97
Chapter 7
CONCLUSION: DERIVED OPTIONS
In this chapter the candidate explains the steps to arrive at final solution taken by PII (going with the project team’s common opinion) and derived from her case study.
First of all she expounds the main conclusions of her analysis.
7.1 Conversion of all Data From 1980 to 1995 (Fig. 7.1):
During this period the data will need to be Restored, Re-processed using PUMA, then Converted10 using PUMACONVERT to the PC format as used.
Figure 7.1: Estimation of time for transferring inspections from 1980 to 1995 From 1996 to 2000 (Fig. 7.2):
During this period the data will need to be Restored, then Converted10 using
PUMACONVERT to the PC format as used today (Vax AlphaStation).
Figure 7.2: Estimation of time for transferring inspections from 1996 to 2000
10
Multiple conversions can be ran simultaneously (with Fortran software fix $1k)
6 yrs
11 yrs
98 From 2001 to 2006 (Fig. 7.3):
During this period the data will need to be Restored (Note from 2001 to 2003 this data is held on DLT Tapes which uses the VAX AlphaStation for the Restore ).
Figure 7.3: Estimation of time for transferring inspections from 1996 to 2000 Estimation Time: Conclusions (Fig. 7.4)
Figure 7.4: Estimation of time for transferring all inspections from 1980 to 2006
• The estimated elapsed time to convert and transfer data of ALL previous inspections to a new format is 18 years11;
• Due to the availability of Hardware a maximum of 3 restores/conversions could take place per day equating to 6 Years;
• Additional Human resources would not reduce the overall time.
11
Due to the availability of Hardware a maximum of 3 restores / conversions could take place per day equating to 6 Years
99
In the following graph the candidate shows the conversion process used by PII to transfer data from old tapes to LTO3 tapes (Fig. 7.3).
Steps for conversion process
Figure 7.3: Steps for conversion
The candidate’s conclusions about what are the costs and the losses of time for converting and transferring all previous inspection data are showed here below (Fig. 7.4):
Figure 7.4: Total costs for conversion of all data
At this point the candidate following the PII Mentor and Manager’s suggestion draws up an Overall Summary of Risks.
100 Overall Summary of Risks
Cramlington Computer Room Energy (24Hr cost for maintaining Air Conditioning,
Heating / Cooling, Humidity for Tapes & Equipment below including; 24Hr cost for Electrical power for DEC Mainframes & Alpha equipment): $156K Per Annum.
Historic Data Tapes: 60000 Tapes (Fig. 7.5);
RISKS: Tapes old & deteriorating Loss of revenue
from Runcom / Reinspections;
Would Cost: $300k total (Conversion of ALL data
over a period of 6 Years). Figure 7.5: Space for 3480 tapes inside the computer room
DEC Equipment: Reel / Cartridge Drives (Fig. 7.6); RISKS: Maintenance expires May ’07. Aged /
Broken Equipment & Limited experience to operate;
Costs: $0k (None – If equipment remains in working
condition).
Figure 7.6: Machines to read 3480 tapes inside the computer room
AlphaStations: VMS Operating System (Fig. 7.7); RISKS: Limited experience to operate; Required for
Historic Data; Required for Elastic Wave;
Costs: $130k pa (Maintenance all Alpha Stations
and Servers ). Figure 7.7: VAX devices inside the computer room
101 1 97 9 1 98 0 1 98 1 1 98 2 1 98 3 1 98 4 1 98 4 1 98 5 1 98 6 1 98 7 1 98 8 1 98 8 1 98 9 1 99 0 1 99 1 1 99 2 1 99 3 1 99 3 1 99 4 1 99 5 1 99 6 1 99 7 1 99 8 1 99 8 1 99 9 2 00 0 2 00 1 2 00 2 2 00 2 2 00 3 2 00 4 2 00 5 2 00 6 2 00 7
1s t Ins pe c tio n D ate 2 nd In s p ec tion Da te 3r d In s p ec tion Da te 4th Ins pe c tion D a te 5t h Ins pe c tio n Date 6 th In s p ec tio n Date 7 th In s p ec tion Da t e
At the end the candidate estimates the time and costs to convert and transfer all previous inspections to LTO3 media are about:
Over 6 Years = $2m! $300k (Conversion) + $936k (Energy) + $780k (Alpha)
7.2 Historic Database
The following graphs (Fig. 7.8, 7.9, 7.10) and the Consolidated database holding 5000 Inspections (Used for Global Restoration and Lookup – eDelivery SMR in progress) are result of the candidate’s previous studies. From those she gets some important information.
Figure 7.8: N° of inspections per launch & receive
102 0 5 0 0 10 0 0 15 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 5 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 5 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 6 0 0 0 6 5 0 0 7 0 0 0 7 5 0 0 8 0 0 0 8 5 0 0 9 0 0 0 9 5 0 0 10 0 0 0 10 5 0 0 1980 1981 1982 1983 19841985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 19931994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Figure 7.10: Years with more tapes
Option 1:
Eliminate all inspections before 1990 and the inspections between 1991 and 1992. This corresponds to eliminate 6892 tapes! (13784 including Backup Tapes)
Option 2:
Eliminate at least all inspections before 1992.
This corresponds to eliminate 7817 tapes! (15634 including Backup Tapes)
Option 3:
Eliminate all inspections before 1990 and the inspections between: 1991-1992 and 1995-1996.
This corresponds to eliminate 8026 tapes! (16052 including Backup Tapes) Caution Conclusion
It has been noted by the Analysis Team that PII often has to use multiple previous inspection data for Corrosion Growth comparisons.
For this reason candidate should establish if this is acceptable to the business that PII does not have those previous - previous inspections.
103 7.3 Different solutions
At this point start the last part of the candidate’s case study. With support of all project team she finds out the following options (Fig. 7.11, 7.12, 7.14) and analyzing the pros and cons she draws up her conclusions.
Tape-Tape Copy: Option 1
104 Tape-Tape Copy: Option 2
Figure 7.12: Option 2 and related pros and cons Observations:
• Data cartridges are loaded into hoppers (up to 30 for One Inspection Run);
• Using VMS Backup copy all data directly to LTO3 media12;
• LTO3 drive connected to VAX System ($? for setup cost).
Intermediate Step: Creation of PLM file at the same time as the Tape to Tape copy
Figure 7.13: Intermediate step for analysis
Occasionally, only the PLM is absolutely necessary to make the analysis comparison if no Reinspection Report deliverable is required.
12
Original 3048 cartridges discarded
3480 Tapes DLT Tapes PLM File VMS/VAX XLS File CDS PLM Convert
105 3480 VAX 3480 3480 3480 Terminals in Computer Room DLT Tape drive 1 3480 Cartridge Drives (Hopper holds 6 Cartridges for Batch Processing)
2
3 POSSIBLE
DLT currently connected to VAX System Limitations are Capacity 35Gb per DLT Approx 180 tapes 1 DLT Tape
Approx 350 DLT Tapes required Estimated Transfer Time xx months
No specialist experience required (No PUMA processing at this stage) 3480 VAX 3480 3480 3480 Terminals in Computer Room DLT Tape drive 1 3480 Cartridge Drives (Hopper holds 6 Cartridges for Batch Processing)
2
3 POSSIBLE
DLT currently connected to VAX System Limitations are Capacity 35Gb per DLT Approx 180 tapes 1 DLT Tape
Approx 350 DLT Tapes required Estimated Transfer Time xx months
No specialist experience required (No PUMA processing at this stage)
Solution:
All data has to be initially transferred to the VAX/VMS system before the backup to DLT is possible
Immediately converting PLM File only (it has to be opened with VMS and then converted in XLS file with PLM Convert program). This will add an additional 15 minutes to the Copy task.
Out-Source Solution
Figure 7.14: Out-source option
Another option could be to outsource the conversion. The candidate analyses all skills needed and she concludes that it isn’t possible to find a local company who can support this task.
1. PII – Skills Needed:
• Knowledge of Old File Structures / Conventions; • Limited knowledge of VMS Operating System.
2. Outsource13 – Skills Needed:
• 3480 & DLT Tape Drives; • DEC Alpha station or similar; • VMS Operating System.
13
After searching for Local Companies and Internet Sites we have not yet found a Business in the UK who could support this Task.
106 7.4 Conversion Process
The graph below shows what are the steps for converting inspection data previously stored on 3480 tapes on LTO3 tapes (Fig. 7.15).
Figure 7.15: Picture with conversion process
1. Data cartridges are loaded into hoppers (up to 30 for One Inspection Run);
2. PUMA processing of original RAW inspection data to VMS disk & Restore of Reporting Output files;
3. Processed data is verified, appended then converted to PC format;
4. Data accessible for Analysis / IS usage & held in Analysis Directory structures14; 5. Data held off-line on LTO3 tapes in Robot Library & backup Tapes created.
14
107 7.5 Final In-House Solution
The candidate talking with project team about each different option arrives to concludes that the best solution is represented in the following graph (Fig. 7.16).
Figure 7.16: Picture representing final solution
The two different activities that PII should implement for retention of previous inspection data are:
Safeguarding of Historic Data to DLT Tape (Copy Only); Conversion of Historic Data to PC Format;
108 In-House Solution A15:
1. Skill Set Needed:
• Knowledge of Old File Structures / Conventions; • Limited knowledge of VMS Operating System. 2. Copy Rate (Setup the drives with 6 3480):
• Estimated 660 (6*6*5+480) Cartridge Copies per Week (Includes 1 day per Week prep time);
• Copies per Month 2640 (660*4); • Copies per Year 31680 (~2640*12).
Priority Rules for safeguard of Historic Data to DLT Tape (Copy Only):
• Top 10 Clients – based upon previous Contract volume / repetitive Inspections; • All forecasted Clients from 2007 Plan;
• Oldest first where only 1 Inspection exists (Using new Historic Database). In-House Solution B
1. Skill Set Needed:
• Knowledge of Old File Structures / Conventions; • Knowledge of VMS Operating System;
• Knowledge of PUMA software.
2. Copy Rate (Considering 13.5 tapes per inspection):
• Estimated 108 (13.5*8) Cartridge inputs per Week (Includes 1 day per Week prep time);
• Conversions per Month 486 (108*4.5); • Conversions per Year 5346 (486*11).
15
109
Priority Rules for conversion of Historic Data to PC Format:
• Using MST Forecast view of upcoming Reinspection Work (Global, all Technologies);
• Proactively prepare for imminent Inspection Runs;
• IS Specific Requests (RunCom, Corrosion Growth Study etc); • Client Queries.
7.6 Final Recommendations
The candidate gives to PII some final advices for implementing the Data Retention Solution (Fig. 7.17).
Figure 7.17: Final solution
Here below some rules are suggested to give a priority in converting previous inspection data.
Priority Rules for safeguard of Historic Data to DLT Tape (Copy Only) • Top 10 Clients – based upon Contract volume / repetitive Inspections; • All forecasted Clients from 2007 Plan;
• Oldest first where only 1 Inspection exists (Using new Historic Database). Priority Rules for conversion of Historic Data to PC Format (On-Going)
• Using MST Forecast view of upcoming Reinspection Work (Global, all Techs); • Proactively prepare for imminent Inspection Runs;
• IS Specific Requests (RunCom, Corrosion Growth Study etc); • Client Queries.
110
In following graph (Fig. 7.18) are summed up risks per each solution and activity.
Figure 7.18: Risks year by year per each option
