Built line by line, from your own systems.
Nothing here is inferred. Each line names the system it came from, so the production engineer can check the figure before the morning call and defend it at month end. Values fill in from your own wells.
The explanation becomes work, with a name on it.
An agent can draft the work order, attach the readings it relied on and route it to whoever owns the asset. What it cannot do is file it, close it, or move a set point. Those stay with a named person, inside limits your team writes down.
Wellsite to export terminal, on one model.
The same record covers the whole chain, so a constraint at the terminal is visible from the wellhead that feeds it.
Deferred production, argued every morning.
Rate, choke position, the last well test and the open work order sit in four systems. The explanation has to be assembled by hand, and it usually arrives after the decision.
When a well drops off plan the reason is rarely mysterious. It is just distributed. The historian has the rate. The control system has the choke. The well test file has the split. Maintenance has the work order that moved the choke in the first place. Put all four against the same well and the shortfall gets explained on shift, not reconstructed at month end.
Allocation is the sharpest case. A well test four weeks old still sets the split for every day since, and a partner who disagrees with your number goes after that test date first. Keep the test, the readings and the downtime on the same well and the allocated figure shows how old its evidence is.
A custody figure that survives an audit.
Between the pumps and the terminal, the number that matters is the one on the ticket. It depends on records held in five places.
The ticket figure depends on the meter's last proving, the correction factor applied to it, the BS&W from sampling and whatever downtime the line took that day. Those sit in four places, so the ticket gets reconciled after the fact from systems that disagree. Held against the meter itself, the figure arrives with its proving certificate on it, which is the first thing an auditor asks for.
It also catches the clashes worth catching. An internal inspection falling due inside the window of a planned pig run shows up at scheduling, not on the morning the pig is due to go.
Turnaround scope, named early enough to plan.
Scope is set months out and revised until the unit comes down. It rests on condition, inspection history, the governing documents and the work already open.
When those four sit apart, scope gets built off last cycle's list and then grows in the field, which is where growth costs several times what it would have cost on paper. Build it from condition and every item on the worklist carries the thickness reading or the inspection finding that put it there. The scope challenge meeting then argues about the work.
Deferral is the harder question. Pushing an item to the next turnaround means showing the remaining life it leaves you, and that calculation needs the corrosion rate and the RBI case sitting on the item itself, not filed somewhere near it.
One unit, five stages, a figure at the end.
A paid pilot on a single unit, then an annual licence per site. The baseline goes in before anything changes, so at the end there is a figure to compare against and not a story.
- ScopePick the unit and the question it has to answer.
- ConnectHistorian, maintenance system and the drawings that govern them.
- BaselineMeasure how the unit runs today, before anything changes.
- First answersYour team asks real questions and checks the sources behind them.
- ReviewCompare against the baseline and decide whether it widens.
Put your own numbers in.
We will not publish a result we have not measured, which leaves you with nothing to take to the person who signs. So here is the arithmetic instead, on your figures rather than ours. Change any of them.
This is the size of your problem, not a claim about our effect on it. Muono does not recover a barrel. It shortens the distance between a rate drop and the reason for it, so the recoverable share is the number to argue about, and it is yours to set.
Your questions, answered
- How do we connect to our historian?
- Read-only, over OPC UA or the historian's own interface, on a schedule you set. Tags are mapped to assets once. After that, new readings land on the right asset without anyone mapping them again.
- What happens to our existing SAP work-order flow?
- It stays as it is. SAP remains the system of record for maintenance. Muono drafts and routes, so a work order it raises is one your planners see in SAP, with the readings that justified it attached.
- Can it read our P&IDs and legacy drawings?
- Drawings are read in and turned into structured records, then attached to the equipment they govern. Older scanned sheets need one pass to confirm tag numbers before you can trust them as a source.
- Does it work across operated and non-operated assets?
- Yes, as far as your data rights go. Operated assets arrive as live readings. Non-operated ones usually arrive as partner reports on a cycle, so the record is coarser. The model says which it is rather than blending the two.