2011 Asset Management and Reliability Summit
Join MRG and Flowserve in the Greater Houston Area for one and a half days of industry insight into reliability and maintenance!
"The EAM Summit educated our company on the high potential to improve our reliability efforts. It pointed out clearly to us where we had the opportunity to improve and the value of that opportunity. The concept of evaluating maintenance cost as a percentage of replacement asset value and correlating that measure to various best practices was especially eye-opening." Steve Rowland, COO - Rain CII Carbon LLC
November 15th-16th 2011
South Shore Harbour Resort
League City, TX 77573
(800) 442-5005
Register Today!
Thursday, October 6, 2011
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
MRG and Flowserve Announce - Asset Management and Reliability Summit November 15-16, 2011
MRG and Flowserve Announce - Asset Management and Reliability Summit November 15-16, 2011
MRG and Flowserve invite you to join a select group of your peers for a complimentary* one and a half day Asset Management and Reliability Summit, November 15th & 16th 2011 in the Greater Houston Area.
DATE:
November 15th and 16th 2011
LOCATION: Greater Houston Area
South Shore Harbour Resort
League City, TX 77573
(800) 442-5005
In this powerful workshop, discover the impact reliability-focused asset management can have on business performance. Best-in-class companies from every industry have successfully introduced a culture of reliability while improving asset performance. See how this improves margins, OSHA compliance and availability, while failures of critical assets decrease.
Seasoned industry professionals will discuss common challenges faced today, relate success stories, and demonstrate solution options that you can apply immediately. Learn how to leverage the expertise of key suppliers in making the road to reliability success shorter and less risky. This open and interactive forum will also provide you with a valuable networking opportunity.
Join us and take your organization to the next level!!
For more information or to register, contact:
MRG - Donna Odegard:
(281) 705-6670 or odegardd@mrgsolutions.com
Flowserve - Angela Ooley
(713) 374-7122 or Aooley@flowserve.com
For the schedule at a glance and the registration form, click here.
MRG and Flowserve invite you to join a select group of your peers for a complimentary* one and a half day Asset Management and Reliability Summit, November 15th & 16th 2011 in the Greater Houston Area.
DATE:
November 15th and 16th 2011
LOCATION: Greater Houston Area
South Shore Harbour Resort
League City, TX 77573
(800) 442-5005
In this powerful workshop, discover the impact reliability-focused asset management can have on business performance. Best-in-class companies from every industry have successfully introduced a culture of reliability while improving asset performance. See how this improves margins, OSHA compliance and availability, while failures of critical assets decrease.
Seasoned industry professionals will discuss common challenges faced today, relate success stories, and demonstrate solution options that you can apply immediately. Learn how to leverage the expertise of key suppliers in making the road to reliability success shorter and less risky. This open and interactive forum will also provide you with a valuable networking opportunity.
Join us and take your organization to the next level!!
For more information or to register, contact:
MRG - Donna Odegard:
(281) 705-6670 or odegardd@mrgsolutions.com
Flowserve - Angela Ooley
(713) 374-7122 or Aooley@flowserve.com
For the schedule at a glance and the registration form, click here.
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Join MRG at the SMRP Conference 2011
Join MRG for a workshop at the SMRP Annual Conference in Greensboro, NC from October 17-20!
We are offering:
The Reliability Game® (Workshop #14)
Thursday, October 20th
8:00 AM to 5:00 PM
Maintenance Management 101/201 (Workshop #9)
Thursday, October 20th
8:00 AM to 5:00 PM!
Register today! http://www.smrp.org/conference/2011/registration.asp
We are offering:
The Reliability Game® (Workshop #14)
Thursday, October 20th
8:00 AM to 5:00 PM
Maintenance Management 101/201 (Workshop #9)
Thursday, October 20th
8:00 AM to 5:00 PM!
Register today! http://www.smrp.org/conference/2011/registration.asp
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
The PM Compliance Trap
The PM Compliance Trap
Metrics drive behavior. Many organizations start with PM compliance in the early stages of their reliability program. This is a good place to start when your organization is 100% reactive and pushes behavior that prioritizes Scheduled preventive maintenance over breakdown maintenance. However, once this metric has been accepted within the organization new behaviors can appear which are as detrimental to the organization as breakdown maintenance. Your organization must start to consider additional metrics in order to prevent these new behaviors from setting in.
PM compliance tracks the completion of PM tasks to their scheduled date, but what about work quality, effective use of resources, and the effectiveness of the PM task itself. To ensure a complete set of measures these other aspects must be taken into account. Multiple metrics must be used to create a balance so that the right behaviors are driven into your organization. For example, the quality of a job plan, how well it is scheduled, and how well the crafts time is used are measures of the quality of your work performance.
The other aspect of this series of metrics is the measurement of the effectiveness of you PM tasks. A craftsman will lose faith in the process and leadership if he performs the same task over and over with no new findings. Craftsman know when a task should be changed or deleted from the system. Using metrics to measure the effectiveness of PM's will give the maintenance organization a way to validate their existing PM's and identify areas of waste. It will also give the crafts an opportunity to provide feedback in their role on the front lines.
Metrics drive behavior. Many organizations start with PM compliance in the early stages of their reliability program. This is a good place to start when your organization is 100% reactive and pushes behavior that prioritizes Scheduled preventive maintenance over breakdown maintenance. However, once this metric has been accepted within the organization new behaviors can appear which are as detrimental to the organization as breakdown maintenance. Your organization must start to consider additional metrics in order to prevent these new behaviors from setting in.
PM compliance tracks the completion of PM tasks to their scheduled date, but what about work quality, effective use of resources, and the effectiveness of the PM task itself. To ensure a complete set of measures these other aspects must be taken into account. Multiple metrics must be used to create a balance so that the right behaviors are driven into your organization. For example, the quality of a job plan, how well it is scheduled, and how well the crafts time is used are measures of the quality of your work performance.
The other aspect of this series of metrics is the measurement of the effectiveness of you PM tasks. A craftsman will lose faith in the process and leadership if he performs the same task over and over with no new findings. Craftsman know when a task should be changed or deleted from the system. Using metrics to measure the effectiveness of PM's will give the maintenance organization a way to validate their existing PM's and identify areas of waste. It will also give the crafts an opportunity to provide feedback in their role on the front lines.
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
A Reliability Tip
A Reliability Tip
An essential component of any Reliability Program is to define your terminology at EVERY step of the journey.
With MEL classes and Function descriptions, ensure that everyone saying or hearing ‘Switch’ have the same understanding of the term. In Maintenance and Work Order Systems, I have seen a ‘Tighten Connection’ task, generated from an Infrared scan, entered as Work Type: PdM, Corrective, Repair, Emergency, PM, Reactive, Routine, Condition Based, and even Optional. Define your terms! The definitions must be understood by Planning, Scheduling, Electrical, Mechanical, Instrumentation and Operations. They must be supplied to or developed with any contract work management teams.
Even ‘common sense’ terms like ‘Done’ and ‘Complete’ MUST be defined for each step of the process. This is especially true when Milestones or KPIs are based on job or task status. Develop a list of the criteria that must be met before the status is changed. Correctly explaining what “Done” means, for every step and phase, can avoid misunderstandings and overrun expenses, as well as providing more efficient tools for analyzing and reporting on performance and progress.
An essential component of any Reliability Program is to define your terminology at EVERY step of the journey.
With MEL classes and Function descriptions, ensure that everyone saying or hearing ‘Switch’ have the same understanding of the term. In Maintenance and Work Order Systems, I have seen a ‘Tighten Connection’ task, generated from an Infrared scan, entered as Work Type: PdM, Corrective, Repair, Emergency, PM, Reactive, Routine, Condition Based, and even Optional. Define your terms! The definitions must be understood by Planning, Scheduling, Electrical, Mechanical, Instrumentation and Operations. They must be supplied to or developed with any contract work management teams.
Even ‘common sense’ terms like ‘Done’ and ‘Complete’ MUST be defined for each step of the process. This is especially true when Milestones or KPIs are based on job or task status. Develop a list of the criteria that must be met before the status is changed. Correctly explaining what “Done” means, for every step and phase, can avoid misunderstandings and overrun expenses, as well as providing more efficient tools for analyzing and reporting on performance and progress.
Tuesday, August 9, 2011
What Information Should I Capture When Completing a Work Order?
What Information Should I Capture When Completing a Work Order?
Determining what information to capture when completing a work order is a question that all maintenance organizations struggle with. This question can be especially daunting to organizations transitioning from a paper based work order management system to a CMMS. In order to effectively answer this question one must start with the end in mind. In other words, what information will be useful to track over time? Below are some key pieces of data that should be captured when completing a work order and the value of tracking that data.
Completion Date & Time: This information allows the user to track when specific work was done. It allows for the development of historical trending which can be used setup preventive or predictive maintenance plans and calculate meantime between repairs or failures. This information should be captured for all resources working on the work order.
Labor Resources: This should include all resources that worked on the work order. This will make it possible to determine the true labor cost of the work order and the impact on resource for future planning.
Completion Comments: Completion comments should state in sufficient detail the work that was performed to complete the work order. Just putting "Complete" should be considered insufficient. The completion comments may capture discrepancies in the work suggested by the work order versus the work actually performed. It may indicate follow up work that needs to be done requiring the creation of additional work orders.
Materials Used: This information determines the true materials cost of the work order. It allows improved materials planning future work. It also provides the ability to trend material usage for specific assets over time.
Special Tools: Special tools such as man lifts, power tools, and specialty tools should be captured when completing the work order. This will allow for improved work scheduling by ensuring that work is scheduled when the necessary tools are available. By assigning cost related to the use of these tools, a better understanding of their impact on the overall work order costs can be determined.
Capturing the information above when completing a work order will allow the maintenance organization to get a better understanding of costs associated with specific work orders and specific assets. It can help an organization determine the appropriate staffing levels and skills needed to maintain the equipment and insight into what predictive and preventive maintenance programs should be put in place to improve equipment reliability. Capturing, trending, and reviewing these data elements will help a maintenance organization move from a reactive culture to a proactive culture.
Determining what information to capture when completing a work order is a question that all maintenance organizations struggle with. This question can be especially daunting to organizations transitioning from a paper based work order management system to a CMMS. In order to effectively answer this question one must start with the end in mind. In other words, what information will be useful to track over time? Below are some key pieces of data that should be captured when completing a work order and the value of tracking that data.
Completion Date & Time: This information allows the user to track when specific work was done. It allows for the development of historical trending which can be used setup preventive or predictive maintenance plans and calculate meantime between repairs or failures. This information should be captured for all resources working on the work order.
Labor Resources: This should include all resources that worked on the work order. This will make it possible to determine the true labor cost of the work order and the impact on resource for future planning.
Completion Comments: Completion comments should state in sufficient detail the work that was performed to complete the work order. Just putting "Complete" should be considered insufficient. The completion comments may capture discrepancies in the work suggested by the work order versus the work actually performed. It may indicate follow up work that needs to be done requiring the creation of additional work orders.
Materials Used: This information determines the true materials cost of the work order. It allows improved materials planning future work. It also provides the ability to trend material usage for specific assets over time.
Special Tools: Special tools such as man lifts, power tools, and specialty tools should be captured when completing the work order. This will allow for improved work scheduling by ensuring that work is scheduled when the necessary tools are available. By assigning cost related to the use of these tools, a better understanding of their impact on the overall work order costs can be determined.
Capturing the information above when completing a work order will allow the maintenance organization to get a better understanding of costs associated with specific work orders and specific assets. It can help an organization determine the appropriate staffing levels and skills needed to maintain the equipment and insight into what predictive and preventive maintenance programs should be put in place to improve equipment reliability. Capturing, trending, and reviewing these data elements will help a maintenance organization move from a reactive culture to a proactive culture.
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Promote Proactive Reliability
Promote Proactive Reliability
A Reliability Tip
Detecting Failure Modes Through Instrumentation:
Most physical assets these days contain a large amount of instruments for monitoring and managing the operation of that asset. Maintenance is not often aware of the potential in these configurations to identify failure modes using the assets instruments. One reason is that maintenance often looks for a single point of data to isolate the failure mode, and most times targeting a failure mode in this way would require several instruments. I call this "Triangulation". An example of this I have witnessed recently was in a plate heat exchanger. In this example 2-4 instrument outputs were required to target a specific failure mode.
In the example of the plate heat exchanger, the failure mode they targeted was fouling or loading of the exchanger internally. Temperature and flow instruments they created a thermal efficiency calculation in their DCS which displayed the exchangers performance in real time. When the exchanger loaded up, or otherwise declined in its performance operations requested the exchanger be disassembled inspected and cleaned. This detection method also applies for corrosion which reduces the thermal efficiency of the plates as well. By taking this approach they eliminated a minimum of 30 hours of work and downtime each year for each of their 12 heat exchangers, and made this part of their maintenance program entirely condition based.
A Reliability Tip
Detecting Failure Modes Through Instrumentation:
Most physical assets these days contain a large amount of instruments for monitoring and managing the operation of that asset. Maintenance is not often aware of the potential in these configurations to identify failure modes using the assets instruments. One reason is that maintenance often looks for a single point of data to isolate the failure mode, and most times targeting a failure mode in this way would require several instruments. I call this "Triangulation". An example of this I have witnessed recently was in a plate heat exchanger. In this example 2-4 instrument outputs were required to target a specific failure mode.
In the example of the plate heat exchanger, the failure mode they targeted was fouling or loading of the exchanger internally. Temperature and flow instruments they created a thermal efficiency calculation in their DCS which displayed the exchangers performance in real time. When the exchanger loaded up, or otherwise declined in its performance operations requested the exchanger be disassembled inspected and cleaned. This detection method also applies for corrosion which reduces the thermal efficiency of the plates as well. By taking this approach they eliminated a minimum of 30 hours of work and downtime each year for each of their 12 heat exchangers, and made this part of their maintenance program entirely condition based.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)