Pay for the service not the software

OpenRBI software is open and transparent. Its calculation methods, assumptions, data inputs and outputs can be examined by the user rather than being hidden inside a proprietary black-box system. This transparency allows engineers, inspectors, asset owners and reviewers to understand how a result has been produced, challenge the assumptions, verify the calculations and retain control of the underlying assessment records.

That openness is important in risk-based inspection because the output of an RBI assessment should not be accepted simply because a software package has produced it. The quality of the result depends on the quality of the information entered, the suitability of the methodology, the correct identification of credible damage mechanisms and the competence of the people interpreting the outcome. A transparent application allows these matters to be reviewed directly.

Open software does not, however, remove the need for professional engineering judgement in fact it relies upon it as a foundation. A calculation tool can process the information supplied to it, but it cannot independently determine whether the equipment data is complete, whether an inspection result is representative, whether a corrosion rate is reasonable or whether a proposed inspection interval is appropriate for the particular asset and operating environment.

The professional expertise required to implement OpenRBI as a reliable company RBI program is therefore a separate service. Implementation may involve reviewing the equipment register, confirming design and operating data, checking material specifications, assessing inspection history, identifying credible degradation mechanisms, validating corrosion rates and configuring company-specific risk criteria.

It may also include aligning the software with the company’s inspection procedures, integrity-management framework, risk matrix, approval process and reporting requirements. These activities go beyond supplying a software file. They require time, technical knowledge, experience and above all professional accountability.

This distinction is similar to the difference between providing a calculation method and providing an engineering assessment. A design equation may be available in a published standard, but the existence of that equation does not remove the need for a competent engineer to determine whether it applies, select appropriate inputs and evaluate the result. In the same way, access to OpenRBI does not automatically create a competent or defensible RBI program, you do the engineer.

A reliable RBI program requires more than individual calculations. It requires a structured process for data collection, technical review, damage-mechanism assessment, inspection effectiveness evaluation, consequence assessment, risk ranking, inspection planning, approval and periodic reassessment. The software can support this process, but the organisation must still establish how the process will be governed and who is responsible for each decision.

Professional implementation can therefore include the initial configuration of the system, preparation of equipment records, conversion of existing inspection data, validation of imported information, development of assessment templates and establishment of a consistent basis for risk evaluation across the plant.

Verification is another separate area of professional work. A company may require independent checking of calculations, assumptions, inspection classifications, corrosion rates, remaining-life estimates, probability assessments, consequence inputs and proposed inspection intervals. Verification provides confidence that the software has been used correctly and that the result is supported by the available evidence.

The need for verification is particularly important where the RBI output may influence inspection timing, shutdown planning, maintenance expenditure, equipment availability or safety-related decisions. In such cases, the software output should be treated as an engineering input rather than an automatic approval.

Review and verification by an RPEQ may be required where the work constitutes a professional engineering service in or for Queensland and is not performed under the direct supervision of an appropriately registered engineer. Whether RPEQ involvement is required will depend on the nature of the work, the jurisdiction, the organisation’s procedures and the intended use of the assessment.

The phrase “where required” is therefore important. It avoids suggesting that every use of the software must automatically be certified by an RPEQ, while recognising that some applications may involve professional engineering services that require appropriate registration, supervision or formal review.  An RPEQ does not merely confirm that the software has run correctly. The engineering review may involve considering whether the methodology is suitable for the equipment, whether the damage mechanisms are credible, whether the inspection evidence is sufficient and whether the proposed actions are technically justified.  This professional review may also identify limitations that are not obvious from the calculated result. For example, a low calculated risk may not be reliable if important design records are missing, inspection coverage is poor, operating conditions have changed or the assumed damage rate is not supported by historical evidence. The commercial model is therefore based on separating access to the tool from access to professional expertise. The software may be made freely available, allowing users to examine, test and use the calculation platform without paying a licence fee. The engineering work required to implement, verify and support the system remains chargeable.

This is not inconsistent with the software being free. The customer is not paying for permission to open the program or even use the software. The customer is paying for the time, knowledge, judgement and professional responsibility required to make the program useful within a real operating environment.  This separation can be attractive to asset owners because it avoids locking the company into an expensive software subscription. Most competant Integrity / RBI Engineers can use the software with little or no instruction.  The customer can then retain the program, the assessment records and the completed outputs. The company does not lose access merely because a subscription ends or a vendor relationship changes. At the same time, the customer can obtain professional assistance where it is needed. Some organisations may require help only during initial implementation. Others may need ongoing support for data validation, new assessments, periodic reassessment, methodology updates, training or independent review.

The open and transparent nature of OpenRBI can also make professional review more effective. Because the calculations are visible, the reviewing engineer can examine the basis of the result rather than relying on an inaccessible vendor model. Errors, inconsistencies and unsuitable assumptions can be identified more readily.  Transparency also supports organisational learning. Engineers and inspectors can see how equipment condition, inspection quality, damage rates and consequence assumptions influence the final risk result. The software can therefore serve as both a working calculation platform and a training tool. However, transparency should not be confused with simplicity. A calculation may be visible and still require specialist knowledge to interpret correctly. Making the methodology open does not make every user competent to apply it, just as publishing a design standard does not make every reader qualified to perform engineering design. This is why the professional-service component remains central. The real value lies in ensuring that the software is applied to the correct equipment, with the correct information, using appropriate engineering assumptions and within a properly governed integrity-management process.

The paid service may include implementation planning, data-gap assessment, equipment-register development, damage-mechanism reviews, inspection-data validation, risk-model configuration, calculation verification, report preparation, training and plant-wide risk analysis. It may also include assistance with developing company procedures, defining roles and responsibilities, establishing independent review requirements and integrating RBI results with inspection planning and maintenance systems. The company remains responsible for deciding how the results will be used. OpenRBI should support engineering and integrity-management decisions, but it should not replace the owner’s approval processes, statutory obligations or competent technical review. The statement therefore protects both the customer and the service provider. It makes clear that the software is available openly, while professional implementation and engineering review are distinct activities with a defined scope, responsibility and commercial basis.

It also avoids the impression that the software vendor is charging simply because the calculation logic has been hidden from the customer. The methodology remains visible. The professional fee is for applying that methodology properly, checking it and helping the organisation establish a reliable working system.  The strongest commercial message is that OpenRBI provides freedom from software lock-in without removing the need for competent engineering. The customer retains control of the tool and its data, while having access to professional support when the work requires specialist judgement or formal engineering review. The software is therefore not the entire service. It is the platform on which the service can be delivered. The engineering value lies in implementation, verification, interpretation and accountable decision support.

OpenRBI software is open and transparent. Users can examine the methodology, retain their data and continue using the platform without dependence on a proprietary subscription. The professional expertise required to establish a reliable company RBI program, validate the information, verify the assessments and provide RPEQ review where required is supplied separately as a paid engineering service.