complying with the

explosion-proof requirements on the RFID equipment. This reduced the complexity of the pilot

design. The industrial explosion-proof requirement would need to be addressed later in the full

commercial implementation.

2.3 RFID Technology Immersion

RFID is an automated data collection system that uses electronic tags to store identification and

other data, and a wireless reader to communicate with the tag and the central database. For a

more complete overview of RFID technology, please see Appendix A - Overview of RFID

Technology. The specific RFID technology used in this pilot was the CargoWatch system

developed by Phase IV Engineering of Boulder, Colorado. Phase IV provided the CargoWatch

RFID Tags, handheld readers (Intermec 700 Series Color Mobile Computer) and docking

stations, as well as the CargoWatch demonstration software version 1.0. Readers and RFID tags

are shown in figure 2.3.1. Additional system requirements were Windows 2000/XP operating

system PC with USB port, and ActiveSync version 3.7.1.

The “Cargo Watch” system includes active RFID tags that operate at 433.92 MHz frequency.

The tag read/write range is 60-150 feet. Each tag has a memory up to 0.5 MB. Each tag has a

barcode label that can be read by the “Cargo Watch” reader. The barcode label positively

identifies each tag to the reader during the process of associating the tag with the manifest items

to which that tag is attached. The tag casing includes two slots that can accept a tie-wrap plastic


Smart Chips Project

fastener to attach the tags to the item. For further details on the CargoWatch technology, please

see Appendix B.

Figure 2.3.1: CargoWatch Reader and Tags

ChevronTexaco Gulf of Mexico IT team members received the hardware and software in the

middle of March 2004 (see Appendix C, Pilot Project Schedule). The GOM Application Analyst

worked with Phase IV Engineering to develop the software requirements and necessary data

fields to capture data as shown in Table 2.3.2. Microsoft Active Sync was used to communicate

between the PC and Handheld computer for transferring the manifest files. The software

associated with this pilot was incorporated into the already planned new manifest application.


Smart Chips Project

Table 2.3.2 Data Fields for manifest creation, roll calls, and tag association

Tag ID Unique identifier on each tag

Request ID Unique line item for each item on the manifest

Manifest ID Unique manifest number

Description Description of line item (cargo)

Shipped From Location item shipped from

Received Location item was received

Basket # Basket description/number

Destination Destination of line item cargo

In the 3-week period prior to the start of the pilot, the Application Analyst and the Project

Manager made several trips to both Venice shorebase and MP 41 to get an in-depth

understanding of the business processes involved. They also took the opportunity to

communicate the RFID technology and the purpose of the pilot to the local operations personnel.

In this phase the new RFID enabled process flows were identified using an “as is” and “to be”

process mapping process. Detailed process flow diagrams for shiping and receiving at each

location are shown in Appendix D. The process flows were used in recording the observations at

each trial run at the Venice shorebase terminal and the Main Pass 41 offshore platform.

2.4 Venice Shorebase Shipping and Receiving

In the first visit to the Venice shorebase, the pilot Project Manager and Analyst presented an

overview of the technology and the pilot proposal. They also interviewed the shipping and

receiving clerks who would document the current and future processes. The then developed the

agreements and the framing document for the pilot. The corresponding project schedule is

shown in Appendix C. The RFID tagged shipments for the pilot project were scheduled to be

completed within a thirty-day period.

Deliveries occur from the Venice shorebase to the offshore field locations twice a week, every

Tuesday and Friday, using the supply boat, the Beverly F. The Beverly F stays out in the

offshore field between shipments and delivers items from MP41 to Venice upon its return. All


Smart Chips Project

the boats are typically loaded by 10 PM and depart no later than 2 AM the next morning. The

boats arrive at MP41 around 6 AM. They wait for daylight to start unloading. Shipments from

MP41 to Venice take place on an as-needed basis on the return of the boat. The shipping and

receiving (S&R) personnel at the shorebase are all contracted employees. The Application

Analyst and the Project Manager visited and worked with the Venice S&R personnel on the

nights of shipments and observed the busy activities during this time frame. Venice S&R

personnel load multiple boats throughout the night for delivery to various locations. Suppliers

often deliver material just prior to scheduled boat departures. There are time commitments for

releasing boats that the S&R personnel are aiming to meet.

2.5 MP41 Shipping and Receiving

Crane operators are in charge of loading and unloading the boats at the offshore platform and,

therefore, are the key players for shipping and receiving. There are two shifts of three crane

operators that work seven days on and seven days off. Within each shift, there are both day and

night operators. We planned two visits to the field location to train each shift. However, not all

of the crane operators were able to attend this training. It turned out that hands-on experience

with the process and detailed documentation were critical. The shorebase personnel also created

a “cookbook” that was useful in quickly training the offshore personnel. The field coordinator at

MP41 was also a critical player in carrying out this pilot. Field coordinators hold meetings every

morning with field personnel to review and plan the day’s work.

Some locations on the off-shore platforms require all operating equipment to meet intrinsically

safe standards. If RFID readers and tags are used at those locations, they will need to be

properly packaged to meet those specifications. However, the unloading point at the platform is

“unclassified,” allowing a waiver of the intrinsically safe requirements for this pilot.

2.6 Selection of Items for Tracking

Items that are of high dollar value, such as drilling tools, and frequently used cargo baskets, are

the most critical. However, limiting the study to these items would restrict the amount of data

gathered within the pilot schedule. The pilot team instead worked with the clerks to identify

commonly shipped items with the intent to tag 10 – 15 items during each shipment. These items


Smart Chips Project

are often bundled (wrapped) together and placed in a “cargo” basket. It is also common to have

items going to multiple locations in a single cargo basket. Table 2.6.1 shows the items that are

frequently shipped between Venice and MP41. On the average, 30-40 line items of different

quantities are shipped from Venice to MP41, and a total of 5-10 total items are shipped from

MP41 to Venice.

Table 2.6.1- Items Shipped From Venice to MP41 From MP41 to Venice Both Directions Water Compactor Trash Bags Scaffolding Baskets Groceries Cargo Box Trash Bins /Dumpsters Warehouse supplies Filter Bins Laundry Cutting Boxes Bottle Racks GIS Baskets Chemical Tanks Drum racks

The RFID tags were secured to the cargo items using plastic zip ties and heavy-duty Velcro

straps. Each cargo item was different in size, material, and shape. The placement of the tags on

the cargo was critical to minimize damage to the tags. The shipping clerk decides on tag

placement to minimize damage due to collision and/or vibration.


Smart Chips Project

3.0 RFID Technology Field Testing Process flow diagrams as shown in Appendix D describe the work process at each field location

during the pilot study. These flow diagrams were used as observation sheets to assist the clerks

and crane operators in running the pilot and capturing learnings as they occur. The observation

sheets allowed participants to capture the data shown under each process list in Appendix D.

This data includes: number of items tagged, shipped and received; time spent to tag items; time

spent to do the associations and perform the roll calls; and the number of required roll calls to

account for all tagged items. The pilot Project Manager and Analyst called or visited each

location after deliveries to confirm that the observation sheets were utilized and appropriate data

were captured and documented.

3.1 Field Pilot Activities and Results

Shipping From the Venice Shorebase - Activities and data collected related to shipping from the

Venice Shorebase are shown in Appendix D-1. Typical activities related to receiving materials

and shipping them to the offshore platforms from the Venice shorebase include: 1) receiving

material shipments from supplier and documenting the receipt in the Shorebase Manifest

Application (SMA) system , 2) storing materials as required, 3) preparing materials and

documentation for shipment, and 4) loading, shipping, and documenting materials to be shipped

to the offshore platforms. Currently, all receiving and shipping documentation at the Venice

shorebase is originated on paper forms and manually entered into the SMA system. Additional

steps required for the RFID pilot study included: 1) downloading a shipping manifest into the

handheld RFID reader, 2) attaching RFID tags to items to be shipped, 3) associating each

shipping manifest item with the attached RFID tag, 4) taking electronic inventories of items to be

shipped (both on the dock and on the boat).

Some of the activities described here as “additional” requirements for the RFID pilot study

would actually replace similar activities in the current process (e.g. electronic inventories on the

dock and boat would replace manual inventories in the current process). While the results in

Appendix D show the time required for these “additional” steps, pilot study did not attempt to

establish baseline time for activities in the current process for comparison to those times in the


Smart Chips Project

equivalent pilot study activities. However, it is clear that the reduction in paperwork, translation

of documents into the SMA system, and electronic inventories enabled by the RFID technology

would save work time over current manual processes. The principal benefits expected from the

RFID technology would result from reduction of errors in these processes.

The RFID system performed well in this phase of the pilot study. The association of RFID tags

with the manifest was the most difficult part of the RFID enabled process throughout the pilot

study. People had difficulty tagging and associating items after they had been placed in a cargo

box, and it is recommended that items be tagged and associations made as soon as possible in the

process. Some associations were lost due to inadvertent erasure caused by pushing the wrong

button on the handheld device. Phase IV later advised that the handheld could be reprogrammed

to require user confirmation before erasing.

In general, significantly more items were tagged and tracked in the pilot study when the pilot

Project Manager and/or Analyst were present at site. This was probably due to time pressure and

unfamiliarity with the equipment on the part of the clerks. If the system were more familiar and

benefits demonstrated to the shore based personnel, it would likely be used more readily.

Receiving at the MP41 Platform - Activities and data collected related to receiving at the MP41

platform are shown in Appendix D-2. At the MP41 platform, materials are typically lifted from

the delivery boat onto the platform with a crane. The crane operator is responsible for verifying

receipt of materials. Using the RFID technology, materials received are automatically verified

against the shipping manifest. The manifest is e-mailed from the shorebase to the platform after

the delivery boat leaves the shorebase dock. The manifest file is received at the platform and

downloaded into the handheld RFID reader. When the materials arrive at the platform, the crane

operator performs a roll call of the RFID tags using the handheld reader. During the pilot study,

two roll calls were planned at the platform: 1) a roll call was performed on the tagged items in

the delivery boat before unloading- this roll call confirmed that all items on the electronic

manifest were indeed on the boat, and 2) a second roll call was performed in the receiving area

of the platform to confirm that all manifest items had been unloaded from the boat. Tags were

then removed and cleared for future use.


Smart Chips Project

In each receiving event where the roll calls were performed at MP41, 100% of the manifest items

were accounted for using the RFID technology. However, in three of the nine deliveries, roll

calls were not attempted at MP41 receiving; and in three of the remaining six deliveries, roll

calls were made on either the boat or the platform- but not both. In most instances, multiple roll

calls were required from different relative positions in order to confirm all of the manifest items.

In all but one instance, the full roll call process confirming 100% of manifest items took less than

15 minutes.

Shipping from the MP41 Platform - Activities and data collected related to shipping from the

MP41 Platform are shown in Appendix D-3. The process of shipping items from the offshore

platform to the shorebase is similar to that of shipping from the shorebase to the platform,

although there are significantly fewer items shipped from the platform. Four shipments were

made from the platform to the shorebase during the pilot study. Each shipment was tracked

using the RFID technology.

Receiving at the Venice Shorebase - Activities and data collected related to receiving materials

sent from the platform to the Venice Shorebase are shown in Appendix D-4. The process of

receiving items from the offshore platform to the shorebase is similar to that of receiving at the

platform.

3.2 RFID Technology - Observations

In general, the RFID technology functioned well and as expected. It was very easy to learn and

implement. The pilot study Analyst and Project Manager were able to work with the RFID

equipment out of the box with written instructions and no special training. They, in turn, were

able to train the shorebase and platform personnel in use of the technology. At each

shipping/receiving event during the study, the RFID technology accounted for 100% of the

manifest items. The following observations described technical issues encountered in the course

of the pilot study. These should be addressed in any further pilots of the technology, but they

appear to be relatively easily resolvable with minor adaptation of the technology or changes in

the work procedure.


Smart Chips Project

Tag Reading Offshore: Initially, it was intended that the crane operator would scan items from

the crane cab, but the distance from the cab to the furthest unload point was too great. The

presence of metal throughout the structure and within the cargo also contributed to problems

during scanning. The work process was adjusted to have the crane operators walk around the

unloading point and run multiple roll calls to the items.

Tag Association: During shipment, the operaror experienced problems with tag association to the

manifest items possibly due to the large amount of metal present in the vicinity. At times the

operator needed to remove the tags and perform the association by pointing the reader down

through the decking grate.

Equipment Usage: Both the tags and the handheld readers performed well and as expected.

Minor issues with regard to use of equipment are as follows:

1) The stylus to the handheld device needed to be tied to the device to prevent the it from

being dropped and lost. Otherwise stylus would fall through the grating and into the

water.

2) The screen of the handheld reader was very sensitive. It was hard to work on the small

screen because of proximity of buttons. At times we deleted items unintentionally. A

verification check before deletions would help.

3) Only two handheld readers that were assigned to the shorebase and the offshore during

the pilot. It would have helped to have an extra one with the Application Analyst for use

at the office to work on software related problems as they arose.

Initially, users did not know how to turn on the backlight of the reader screen and this made

work difficult in late shipment hours under very low lights on the boat. This problem was

resolved quickly.

Weather Resistance: Weather plays an important role in offshore deliveries. Rain does not affect

the loading process, but lightning causes significant delays as the cranes used to load the boats

cannot be used during an electrical storm. In such cases we tagged the items inside the

warehouse and when necessary used a plastic bag to protect the handheld readers from water

damage. Working through a plastic bag caused problems with reading the screens and


Smart Chips Project

associating items, etc. Phase IV later advised that both the handheld readers and tags are

resistant to rain, and no additional steps are needed to protect these items from the elements.

3.3 Implementing RFID Technology

In the beginning, it was mistakenly assumed all items to be loaded onto the boat were staged

(gathered into a single location) on the dock next to the boat. The pilot was designed to tag the

items as soon as they are received and to create the associations to the master list, create the

manifest and to do the roll call at the same time first at the staging area and second on the boat.

However, in actual practice, items are scattered throughout the yard prior to loading on the boat.

Therefore, multiple roll calls were required to build the manifest for shipment to the field

location.

At first, it was believed that the electronic documentation for the Shipping Manifest, Microsoft

Active Sync, and the Cargo Watch application, together with assisted hands on training would be

sufficient support for the field personnel. During the pilot, the shorebase personnel generated a

“cookbook” listing the steps to be performed from start to finish for the shipping and receiving

process. This “cookbook” turned out to be a better training tool, which the S&R clerk at the

shorebase could relate to and follow. It also proved useful offshore in training the crane

operators at MP41.

Modifications were also made to the original process flow. For a large shipment, tagging all

items in one step put a strain on resources and manpower when they are most needed. A new

work process was created to append the items to the manifest during the day to alleviate the

manpower pinch at night during shipping. Since personnel shifts occur frequently at MP41, we

have to pay attention in making sure that trained personnel were in attendance during the pilot.

3.4 Work Processes Around RFID

Both the shorebase shipping and receiving personnel and the offshore field operators recognized

that having the suppliers tag the items prior to shipment to the shorebase would be highly

desirable. However, this was out of the scope of the pilot.


Smart Chips Project

Initially items were thought to be unloaded at one specific location at MP41 ‘D’ structure at the

same time. This was not the case in actual practice. Grocery baskets, for example, are

unloaded next to the galley on a different structure, MP41 ‘M’. When items for multiple

locations are loaded into a single cargo basket, they are often only partially unloaded. The boat

moved on to other locations before returning to finish unloading the cargo. Alternatively, the

whole basket might be unloaded at the other location, the portion designated for MP41 would be

sent back from the other structure. Once again, it requires multiple roll calls to ensure a

successful shipment.

During the RFID pilot, shipping from MP41 required two people, one to handle the crane and the

other to perform the roll call on the boat. Typically there are two operators during the day but

only one at night. Accordingly, we scheduled the shipping from MP41 during the day.

During the pilot, the boat captain expressed a strong interest in the RFID technology because he

perceived possible benefits for his operation. Normally if the boat captain wanted to ensure that

all items were accounted for on board he would have spent as much as an hour checking the

inventory. He can see that using RFID, this step can be shortened to about five minutes.

3.5 Participant Survey and Results

Upon completion of the pilot, a user survey conducted to get feedback from the clerks and the

crane operators involved in the pilot. Three shipping and receiving clerks at the Venice

shorebase and five crane operators at the offshore platform had participated. All of the offshore

survey information was captured via phone interviews to ensure that the proper metrics and

documentation were used. The survey contained two sets of questions. One set of questions

requested a numerical assessment of RFID technology effectiveness and ease-of use. The results

are summarized in Table 3.5.1 below. The other set of questions were open ended as shown in

Appendix E, Feedback from the Shipping and Receiving Personnel.


Smart Chips Project

Table 3.5.1 : Survey Results - Assessment of RFID Technology Effectiveness

Location based results

(number of respondents shown in parentheses)

Overall Results

(8 respondents)

Venice Shorebase (3)

Offshore Platform (5)

Questions

(Answers are scores of 1 to 10 where the meaning of the scores are shown below in parentheses) Average Range Average Range Average Range

How easy was it to do the roll calls? (1 means very difficult; and 10 very easy)

7.63 6-10 6.67 6-8 8.2 6-10

How easy was it to do the associations? (1 means confusing, incoherent; and 10 very easy to understand and act upon)

6.29 1-10 6.67 1-10 6 4-8

What was the overall quality of the RFID technology (hardware and software) you received? ( 1 means very amateurish; and 10 highly polished, very professional)

6.5 1-10 6.33 1-10 6.6 1-9

How useful did you find the RFID technology? (1 means it was useless, I got nothing from it; and 10 a real eye opener, I got unexpected and valuable insights)

5.86 2-10 7.33 6-10 4.75 2-7

What is your overall satisfaction with the RFID pilot? (1 means it was useless, I got nothing from it; and 10 a real eye opener, I got unexpected and valuable insights)

6 3-9 7 6-9 5.4 3-8

How useful did you find the RFID tags? (1 means very unsatisfied, it wasted my time; and 10 very satisfied)

5.63 2-8 6.33 6-7 5.2 2-8

Both the shorebase and Offshore Platform personnel agreed that the RFID system was relatively

easy-to-use. However, the shorebase personnel felt that this technology was more useful to them

than those on the Offshore Platforms. This response is understandable because the primary job

responsibilities for the personnel at the shorebase are different than those on the Offshore

Platforms.


Smart Chips Project

4.0 Lessons Learned The pilot provided valuable insights in three main areas: RFID Technology, Work Processes and

RFID Implementation, and Potential Benefits for Full Implementation. These are described

separately as follows.

4.1 RFID Technology

The fundamental RFID technology performed well and as expected. Other than the occasional

difficulty in areas on the offshore platform where there is a high concentration of metallic

structures, all the tags were read accurately and completely. The tags and readers were easy to

use immediately out of the box. The instructions for both the hardware and software were

relatively simple and easy to understand. The readers and tags were not affected by the weather,

the harsh marine environment, or rough handling. Feedback from the field personnel suggested

minor enhancements to the software that could further improve the ease-of-use of the system.

4.2 Work Processes and RFID Implementation

The pilot study team organized training sessions for the oil field operators and shorebase

personnel on how to operate the hardware and software. It is clear that this is an important step

to ensure successful execution of an implementation. In the future, more time should be

allocated to design and execute training before the start of a pilot study or implemetation. This

would have lessened the need for on-demand support during the pilot. This is consistent with the

Gilmore (2004) report that RFID pilots tends to take longer than originally estimated. In spite of

working through some unforeseen problems, the pilot was successfully completed within the

planned time frame.

An unexpected benefit of conducting this pilot is that it flushed out certain process improvement

opportunities regardless of whether we adopt the RFID technology. For example, electronic

acknowledgement of materials on route and received. It is also important to incorporate

procedures to resolve exceptions. A standardized method is required in order to distinguish

whether an item is truly missing or the tag was not read due to instrumental problems.


Smart Chips Project

4.3 Potential Benefits of Full Implementation

The RFID technology is definitely preferred over the bar code system in moving toward an

automated shipping and receiving process. This will involve certain changes in the work process

to fully utilize the technology. An added benefit would be that this new work process would be

more stringent and robust, eliminating many opportunities for human error in the current process.

The RFID technology allows faster, easier, and more accurate accountability while reducing the

number of causes for misplaced, misdirected, lost, and stolen items. The traditional manual

process of accountability is tedious, and tempts workers to skip some steps and take short cuts.

The benefit is the maximized when the technology is incorporated further upstream in the supply

chain. Ideally, the shorebase terminal’s suppliers should tag the items in their own shops before

shipping to ChevronTexaco, and send an electronic manifest with the shipment. This is the

principle behind the initiatives by Wal-Mart, DoD, and others.


Smart Chips Project

Appendix A – Overview of RFID Technology

RFID is a data collection system that uses electronic tags to store identification and other data,

and a wireless reader to capture it.

RFID tags are made up of three parts:

1. Chip: Chip holds electronic data about the physical object to which the tag is attached to.

2. Antenna: Antenna transmits information to a reader using radio waves.

3. Packaging: Packaging encases the chip and antenna so that tag can be attached to physical

object

Based on the technology currently in existence we can classify RFID tags into three categories:

1. Active RFID tags: Active RFID tags use a battery within the tag to continuously power

the tag and its radio frequency (RF) communication circuitry whether in the reader field

or not. This allows extremely low-level RF signals to be received by the tag and high

level signals to be sent to the reader. These tags are normally used when a longer tag

read distance is necessary.

2. Passive RFID tags: Passive RFID tags have no internal power source and rely on energy

transferred from the reader. They reflect energy from the reader or receive and

temporarily store a small amount of energy from the reader in order to generate the tag

response. They require strong signals from the reader and the signal strength returned

from the tag is constrained to very low levels of energy. These tags are best in close

proximity to the reader.

3. Semi-passive RFID tags: Semi-passive RFID tags use an internal power source to

monitor environmental conditions (temperature, shock), but require RF energy from the

reader (similar to passive tags) to power a tag response.

There are two main organizations involved in creation of voluntary RFID standards: EPCGlobal

and ISO. EPCGlobal is a Brussels-based international RFID standards organization. EPCGlobal


Smart Chips Project

is a joint venture with EAN International and the U.S. based Uniformed Code Council. EAN has

101 national organizations around the world. ISO is a separate international standards body

composed of a network of national standards institutes in 148 countries. It is not yet clear how

different countries and organizations will approach the standards.

Table 1 shows a classification of RFID tags based on frequency along with common commercial

applications. As shown in Table 1 RFID promises data accuracy advantages inherent in all types

of automatic identification technology. What is particularly interesting for the purposes of this

study is that RFID has the potential to provide significant benefits in inventory management,

asset visibility, and integration in an end-to-end supply chain.


Smart Chips Project

Table 1. Four most common types of RFID and their commercial use

Radio frequency

Benefits Limitations Common commercial uses today

Low frequency (125 to 134 Kilohertz)

• Frequency accepted worldwide

• Works well near metal

• In wide use today

• Limited read-range (impractical for some warehouse operations such as pick and pack); less than 1.5 meters

• Animal identification

• Beer keg tracking • Automobile key-

and-lock, anti-theft systems

High frequency (13.56 Megahertz)

• Frequency accepted worldwide

• Works well in most environments

• In wide use today

• Does not work well near metal

• Limited read-range; less than 1.5 meters

• Library book tracking

• Pallet/container tracking

• Access control (buildings)

• Airline baggage tracking

• Apparel item tracking

UHF (868 to 928 Megahertz)

• Longer read-range potential; more than 1.5 meters

• Commercial use is growing rapidly

• Frequency not issued for commercial use in Japan

• Detuning when tags are in close physical proximity

• Does not work well in most environments

• Pallet and container tracking

• Truck and trailer tracking (in shipping yard)

Microwave (2.45 Gigahertz)

• Longer read-range potential; more than 1.5 meters

• Frequency not issued for commercial use in parts of Europe

• Complex systems development

• Not in wide use today

• Access control (vehicles)

Source: FORRESTER RESEARCH

Despite the fact that the RFID technology is mature, the cost to implement RFID technology is

still significantly high preventing it from completely substituting the bar codes. A general


Smart Chips Project

comparison of RFID to bar codes is shown in Table 2. A company that ships 50 million cases of

product annually to the retailer, for example, would pay $20 million just to buy enough RFID

tags at an average price of 40 cents each. General predictions are such that the tag price needs to

come down to about 5 cents each before they can be put into widespread use and replace the

barcodes at the individual item level. Besides the cost of the RFID tags, companies need to

invest in the readers and the information systems to support the data collection and processing.

A middle layer of software is required to sort the data, and disregard duplications in real time.

Most logistics operations will require a mixed use of bar code and RFID. Accordingly, the

information systems across the supply chain needs to support a flexible means of data entry.

Table 2. RFID versus Bar Codes

RFID Bar code Can be read or updated without line of sight Requires line of sight to be read Can be read in multiples simultaneously Can only be read one at a time Can be read at high speeds Need slowing down for aiming purposes Can cope with harsh and dirty environments Cannot be read when dirty or damaged Can be automatically tracked Needs manual handling Can identify a specific item Can only identify the type of an item Electronic information can be over-written repeatedly Information cannot be updated Can be read even when concealed within an item (steel, concrete, water, human) Must be visible to be logged Can accommodate longer read range Limited read range Costs are higher Costs are lower

AMR Research analyst Pete Abell estimates that Wal-Mart’s costs associated with supply chain

(storing, transporting, keeping track of goods) are about 10 percent of overall sales (Shim, 2003).

RFID, Abell says, could save 6 percent to 7 percents of those costs annually. For Wal-Mart, that

could mean over $1.5 billion saved yearly. But, that is only the cost side of the story. RFID

could also help limit out-of-stocks and accordingly increase sales. A 1% improvement in this

regard could mean over $2.5 billion increase in sales.


Smart Chips Project

According to a report issued by a consulting firm Accenture, RFID could help retailers increase

sales by as much as 3 percent because of improved stocking, and reduce inventory write-offs

because of spoiled and obsolete items by as much as 20 percent, in-store receiving workforce

expenses by as much as 65 percent and stocking expenses by as much as 25 percent (Levy,

2003). Another consulting firm, A. T. Kearney estimates retailers will see benefits in three

primary areas: reduced inventory through a one-time cash savings estimated at 5 percent of total

inventory, an annual benefit from a reduction in store and warehouse labor expenses of 7.5

percent; a reduction in out-of-stock items resulting in a recurring annual benefit of $700,000 per

$1 billion in annual sales (A. T. Kearney, 2003). The cost of EPC and RFID adoption to retailers

is estimated at $400,000 per distribution center and $100,000 per store, with an additional $35

million to $40 million for systems integration across the entire organization.

While ABI Research, a New York-based technology market research firm, expects the RFID

market to reach $3 billion by 2008, a recent Forrester Research poll of IT decision makers in

North America (Table 3) finds that more than one-third have no plans yet for adopting RFID

technology (Markowitz, 2004).

Table 3 READY FOR ADOPTION? Companies' plans for engaging in RFID in 2004

Piloting, in production,

or upgrading Considering

No plans

to adopt

Don't know

Distribution 36% 15% 38% 11% Manufacturing 32% 16% 38% 14%

Retail 21% 23% 44% 12% All other

industries 12% 12% 64% 12% Source: FORRESTER RESEARCH


Smart Chips Project

Appendix B – Cargo Watch System- Product Information Fully integrated with CargoWatch™ family of products

HERO compliant (Hazard of Electromagnetic Radiation to Ordnance)*

Part of the comprehensive solution from Phase IV Engineering, including software, fixed readers and handheld readers

CargoWatch™ RFID Tags are battery powered and can last up to five+ years—depending on duty cycle and operating frequency. The tags are easily mounted inside containers or on pallets. Each tag is uniquely identified and records the environmental data of its surroundings—

temperature, humidity and, in future, G-shock. The data is stored in the tag. The tags can be programmed to record this data on a user-programmable sampling cycle.

Each uniquely identifiable tag can provide additional container and cargo-specific information to aid in cargo identification, tracking and monitoring. For example, part number, date of manufacture, serial number, consignee, date of embarkation, and so on.

Four tag types are available with CargoWatch: 1) CW101 Temperature Tag* 2) CW100 Temperature/Humidity Tag*, 3) CW Warehouse Locator Tag, 4) CW Extended Sensor Tag Characteristics Beacon Mode: User programmable interval

Standard Mode: Sensor data updated once per hour (customization available)

Read/Write, Memory: 0.5 MB (sufficient tag logging for the life of the tag)

Standard anti-collision mode

Physical Dimensions: 8.9 x 6.4 x 3.2 cm

Temperature Span: -30°C to 100°C ± 1.0°C at 25°C accuracy

Humidity: 5 to 95% ± 3.5% RH accuracy

Emitted Field Strength: Compliant to FCC specification of 80 dBuV/m at 3 meters

Battery Type and Life

Lithium Thionynl Chloride, 3.6V. Battery Life: 5+ years depending on duty cycle and operating frequency. Tag ID: Factory programmed

*Meets IP-67, MIL-STD-202G Method 214A

Smart Chips Project CargoWatch™ RFID Handheld Reader: Mobile RFID reader provides the mmunicate (read/write) with CargoWatch Tags. Comprises of:

Intermec 740A Series Color Mobile Computer, Microsoft® Windows® for Pocket system, numeric and full alphanumeric keypad options, advanced replaceable battery power, and configurable for up to 3 w nication options

Handheld Reader Docking Station for desktop connectivity

USB Cable for PC Connection (requires ActiveSync® installed on the PC – see “ ements” below)

Docking Station Power Adapter and Adapter Power Cord

CargoWatch™ Fully Integrated RFID Reader Handle with removable Recharge Power Pack

CargoWatch™ Active RFID Reader Handle Battery Charger, Power Adapter an wer Cord

Can read up to 1,000 tags in a single read

Query and view tag data, Write tag data, Clear tag data

View current sensor and alarm data for a tag (when applicable)

Save data as comma separated value (.csv) file

Part of the comprehensive solution from Phase IV Engineering, including softwa

Physical Characteristics

Handheld Reader weight with Intermec 700 Series Color Computer: 942 gms (33

Read Range: At least 30ft feet – significantly greater under optimal conditions (up to 1,000 tags in a single read (approx. 100 tags in 15 seconds)

Battery Type and Life: Internec 700 Series Color Computer: Lithium-Ion, 7.2V, (2 customer replaceable. Battery Life: 6-10 hours, application dependent. Recha

CargoWatch™ Fully Integrated Reader Handle: Uses 1 removable Lithium-Ion BamAh), (2 x batteries provided). Battery Life: 100 hours, application dependent.

ability to co

PC operatingireless commu

System Requir

able Battery

d Adapter Po

re and tags

.2 oz) with battery

subject to tag orientation and tag proximity to metal). Can read

Phase IV Engineering, Incorporated 2820 Wilderness Place Boulder, Colorado 80301 Tel: +(303) 443 6611 Fax: +(303) 443 8379

x 2000 mAh cells), rging time: 4 hours

ttery Pack, 3.6 V (2200 Recharging time: 4 hours

Appendix C- Pilot Study Schedule

ID Task Name Duration Start3 Preparation 22 days 2/9/044 Plan Agreed/Approved 13 days 2/9/045 Draft for review 5 days 2/9/046 Review/Approval 8 days 2/16/047 Hardware preparation 20 days 2/9/048 Software Interfaces 20 days 2/9/049 CT Software Prep & Training 12 days 2/23/0410 OtherTech/Operationl prep 20 days 2/9/0411 Handheld software inst 15 days 2/9/0412 Installation set-up 10 days 2/9/0413 CT follow-up 15 days 2/9/0414 Tag Issues 20 days 2/9/0415 Tag attachment 20 days 2/9/0416 Tag return process 20 days 2/9/0417 Team Schedules 5 days 2/25/04181920 Execution 40 days 3/8/0421 Hardware Delivery/Instalation 2 days 3/8/0422 Training 2 days 3/18/0423 Phase IV visit 3 days 3/30/0424 Operation 28 days 3/24/0425 Supported Start-up 5 days 3/24/0426 Ongoing Pilot 23 days 3/31/04

2/1 2/15 2/29 3/14 3/28 4/11 4/25 5/9 5/23 6/6March May

Field Trials of RFID Technology for Tracking Fabricated Pipe 27


Appendix D – Pilot Work Process Flow and Results

Appendix D1 – Shipping from the Venice Shorebase

Process12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

Results

Step 3 Step 4 Step 6 Step 7 Step 8Steps 10/12 Step 14

3/30/2004 3 3 10 5 20 5-10 20 1 na 34/7/2004 21 20 18 5 8 25 20 15/4 3 4/44/9/2004 na 3 2 1 2 10 3-5 1 1 3

4/14/2004 6 4 2 2 na 1 4 3 2 14/17/2004 8 8 4 1 2 6 na 54/20/2004 21 2 2 1 1 4 30 1/5 2 1/14/24/2004 45 42 20 5 2 20 105 4 1 44/27/2004 27 27 na na 2 10 1 34/30/2004 60 27 4 1 2 <40 3-5 6 na 5

Venice S&R inventories and stores on the server the following files used in the process: Shorebase Dock Roll Call, Shipped Boat Roll Call, Received Boat Roll Call and Received Platform Roll Call.

Dates (shade denotes presence of the project manager and/or analyst)

Total items

shipped# of items

tagged

Process times in minutesSteps 10/12

number of roll calls required

Venice S&R loads the boat

Venice S&R takes electronic inventory of the tagged items on board and stores the corresponding Shipped Boat Roll Call file.Boat captain's signature goes on handheld reader

Venice S&R uploads the Shorebase Dock Roll Call and Shipped Boat Roll Call CSV files from the handheld to the server using Microsoft Active Sync on the PC. These CSV files are emailed to platform.

Tags are attached to the control items as soon as they are received—every item to be tagged becomes a separate line item with quantity of one (if tagging more than one dumpsters/baskets we need to create a line for each separately).

Venice S&R selects each item on the check list and reads barcode on tag. Handheld reader automatically writes each item from the check list into tag memory (Manifest and RFID tags are matched). When the association has been made between the item and the RFID tag, the item will move from the Master List tab to the Manifest tab on the handheld.

Venice S&R stages shipment of MP41 items to be loaded on boatVenice S&R takes electronic inventory of the allocated & tagged items and stores the corresponding Shorebase Dock Roll Call file.

Materials arrive at the Venice S&RVenice S&R receives the manifest

Venice S&R enters received items into the Non-shipped items area of the new version of the SMA (in Visual Basic). Remember to list items singly (quantity of 1) for Platform destinations MP 41 D,L,M.

Venice S&R creates a checklist by selecting items for shipment in SMA (Visual Basic) for MP41 D,L,M.Use the checklist to verify basket/container numbers and weights as they walk around the yard/warehouse

Checklist (manifest) is put in CSV format and downloaded to handheld reader

25

30


Appendix D2 – Receiving at the Offshore Platform

Process

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

ResultsDates (shade

denotes presence of project

manager and/or analyst)

Total items shipped

# of items tagged

Step 1 time (min)

Step 3/5 time (min)

spent on roll calls

Step 3/5 % of items

captured in roll call

Step 3/5 number of roll calls needed

Step 6 time (min)

Step 8 time (min)

3/30/2004 3 3 na na 100% na na na4/7/2004 21 20 na na/15 100% na/3 na na4/9/2004 na 3 5 2/1 100% 3/2 1 24/14/2004 6 4 1 1/5 100% 2/5 1 24/17/2004 8 8 na na 100% na na na4/20/2004 21 2 1 1/1 100% 1/2 2 34/24/2004 45 42 1 15/na 100% 10/na 1 64/27/2004 27 27 3 30/15 100% 6/na na 104/30/2004 60 27 na na 100% na na na

Venice S&R inventories and stores on the server the following files used in the process: Shorebase Dock Roll Call, Shipped Boat Roll Call, Received Boat Roll Call and Received Platform Roll Call.

Platform receives the Emailed CSV file from the Shorebase and downloaded the manifest to the handheld reader using Microsoft Active Sync on the PC.

The boat arrives at the platform.

Platform performs a roll call before the boat is unloaded using the handheld reader and stores the corresponding Received Boat roll call file

Items are unloaded onto the platform

Received items are scanned at the platform to ensure all items are received.Store the corresponding Received Platform roll call file.

Platform uploads the Received Boat roll call and Received Plaform roll call CSV files from the handheld to the PC via Mcirosoft ActiveSync on the PC. The CSV files can be found under the FlashFile folder.

Platform sends the Received Boat Roll call and Received Platform Roll call CSV files by email to Venice S&R.

Tags are removed and cleared for future use. They are sent back to Venice shorebase to replenish their supply of tags on the Sun Trae daily boat run. 10 tags will be kept at MP41 D (and can be used for shipments from MP41 D, L, M).

Venice S&R inventories and stores on the server the following files used in the process: Received Boat Roll Call and Received Platform Roll Call.


Appendix D3 – Shipping from the Offshore Platform

Process12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

Results

Total items

# of items tagged

Step 3 time

Step 4 time

Step 6 time

Step 7 time

Step 8 time

Step 10/12 time

Step 14 time

4/6/2004 4 4 10 1 1 5 15 5/5 1 3/34/13/2004 6 6 10 5 1 3 15 4/1 5 2/14/20/2004 4 4 30 2.5 3 1 5 1/5 2 1/14/27/2004 12 12 1:30 3 7 10 30 10/15 5 3/4

Step 5 number of roll calls needed

Materials identified for shipment from MP41 D, L, or M to Venice shorebase.MP41 creates manifest

MP41enters received items into the Non-shipped items area of the new version of the SMA (in Visual Basic). Remember to list items singly (quantity of 1) for MP 41 D,L,M.

MP41 creates a checklist by selecting items for shipment in SMA (Visual Basic) Venice.

Use the checklist to verify basket/container numbers and weights as they walk around the yard/warehouse

After verification the checklist (manifest) is put in CSV format and downloaded to handheld reader

Tags are attached to the control items as soon as they are identified—every item to be tagged becomes a separate line item with quantity of one (if tagging more than one dumpsters/baskets we need to create a line for each separately).

MP41 personnel select each item on the check list and reads barcode on tag. Handheld reader automatically writes each item from the check list into tag memory (Manifest and RFID tags are matched). When the association has been made between the item and the RFID tag, the item will move from the Master List tab to the Manifest tab on the handheld.

MP41 stages shipment of items to be loaded on boat

MP41 takes electronic inventory of the allocated & tagged items and stores the corresponding Platform Dock Roll Call file.

MP41 loads the boat

MP41 takes electronic inventory of the tagged items on board and stores the corresponding Shipped Boat Roll Call file.

Captain's signature goes on handheld reader

MP41 uploads the Platform Dock Roll Call and Shipped Boat Roll Call CSV files from the handheld to the server using Microsoft Active Sync on the PC. These CSV files are emailed to Venice S&R.

Process times in minutes


Appendix D4 – Receiving at the Venice Shorebase

PROCESS

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

RESULTS

# of items tagged Total items

Step 3 time

Step 3 % of items captured in

roll call


Step 5 time

Step 5 % of items captured in

roll call


Step 8 time

4/6/2004 4 4 2 100% 3 na 100% na 54/13/2004 6 6 5 100% 4 1 100% 2 24/20/2004 na na na 100% na na 100% na na4/27/2004 9 ? na 100% na 5 100% 3 2

Venice S&R uploads the verified Manifest, Received Shorebase Roll Call and Received Boat Roll Call CSV files from the handheld to the PC via Microsoft ActiveSync on the PC. The CSV files can be found under the FlashFile folder.

Shorebase sends the verified Manifest, Received Shorebase Roll Call and Received Boat Roll Call CSV files by email to MP41

Tags are removed and cleared for future use. They are sent back to platform to replenish their supply of tags on the Sun Trae daily boat run. 10 tags will be kept at MP41D (and be utilized for shipments from MP41 D, L, or M).

Venice S&R inventories and stores on the server the following files used in the process: Platform Dock Roll Call, Shipped Boat Roll Call, Received Boat Roll Call and Received Shorebase Roll Call.

The boat arrives at the shorebase with items tagged at MP 41.

Venice S&R checks for correctness of shipped items before unloading the boat electronically using handheld reader and stores the corresponding Received Boat Roll Call file.

Items are unloaded by Venice S&R

Received items are scanned at the Venice dock to ensure that all items are received. Store the corresponding Received Shorebase Roll Call file.

MP41 uploads the Platform Dock Roll Call and Shipped Boat Roll Call CSV files from the handheld to the server using Microsoft Active Sync on the PC. These CSV files are emailed to Venice S&R.Shorebase receives the CSV files from the email and downloads the manifest to handheld reader using Microsoft ActiveSync. The files will be received into the Flash File folder on the handheld.


Appendix F - Feedback from Shipping and Receiving Personnel 1. What did you find to be the most useful part of RFID pilot?

a) Shorebase i) Being able to do the roll call by walking in the yard and on the boat. ii) The tracking of items. It puts the pressure on the rigs to find lost items. With RFID

you know they have the item on the rig and it’s just lost. iii) The scanning on the boat (boat roll call); Checking out quickly with the boat captain. iv) Learning about ActiveSync

b) Offshore i) It helped track and keep better inventory of parts and supplies ii) It helped prevent you from losing cargo iii) The manifest and the emailing of the manifest. I liked knowing what was supposed to

be on the boat so that I could be prepared. iv) Ease - portability

2. What did you find to be the least useful part of the RFID pilot?

a) Shorebase i) It was a learning experience. Could have simplified the manifest creation – seems like

we were making it in two places ii) Every part was useful

b) Offshore i) Time spent ii) Redundancy in the system iii) Putting tags on and taking them off iv) Too many roll calls and checkpoints. If boat operator could roll call it would have

helped out. v) We got everyone else’s cargo and had to send them their cargo vi) It was all useful

3. What could we have added to the pilot that would have most improved its value to you?

a) Shorebase


i) Items being tagged from the vendor; involving Wilson as a vendor and seeing the impact upon things delivered from Wilson with RFID tags on the shore base and MP41. It would have given me a better feel for how it would really work for us.

ii) To use GPS to track lost items from the shore base in cases of mis-deliveries

b) Offshore i) Involve the boat captains – have them do the roll call themselves. ii) Figuring out where supplies got dropped off when the boat entered the field – many

times it visits and delivers at other platforms before it gets to MP41L. We usually spend a lot of time tracking what got delivered where.

iii) Each gauger beat’s (structure) items are in different baskets. We load baskets according to gauger beats (structure). Things were tagged that shouldn’t have been tagged.

iv) More user friendly – less steps to accomplish v) Had to put individual items on the manifest. E.g. each laundry bag rather than 5 bags

of laundry 4. What would you want us to describe in more detail in the instructions?

a) Shorebase i) More detailed instructions on how to create a manifest download the file and put into

the proper folders, etc.

b) Offshore i) One needed good computer skills to follow the instructions that were given ii) It helped having hands-on instruction iii) Really didn’t look at the instructions – just winged it. Just felt my way through it –

was able to contact support at office and had help at the platform. Instructions were clear.

8. What else could we have included to make it more useful?

a) Shorebase i) Duplication of manifest process hurt us on the busiest night of shipping. ii) Be able to do a lot more from the PC side than the handheld iii) More manpower for the pilot; Three extra hours in the night.

b) Offshore i) Screen on the handheld ii) Scanning ability


iii) We had to duplicate work. It worked as well as it could the way it was constructed iv) Keeping up with id tags – we were apt to lose tags v) The programming could be easier, more user friendly; an easier process like when

you download the file it goes automatically to the shore base and automatically gets received at the shore base.

vi) Taking into account prior deliveries 11. What are the top two things you were most (or least) satisfied with?

a) Shorebase i) Most satisfied

(1) roll call (2) the ease of association, tagging of items, accountability and ease of finding items

in the yard. ii) Least satisfied

(1) layout of the file on the handheld (2) the pilot started out bad but it got better and then there was a breakdown in the

process. Maybe we could have done a better job as a team at the shore base. iii) Overall, real good. We need to look into RFID because technology is there to do it.

b) Offshore i) Most

(1) creating the manifest (2) Hit roll call and found everything

ii) Least (1) Tag size; Handheld screen; Scanning ability and tag association (2) Putting tags off and on – it was too much to track (3) the # of roll calls – on the boat and on the deck. If you are doing this by yourself

offshore, it is not possible. (4) Sending the manifest file via email was a pain (5) Creation of the Shipping Manifest - it caused me to enter items one at a time. It

took me 1.5 hours to make my first manifest and doing it the old way would have taken 10 minutes.

(6) Getting off platform to get down on the boat. (7) The programming could be less confusing

12. What feedback would you like to share about this or other evaluation system

providers?


a) Shorebase i) Make sure you have extra help when you do the pilot; Consider the time frame it will

take as far as your work schedule goes; Look at the players ii) Run a trial and identify potential problems and you’ll be better prepared iii) Pre-plan the set up of the screen with personnel who will be using it. The most useful

data fields need to be easily accessible and visible iv) Define the process more before the equipment is selected; first determine the process

and the issues and then determine what solution should be selected. v) Look at different solutions and different hazards vi) For the future, GPS would be the key. We could use GPS to tack items from the

shorebase to where they go so we would know where it went. A tracking system would be nice.

b) Offshore i) Don’t want to have to work with too many tags – pulling off tags and would lose tags. ii) Doing roll call on the boat wasn’t convenient; Don’t get on boat iii) In theory I liked it. It could save time and money. Must take into consideration the

high turnover rate of personnel. It needs to be easy enough for people to take it and go. It needs to be user friendly.

iv) Need more people involved to get more feedback. Need more people with hands-on to get more feedback. Need more manpower to do a pilot.

v) Be open minded, try it

Document

Documents

Transcript of Document