How much data is required for Quantitative vs. Qualitative RBI? Is the cost of the ticket worth the ride?
By Greg Alvarado
Many RBI software platforms are available. They are based on various methodologies, some public, some private, some qualitative, some quantitative and anywhere in between. Some owner/operators use RBI to better manage risks while some do RBI to save money. The objectives of this entry are to:
- Clarify the data requirement differences between GE/Meridium’s 580 qualitative RBI module and the 581 quantitative RBI module
- Point out some outcomes of using either
- Get some feedback from users on their experiences
There is a common misunderstanding of when to use the damage models in the 581 module to calculate corrosion rates and damage susceptibilities. The damage models from API RP 581, which are in the software, are meant to err to the conservative. These are not required models or entry fields. Since most owner operators have performed damage mechanisms reviews which provide this information it is not necessary to use the damage models. So, only approximately 10-20% additional data is needed to perform quantitative analysis in this comparison.
Based on recent projects, comparisons of quantitative modeling vs. qualitative have shown that quantitative models:
- Are more dynamic (over time, today and tomorrow) versus static (today) risk modeling and predictions.
- Are more fact based and guide the user more systematically through the process producing greater reproducibility and consistency. Qualitative methods are prone to being heavily opinion based.
- Enable “what if” modeling, predict future conditions, and produce discreet PoF, CoF and risk values, have greater bandwidth for metrics and KPIs for managing risk, risk reduction vs. cost, risk reduction over time, etc.
We would love to hear from you, how does this compare with your experiences? What types of metrics are you using? If you are using qualitative methods, what benefits are you seeing? Thanks in advance for your input.