HELIOS BY EQUIPMENT / Valves
The buyer also needs records of its materials and tests. IOGP JIP33 gives buyers and manufacturers common purchasing requirements. Helios is intended to turn the requirements agreed for each order into checks and supplier tasks, with evidence linked to each valve for review.
Illustrative example · Intended Helios workflow until verified
Ball valve · IOGP S-562 v4.0 · API 6D
A short animated explanation. Play at your pace or read the transcript.
VLV-012 / Ball valve
Illustrative 3D model
Existing practices
IOGP provides common purchasing requirements today. This example shows the intended Helios workflow for tracking the evidence.
FROM THE STANDARD TO THE WORK
IOGP provides a shared procurement basis today. Helios would carry the requirements agreed for this order into the work, keeping each check connected to its source.
Confirm the applicable IOGP specification, base standard or design code, editions and project requirements.
Turn the agreed requirements into checks and supplier tasks, with an owner and a deadline. The project team approves the mapping.
Link the required record to the equipment or component. Keep missing, received and awaiting review distinct.
Keep the authorised review and unresolved issues with the evidence. Reassess affected checks if a requirement changes.
Common requirements can reduce repeated specification work. Earlier visibility of missing records could reduce late chasing.
Agreed checks and traceable evidence support qualified review. The record does not prove that equipment is safe for a particular service.
Owners and deadlines make the next action clear. Building the record during manufacture could reduce work left at handover.
Measure the result on one order: document-chasing hours, time to find the correct record, and unresolved review issues. No Helios savings are asserted here.
0:00 to 0:10 / Existing practices
IOGP provides common purchasing requirements today. This example shows the intended Helios workflow for tracking the evidence.
Example: a ball valve for an industrial pipeline.
0:10 to 0:24 / Existing practices
Different buyer requirements can mean repeated clarification. A late certificate can delay acceptance while teams find and check the missing record.
Illustrative example of fragmented records.
An example of fragmented records. Many teams already use effective controls.
0:24 to 0:37 / IOGP today
For this ball valve, IOGP S-562 adds requirements to API 6D, the base valve standard.
Use the applicable editions and requirements in the order.
0:37 to 0:50 / IOGP today
The specification family covers technical requirements, project choices, quality checks and required records. The buyer still defines the project needs.
The procurement data sheet and information requirements can both be tailored.
0:50 to 1:02 / IOGP today
Less repeated clarification can save effort. Agreed inspection requirements support quality and safety decisions.
IOGP benefit, independent of Helios.
These are benefits of adopting the framework. They do not depend on Helios.
1:02 to 1:12 / IOGP today
Common requirements do not collect the certificates. People must still check the evidence against the order.
A record supports a decision. It does not replace engineering or inspection.
1:12 to 1:24 / Intended Helios workflow
Helios would turn agreed IOGP and project requirements into checks and supplier tasks, linked to their source.
Intended workflow: the project team confirms applicable documents, editions and requirements before using the checklist. Each task would retain its source reference. See the example below playback.
1:24 to 1:34 / Intended Helios workflow
The required certificate has not arrived. The forging supplier is asked to provide it before handover.
R-07 is an illustrative order requirement, not an IOGP clause number. The forging certificate is required by this example order. The timing of real alerts must be tested.
1:34 to 1:44 / Intended Helios workflow
An authorised reviewer checks the certificate against the order and records the decision.
Record review is separate from valve approval.
Review shown here is illustrative. A received file does not prove conformity.
1:44 to 1:55 / Intended Helios workflow
The aim is a reviewed record linked to this valve, ready for the next authorised user.
The intended handover would use agreed data fields. CFIHOS mapping still needs verification.
1:55 to 2:05 / Intended Helios workflow
IOGP provides common requirements. Helios would carry them into each valve's tasks, evidence and reviews.
Conformity decisions stay with responsible people.
The maker, inspector and purchaser retain their responsibilities. Benefits must be measured in a pilot.
An illustrative ball valve under the API 6D and S-562 procurement basis. The project sets the applicable editions and order requirements. Demo requirement R-07 calls for a forging certificate; it is not an IOGP clause number or a universal certificate requirement.
IOGP is the International Association of Oil & Gas Producers. Its JIP33 programme develops common purchasing specifications. Technical requirements, project choices, quality requirements and required information work with the purchase order. The responsible team determines applicability, inspection responsibilities and acceptance.
These references do not establish a live integration, complete standards coverage, IOGP certification or endorsement of Helios. Illustrations represent the equipment category and are not manufacturing drawings.
Illustrative order: VLV-012 uses the S-562 v4.0 family. The buyer selects assessment level B, which sets the extent of purchaser involvement.
S-562Q v4.0, Table A.1, item 4.1.1: material traceability and certification has a review intervention at assessment level B.
Demo requirement R-07, revision A: provide the forging certificate before handover. R-07 is an invented order reference, not an IOGP clause or a universal certificate requirement.
VLV-012 / forged component → R-07 → forging supplier → due before handover. Status: missing. The intended workflow would keep the IOGP review reference alongside this order-specific task.
Certificate received → review by the buyer or its appointed representative against the applicable requirements → decision and outstanding issues recorded. Receipt would not close the review or approve the valve.
Compare the intended checklist with the approved order and inspection plan. Test a missing record, an incorrect equipment or component reference and a revised requirement. Confirm that unresolved holds remain visible and that receipt cannot substitute for review.
Check that every decision leads back to the correct source and revision. Validate access permissions and agreed handover fields. CFIHOS information mapping and use of the IOGP Material Digital Passport framework require separate verification.
The pilot would need to verify who attested each record and whether it changed. A traceable record does not establish that its underlying statement is true. Read about EventChain.
Bring the agreed requirements and a sample of its records. Define what needs to be checked and how to measure the result.