Today’s Professionals. We just completed two exciting professional development events at the University of Tennessee Maintenance and Reliability Center. The first was MARCON 2004, our annual conference. Feedback showed that the papers, the presentations, and the entire content were a step up in quality and delivery. I think this was partly due to the subjects presented being of more interest, and perhaps some actual quality improvement in content, but also because the attendees this year were very serious about learning and improving their knowledge.

It struck me that there is an increasing awareness of the importance of professional development permeating the workforce. As the economy climbs out of the doldrums (albeit slowly), there appears to be more awareness of the competitive necessity for excellence in the reliability and maintenance areas. Notice that I used the term “competitive necessity,” not “competitive advantage.” Certainly maintenance and reliability can be used as an advantage, but frankly it has become a necessity for survival in many business sectors.

Tomorrow’s Professionals. The second event was our “Overview of Modern Maintenance and Reliability Concepts” (or “boot camp,” as our students lovingly call it). This is a week-long training session that our maintenance and reliability student interns participate in before reporting to summer intern positions with their companies.

During these five 8-hour-plus days, we exposed them to many of the definitions, concepts, acronyms, systems, technologies, and management philosophies that govern maintenance and reliability in today’s world class enterprises. This year we added a case study that the students, grouped into teams, worked on throughout the week to reinforce the material presented to them by various experts. We also had representatives of several of the employers adding their experience and know-how for the students (and learning a few things as well).

The Case Study. The case study involved the Volunteer Manufacturing Co. (VMC), a medium-age plant with a highly reactive approach to maintenance and a somewhat poor record of reliability, but with a new plant manager who charged the teams with recommending improvements to bring the plant back to outstanding performance in regard to maintenance and reliability.

Converting Information to Action. As one of the “VMC managers” listening to the five student team reports and recommendations on Friday, I was pleasantly startled by the grasp that these young engineering students had of various concepts and ideas. I had expected good presentations, but I heard very good to outstanding reports.

The students had obviously listened well, but they had also taken what they heard and translated it into concrete action plans based on the VMC situation. It was extremely gratifying to observe how well they had assimilated a voluminous amount of information and converted it to solutions and proposals.

The Point. Although it may seem that this article so far is a bit self-serving, the real point I want to make is two-fold. One, the maintenance and reliability professionals currently at work appear to be realizing that professional development is key to improvement and that maintenance and reliability are legitimate strategic areas for enterprise survival as well as for competitive advantage. More and more, they are seeking out methods to improve their performance in order to raise the competitive situation within their enterprises.

Second, there are students entering the profession of maintenance and reliability who are going to enter the workforce with more knowledge and ability than many of us from my generation did. They are going to enter with experience and rapidly help their enterprise improve performance.

When I Goggled “CMMS” I got 514,000 Web pages delivered. “Computerized Maintenance Management” returned 656,000 pages, and “Enterprise Asset Management” returned 3,890,000 pages. That is a lot of Web surfing. Besides, search engines like Google are now in the paid listing game—so the top results are not often the most relevant.

One good way to start your search is by learning what others are doing to be successful with CMMS and EAM. For details visit Maintenancebenchmarking.com. Look for the CMMS Best Practices link on the home page and download the pdf version. This study was conducted with more than 650 companies sharing what worked and, just as important, what did not work with their maintenance software implementations.

There are dozens of online CMMS software directories such as the MAINTENANCE TECHNOLOGY directory, the MaintenanceResources.com directory , and Cmmscity.

In addition to these Internet directories, the Web offers a new breed of helpful tools that include searchable databases of CMMS and EAM vendors and active comparison charting features that allow you to change the importance of several variables and more.

Software Evaluation is a new site that features a free spreadsheet that includes more CMMS/EAM software evaluation categories than you could want. It also suggests a scoring system. You can pare the list down to reflect the elements and issues that are important to you. The people behind this site have extensive experience with maintenance software and it shows. They also offer CMMS/EAM consulting services over the Web and e-mail at very reasonable prices.

Cmmscity has partnered with Technology Evaluation Center to create an intelligent CMMS knowledge base.

To use the service, you must register for a no-cost trial. Start by answering questions related to your specific software needs and desires. You can set the importance level of one element over another depending upon your requirements. Once you complete the questionnaire the knowledge base displays all the CMMS and EAM vendors who met your criteria.

You can select up to five vendors and dig even deeper into their capabilities and see how each supplier stacks up as you change the importance of the criteria you chose earlier. For example, if accounting integration was rated as less important during the initial software selection, you can change it to very important and see how that affects the recommendations about each of the five selected vendors.

There are also several good books on the subject that should be considered when evaluating new maintenance software. The connection to this Web column is that you can order them online. Visit Industrial Press and select the maintenance category. Check out Computerized Maintenance Management Systems by Terry Wireman (ISBN: 0-8311-3054-7) and Managing Factory Maintenance by Joel Levitt (ISBN: 0-8311-3189-6). Of course, Amazon.com also offers these books.

You also can attend conferences and learning events like the new SAP-centric EAM 2005 March 20-23, 2005 in Tucson, AZ; MARTS 2005—The Maintenance and Reliability Technology Summit May 23-26, 2005 in Chicago, IL; or CMMS 2005—The Computerized Maintenance Management Summit July 26-29, 2005 in Indianapolis, IN, to learn from peers and industry experts in a networked educational environment. MT

Installation of the permanently mounted fan balancing system (center) that continuously monitors fan vibration levels has enabled Boise to run the lime kiln with fewer production interruptions. Previously, massive build-up of calcium carbonate on the induction fan used for the kiln would throw the fan out of balance. The high level of vibration resulted in an average of 2.5 unscheduled shutdowns per year at a cost of $33,000-$35,000 each in lost production, makeup lime, and maintenance costs.

“When the fan started to vibrate, my coffee would actually shake in my cup as it sat on my desktop,” Blood said. “Shutting down is a serious process that typically takes 3 hours to allow the kiln to cool off, and another 3 hours to conduct the cleaning process. By the time we would get the kiln back in service, at least 10 hours of production were lost.”

In addition to lost time and production, frequent episodes of high vibration also were causing accelerated wear on the fan bearing, and the staff was often taken away from regular duties to troubleshoot vibration problems.

Searching for an answer
When faced with finding a solution to this situation, Blood remembered reading an article about a technology that might help solve his problem. After an Internet search, he located Lord Corp., Cary, NC, and called for more information. Andy Winzenz, sales manager for Lord, visited the plant and helped confirm the diagnosis.

“Bosie’s manufacturing process is dependent on the performance of the fans and their ability to maintain process air flow,” Winzenz said. “As such, when the fan was thrown out of balance because of build-up, the result was untimely and expensive shutdowns.”

After analyzing the problem, Winzenz recommended the company’s RealTime balancing technology—a permanently mounted fan balancing system that continuously monitors fan vibration levels. He recommended this balancing system because of its ability to make rapid balance corrections and to withstand the harsh environment surrounding the lime kiln ID fan.

How balancing ring works: The balancing ring of the system mounts permanently on the fan shaft. Vibration signals from the fan bearing are received and processed by a control system, which then determines the balance adjustments that are required. Insert heaters of the heavy chamber vaporize a high-density fluid, forcing it through transfer tubes to the opposite cooler chamber where it condenses into liquid, correcting the unbalance. This process continues until the controller senses that balance has been restored.

The balancing ring of the system mounts to the fan shaft. The ring houses liquid counterweight masses that can be repositioned to offset the unbalance detected in the fan rotor. Using vibration sensors, the system monitors the fan bearing vibration. Vibration signals are received and processed by a control system, which then determines the balance adjustments that are required. The controller relocates the counterweight masses to the desired position to minimize vibration levels. This process continues until the controller senses that balance has been restored. Typical balance cycle times range from 30-120 seconds, depending on operating speed.

Lord developed and patented the actuator coil assembly used in the balancing system. The actuator coil is traditionally mounted to support brackets located on the bearing pedestal. The noncontact power supply used in the actuator coil eliminates the need for maintenance, sending power across an air gap between the stationary actuator coil and the rotating balancer ring.

Implementing the solution
According to Blood, after the balancing technology was presented to the Boise team, a capital request was made and approved, allowing for an April 2003 installation during a regular scheduled shutdown. Installation involved moving the motor out of the way, pulling the coupling and bearing off the fan shaft, installing the balance ring, reassembling the bearing and coupling, and putting the motor back in and aligning it. Some minor trimming of the stiffening ribs on the fan housing had to be done to make clearance for the balance ring. Other work, such as installing power to the controller and then mounting it in a dustproof, waterproof box near the fan, was completed in advance of the shutdown.

Since installation, the team has endured only one unscheduled shutdown and that was caused by massive particulate build-up and throw-off. Blood said that after the installation, the fan ran so smoothly that the team forgot the fact that build-up was still happening.

“We received a wake-up call several months after installation when a large chunk of build-up flew off the fan,” Blood said. “The resulting vibration was more than the balancer could compensate for, so we had to shut down and sandblast.”

Because the balancing technology stores balance history and events, data can be analyzed—greatly aiding Boise’s process of calculating the build-up rate of the particulate in order to better plan for any necessary cleaning and sandblasting.

The proof is in the numbers
According to Blood, this process improvement has added up to big savings—an estimated $87,000 in 2003. Not only is Boise able to run the lime kiln with fewer production interruptions, it is also extending the life of the equipment and has minimized wear and tear on the fan bearings. Although Boise still shuts down the lime kiln three to four times per year for routine maintenance, such occurrences are typically planned and not in response to fan unbalance.

Blood can demonstrate the smoothness of the fan operation with the addition of the balancer by balancing a nickel on the edge of a fan bearing while in operation. Even more important, the production supervisors have little worries about the fan and are afforded the opportunity to perform their daily functions without the hassle of an unscheduled shutdown. Finally, the vibration figures speak for themselves. Before installation of the balancer, the fan registered 0.3-0.8 in./sec within 30-60 days of sandblasting. Today, however, Boise reports vibration levels of 0.04-0.06-in./sec within the same timeframe thanks to the new balancing technology.

“The new balancing technology paid for itself in six months, not taking into account the expense of wear and tear on the bearings,” Blood said. “Although the installation and learning curve had some glitches, the technology has more than met our expectations. A fan that was once a chronic problem and a constant worry is now one of the smoothest running pieces of rotating equipment in the mill.” MT

When properly used, thermography can reveal not only the liquid/gas interface, but also sludge buildup and floating materials such as waxes and foams. Similar techniques can be used to locate levels and bridging problems in silos containing fluidized solids.

This article discusses the parameters and limitations that must be addressed and explains techniques that can be employed.

Fig. 1. Levels can be seen in two tanks (left and center), along with differing solar influences, while the right tank appears to be full. Fig. 2. Sludge completely covers the manway opening in this tank in a paper mill. Anticipating this condition will result in maintenance strategies that are safer and more cost effective.

Why inspect?
Instrumentation for locating levels in tanks and silos is often unreliable. The need for precise information about levels remains necessary, or even critical, in many instances.

For example, prior to the arrival of a tanker ship it may be necessary to verify a liquid level in a large storage tank. In continuous processes the operator must know how much capacity is available in each tank. Without that knowledge production may be impeded or, if an overflow occurs, a potentially dangerous situation could be created.

Sometimes existing instrumentation cannot determine levels (Fig. 1). Foams and waxes, for instance, are difficult to detect and measure accurately. A report from a paper mill identified a situation in which a tank was believed to be sized improperly when in fact it was full of foam rather than liquid. Defoaming the tank proved more cost effective than unnecessarily replacing it with a larger one.

A thermographer working in a petrochemical plant relayed a story about a contractor hired to clean out a large tank (Fig. 2). When the manway door was opened, sludge, which had settled to a depth high above the door, oozed out creating a dangerous and environmentally damaging situation. For industries needing to comply with the safety and process requirements of OSHA 1910, thermography may prove to be a particularly cost-effective tool to use.

How does thermography help determine levels?
Most of the time, the materials in a tank or silo behave differently when subjected to a thermal transition (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3. As it transitions from night to day and back, a simple liquid/gas interface influenced by the outdoors ends up all the same temperature twice. In large tanks liquids do not change temperature greatly, but gases do.

The materials often have differing rates of thermal capacitance. Gases typically change temperature much more easily than liquids. Water, for instance, has a thermal capacity that is 3500 times greater than air. One Btu of energy added to a cubic foot of water will raise its temperature 0.016 F while the same energy added to the same volume of air results in a 55 F increase.

While the thermal capacity of solids may be similar to liquids, the different way heat is transferred allows them to be seen. Solids, such as sludge, are influenced primarily by conductive heat transfer vs fluids (nonsolids), which are strongly influenced by convective heat transfer. The result is that the layer of solids in close contact with the tank wall, despite its often high thermal capacitance, heats and cools more rapidly than the liquid portion because it does not mix in the same way the liquid does.

What conditions are necessary?
Key to determining levels is to observe the tank or silo during a thermal transition. If viewed while at steady state with their surroundings, no differences will be seen. In fact, tanks and silos that are full or empty often appear identical, i.e., no indication of a level.

It is difficult to find tanks or silos that are not in transition, although it may not always yield a detectable image. Outdoors, the day/night cycle often provides enough driving force to create detectable differences. Even indoors, variations in air temperature are often more significant than they might seem.

Environmental conditions can influence detectability. Wind, precipitation, ambient air temperature, and solar loading can all, separately or together, create or negate differences on the surface.

Other factors to be considered include the temperatures of the products being stored in or moved through the tanks and silos, as well as the rates at which they are moving. Many tanks are insulated, although rarely to the extent that they obliterate the thermal patterns caused by levels. When insulation is covered with unpainted metal cladding, care must be taken to increase emissivity as discussed below.

What thermal patterns will be seen?

Fig. 4. Thermography is an important, cost-effective tool to verify or locate tank levels. A straightforward gas/liquid interface is shown here.

The most obvious pattern is the liquid/gas interface (Fig. 4). In a situation where the product is not heated, the gas typically responds quickly to the transient situation while the liquid responds slowly. During the day it is warmer than the liquid and at night it is cooler.

Liquid/sludge relationships may be more difficult to discern (Fig. 5). A larger transient may be required to create a detectable image. Thin layers of sludge also may be indistinguishable from the tank bottom. Sludge buildup in the center of a tank, i.e., not in contact with the wall, is simply not detectable, although product buildup on the side walls often is quite obvious.

Foams are often not difficult to distinguish from liquids but may appear similarly to gases (Fig. 6). Care should be taken to push the tank through a rapid thermal transition to reveal the differences.

Locating levels associated with floating materials such as waxes will typically require more persistence, skill, and a greater rate of transitional heat transfer.

Whether or not liquid/liquid interfaces, such as a mix of oil and water, can be seen depends entirely on their differing thermal capacities and, to a lesser extent, their viscosity. Simple experiments suggest it is fairly easy to locate the interface of oil and water, but further work needs to be done in the field to validate this technique.

Fig. 5. Sludge buildup in this tank is substantial, nearly 20 ft deep, a condition that had not been well understood. The outflow is pumped on the right side. Fig. 6. In this black liquor tank both the gas/soap and the soap/liquid interfaces are visible. The level indication equipment had been reading the gas/soap level rather than the liquid level. Fig. 7. Two silos are being filled, on alternate days, with lime from a kiln. The silo on the right had been filled the previous day while the one on the left was being filled with hot product at the time the image was taken.

Some solids, such as coal ash, plastic pellets, powered lime, and wood chips, behave as fluids and are called fluidized solids. While heat transfer in such materials is still primarily conductive, mass transfer of heat by the material’s movement can be significant. For instance, hot ash or lime blown into a silo carries its process heat to the silo (Fig. 7). Fluidized solids tend to behave similarly to liquids in the way they respond to gravity, except for the fact that they can bridge areas where liquids typically would not. In fact, locating bridging of fluidized materials is a valuable use for thermography.

Issues to be considered
Some tanks are covered in cladding, often unpainted aluminum or stainless steel. Detecting the kind of fine temperature differences necessary to reveal levels on surfaces such as these—ones having low emissivity and high reflectivity—is nearly impossible. The radiant difference is not detectable.

The problem, however, is most often rectified by applying a high emissivity target vertically. A painted stripe or a piece of tape on the tank, for instance, can work well. For outdoor work, use light colors and/or the shady side of the equipment to avoid solar loading.

Occasionally tanks are heated or cooled with a jacket. These often prove impossible to work with. In some instances it may be possible to see the structural stand offs between the tank wall and the jacket.

Tanks which are insulated also can prove challenging. Insulation levels are typically not great enough that they preclude seeing levels; rather the insulation changes the thermal dynamics to the point where a detectable level may not be obvious as often. Simple techniques, explained below, can help enhance thermal differences so they can be detected. In some instances it may be possible to cut small plugs out of the insulation at various levels that would more clearly reveal the tank temperatures.

Fig. 8. The impact of solar heating is evident on the left side of the tank, although it does not fully obliterate the level. Note the level is more clear on the shady side.

Although solar loading can enhance a pattern, more often it can cause subtle thermal patterns in a tank or silo to be obliterated (Fig. 8). It may be possible to view the device on the shady side, but sometimes it may be necessary to return when the sun’s affect is lessened.

Spheroid tanks offer another type of challenge in that, when viewed from one point, their reflectance varies so widely over their curved surface. It is not unusual to find the top of these tanks appearing cooler while the bottom appears warmer; all too often both patterns are related more to reflectance than emission.

Tanks located inside of buildings are not subjected to diurnal heating cycles. Some thermal cycling usually does take place, but it may not be enough to make the radiant differences detectable. Again, simple techniques, explained below, can be used effectively to enhance surface temperature differences.

Enhancing thermal patterns

Often thermal patterns can be enhanced by using simple techniques to increase transient heat transfer. It may be possible to heat or cool the tank/silo or the surface of the tank/silo. The gas head in the tank responds more quickly than the liquid. As discussed earlier, solids may respond in a more complex manner.

Gas/liquid level Thermocline Sludge level Fig. 9. An unusual pattern can be seen in this tank where a thermocline has established itself in the liquid. A high-temperature flare in the background caused the “blooming” on the right side of the thermal image. (Courtesy Greg McIntosh, Snell Infrared Canada)

An industrial hot air gun can be used to heat the surface of small- to medium-sized tanks. Heating even a narrow area may dramatically reveal a level. Cooling can be provided simply by wetting the surface with water. As evaporation takes place, cooling drives transient heat flow and reveals or enhances the levels.

These techniques also are feasible for large tanks. Cooling in particular can easily be supplied with a spray of cold water hosed onto the tank surface. Add the element of time for the cooling to take effect and, in many cases, the image becomes readily apparent.

Get results
Many industries have a critical need to determine levels in tanks or silos or to validate existing level-indication instrumentation. In many instances, infrared thermography provides a cost-effective means of doing both. Conditions often allow for levels to be seen at almost any time of the night or day and throughout the year.

While levels are not always immediately obvious, persistence, careful imaging, and simple enhancement techniques can often produce remarkable results.

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the following individuals for their assistance: Jeff Backer, Shane Brooker, Matt Clarke, Lee Colgrove, Jeff Cordova, Keith Dodderer, Patrick Lawrence, Greg McIntosh, Rob Spring, and Mark Soult. MT

How does your income match up with others in the maintenance and reliability community? It may be hard to find out where you stand because income figures vary so widely almost any way the data are tabulated.

INCOME DISTRIBUTION Half the respondents receive between $57,000 and $90,000. The average income is $74,995. INCOME BY AGE* Respondents 60 plus have the highest average income at $79,735. INCOME BY INVOLVEMENT* At $77,635, maintenance managers have higher average income compared to $72,208 last year. INCOME BY PLANT SIZE* Average income of readers in the largest plants (1000 or more employees) led this year’s sample. *The vertical brown line represents the income range within the group. The box shows the income range for the middle half (quartile two and three) of the respondents within the group. The green diamond within the box indicates the average income for the group.

That is what MAINTENANCE TECHNOLOGY Magazine has found out in all of its surveys of reader income. This year, respondents’ income ranged from less than $20,000 to more than $200,000, much broader than previous years. The lowest incomes were reported by practitioners working for nonindustrial facilities; highest incomes by executives with corporate or multiplant responsibilities in larger organizations.

Basic income profile
Average income of all readers responding to the survey was $74,995, somewhat more than the $71,153 registered last year and the $69,462 of the year before. The survey was conducted over a random sample of magazine readers, salaried and hourly, and we believe the data are representative of maintenance and reliability leadership.

Overall, 60 percent of survey respondents have worked in the maintenance trades or crafts. That level of craft experience was reported by respondents with a high level of responsibility: 44 percent for those who identified themselves with corporate/multiplant responsibility; 66 percent for plant managers; and 60 percent of maintenance managers.

Age and income profile
Half the respondents were 42 to 53 years old, with the average 47.3 years, older than the 46.6 years reported last year. Half the respondents received an income of between $57,000 and $90,000, more than last year. The income distribution chart illustrates the distribution in $10,000 groups. The midpoint was $74,000, lower than the average of $74,995.

The income by age chart that displays income distribution data vs age grouped by decades shows the wide variance of income within each of the groupings, with average income rising by age.

Education and registration
As expected, average income rose with the level of education. Average income rose from $67,260 for respondents with associate degrees, to $83,482 for respondents with bachelor degrees, and to $87,385 for respondents with advanced degrees.

Nearly 19 percent of respondents were registered professional engineers, certified maintenance and reliability

professionals, certified maintenance managers, or certified plant engineers. Average income of the professional engineer group was $86,509, roughly $4000 more than the average income of those with a maintenance manager or plant engineer certification, which were essentially the same.

Income by involvement
All respondents were involved in or responsible for plant equipment maintenance and reliability. That is the basic qualifying question on the application to receive MAINTENANCE TECHNOLOGY, and all respondents receive the magazine. However, they work at different levels and have varying responsibilities within the enterprise.

Respondents were asked to choose their level of involvement. Average income was $91,986 for corporate or multiplant involvement, $76,972 for plant management level, $77,635 for maintenance or reliability manager level, $68,021 for supervisor level, $76,971 for maintenance engineer, and $62,116 for technician level. The income by involvement chart shows a wide spread of income within each involvement sector.

Income by plant size
Respondents working in plants with 1000 or more employees received the highest average income at $80,220. The lowest average income occurred in plants with 50 to 99 and 100 to 249 employees, a pattern reflected in the data of earlier surveys.

Job responsibilities
Respondents were asked to indicate their job responsibilities by checking multiple items from a list. The portion of respondents checking various responsibilities in decreasing order are department performance, 65 percent; ordering or specifying plant equipment, 63 percent; ordering or specifying tools or supplies, 62 percent;

Hands-on troubleshooting of equipment, 61 percent; hands-on predictive maintenance analysis, 60 percent; time management and supervision of others, 59 percent;

Management of contract services, 58 percent; hands-on planning of maintenance work orders, 55 percent; department budgeting, 51 percent; engineering/design, 48 percent; hiring maintenance personnel, 45 percent; hands-on maintenance or repair of equipment, 44 percent.

The average span of responsibility included nearly seven out of the 12 responsibility items.

Respondents were contacted by e-mail and asked to visit a special Web site to fill out the survey questionnaire during a five-day period. The survey software did not collect respondent identification; however, respondents were given the opportunity to submit their email address separately to receive a copy of survey results.

For most questions, there were more than 990 usable responses. MT

There is a growing concern in the U.S. over a skill shortage in the technical trades crucial to run American industry. With many seasoned veterans planning retirement in the next 3-5 years, the question of how to transfer knowledge becomes more and more important. A well-planned and executed training program becomes the key to maintaining the level of expertise that is needed to keep American industry competitive.

Planning a training program
An effective training program starts with management support. Management should understand that there will be an up-front cost that has to be paid to put a program in place, but that the cost will usually be paid back quickly through numerous mechanisms, including decreased downtime because maintenance personnel have better skills to prevent equipment failures as well as less turnover in personnel who see the investment management is making in them.

A plan that describes the goals of the training program must be put together. The plan should draw upon information gathered in a training needs analysis (TNA), which is an exhaustive survey of plant operations, maintenance procedures, and equipment. It includes interviews with the technicians who maintain the equipment to determine the different skills they possess, and thus, the skills that should be maintained by anyone working on that equipment.

The TNA should include everything from union issues governing work practices to government regulations about plant operations to special ongoing problems in operations of all the different types of equipment in the plant.

From this needs analysis come the objectives of the training program. These objectives determine the exact nature of the needed training, which usually combines many methods, including classroom instruction, on-the-job training (OTJ), consulting for specialty subjects, and even outsourcing to companies that specialize in intense theory to practice-type training.

Classroom instruction
Classroom training offers a focused atmosphere in which to learn. The classroom curriculum should be based on the TNA. It should start with the basics: purpose and functions of equipment and basic operation, including theory of operation, how equipment interacts with the larger systems, etc.

The curriculum establishes a baseline of knowledge so that everyone is on the same level when more advanced training begins. Depending on the complexity of the equipment, this training could last anywhere from 1 hour to 1 week. Along with a good curriculum, the key to effective classroom training is a good instructor.

A good instructor has worked with the actual equipment and understands all aspects of it, from preventive maintenance required to how to troubleshoot unexpected problems. This person should understand the hazards involved in working with the equipment and the way the equipment interacts with other plant components. Safety should always be at the forefront of every discussion so as to incorporate it as part of the culture of plant technicians.

Before classroom instruction begins, the instructor should give a brief introduction of his or her experience to demonstrate expertise and understanding of what students will face in their day-to-day jobs. Next, students should give brief introductions of themselves to give the instructor an idea of the different skill levels and what they expect to get from the training. These introductions are crucial in setting up a comfortable place in which to learn.

The information should be complemented with visual aids, such as a computer-projected slide presentation, a white board or flip chart, or show-and-tell with parts from the machinery.

Also, there should be question-and-answer sessions throughout the presentation, and instructors should be able to answer questions effectively. It is common that if one student asks a question, over half of the class has the same question. Although a question from a student can disrupt the flow of the material, good instructors use the disruption to engage the class even more fully, and in doing so the instructor shows that questions are desired and will be answered in a way that will add to the comfort level of the learning situation. (See accompanying text “Steps to Answering Student Questions.”)

Other attributes that make a good instructor are the ability to communicate the curriculum clearly and concisely, the ability to maintain control of a classroom and keep the students engaged and on topic, and the desire to improve. A critique of the instructor should be done by all students at the end of the class so the instructor can learn what was done well and what can be done to improve the presentation. A good instructor and curriculum are crucial for the beginning stages of any effective training program.

Hands-on instruction
When a trainee understands the theory behind how a piece of equipment operates, the next step must be taken—on-the-job training. OJT reinforces what students learn in the classroom with a hands-on, learn-by-doing approach. Again, it is very important to have developed a curriculum by which to carry this out.

OJT can consist of students assisting qualified technicians in carrying out daily routines or assisting in preventive as well as repair maintenance. OJT must be incorporated into the work scheduling process and controls must be in place to ensure that it is effective and safe. The Occupational Safety & Health Administration, Environmental Protection Agency, and other regulatory agencies have guidelines and regulations involving training that discuss liability issues and the safety of workers.

Tracking progress
OJT should include a system in which to track a trainee’s progress. For example, a series of tasks could be listed in which the trainee has to participate under supervision of a qualified technician, who then would sign and date the task when it is accomplished to the supervisor’s satisfaction.

The curriculum for the OJT also should have a pre-existing set of questions that the qualified technician uses to quiz the trainee during the task being performed to ensure that the trainee fully understands all that is involved for each task. With an OJT program in place and running effectively, the knowledge transfer begins to take shape.

Follow up
To know whether the training program is effective and to continually improve upon it, follow up should be done with trainees. Surveys should be done periodically, possibly 30, 60, and 90 days after completing each segment of training.

These surveys should include questionnaires and quizzes that can gage the retention of knowledge by trainees and the applicability of what they have learned. They also should include a place for comments, so the trainees can make suggestions for improving the program.

Outsourcing and consulting
As stated earlier, outsourcing and consulting can be effective tools in setting up a training program. Experts in a particular field can assist in a variety of ways, from building the program from scratch to a more limited role, such as reviewing the safety controls in place to ensure regulatory compliance.

Some companies have already developed generic training curriculums with a wide range of industrial topics to choose from. These courses can be tailored to a specific arrangement or used as they are, the next step being that the organization will then build the OJT portion in-house.

Training pays off
The skills shortage is not an easy thing to fix. It takes management support, exhaustive TNAs, well-thought-out objectives and goals, participation from veteran technicians, and a program that employs the most effective means available. It includes an understanding of the complex workings of industry from regulatory compliance and safety to basic theory of machinery.

However, it is a continuing part of successful companies who understand that training does not cost—it pays. It pays through decreased downtime as technicians have the tools to troubleshoot costly problems, as well as decreased turnover as employees understand the investment the company is making in them. This endeavor, if done well, will keep the focus on smooth operations that, in the end, contribute to the success of the company. MT

Alan Lovett is the director of new product development for National Technology Transfer, Inc., P.O. Box 4558, Englewood, CO 80155; (800) 922-2820

SMRPCO (or certification) experience. As a member of the SMRP Certifying Organization board, I have been able to watch the impact that earning the CMRP status has had on several individuals and their companies. Some companies have implemented a policy of an automatic salary increase for those passing the exam. Others have provided public recognition and praise.

I believe it is fair to say that almost all companies have at least recognized the importance of the achievement for those individuals who have studied and worked to improve their skills and knowledge by becoming CMRPs. Has it made a difference in payback on their individual investment? I think so, if not immediately, certainly in the longer term. Whether in personal satisfaction, peer recognition, salary, or some combination of the three, I think almost every CMRP would tell you that it was well worth the effort.

Graduate studies experience. As a coordinator for our distance education (or off campus) Graduate Program in Maintenance Management and Reliability Engineering, I have seen a number of industry professionals earning degrees, or certificates, or simply participating in courses to further their education.

Most of these individuals report increased respect and recognition—and often, salary increases and new job opportunities due to their development endeavors. They continue with the program until they reach whichever goal they have set for themselves. Are they receiving the return on their investment? I think so, or they wouldn’t stay with the program. Here is what some of them say:

“I am sure that my participation in this course was a deciding factor in winning the job, and the knowledge I am continuing to gain will be more and more valuable.” (promoted to asset manager)

“The Graduate Certificate was instrumental in helping me win the job of production supervisor at a new gas plant. A great opportunity for further advancement, apart from about $40K increase in salary.” (promoted to supervisor)

College student experience. I have recently been reviewing our UT undergraduate intern reports from the recent summer as well as some feedback from two of our recent graduates from our maintenance and reliability engineering program. I think these excerpts tell the story better than I can:

“The extra specialization really helped when it came time to find a job during my senior year. When recruiters saw that I chose to deepen my knowledge in one particular area, they became more interested, and it oftentimes led to a second interview. Both at work and during the interviewing process, most of the engineers were surprised to see that I was familiar with various maintenance technologies.” maintenance engineer, May 2004 graduate

“Now that I have moved on to graduate school, my Maintenance and Reliability Certification impresses professors who thought I was just another face on campus. My research project focuses on diagnostic and prognostic analysis for condition-based maintenance for space shuttles. I believe that had I not gone through the MRC certification program, the opportunity to work with the manufacturing department at Georgia Tech would have been greatly reduced.” graduate student, May 2004 graduate

A Good Investment? So, does professional development pay? The answer is generally a resounding “yes” at all levels from seasoned veteran to university student. Certainly increased salary is a positive return. Promotion and/or new jobs also are normally considered great return on investment.

Air Liquide America (ALA) is part of the Air Liquide Group, the global leader in industrial and medical gases, headquartered in Paris, France. Its products include air gases such as nitrogen, oxygen, and argon as well as hydrogen, CO2, electricity, and steam. In the United States, the company maintains more than 125 production facilities and 700 customer installations.

Late in 1999, ALA’s management team realized that a higher reliability performance was key to existing and prospective clients. Concerned that current performance levels needed to be raised, a standardized benchmark assessment of maintenance and reliability capabilities was commissioned.

This article will summarize the original assessment in 2000 and the ensuing improvement efforts from 2000 through 2003. The focus is on the improvements made from 2000 through 2003 and the benchmark update in late 2003. The progress achieved by ALA over 3 years is highlighted.

Situation in 2000
Since the company’s beginnings in the United States, the maintenance function was decentralized and primarily the responsibility of the plant managers. The plants were supported by technical resources at headquarters, but were largely autonomous. Few reports or key performance indicators (KPIs) measured maintenance or reliability performance. Performance was mainly measured by two indicators—costs and headcount. This arrangement served ALA well for many years, but by the late 1990s, reliability issues began to affect customer satisfaction and maintenance costs were rising and unpredictable.

In 1999, ALA commissioned a regional maintenance concept designed to support up to two dozen sites from regional reliability centers (RCs). Initially the RCs were staffed primarily with a manager and technicians from the plant sites. Maintenance engineering support was provided as was planning and scheduling. However, the RCs were mostly reactive in nature, trying to provide resources for plant shutdowns and emergency responses.

After a year, the RCs were having moderate impact on reliability and maintenance costs remained unpredictable. As a result, the plants saw minimal value in the new centralized approach. Rather than abandon the effort, ALA executives decided to commission a Maintenance Benchmarking Study to define the issues that could accelerate progress.

Benchmarking process
Benchmark assessments usually involve the collection of pertinent data and a mechanism to validate the data. For most studies, a base of comparison data already exists. The challenge is to collect “apples-to-apples” client data. Using an unvalidated database can introduce a wide variation in data submissions for key information such as maintenance costs, replacement asset value, and personnel counts. These variations, in turn, can significantly affect comparisons and interpretations.

In the ALA studies in 2000 and 2003, all data was validated through on-site review of definitions, data reconciliation, and interviews. Similarly, comparison data also was validated project-by-project to ensure that comparisons were as consistent as possible.

On-site validation not only provides an opportunity to validate submitted data, but also allows observation of maintenance practices. In reality, the validation visit provides the opportunity to:
• Validate data
• Interview personnel
• Tour and observe the plant and its conditions
• Develop data comparisons and key issues in a team-based environment
• Draw conclusions that the plant team understands and supports
• Develop consensus lists of plant strengths and improvement opportunities

Interviews conducted during the site visits allow the process to move beyond collection and comparison of data. The interviews typically highlight problem areas, obstacles to improvement, and, very often, support conclusions implied by data comparisons.

When the on-site work is completed and the benchmark team has discussed the issues and key improvement needs, the assessment report documentation begins. At this stage, the team understands the hard number comparisons and the key areas for improvement. The final report and the subsequent presentation to management are designed to highlight issues to be addressed and resources required. The report also quantifies the potential financial gain from improvements.

Benchmark 2000 conclusions
In applying the benchmark assessment process at ALA in 2000, standard techniques were used with accommodations for the typically smaller size of ALA’s United States plant locations. The same validation processes, interviews, and team approaches were applied, as described above.

The areas identified for improvement from the initial 2000 assessment were:
• Improve cost control through improved reliability
• Coordinate maintenance and reliability with capital projects
• Restore key support resources
• Redesign the reliability center concept
• Strengthen or replace the computerized maintenance management system (CMMS)
• Develop a contractor management strategy
• Institutionalize root cause failure analysis (RCFA)
• Perform reliability centered maintenance (RCM) analyses
• Institute work planning and work scheduling
• Strengthen spare parts management

Benchmark comparisons were provided in the assessment to allow the ALA team to gauge appropriate staffing levels for direct maintenance as well as for support functions including planning, reliability improvement, and parts management. The comparisons with external data and practices also provided a frame of reference for total maintenance costs, maintenance organization structures, and maintenance philosophies.

Given the number of issues highlighted by the study, it was clear that ALA would have to prioritize its targets. A potential cost reduction of up to 25 percent was identified, but it would come slowly, given the economic downturn in 2000.

Using the benchmarking report as a basis, a maintenance improvement team began to develop strategies and implementation plans. The elements of that strategy are described below.

Gaining control of the work
Figure 1 shows that at the start of the change process, the plant audits were generating 50 percent breakdown work. After applying the new tools and processes, ALA would control the work and equipment to the point where 90 percent of the work would be plannable.

The level of existing emergency work required a significant amount of resources and overtime. In addition, plant turnaround performance was inconsistent, hampering cost control and causing additional overtime. Before any of the improvements could be implemented, it was imperative that the plants and the RCs gain control of the work.

The RCs decided to concentrate on improving shutdown performance. Experienced professional planners were hired to supplement the existing planners, who were provided training. Planning tools were developed and planners began the planning process months in advance. To better manage the shutdowns in the field, additional field supervisors were hired and developed.

However, the most important aspect was the consolidation of quality contractors. ALA turnarounds were small compared to those of our large customers such as refineries, chemical complexes, and steel mills. ALA plants usually shut down when their customers do. However, because the customers dominated the labor market during shutdowns, ALA was often left with few quality contractors.

ALA immediately identified three high-quality contractors to do general mechanical, high voltage electrical, and major compressor repairs, and signed national contracts with them. These efforts gave ALA improved planning, good field supervision, and quality contractors. In less than a year, a measurable improvement in turnaround performance was observed.

There was not much that could be done about the frequency of emergency breakdowns at this point, but they could be better managed and investigated. Maintenance and reliability engineers were hired at each RC. These engineers were assigned to provide engineering analysis to determine the optimum scope for the repair.

The new planning resources provided some planning, and the increased field supervision was deployed to better manage emergency repairs. The new national contractors improved the quality of repairs and RC performance in emergency situations started to improve. The new maintenance and reliability engineers were all sent to RCFA training and began to perform RCFAs on incidents in an effort to understand and prevent them in the future.

Implementing a process
One of the major barriers to improved coordination and communication between the plants and the RCs was a lack of process by which they would work together. There were no agreed upon roles and responsibilities. Each group did what it thought it should be doing.

A simple maintenance management process was developed that included work identification, approval, planning, scheduling, execution, and documentation. Each of these functions was broken down into tasks. For each task, roles and responsibilities were spelled out in RACIs. RACI is a simple tool that details for each task who is responsible (R) for doing the task, who is accountable (A) to see that the task is completed, who is consulted (C), and who is informed (I) . Training manuals were developed and all RC and plant employees were trained.

Soon thereafter much of the wasted energy and confusion, trying to determine who was going to do what, began to disappear. Employees began to better understand their roles and how their roles supported the process.

As new and unexpected issues arose, collaborative troubleshooting took place. Improvements in the process were documented and after a year the process was reviewed, the manual was revised, and employees were retrained.

CMMS implementation
The study revealed that the legacy CMMS was not being fully utilized. The strategy development team evaluated reconfiguring the system or replacing it with a new one. After a thorough analysis, the team recommended replacing it with a new version of Maximo from MRO Software, Bedford, MA.

The new software was configured to support the new processes. Asset data was gathered from the sites and placed in a multilevel hierarchy. Engineers entered legacy PMs where they existed and created new ones where they did not. The workflow feature of the software was mapped to route work orders for approval according to the approval limits set forth in the company’s delegation of authority. The software was interfaced with the company’s financial software to enable cost tracking and enable the purchasing and inventory modules. Virtually all software functionality was exploited.

This CMMS project is discussed in the article “Enhancing an Enterprise Asset Management Project”.

Vendor consolidation
Because the maintenance function was decentralized for many years, the company employed hundreds of mostly small local vendors. Most of these vendors were responsive to the local site but many lacked the level of quality needed to improve long-term reliability of the company’s assets. Furthermore, the fragmented service providers did not leverage ALA’s expense in the basic maintenance services.

The maintenance department teamed with corporate supply management and began to identify common services used at all of the sites. Collaborative cross-functional teams of experts and stakeholders were assembled to evaluate potential service providers.

A matrix of critical success factors was weighted and agreed upon by the team, and potential service providers were identified based on the quality of their work with ALA and the potential of providing their services on a national basis. Each potential service provider submitted a proposal and made a detailed presentation to the team.

Based on the data and final matrix score, a finalist was selected and formal negotiations took place. After negotiations were completed, the contacts were signed for a 3- to 6-year period. Both ALA and vendor KPIs were established to assure that both parties benefited from the new agreements. For ALA, KPIs were established to measure quality and savings. For the vendor, leakage and timeliness of invoice processing were measured.

Prior to rollout, each agreement was communicated to both maintenance and operations employees. Service providers handed out catalogs, normal and emergency contacts and phone numbers, and answered questions. Problems that arose were quickly addressed by the team to ensure that small issues did not escalate into bigger ones.

After 2 years, 17 contracts were signed including gas turbine maintenance, general mechanical services, compressor maintenance, electric motor shop repairs, safety relief valve management, electrical switchgear PMs, inspection services, transformer oil analysis, vibration monitoring, MRO supplies, and expander turbine shop repairs.

Organization changes
As it existed in 2000, the maintenance organization was comprised mostly of technicians and specialists. To support the new processes and tools, the RCs needed to be reorganized. The new organization increased support in the areas of engineering support, and work planning and scheduling.

Additional maintenance engineering resources were hired in each RC to apply engineering principles to determine the optimum repair scope for equipment failures or equipment with known component degradation. They were required to document the repair scope and write detailed job plans in the CMMS. They followed the repairs, examined the parts, and made necessary adjustments to the scope and plan based on what they found. They documented the repairs and conducted RCFAs.

Reliability engineering resources also were hired to monitor and improve equipment health. They were assigned to monitor vibration, oil condition, and infrared scans for the plants in their zone. For each recommendation, they were to write work orders in the CMMS with target dates based on their review of the data.

In the first year, more than 500 interventions were made prior to failure, saving large amounts of downtime and significantly reducing costs. The reliability engineers also were assigned to do an in-house version of streamlined RCM called a vulnerability study. For each piece of equipment, failure modes were identified and the appropriate predictive or preventive activity was identified. Spare part stocking levels were determined based on criticality and lead time.

Work planning was also strengthened. Additional planners and schedulers were assigned to each RC. All RC employees attended planner training to instill the importance of the activity throughout the organization. Additional schedulers worked with production to plan work on a weekly and monthly basis, according to business needs and equipment availability.

At the technician level, both in-house and outsourced competencies were determined. It was decided that ALA needed to keep instrument, electrical, and control system technicians in-house because the intimate knowledge of plant processes could not be readily obtained off the street. On the other hand, it was decided that almost all mechanical maintenance services could be safely outsourced because of the high quality of service providers available.

Importing and developing talent
Perhaps the most critical success factor was the hiring of new talent to fill many of the key positions and the development of the substantial technical talent that existed.

The new department inherited some outstanding technical talent, but there were not enough resources to meet the needs and there were some gaps in certain areas. The gaps were identified and an extensive talent search began. Over 2 years, some of the best technical talent in the nation was recruited to join the team. Together these technical specialists made an immediate impact better managing major overhauls and repairs.

However, the most critical positions needing an immediate influx of talent were the five RC managers. In the early stages of the implementation, several of the technical specialists were used for these positions because it was thought that these senior-level engineers would be the perfect mentors for the influx of younger talent being hired as maintenance and reliability engineers.

However, this was not the best use of their talents. What was needed was managers experienced with change management and implementing maintenance and reliability best practices.

In 2002 and 2003, several new RC managers were hired with this type of experience. Most of them had successfully passed the Society for Maintenance & Reliability Professionals’ certification examination and were Certified Maintenance and Reliability Professionals (CMRP).

Each of these new managers was able to articulate to their employees and counterpart in production how and why we were doing what we were doing and could paint a vision of what the end state should look like. They focused on roles and responsibilities and did extensive troubleshooting of issues and work processes that hampered performance. Once on board, the new managers applied the knowledge and experience of the new and existing technical specialists in a more effective manner, focusing on long-term reliability improvement.

The new department also recruited some world-class planners to lead the new planning efforts and to serve as mentors for the fleet of planners in training. After 2 years, the depth of planning talent has increased significantly. These new planners were critical in troubleshooting issues that arose in the new planning and scheduling processes.

The new department also filled entry-level engineering positions with extremely bright young engineers. With their enthusiasm for their assignments and the new managers’ ability to use them effectively, their impact exceeded expectations and made the future of the department bright.

Condition monitoring
By 2002, the focus was on improving condition monitoring. The benchmark study indicated that the existing vibration program was not optimal, primarily because data was not collected frequently enough to avoid most failures.

A team was assembled to design a state-of-the-art system that could increase the frequency of data collection and implement a process that assured action prior to failure. The idea was to partner with a nationwide company that could provide data collection, analysis, issue reports and provide ad hoc troubleshooting.

After evaluating several proposals, the team selected Rockwell Automation as that partner. The program provides three full time and dozens of part time Level 2 (Vibration Institute Certification) vibration technicians to collect data at all plants on a monthly basis and issue monthly reports to the reliability engineers. The program also provides a full time program manager who is located at ALA headquarters. This program manager is considered a valuable member of the ALA maintenance leadership team, just as if he was an RC manager.

KPIs were established to assure timeliness of data collection, the issue of reports, the review of the reports, completion of recommendations, and the number of saves attributed to the program. As mentioned earlier, more than 500 work orders were issued that intervened in component degradation prior to failure.

The program has since expanded to include infrared scanning and oil condition monitoring. The predictive maintenance data and reports for all three technologies are kept on a single database accessed from the ALA intranet. ALA technicians, engineers, and managers anywhere in the world can access this data for analysis or troubleshooting of issues with any piece of equipment at any plant in the United States.

Given the challenging geography of the assets, this is an invaluable resource of information that is constantly being accessed to address and preempt equipment component degradation and avoid breakdowns.

KPIs and monthly reports
Once the new people, tools, and processes were in place, KPIs and monthly management reports were created to drive improvement. As ALA defined them, KPIs are quite different from monthly reports.

KPIs were initially established to measure the effectiveness of the initial implementation and subsequent adjustments to the processes. For example, during initial implementation of the maintenance management process (MMP), it was discovered that simply writing work orders for maintenance work was inconsistent. So a maintenance work order compliance measure was developed for each plant and zone. This identified plants with high and low compliance. Plants with high compliance were recognized publicly and additional training and coaching were provided for plants with lower compliance.

As work order compliance increased, the next problem arose—the lack of resources and skills to adequately plan the increased amount of work orders. There were work order planning KPIs for volume and quality but when work order compliance was low, the planning KPIs looked pretty good. As the planning KPIs fell, additional planners were hired and others were trained until the volume and quality improved.

As planning volume increased, it was discovered that the scheduling process was under-performing. Managers, planners, and engineers worked hard evaluating and troubleshooting the issues and bottlenecks in the scheduling process until it became streamlined and effective.

This process was called “getting around the bases.” In other words, we had to get to first base before we could reach second base. And we had to get to second and third base before we could get to home plate and score a “run.” A run was defined as getting a well-written work order; having it properly approved, well planned, scheduled days to weeks in advance; executing it on time and with high quality; and documenting the problem, cause, and remedy. In this environment, KPIs were use for tactical improvement and modified weekly to measure new issues as they arose.

As problems were solved and improvements became sustainable, old KPIs were dropped to make room for new ones. To assure that the improvements were institutionalized, a higher level of the most critical KPIs was incorporated into monthly reports for management and corporate executives.

The relatively few monthly report measures were much different than the numerous KPIs. Instead of being malleable measures used at the field level to measure the implementation issues of the day, the monthly reports measured performance at a higher level and were held consistent for at least a full year. They were used to assure management that the new processes were working and improving.

The monthly reports consist of two sets of measures—one set for the MMP and one set for equipment reliability. For the MMP, four items are measured:
• Age of the work order backlog. This measures the age of each work order so it can be determined if the volume of work orders exceeds the capacity of the RCs to complete work orders. The measure easily shows how many work orders come into the system each week, are completed, and grow old past the target of 9 weeks (excluding turnaround work orders).
• Preventive maintenance work order scheduling compliance. This measure shows compliance to the schedule date of PM work orders.
• Predictive maintenance work order target compliance. This measure shows compliance to the target date of work orders that were written as the result of a discovery by a condition monitoring report.
• Maintenance activity type. This measures the percentage of man-hours worked for each of the maintenance management plan work types: normal (planned at least a week in advance), preventive maintenance, urgent (planned less than a week in advance), and emergency (no planning). (See Fig. 2.)

The equipment reliability measures are a series of mean time between repair (MTBR) calculations for our most critical equipment. These classes and subclasses are:
• Compressors—large (>2000 hp), medium (200-2000 hp), and small (<200 hp)
• Motors—large (>2000 hp), medium (200-2000 hp), and small (<200 hp)
• Expander turbines—All

These calculations take the number of significant work orders generated for a class of equipment and divide it by the number of pieces of equipment in that class. Because spared equipment is less prevalent in our industry, we do not attempt to account for on-line spares or actual run time. What the metric lacks in pure theoretical accuracy it more than makes up for in consistency. Therefore, its repeatability makes it ideal for internal continuous improvement. The thought is that if the number of significant work orders is reduced, equipment reliability must improve.

Each of the MMP and equipment reliability measures is published in charts on the ALA intranet for all employees to see. Each has the ability to show any of the measures by plant, production zone, maintenance zone, or business unit. This allows any manager at any level in the company to view a customized report with his staff anywhere in the country (see Fig. 4). Managers can now set improvement targets for any plant or group of plants in a zone or business unit.

ALA also has an extensive set of production availability and production disruption reports generated by other departments. Coupled with these measures from the maintenance department’s databases, ALA now has a balanced and comprehensive view of key performance indicators.

Designing the rebenchmark study
In late 2003, ALA decided it was time for an external assessment of improvement progress. The benchmark approach was used again to get a consistent, 3-year progress analysis. The team approach was applied as it was in 2000. Data collection was conducted on the same basis as in 2000. The focus of this assessment was to gauge the extent of improvements over the 3-year period and to bring attention to lingering issues still to be addressed.

Certainly, we all wanted to identify progress and recognize the hard work invested by the entire organization. Once again, quantifying the continuing financial stake was an objective. Another key objective in the rebenchmark study was to provide input for a more formal strategic plan.

With the list of issues from the 2000 assessment, ALA opted to tackle the low hanging fruit without the delay imposed by developing a formal strategy. The expectation in the 2003 assessment was that the remaining issues would likely be more difficult to address and might require a longer-term investment in shifting the culture. The concept of a 3-5 year formal strategic plan approach forces people to keep all issues on their radar, but follow a disciplined schedule of tasks and resources.

2003 results
Substantial improvements were made in the 3½ years between the initial benchmark study and the follow-up study in 2003. Key improvements included:
• Personnel changes to facilitate planning and reliability improvement
• More disciplined processes for planning, reliability analysis, and work scheduling
• Better coordination of contractors
• Improved material management
• A comprehensive set of performance tracking measures
• A substantially improved morale and teamwork environment
• An emerging reliability culture in place with support at the highest levels of management.
• A number of technology tools supporting improved practices including a new CMMS, vibration technology with routes and analysis, RCFA, vulnerability studies, and improved cost definitions, reporting, and analysis
• National agreements with key service providers and suppliers

Of course, there are still issues to improve going forward.
• Develop the new warehousing system into a comprehensive set of integrated national and regional warehouses
• Continue to support the growth of the new reliability culture by finding ways for maintenance, operations, and engineering to collaborate on solving reliability issues and integrating the operating technicians into the new reliability systems.
• Develop a mechanical integrity program to improve reliability for fixed equipment after focusing on improving rotating equipment over the past few years.
• Take the new systems such as the CMMS, the RCFA process, and condition monitoring to the next level.

Measurable progress
Between the recent benchmarking report and the new monthly reports, progress in several areas can now be validated and, more importantly, can drive continuous improvement.

Work order execution. Putting the MMP in place with its defined roles and responsibilities and implementing the CMMS to support it has dramatically increased the department’s ability to do more work more efficiently. While the work order volume was not known prior to the changes, the documented number of work orders completed each month has more than doubled in the past 18 months while reducing costs.

The primary reason is that the two most efficient MMP streams of work, PMs and normal (full planning), have increased from below 50 percent to greater than 75 percent, and are fast approaching the target of 80 percent. Consequently, the most inefficient streams, urgent (minimal planning) and emergency (no planning), are now less than 25 percent with the least efficient emergency work now at less than the target 10 percent.

The next opportunity is to reduce the urgent work to below 10 percent so PM compliance can be increased.

Work order backlog. When the MMP and CMMS went live, the number of work orders being written skyrocketed as previously undocumented maintenance work became documented.

For about a year, the size of the backlog increased steadily each month. Then in 2003, as the influence of the MMP and the CMMS began to grow, the size of the increase began to lessen. By the beginning of 2004, the increase stopped and the total backlog remains remarkably constant.

This is another indicator that the ability to complete work orders has equaled the volume of work orders created. The next opportunity is to continue to increase efficiencies so that the number completed exceeds the number created and the work order backlog can be reduced.

PM work order schedule compliance. Again, when the MMP and CMMS went live, the number of PM work orders increased. As expected, initial PM schedule compliance was low. However, the volume of completed PM work orders also has increased and is now four times what it was a year ago. This has increased PM compliance to about 80 percent in some months, but it is not consistently at that level.

This is related to the number of urgent work orders being above target. If the amount of urgent work can be reduced, the 90 percent target for this measure should be attainable.

PdM work order schedule compliance. When the condition monitoring programs were put in place, they initially generated large volumes of work orders because far more equipment was being looked at far more frequently than ever before. As expected, initial schedule compliance for these work orders was lower than desired. But as the work order capacity of the department grew, the backlog of these work orders was minimized and compliance is consistently up from 50 percent to more than 75 percent, and is fast approaching the 90 percent target.

Maintenance costs. Maintenance costs decreased between 2000 and 2003 despite doing more maintenance work. All the efforts from implementing the MMP and CMMS, to consolidating vendors, to increasing the engineering, managerial, and planning talent have played a role.

Downtime for planned maintenance. The amount of planned downtime has more than doubled in the past 4 years, confirming the fact that far more work is being controlled than ever before. The ability to do this work on our own terms instead of the equipment’s terms not only improves the efficiency of maintenance, but also all of the other business unit costs associated with taking a plant out of service. Now that major maintenance is more defined and better planned, it can be better coordinated with customers and the internal supply chain, reducing costs and increasing profits for both.

Supply availability. Like most everyone, during the recent downturn in the United States economy, business volumes were lower than they are today. Therefore, supply availability remained high due to the availability of excess capacity. Now that the economy has picked up markedly, our volumes have steadily increased and in some business units are at record levels. This has put a premium on the reliability it takes to operate at these rates with less backup capacity. During the past 4 years the traditional high levels of supply availability have held steady at these higher rates, again confirming that the investment the company made in the area of maintenance and reliability during a down economy has positioned it well for an improved one.

Reliability. ALA now has two new measures for reliability. The one at the plant level is the number of production incidents, no matter how small and no matter if they had any affect on supply availability. At the equipment level, the MTBR is measured for all motors, compressors, and turbine expanders. Both measures are too new to give a trend, so the 2004 data is being validated and improvement targets for 2005 are being set.

The future
ALA still has several areas to complete and optimize along this never-ending journey toward reliability excellence. In the short term, Air Liquide Group has completed the acquisition of Messer Griesheim’s operations in Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States (MG Industries).

In the United States, more than two dozen production facilities will be gained. These plants will be incorporated into the MMP, CMMS, condition monitoring program, PM program, and the national service and supply agreements. In addition, at least four new plants under construction must also be incorporated into these systems.

The commissioning of a new national warehouse in Houston has been completed, and now regional warehouses need to be created to hold spare parts currently located at the plants. This is a huge project that will tell what is on hand. In parallel, vulnerability studies will be completed at all our sites over the next 2 years. Among other things, this will tell what we need. Then the spare parts stocks can be optimized from what we have to what we need.

A cross-functional team of operations, maintenance, and engineering has been commissioned that will determine and define collaborative reliability activities to instill a reliability culture throughout the company. The team will explore several elements of total productive maintenance including operations-driven reliability, equipment improvement teams, early equipment management, and the increasing use of RCFA.

Earlier this year a mechanical integrity project was approved and staffed. This team will implement a more formal and comprehensive mechanical integrity program. They also will institutionalize all of the new tools and processes with new maintenance and reliability policies and procedures and establish a formal audit protocol that will ensure compliance and improvement.

And, benchmarking approximately every 3 years will always be a part of the long-term plan to validate progress, see where other companies are moving, and adjust the strategic direction to meet business needs and incorporate industry best practices.

At ALA, it is our firm belief that our investments in improving reliability will separate us from our competition and, in the end, make both ALA and its customers stronger and more profitable partners. MT

Mark E. Lawrence, PE, CMRP, is director of maintenance and reliability, Air Liquide America, LP, 2700 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 1800, Houston, TX 77056; telephone (713) 624-8181. Edwin K. Jones, PE, is a consultant who can be reached at telephone (863) 699-9196

Early maintenance process

Fig. 1. This is an early ALA strategy to gain control of maintenance work by applying planning and scheduling to half of the work that could be planned and scheduled and using national contractors and improved supervision on both the planned and emergency work. For gaining control of the equipment, the planned work would flow into CMMS work history and the unplanned work would flow into RCFAs. RCM would proactively generate the PM and PdM programs and plant assessments would detail needed restoration. All of this would reside in the CMMS and the outcome would maximize planned work and minimize breakdowns.

back to article

Maintenance work categories

Fig. 2. The maintenance management process designated four types of maintenance work: emergency (no planning) where work starts immediately, urgent (minimal planning) where work starts in 24-72 hr, normal (full planning) where work is scheduled weeks in advance, and preventive maintenance (preplanned and approved) that can go straight to scheduling.

back to article

Task Roles and Responsibilities

Fig. 3. RACI chart is used to explain the roles and responsibilities of all employees involved in the maintenance management process. R = responsible, A = accountable, C = consulted, and I = informed

back to article

Completed work report

Fig. 4. Sample monthly report shows the percent of man-hours spent on the four maintenance management process flow paths. These reports have drill-down capability to the business unit and plant level and can be viewed by any ALA employee anywhere in the country.

back to article

2003 benchmark improvements

Fig. 5. These two benchmarking charts showing estimated replacement value per planner and per engineering support person confirm that both planning and engineering resources were brought more into line with world class companies in the benchmark database.

Robert C. Baldwin, CMRP, Editor

MAINTENANCE TECHNOLOGY surveyed its readers to find general information about current practice in certain areas of plant equipment maintenance, reliability, and asset management. It was a part of our annual survey of maintenance salaries.

We found that most respondents are using multiple predictive maintenance or condition monitoring technologies, which was expected. Infrared thermography led the list with 74 percent of respondents reporting they are using or have used it in their facility. Oil and fluid analysis was a close second with 73 percent using, followed by vibration monitoring and analysis at 66 percent.

Less than half the respondents were using or had used each of the other listed technologies: Ultrasound inspection, motor circuit analysis, electric power monitoring, and process parameter monitoring. However, when figures for respondents who were considering using the technologies were included, each technology was being considered or had been used by at least two-thirds of the respondents.

We also asked readers about their use of several maintenance and reliability tools and techniques: Reliability centered maintenance (RCM), total productive maintenance (TPM), root cause analysis (RCA), PM optimization, benchmarking and key performance indicators, precision maintenance, and Six Sigma. For each tool, more than half the respondents said they were using or dabbling in it. The success rate was best for precision maintenance (precision alignment and balancing), where 82 percent of those using it reported moderate or extreme success. PM optimization was second at 76 percent and root cause analysis third at 68 percent.

The overall failure rate in applying predictive maintenance technologies and maintenance reliability tools was about 10 percent, which suggests that all techniques are providing significant value to the approximately 1000 practitioners who responded to the survey.

We all know there are many plants in the fail-and-fix repair mode that have yet to discover the predict-and-prevent world of modern maintenance. And, thanks to the readers who shared their personal information, we are confident that you are making progress with predict-and-prevent.

We wish you continued success in 2005. MT

The clutch is being used on drive units that power a vertical lift and transfer system in the assembly plant where the Saturn VUE small sport utility vehicle and the Saturn ION sedan and quad coupe are built. This assembly is part of a condition monitoring program that is being used to optimize maintenance at the facility.

Avoiding downtime
Significant downtime has been attributed to the vertical lifts and transfers which move the vehicles through the assembly process. These enormous drive units carry large amounts of weight which causes massive torque loads and sizable vibrations. These drives can fail for a variety of reasons: gearbox failures, motor failures, bearings, sprockets, etc.

If one of these drives fails, the line stops. Although most units are equipped with a backup drive, it can take maintenance personnel anywhere from 45 min to 1 hr to manually switch to the backup. A projected loss of up to $3500/min makes this downtime extremely expensive.

Prototype installed
A prototype clutch, designed jointly by Autogard Corp., Rockford, IL, and GM Spring Hill, was installed on selected lifts. The clutch quickly switches between drives and can be coupled with a torque ring and telemetry system for continuous monitoring of the torque and velocity of the drive shaft.

Using the torque ring outputs, the primary drive can be switched automatically to the secondary drive in 1 min rather than the 45 min at minimum that it takes for a manual changeover. Because this switch occurs automatically, the operations continue to run smoothly, allowing the maintenance personnel to redirect their work to other priority areas.

Fig. 1. Right side angle shot with lifting carriage in full down position

Reduced interruptions in the flow of parts to the line and the stream of vehicles through the plant results in improved uptime and lower operating costs. The end result is that the maintenance department and operations management see improved efficiencies that favorably impact the bottom line.

Monitoring identifies problems
The data ring monitoring system provides key running load information on the condition of the vertical transfer. In one instance, information from the new unit identified a problem caused by a gearbox failure during the first 5 min of operation. The limit switches and spring preloads on the vertical transfer were adjusted incorrectly resulting in overtorque of the gearboxes by a factor of four times the maximum rating of the gearbox.

The monitoring system was used to aid in the proper adjustment of the limit switches and preload springs to bring the elevator back to its designed parameters. The system facilitates the detection of developing problems and allows the scheduling of maintenance based on conditions requiring attention before an impact to production occurs.

The result has been improved preventive maintenance scheduling, more efficient use of maintenance personnel, and early detection of mechanical problems through continual monitoring of the equipment.

Once the torque ring receiver is attached to a programmable logic controller, a computer program is then able to monitor the torque and velocity readings. If the threshold is reached, the system warns the maintenance team that something is about to fail. The monitor can be used to determine how much counterweight is needed.

Lessons learned
While considering the implementation of this project throughout the plant, several key lessons were learned:

• If designed correctly, the clutch can be an extremely cost effective, efficient, and useful way to switch to the backup drives. In the current situation, it paid for itself the first time that it was used.
  
• The torque monitor is not always required for brake solutions.
  
• The torque monitor is not required for clutch implementations but without the data ring, the clutch cannot switch automatically between the primary and backup drive. With the torque monitor, the clutch switches to the backup during a failure, and provides an indication that the primary has failed. The data ring also can warn of imminent failure, allowing repair or replacement of the primary drive during scheduled downtime.
  
• If a condition based monitoring system is in place, it is not imperative to have a backup. However, it should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, depending on the criticality of the equipment and the efficiency of the maintenance organization. If planned downtime and occasional unplanned downtime can be tolerated, then the data ring should be sufficient.

Understanding each unique environment will help to ascertain which components and strategies need to be implemented. MT

Thomas A. Rogers, Ph.D, is vehicle systems engineer at General Motors’ General Motors Spring Hill Manufacturing, 100 Saturn Parkway , P.O. Box 1500, Spring Hill, TN 37174-1500. He can be reached at (931) 486-6782

Currently many maintenance budgets are developed based on previous maintenance budgets or a percentage of the replacement asset value (RAV) of maintained equipment. Sometimes maintenance budgets and staffing decisions are based on negotiations between management and the maintenance department. Often an exacting method of determining the specific number of maintenance technicians and their required skill set is not in place.

This article presents a method of establishing a defendable zero-based maintenance budget and staffing requirements based on equipment requirements and company goals that are supported by documentation. Decisions regarding budgeting and staffing are based on facts instead of emotions or educated guesses. Key areas for optimizing equipment expenditures and staffing requirements are easily identified.

Step 1. Determine the maturity of your maintenance and reliability program
The ability to establish, control, and predict a maintenance budget is directly related to the maturity of a maintenance and reliability program. Maintenance and reliability professionals often describe the maturity of a program in distinct phases, levels, or steps. It is important to understand the level of maturity of the maintenance program in a plant prior to attempting to develop a budget.

Typical phases in the maturity continuum of a maintenance and reliability program can be seen in the accompanying text “Maturity Continuum of a Maintenance and Reliability Program.”

Maintenance and reliability practitioners often debate the actual number of phases and what programs or systems should be included in each phase. The phases and the programs or activities associated with each phase are listed as an example of a typical progression of a maintenance program.

A maintenance and reliability program must be built in phases. It is important to have the Phase 1 programs and systems in place prior to developing Phase 2 programs and activities. Phase 2 programs and systems must be in place prior to effectively developing Phase 3 programs, etc.

A maintenance budget and staffing needs are best controlled when the maturity of a maintenance and reliability program has progressed to Phase 3. The more the maintenance and reliability program has progressed, the easier it is to control the maintenance budget.

Step 2. Determine how your maintenance budget and staffing levels compare to those of your competitors
It is important to determine how your maintenance budget and staffing requirements compare with those of your competitors. If you are spending too much on maintenance, you cannot be competitive. If you are not spending enough on maintenance you will be under-maintaining your assets and your equipment will start to deteriorate.

A method of determining how your maintenance budget compares with those of your competitors is to compare your maintenance expenditures and staffing levels to the RAV of your plant. The RAV is the amount of current dollars that would be required to replace the assets in a plant. Benchmarks for the maintenance budget as a percent of RAV and the number of maintenance technicians compared to the RAV are available for most industries.

The more advanced a maintenance program becomes; the less money will be spent on maintaining equipment. Fig. 1 shows typical RAV maintenance costs for a few generalized industries.

Step 3. Develop an equipment hierarchy
To properly manage a maintenance and reliability program, and a maintenance budget, an equipment hierarchy must be established. Equipment hierarchies are not “standardized” in the maintenance and reliability community. Typically, the methodology for developing a hierarchy for a specific company is standardized across a company.

See accompanying text “Typical Equipment Hierarchy” for a hypothetical chemical company. This hierarchy has been developed for use in this article.

Step 4. Understand methods used by your corporation and local plant to track and control maintenance expenditures and develop a maintenance budget for each asset

Corporate maintenance metrics are typically developed to reflect the performance of assets identified in Level 1 through Level 3 of the hierarchy. An associated metric might be the total cost to produce a thousand pounds of polymer per maintenance dollars spent. It is difficult to control maintenance expenditures at Levels 1 through 3.

Individual plant maintenance metrics are typically tracked for each department and each production area (Levels 4 and 5). Many plants can easily track production costs for each department and each production area of the plant. At most plants, an attempt is made to control the maintenance budget at these levels. Although the costs can be easily tracked, it is difficult to control maintenance expenditures at these levels.

Costs to maintain individual assets can be effectively developed and maintained only at the asset level (Level 7).

Consider the following:
•Observation made at company level (Level 1): We are not competitive. A key reason is that maintenance costs are too high.
• Observation made at the business unit (Level 2): The maintenance costs at the chemical plant in Mobile, AL, are too high. The costs of maintenance at the chemical plant in Macon, GA, are at an acceptable level.
•Observation made at the production unit level (Level 6): The cost of maintenance for Reactor #3 is too high. (Note: Although the source of the high maintenance costs, Reactor #3, has been identified, the reasons for the high maintenance costs have not been identified and cannot be controlled.)
• Observation made at the individual asset level (Level 7): The cost of maintenance is high primarily due to failures of the reactor vessel. The vessel continues to develop leaks. It is often necessary to shut down the vessel and build scaffolding inside the vessel in order to repair the leak. There have been four serious leaks in the reactor vessel within the past 8 months. The costs are generated at this level. This is where the costs must be controlled.

Typically maintenance budgets are developed and managed at levels above the asset level (Level 7), but maintenance budgets can best be developed and managed at the asset level. Each asset should have a budget that includes material and labor. Once a budget is established for each asset, the budget for the department and plant can be determined. See accompanying text “Budget Example for a Specific Asset.”

Step 5. Control maintenance costs using the maintenance budget
A budget developed at the asset level can be used as a tool to reduce and control costs, determine manpower requirements, identify training needs, and develop business cases.

•Reduce and control costs. Review the Budget Example for a Specific Asset. All the tasks shown are preventive maintenance, time based, tasks. Costs can be reduced by performing predictive maintenance tasks.

For example, vibration monitoring can be performed on the pump and the bearings can be replaced when they start to fail. The mean time between failures can be predicted by determining the B10 life of the bearing. The budget then would be modified as shown in “Modified Budget Example for a Specific Asset.”

The costs for maintaining the equipment based on the initial maintenance plan can be compared to the costs for maintaining the equipment as shown in the “Modified Budget Example for a Specific Asset.” Any cost savings are easily identified.

On a regular basis, the actual cost of maintaining each asset should be compared to the budgeted costs of maintaining the asset. Any over- or underexpenditure should be addressed on an asset-by-asset basis. By controlling the expenditures on each asset the overall maintenance budget is effectively managed.

•Determine manpower requirements. Manpower requirements can easily be determined by using the individual budget for each asset. In the example, the specific manpower requirements are identified by craft. The overall manpower requirements for each craft can be developed by combining the manpower requirements required to maintain each asset.

If more resources are needed to maintain equipment, the information required to justify an increase in staffing is available. If a reduction in manpower is required, the maintenance manager can work with plant supervision on an asset-by-asset basis to determine which maintenance tasks will no longer be performed.

• Develop business cases. Information from the zero-based budget can be used to create business plans for improving the maintenance of the plant. How many times have you attempted to improve maintenance at your plant but could not convince management to support the effort? It is much easier to convince management to support an effort if an effective business plan is developed to support your case.

In the example above, vibration analysis was used to extend the life of the bearings. To start a vibration analysis program at a plant, one could modify the budget for each piece of equipment that has the potential to be monitored. The costs savings then can be identified.

The increase in manpower due to the addition of a vibration analysis program to your existing maintenance program can be developed. The decrease in manpower brought about by replacing bearings based on the bearing’s condition as opposed to the time the bearing had been in service can be calculated. Once the cost of developing the vibration analysis program is determined, the payback for implementing a vibration monitoring program can be calculated.

• Develop a budget, staffing, and training plan for each asset. If a budget is developed for each asset the following items can easily be developed:

1. A maintenance staffing plan that identifies and supports the number of technicians, by craft, required to maintain the plant.

2. A specific training plan because all tasks that will be performed are identified. Technicians can be trained to perform the specific tasks identified in the budget.

3. An overall maintenance budget that can be defended.

4. A justification for increasing or decreasing the maintenance budget when pieces of equipment are installed or removed.

5. A justification for increasing the maintenance budget if an asset is utilized more than it has been in the past. If an asset is utilized more, the specific budget for the asset must be modified to reflect any increases in maintenance expenditures required to ensure that the equipment can be operated reliably.

6. A basis for a business plan that will support maintenance improvements.

•Utilize zero-based budgeting to develop life cycle costing. The process that is used to develop budgets for individual assets can be utilized in a life cycle cost analysis. Life cycle costing is part of a world class, reliability centered maintenance–advanced reliability program.

For the purpose of this article, life cycle costs are listed as a Phase 5 activity in the development of a maintenance and reliability program. The total cost of maintaining an asset along with the manpower needed to maintain the asset should and can be considered during the project delivery phase of the project. Various alternatives with various life cycle costs can be evaluated.

Call to action
It is important to understand the current methods that are used to establish maintenance budgets within your organization. Is there a well-thought-out method of developing a maintenance budget? Or is last year’s budget simply increased or decreased by an arbitrary amount to develop this year’s budget?

Determine the maturity of your maintenance program and benchmark your maintenance costs with those of your competitors. The cost of maintaining equipment vs the RAV for various types of manufacturing plants is available. The information on the cost of maintaining a plant based on the maturity level of the plant’s maintenance program is also available. By gathering this information, you can answer such questions as how much your plant could benefit from maintenance improvements and whether you are spending too much or not enough on maintenance.

Either develop an equipment hierarchy for your facility or validate the existing hierarchy. An equipment hierarchy is a vital element of any maintenance program.

Control your maintenance budget. Do not let your maintenance budget control you. By controlling maintenance expenditures at the asset level, the overall maintenance budget can be managed effectively.

Determine your specific staffing requirements and training needs. An asset-based equipment budget will provide this type of detailed information.

Consider incorporating asset life cycle costing into your capital deliver program. MT

Michael Eisenbise PE, CMRP, CPE, is director of performance technology and site services at Fluor Corp., 100 Flour Daniel, C301J, Greenville, SC 29607-2770; (864) 281-8625

back to article

Maintenance Budget Based on RAV

Fig. 1. This shows typical replacement asset value (RAV) maintenance costs
for a few generalized industries. The more advanced a maintenance program
becomes; the less money will be spent on maintaining equipment.

back to article

typical equipment hierarchy

back to article

Budget Example for a Specific Asset

Modified Budget Example for a Specific Asset

back to article

OK, I will admit that anything related to the Web and maintenance gets my immediate attention—and this looked very interesting indeed. In brief, the Web-based Skills Accelerator allows maintenance managers and supervisors to determine what their employees do not know about their jobs and then identify resources and tools to develop these skills within their work groups.

Although there are off-the-shelf industrial skills assessment programs out there, Universal Technologies Interactive grew out of a maintenance training company and a skills assessment technology company combining resources to create a specialized and detailed offering.

To use the Skills Accelerator the maintenance supervisor logs into the secure Web site, defines specific jobs, and assigns discipline and job tasks. This list can be edited and updated at any point in the future. Once the system is set up, job and tasks analysis (JTA) defined processes are used to identify specific job classifications such as mechanical, electrical, and operations. Common tasks are identified for various skill areas as well as specific skills required.

An employee starts the assessment process by logging into the Web site and answering questions. The assessment can be taken in stages or completed in one sitting. The evaluation is sent to the supervisor immediately; the employee does not have any direct access to the results.

The knowledge and skills assessments are designed to identify “employee readiness” to perform tasks in accordance with identified best practices, and develop strategies to overcome identified gaps. The key to developing an individual development program is to assess each individual’s knowledge and skills for each element of each assigned task.

Gaps between knowledge and skills possessed vs those that are needed are part of the Skills Accelerator. The system also identifies areas of opportunity for future employee development. This allows the supervisor to select from a wide variety of training resources that are aligned with the company’s business priorities and budget. This method not only identifies individual skill gaps but can be used to spot skill deficiencies within certain employee groups as well.

Once the supervisor selects the appropriate curriculum, an employee’s development plan is generated. With the implementation of the development plans, companies can help each employee to become world class.

Eventually the system will even rate the effectiveness of the various training resources, including live instructor led, distance learning, and computer-based products, as the use of the system grows. Training resource companies are invited to send an e-mail to support@utinteractive.com with a brief explanation of the maintenance training offered to be added to the resource index.

To generate a valid result, managers and supervisors must communicate the positive aspects of employee and career development and avoid using the system for the “blame game.”

Individuals can log on for less than $75 and corporate pricing plans are also available for volume users.

There is even a patent pending on the Skills Accelerator. It sure is exciting to see an innovative leading-edge technology applied to improving maintenance skills which we all know make our industries more competitive in world markets. MT

Internet Tip: Update, Update

Be sure and visit the Microsoft Windows Update site to read about possible incompatibility issues of certain programs (like firewalls and automatic updaters) with new Windows XP Service Pack 2. There is a list of known issues and you will do well to address them before you select the update. This update is a good one. It includes a firewall to beef up XP security, although some new flaws have already been identified with SP2.

Blogging, anyone?

Blogs or Web logs are becoming very popular. They are simply daily or weekly writings of everyday people who have something to say. A Blog is really an ongoing conversation between the author and the readers.

There is one maintenance and reliability blog site at www. maintenancetalkcom and a Blog 101 explanation will give you a good overview of blogging and whether it is for you or not. If you want your own blog, you can easily set up one at Blogger.com

Spray nozzles are vital components in many production facilities. Their accuracy, durability, and interchangeability are absolutely essential to maximum uptime.

If a spray system is not working optimally, it can drain staggering amounts of money. The cost of wasted water alone can approach $100,000 annually even in a system with relatively minor performance problems.

Factor in all the related expenses—the cost of excess chemicals, wasted energy, extra scrap caused by quality problems, unscheduled production downtime, and additional labor—and the true total can quickly mount to hundreds of thousands of dollars per year.

Once the magnitude of the issue is appreciated, it is time to begin the process of optimizing a spray system. Start by learning about the typical sources of spray problems.

Spray nozzle troubles
They may look simple enough, but in reality spray nozzles are highly engineered precision components that can wear over time, or suffer damage during normal operations or cleaning. The most common problems that cause substandard spray performance include:

• Erosion/wear. Gradual removal of metal causes the spray nozzle orifice and internal flow passages to enlarge and/or become distorted. As a result, flow usually increases, pressure may decrease, the spray pattern becomes irregular, and liquid drops become larger.

• Corrosion. Spray nozzle material can break down due to the chemical qualities of the sprayed material or the environment. The effect is similar to that caused by erosion and wear, with possible additional damage to the outside surfaces of the spray nozzle.

• High temperature. Certain liquids must be sprayed at elevated temperatures or in high-temperature environments. The spray nozzle may soften and break down unless special temperature-resistant materials are used.

• Caking/bearding. Buildup of material on the inside, on the outer edges, or near the orifice is caused by liquid evaporation. A layer of dried solids remains and obstructs the orifice or internal flow passages.

• Clogging. Unwanted solid particles can block the inside of the orifice. Flow is restricted and spray pattern uniformity disturbed.

• Improper reassembly. Some spray nozzles require careful reassembly after cleaning so that internal components, such as gaskets, o-rings, and valves, are properly aligned. Improper reassembly causes leaking and inefficient spray performance.

• Accidental damage. Damage can occur if a spray nozzle is dropped or scratched during installation, operation, or cleaning.

Detecting worn nozzles
This is more difficult than it sounds. The human eye is a remarkable instrument, but it simply cannot provide the true story when it comes to actual spray nozzle wear.

In the photos, the spray tip on the left is new, and sprays properly. The spray tip on the right is worn, and sprays 30 percent over capacity. The difference is undetectable with the naked eye—but there are other tip-offs that something is amiss.

Watch for these clues:

• Quality control issues and increased scrap. Worn, clogged, and damaged spray nozzles will not perform to specification, and can result in uneven coating, cooling, cleaning, humidifying, and drying.

• Increased maintenance time. Unscheduled spray system downtime, or an increase in cleaning frequency, is an indicator of spray nozzle wear.

• Flow rate change. The flow rate of a spray nozzle will increase as the surfaces of the orifice and/or the internal core begin to deteriorate. In applications using positive displacement pumps, the spraying pressure will decrease as the spray nozzle orifice enlarges. Even small changes in flow rate can have a negative impact on quality, so routine monitoring can reveal potential problems. But in some instances, the spray pattern will look fine so it will be necessary to actually collect and measure the spray fluid output to reveal wear.

• Deterioration of spray pattern quality. When orifice wear occurs in hollow cone spray nozzles, spray pattern uniformity is destroyed. Streaks develop and the pattern becomes heavy or light in the circular ring of fluid. In full cone spray nozzles, the pattern distribution typically deteriorates as more liquid flows into the center of the pattern. In flat fan sprays, streaks and heavier flows will be visible in the center of the pattern and the effective spray angle coverage will decrease.

• Spray drop size increase. Liquid flow will increase, or spraying pressure will decrease, as nozzles wear. The result is larger drops and less total liquid surface area. This is difficult to detect visually, so if a problem is suspected, arrange for drop size testing.

• Lowered spray impact. Worn spray nozzles operate at lower pressure, generally resulting in lower spray impact. (Ironically, in applications with centrifugal-type pumps, impact may actually increase because of increased flow through the spray nozzle.) Special testing may be required.

Preventing and solving problems
A comprehensive spray nozzle maintenance program will help ensure fewer headaches. By setting a regular schedule, key issues can be addressed before they cripple a production line.

The checklist that follows should become the foundation of a spray nozzle maintenance program. Consistent evaluation of these factors will enable early wear detection and appropriate action. Specific applications will determine how often each factor should be checked. The proper frequency could range from the end of every shift to every few months.

By implementing a nozzle maintenance program and documenting its procedures, the best nozzle maintenance and replacement strategy for achieving optimal performance can be determined.

Flow rate. For centrifugal pumps, monitor flow meter readings to detect increases. Or collect and measure the spray from the spray nozzle for a given period of time at a specific pressure. Compare these readings to the flow rates listed in the manufacturer’s catalog or compare them to flow rate readings from new, unused spray nozzles.

For positive displacement pumps, monitor the liquid line pressure for decreases; the flow rate will remain constant.

Spray pressure (in nozzle manifold). For centrifugal pumps, monitor for increases in liquid volume sprayed. The spraying pressure is likely to remain the same.

For positive displacement pumps, monitor the pressure gauge for decreases in pressure and reduction in impact on sprayed surfaces. The liquid volume sprayed is likely to remain the same. Also, monitor for increases in pressure due to clogged spray nozzles.

Spray pattern. Visually inspect the spray pattern for changes. Check the spray angle with a protractor. Measure the width of the spray pattern on the sprayed surface. If the spray nozzle orifice is wearing gradually, changes may not be detected until there is a significant increase in flow rate. If uniform spray coverage is critical to the application, request special testing from the spray nozzle manufacturer.

Drop size. Drop size increases cannot be visually detected in most applications. An increase in flow rate or decrease in spraying pressure will affect drop size.

Nozzle alignment. Check uniformity of spray coverage of flat spray nozzles on a manifold. Spray patterns should be parallel to each other. Spray tips should be rotated 5-10 deg from the manifold centerline.

Product quality/application results. Check for uneven coating, cooling, drying, cleaning, and changes in temperature, dust content, and humidity.

If, after implementing a spray nozzle maintenance program, it is determined that current nozzles are not performing as well as they should, it is time to replace them.

Extending spray nozzle life
There are some proven techniques to prolong the useful life of your spray nozzles.

Improve cleaning procedures. Nozzles are precision instruments. Cleaning should be done regularly but carefully, with materials that are much softer than the nozzle orifice surface. Use plastic bristle brushes, wooden probes, or plastic probes. Never use wire brushes, pocket knives, or welder’s tip cleaning rasps. It is easy to damage the critical orifice shape or size and end up with distorted spray patterns or excess flow. If faced with a stubborn clogging problem, try soaking the orifice in a noncorrosive cleaning chemical to soften or dissolve the clogging substance.

Add line strainers, or change to spray nozzles with built-in strainers. Orifice deterioration and clogging is typically caused by solid dirt particles in the sprayed liquid and is particularly common in systems using continuous spray water recirculation. Strainers, or spray nozzles with built-in strainers, are recommended—with a screen mesh size chosen to trap larger particles and prevent debris from entering the spray nozzle orifice or vane.

Decrease spraying pressure. Although it is not always possible to implement, decreasing the pressure—which will slow the liquid velocity through the orifice—may help reduce the wear and corrosion rate.

Reduce the quantity of abrasive particles or concentration of corrosive chemicals. In some applications, it is possible to reduce the amount of abrasive particles in the feed liquid, and/or change the size and shape of the particles to reduce wear effects. Also, the corrosive activity of a solution can occasionally be reduced by using different concentrations or temperatures, depending on the specific chemicals involved.

Consider durability and resistance issues. It is important to keep in mind that replacing old spray nozzles with the very same type (for example, replacing an aluminum nozzle with an aluminum nozzle) may not be the best option. Obviously a new spray nozzle is superior to a worn nozzle, but the situation may call for replacing current spray nozzles with nozzles that are much better suited to handle the types of liquids and chemicals that are routinely used.

Spray nozzles made of stronger material generally provide longer wear life. Predictably, stainless steel has a greater abrasion resistance ratio than aluminum, while carbides provide far greater abrasion resistance than stainless steel. To determine whether a different material should be considered for nozzles, spray tips, or orifice inserts, consult the chart “Approximate Abrasion Resistance Ratios.”

In addition to abrasion resistance, corrosion resistance may be necessary. The rate of chemical corrosion on a spray nozzle depends on several factors, including the corrosive properties of the liquid being sprayed, its concentration in the solution, its temperature, and the properties of the nozzle material.

Explore special nozzle types. New types of spray nozzles feature extremely convenient, nonslip extensions that are easy to grip and twist even in wet or sticky conditions involving lubricants, oils, or other viscous materials.

Also, look for single and double pipe clamps that enable a worker to quickly change entire nozzle mounts whenever necessary.

Fortunately, many modern nozzles can be installed and replaced without the use of any tools. This makes the whole process faster, easier, and more reliable than ever.

Get expert assistance. A spray nozzle manufacturer should have the capacity to test and evaluate spray nozzles to help establish baseline performance measures that will guide cleaning, maintenance, and repair schedules. This can minimize downtime significantly, and help avoid quality control issues through timely spray nozzle replacement.

A fast and convenient calculator is available online to help you figure out the actual costs of sub-par spray nozzle performance in your own application. MT

Jon Barber is a specialist at Spraying Systems Co., P. O. Box 7900, Wheaton, IL 60189-7900; (630) 665-5000

Worn nozzles cannot be determined just by a visual examination. Differences can be seen in a new nozzle (left) and a worn one (right) in a magnified view, though.

back to article

Approximate Abrasion Resistance Ratios

back to article

This article concentrates on one technology that has been developed to reliably detect broken rotor bars, abnormal levels of air gap eccentricity, and other problems in squirrel cage induction motors and driven components using motor current signature analysis (MCSA).

Consequences of broken rotor bars
Rotor windings in squirrel cage induction motors are manufactured from aluminum alloy, copper, or copper alloy. Larger motors generally have rotors and end-rings fabricated out of these whereas motors with ratings less than a few hundred horsepower generally have die-cast aluminum alloy rotor cages.

Fig. 1. A 1700 hp motor with broken rotor bar

Replacement of the rotor core in larger motors is costly; therefore, by detecting broken rotor bars early, such secondary deterioration can be avoided. The rotor can be repaired at a fraction of the cost of rotor replacement, not to mention averting production revenue losses due to unplanned downtime.

Some of the more common secondary effects of broken rotor bars are:

• Broken bars can cause sparking, a serious concern in hazardous areas.

• If one or more rotor bars are broken, the healthy bars are forced to carry additional current leading to rotor core damage from persistent elevated temperatures in the vicinity of the broken bars and current passing through the core from broken to healthy bars.

• Broken bars cause torque and speed oscillations in the rotor, provoking premature wear of bearings and other driven components.

• Large air pockets in die-cast aluminum alloy rotor windings can cause nonuniform bar expansion leading to rotor bending and imbalance that causes high vibration levels from premature bearing wear.

• As the rotor rotates at high radial speed, broken rotor bars can lift out of the slot due to centrifugal force and strike against the stator winding causing a catastrophic motor failure.

• Rotor asymmetry (the rotor rotating off-center), both static and dynamic, could cause the rotor to rub against the stator winding leading to rotor core damage and even a catastrophic fault.

MCSA technology
Motor current signature analysis technology has existed for many years to help diagnose problems in induction motors related to broken rotor bars, air gap eccentricity, drive-train wear analysis, and shaft misalignment. The technology relies on the fact that each of these problems produces recognizable frequency patterns in the motor load current that can be predicted by using empirical formulae and measured. These problems give rise to magnetic asymmetry in the rotor air gap that produces current components at specific frequencies in the load current.

A trace of the motor supply current is obtained by using a clamp-on current probe either from one of the main phase leads to the motor or from the secondary side of a motor CT. A Fast Fourier Transform is performed on the time-domain data to obtain a frequency spectrum. Depending on the device used, this can be done either by the datalogger itself or by computer software.

Once the frequency spectrum is obtained and stored, empirical formulae are used to look for frequency signatures in the spectrum within various frequency ranges depending on the problem to be diagnosed. For example, broken rotor bar frequencies (also called sidebands or pole-passing frequencies) usually can be found within ±5 Hz of the motor supply frequency; for air gap eccentricity a wider range is required for the search, from a few hundred Hz up to a few kHz. If the predicted frequency patterns are present in the spectrum, a positive diagnosis is returned.

In all cases, accurate estimate of the operating slip of the motor is a prerequisite to reliable diagnosis as the predictor equations require operating slip as one of the input parameters. In an induction motor, slip is dependent on the load and increases with increased load. In most cases, the only knowledge a tester would have regarding slip is that at full load; the motor nameplate data contains the rated speed at rated horsepower and the slip can therefore be easily derived when the motor is running at full rated load. However, as motors rarely operate at exactly full load, determining the operating slip becomes a challenge.

There are several ways to determine operating slip—a stroboscope or axial flux measurement are two examples. However, between the time the speed is determined using these techniques and the current measurement taken the load can change, leading to an inaccurate slip estimate. Not to mention the fact that these methods are cumbersome and time consuming.

Much work has been done in recent years to make MCSA technology reliable and user-friendly by calculating the slip based on motor nameplate parameters and measured load current. Depending on the MCSA instrument vendor, several algorithms may be employed to calculate slip. Some algorithms rely on deriving slip from the torque and some from operating current. Such algorithms do not need an external speed input.

Advances in pattern-recognition technology have now made it possible that systems rely less on expert knowledge, thereby making these systems useable by nonexperts who may not have in-depth knowledge of current signature analysis.

Detection of broken rotor bars
The location of the frequency components of the current due to broken rotor bars in the frequency spectrum is given by the formula:

f_sb = f₁(1±2s) Hz

where:

f_sb = frequency components of the current due to broken rotor bars, also known as sidebands

f₁ = power supply frequency (Hz)

s = operating slip (per unit)

Figure 2 illustrates the current spectrum from a 13.8 kV primary air fan motor with broken rotor bars operating in a fossil power station. The motor supply frequency is 60 Hz. Frequencies due to broken rotor bars are clearly visible.

Frequency spectrum from motor with broken rotor bars Fig. 2. Frequencies due to broken rotor bars are clearly visible, as is the influence of load changes during data acquisition.

The influence of load
Figure 2 also illustrates the influence of load changes during the data acquisition process. Note the skirting effect at the base of the 60 Hz spike. Keeping in mind that the slip is dependent on load one would, in fact, expect such a skirting effect as the current components are recorded in multiple positions on the x-axis.

The influence of gearboxes
Speed-reducing gearboxes or belt drives connected to the motor also may induce frequency components of the current in the spectrum and also have been a cause of false alarms. The position of such components depends on the rotational frequency of the individual gearbox shafts. Often the frequencies of these components are very close to positions that are expected from broken rotor bars.

Take the case of a coal-mill motor for which the current spectrum is shown in Fig. 3. This motor is rated at 300 hp, 575 V, 295 A, 885 rpm, and is connected to a 3-stage gearbox for which the output shaft rotates at 19.39 rpm (0.32 Hz) at full load (nameplate data). Speeds of the individual shafts internal to the motor are 52.8 rpm (0.88 Hz) and 141.69 rpm (2.36 Hz), respectively. Table 1 depicts the location of the frequency components of the current due to each shaft rotational speed at full load.

In addition to fundamental speeds of shaft rotation, harmonics also can produce frequency components that occur at locations in the spectrum where broken rotor bars are expected (see Table 2). It can be seen from Table 2 that gearbox shaft rotation, especially the rotational harmonics from the 2nd and 3rd stages, induces frequency components of the current at locations very close to where components from broken rotor bars are expected to occur. Keep in mind that Table 2 depicts conditions at full load.

Spectrum from a motor connected to a gearbox Fig. 3. Several current components are present in the spectrum. The question is which ones are due to broken rotor bars.

In this case study, the motor was operating at less than full load with a current of 250 A and therefore at lower slip (higher speed). Even at this load, the harmonics from shaft rotation may lead a user to raise a false alarm of broken rotor bars if not correctly identified as such. Whereas frequency components due to the gearbox are expected to remain at almost the same location for full load (295 A) as well as reduced load (250 A), components due to broken rotor bars move “inwards” at reduced load, i.e., toward the fundamental 60 Hz component. As a corollary, if it is possible to collect data at two different loads, chances of misdiagnosis can almost be eliminated as this would help identify twice-slip-frequency components from mechanical components. In fact, the motor in this case study did not have broken rotor bars.

Problems due to gearbox interference are easily circumvented by embedding intelligence in the instrument that enables it to predict such interfering frequencies. This requires that the reduction stage ratios are known and fed in prior to processing the data for diagnosis.

The importance of high resolution
This case also highlights the necessity of using high resolution in data acquisition and spectrum analysis. A resolution of 10 MHz would generally be sufficient to discriminate between distinct sidebands and therefore enable reliable diagnosis. High resolution is particularly important when testing low-slip and/or low-speed motors where the sidebands do not move as much as high-slip or high-speed applications and therefore could make frequency discrimination difficult.

One of the problems encountered when acquiring high-resolution data is the acquisition and processing time. However, with modern processors and digital technology this problem has largely been overcome due to high-speed sampling and processing capabilities.

Motor current signature analysis technology can reliably be used to detect problems in induction motors. Advancements in technology have made devices intelligent enough to minimize false alarms while at the same time minimizing need for expert interpretation and reducing time for testing and diagnosis. MT

Information supplied by Hasnain Jivajee, product specialist, and Ian Culbert, rotating machines specialist, at Iris Power Engineering Inc., 1 Westside Dr., Unit 2, Toronto M9C 1B2, ON; (416) 620-5600.

Table 1. Expected Frequency Positions from
Broken Rotor Bars and Gearbox at Full Load

back to article

Table 2. Expected Frequency Positions of
Gearbox Harmonics at Full Load

back to article

Many large organizations have highly sophisticated preventive and predictive maintenance departments that are staffed with well-trained technicians. Other companies have their programs embedded in the general maintenance staff with technical and specialized support provided by contract vendors. At other businesses, the PM activities take place just because the maintenance professional believes it is the right thing to do.

Whatever format or structure the PM program takes, it must deliver the desired results to be effective. A six-step program will help research the issues and provide the data required for analysis and discussion.

Review existing program
The first step in the process is analyzing the existing PM program in enough detail to produce data and facts so good business decisions can be made. Allocate enough time and resources to produce the real picture of a PM program, its process, its costs, and most importantly, its results.

For review, the PM program will need to be broken down into a series of steps. Typically, it is necessary to have a predefined process with a logical flow. Some of the actions that will be required may include developing an As-Is or current state process flow, reviewing existing PM work orders for quality and accuracy, and reviewing existing program statistics and compliance.

The development of an As-Is process flow is essential for understanding what and how the PM program is currently functioning.

Plan and analyze new program
The next step includes developing a To-Be or future state process flow. There will most likely be differences or gaps between the existing program and the desired one. This process may take place at the beginning of step 2 and be used as a road map, or it may be completed later in the process after envisioning what the process will be. Either way, it is necessary to support the gap analysis and serves as a visual guide for the discussions concerning process flows.

Other actions in step 2 may include:
· Identifying equipment that would benefit from PM activities
· Defining the criteria for PM activity templates or checklists
· Defining cost models and metrics
· Defining types of PM activity to be performed

Establish system support requirements and configuration
The third step in the process involves defining the configuration of computerized maintenance management/enterprise asset management (CMMS/EAM) software to support the action items defined in step 2. A properly configured system is a key element to managing all aspects of a maintenance organization. The key to this effort is to understand what the system should do and then make sure it is configured to support this effort. Configuration may include:
· System codes to facilitate how data is selected and sorted
· PM triggers that identify what and how the system will generate PM work orders
· System default codes to auto populate data fields
· Work completion codes to support the ability to analyze and trend

Define a re-implementation plan with timeline
This step involves developing an implementation plan and establishing the functional and management teams to execute and oversee the PM enhancement program. Key elements include establishing project execution and oversight teams, defining the project scope, and defining the project approach.

When defining the project scope, include the detail of amounts and duration efforts required to complete the project. Some of the detail includes:
· Amount and type of equipment
· Amount of data acquisition and development required
· Resource availability
· Project constraints

Design performance measurement metrics
This step involves gathering information and equipment data that will be required for managing the PM program during and after implementation. It is important to understand the current state of the program, and have reasonable expectations if improvements are made.

Selecting applicable metrics should be thoroughly reviewed and discussed prior to implementing the PM process. It is also important to communicate the intent of the metrics, ensure understanding of how they are generated, and allow for modifications as required. Some activities in this step include researching industry benchmarks, developing applicable metrics, and defining goals.

Develop benchmark, change management, and audit programs
This final step defines the follow up required to make the PM program an ongoing success. All PM programs need to be monitored to verify they are delivering the anticipated results. All PM programs will require modifications as improvements are experienced or changes are made to equipment or production demands.

It is important to keep the PM program alive and dynamic in order to achieve all potential savings. The two key actions to complete this step are defining PM audit and accountability responsibilities and defining a change management program.

These steps lay out a systematic approach to review and analyze the effectiveness of an existing PM program. The key is to have an organized and logical review of the existing program, design what is expected from a PM program, configure the CMMS, develop benchmarks and measurements, and develop ongoing audits and improvement programs. This review effort will be hard work if properly done, but the results can reap tremendous benefits. MT

Robert C. Baldwin, CMRP, Editor

I can’t do my job without traveling. Fortunately, I enjoy it, but when it’s more than one week a month, I start to feel my age.

No matter how uncomfortable or tiring, or how many misadventures, I don’t believe I have ever had a bad business trip. There are always significant gains in information, knowledge, and ideas from face-to-face meetings with practitioners, suppliers, consultants, and even fellow travelers (more and more travelers have clothing or gear with company logos that can spark conversation).

Some of the people I expected to see at meetings recently have not been there because their travel has been curtailed to reduce costs. That is unfortunate for them and for their companies because they are missing out on opportunities to collect information that can be leveraged into considerable long-term cost reductions—for example, the nuances of using reliability centered maintenance (RCM) to increase maintenance effectiveness such as I picked up on a recent trip to the West Coast.

That trip took me to Sonoma, CA, for the user group conference of Synergen, a supplier of enterprise asset management software, where I was able to renew my acquaintance with Peter Stock of Sentratech, one of the conference speakers and a licensee of the RCM II process explained in John Moubray’s book Reliability-centred Maintenance.

Later, in Burlingame, CA, on the way to the airport for my flight home, I was able to get together with Mac Smith, author of Reliability Centered Maintenance: Gateway to World Class Maintenance, the second edition of which came out this year.

Thanks to Smith and Stock, who shared bits of their experience teaching and practicing rigorous RCM, I came home with a better understanding of this analytical process for determining the true maintenance requirements for plant equipment and systems.

Whether from a workshop, conference session, plant tour, or casual conversation over a cup of coffee, I treasure these encounters with people who have something to say about what they do. What you leverage from these conversations can make the difference between outstanding and ordinary performance.

If you can’t network with practitioners and experts because you are cutting costs by not traveling, I hope it is proactive cost cutting—searching out and installing best practices, including the principles of reliability centered maintenance waiting for you in both of the books mentioned here. MT

Robert M. Williamson, Strategic Work Systems, Inc.

I was speechless. He was in a hurry. So I gave him a 60-second blast that ended with…“the equipment will fail to do what you expect it to do without proper training and maintenance. Unfortunately these are the historical first-to-be-cut budget items—a prescription for failure. Especially now: Maintenance and training should be a top priority as we are in the midst of an ever-worsening shortage of skilled and qualified maintenance people in the U. S.”

The Company’s new equipment was designed and developed at great expense to significantly improve its business efficiency (accuracy and volume) and lower the Company’s operating costs in one of its growth markets. Now this Company is about to shoot itself in its proverbial foot. How can it spend hundreds of millions of dollars on equipment development, procurement, and installation to improve its competitive position and not spend the necessary resources to make it operate reliably as designed for the next 10, 15, or 20 years?

The manufacturers of the new-technology equipment recommended about 4000 hr/yr for routine maintenance. However, the Company is budgeting approximately 2000 hr/yr. What these decision makers often fail to realize is that repairs can cost 10-100 times more than thorough preventive maintenance considering parts, labor, and lost production revenues, not to mention customer dissatisfaction and opening the door to the competition in growth markets.

The bottom line with his “maintenance question” is not whether to cut maintenance costs but rather to ask “what does the equipment truly require to perform reliably—to do what we need it to do first time every time?” Then, how can we make the equipment require less maintenance (maintenance prevention design/ modification)? What can we do to make maintenance and operations easier to perform (maintainability and operability). And, what can we do to improve preventive maintenance efficiency (running PMs, condition monitoring, and predictive maintenance)?

The bottom line with his “training question” is not whether to cut training costs but rather to ask “what does the equipment truly require people to know and to do to keep the equipment running reliably?” If people are not trained and qualified to properly operate and maintain the equipment, their mistakes and trial-and-error methods will result in damaged equipment, delays, and unprocessed products.

My training recommendation: do not cut back on equipment-specific training in any manner; make it more efficient and more effective. Make sure all of the operators and maintainers have the necessary core skills and knowledge or the prerequisite skills to comprehend and apply the equipment specifics. Then, apply visuals to every critical component and indicate every critical operating parameter on the equipment.

Physically locate and identify every lubrication point on the equipment. Attach lubrication pictorials or diagrams to the equipment indicating the frequency, lube type, and methods. Match-mark all critical nuts, bolts, and fittings, making it easier to spot looseness.

Label every major component with its name and identification number so everyone uses the same terminology thus improving communications and equipment repair and maintenance history accuracy. Label replacement part numbers and sizes for belts, filters, and light bulbs. Locate all vibration analysis pickup points with labeled discs on critical motors and drives.

And finally, hold the equipment manufacturers and system integrators responsible for the timely delivery of all documentation for maintenance and training prior to equipment installation.

Too many times in lean manufacturing and other lean environments, 10-40 year old equipment is redeployed, moved, and organized into lean cells without adequate concern or attention to maintenance reliability. In a lean cell, unscheduled equipment downtime usually costs 10-20 times what the same equipment downtime costs in a traditional batch processing or functional department.

For example, before lean, CNC machine tool downtime may have been $250–$750 per hr for a single 3-5 axis machine or robot. Now, automakers who have well-configured lean manufacturing plants cite machine tool or robot downtime costs of $2500-$5000 per hr unless the robot misses painting a car. Then the factory is backed up and downtime cost jumps to $3350 per min.

As a maintenance engineer for John Deere Co. in the 1970s, this writer was highly motivated by downtime figures of $250-$750 per hr—motivated to find ways to avoid, reduce, or eliminate downtime wherever possible. How much more motivating is lean maintenance reliability today?

Six Sigma for increased uptime
The answer to increased reliability and uptime of computers, telecom equipment, machine tools, automation controls, hydraulic systems, electronics, etc., used in lean manufacturing and other lean environments can be derived from Six Sigma’s Y = f(x) and DMAIC. That is as long as the wrong (apparent) path is not followed, as explained below.

Before Six Sigma, analysis began by gathering “cause,” “effect,” and “result” information on each maintenance downtime situation. For example:

Cause—Bad CAU2 circuit board

Effect—X-Y axis cutting egg shapes rather than circles

Result—Scrap parts, downtime

Log books with this format were placed at each machine. Each machine maintenance situation was detailed by the electrician or mechanic as soon as the machine was repaired and the cause was known and corrected.

Soon the analysis database looked something like Table 1.

As this history table of malfunctions and failures is examined, there is little commonality in cause but great commonality in result. Even the effect is often similar from dissimilar causes.

Six Sigma improvement methods would express these malfunctions and failures in terms of Y = f(x) where Y is the malfunction, error, or defect which results from a function of x. Using this approach, three possibilities are apparent:

• Y as the effect and (x) as the cause
• Y as the result and (x) as the effect
• Y as the result and (x) as the cause

It seemed important to focus on the third approach using the result (Y) and the cause (x) to try and reduce Y (downtime, scrap, and rework). More recent years of experience also show that eliminating or reducing Y also results in increased precision, repeatability, and yield for semiconductor and nanotechnology fabrication and other process industries.

The problem is there does not seem to be much commonality in the cause (x) factors as is expected by Six Sigma methodology. This would normally suggest the need for a more elaborate, expensive, and time-consuming predictive maintenance program. With enough tracking, mean time between failure (MTBF) should be able to be calculated and a prediction made as to when these devices and components are about to fail so they can be replaced before they fail.

Identify stresses
At John Deere, this was the apparent path when a single downtime situation, caused by a failed axis drive board, shocked this writer into a huge paradigm shift. It was written into the log book:

Cause—Bad axis drive board

Effect—X axis oscillation

Result—Scrap, downtime

But the simple observation was made, “No wonder the board failed, it’s too hot in that cabinet!”. There was a “cause of the cause.” It was instantly clear that heat stress was causing much of the higher downtime experienced every summer with this vintage of CNC lathe and the stress for each downtime situation in our log books should have been identified:

Heat—Caused—Bad axis drive board

Effect—X axis oscillation

Result—Scrap, downtime

And what are the other stresses that cause electronic, hydraulic, and automation equipment downtime? In this instance the (x) factor was heat. Y (scrap and downtime) was happening as a function of (x), heat.

What are the other basic stresses that cause these seemingly random malfunctions, failures, and downtime? That very day, brainstorming identified these stresses: heat; vibration; dirt buildup; oxidation; corrosion; power surges, lightning storm transients, etc.; and hydraulic contamination.

The first efforts to eliminate heat by adding a cabinet air conditioner proved so effective that the focus moved completely away from predictive maintenance to stress elimination to prolong rather than predict MTBF. Eliminating a stress or hardening equipment against stress resulted in such an increase in MTBF that there was little sense in predicting failure when we were still finding ways to prevent the failure, prolong reliability, and increase uptime.

Now our maintenance history table looked like Table 2.

In Six Sigma terms, (x) had been identified. Of course not all seven (x) factors are present and active on any given computer, machine, or piece of equipment. But, in the 25 years since that discovery, I have not been able to add to that list of basic stresses. Sometimes there are other key issues, such as poor design, operator abuse, or inadequate component ratings, but even these can frequently be endured and downtime avoided by eliminating the related stress.

Eliminate stresses
Now the question is what are the most cost-effective ways to eliminate these stresses. Or, how can equipment be protected against the unavoidable presence of these stresses? Possibly the most effective way to make sure these questions get answered and acted upon is to use Six Sigma and its DMAIC model:

• Define the problem
• Measure the problem
• Analyze how the problem can be eliminated
• Implement the solution, and
• Control the solution to ensure it continues and is improved if practical (kaizen).

At John Deere’s Dubuque Works, 2 years of analyzing and implementing solutions resulted in cutting unscheduled maintenance downtime by 50-60 percent.

Future articles will discuss these seven chronic stresses to keep production moving with lean reliability. MT

Howard C. Cooper is founder of AMEMCO, P.O. Box 211, Kaysville, UT 84037; (801) 859-2073

Table 1. Maintenance history of malfunctions and failures

back to article

Table 2. Maintenance history with stresses identified

back to article

One of the hot topics in electrical and mechanical training classes is the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 70E. Students question what 70E is and how it relates to the National Electrical Code (NEC), if 70E is a new regulation and if not why are they just now hearing about it, and if companies are required to comply with 70E.

This article will take some of the mystery out of 70E.

Troubleshooting live equipment, such as testing a contactor (left), requires hazard/risk level 2 PPE, suitable for protection from an arc flash of 8 cal/cm2, but racking of a circuit breaker (right) demands hazard/risk level 3 PPE, suitable for protection from an arc flash of 25 cal/cm2.

With the passing of the Williams-Steiger Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 came the need for occupational safety and health regulations. Congress directed OSHA to develop new regulations using existing “national consensus standards” and established federal standards.

For electrical safety regulations it originally adopted the most widely accepted electrical standard in the world—the NEC (National Fire Protection Association’s Standard NFPA 70). However, OSHA encountered several problems in attempting to use the latest editions of the NEC:

• With each new update of the NEC (which occurs every 3 years) OSHA had to go through the extensive legal process of adopting the new NEC edition and risk creating potential conflicts between the adopted version and the published version.
• OSHA needed a regulation that addressed installation, operation, maintenance, and repair in the workplace. The NEC is an electrical installation standard only.
• Because the purpose of the NEC is the practical safeguarding of persons and equipment and because it includes provisions for residential, it contains many provisions that are not relevant to OSHA and only confuse the reader.

To correct these problems and others, NFPA created a committee to develop electrical safety standards that would serve the needs of OSHA. This committee reports through the NEC technical committee and is called the Committee on Electrical Safety Requirements for Employee Workplaces—NFPA 70E. This standard has evolved over time:

• 1979: First edition published with only Part I (Installation Safety Requirements).
• 1981: Second edition added Part II (Safety-Related Work Practices).
• 1983: Third edition added Part III (Safety-Related Maintenance Requirements).
• 1988: Fourth edition had only minor revisions.
• 1995: Fifth edition updated Part I based on the most recent NEC and made some major additions to Part II.
• 2000: Sixth edition updated Part I based on the most recent NEC, made additions to Part II, and added Part IV (Safety Requirements for Special Equipment).
• 2004: The most recent edition made many significant changes including a total reorganization into the NEC format. In the reorganization Part II was moved to become Chapter 1, Part III became Chapter 2, Part IV became Chapter 3, and Part I became Chapter 4.

Is 70E a “national consensus standard”?
By definition NFPA 70E is a national consensus standard. In 29 CFR 1910.2(g), a national consensus standard is defined as a standard that is developed by the same persons it affects and then is adopted by a nationally recognized organization.

Organizations that publish national consensus standards include the NFPA, American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), and the American National Standards Institute (ANSI).

What does it cover?
In NFPA’s catalog it states: “70E covers the full range of electrical safety issues from safety-related work practices to maintenance, special equipment requirements, and installation. In fact, OSHA bases its electrical safety mandates—OSHA 1910 Subpart S and OSHA 1926 Subpart K—on the comprehensive information in this important Standard.”

The 2004 edition of 70E has an introduction, four chapters, and 13 annexes.

Chapter 1, “Safety-Related Work Practices,” is the meat of the 70E document. It discusses qualified vs unqualified persons and training. It requires an electrical safety program, electrical hazard analysis for shock and arc flash, energized electrical work permits, and lockout/tagout procedures. It establishes approach boundaries and discusses how to select appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) and protective clothing. Arc flash protection also is addressed in this chapter.

Chapter 2, “Safety-Related Maintenance Requirements,” does not create much discussion. It basically requires that electrical components, wiring, and equipment be maintained in a safe condition.

Chapter 3, “Safety Requirements for Special Equipment,” covers batteries, lasers, and power electronic equipment. This chapter affects more installations than one might initially think because power electronic equipment includes electric arc welding equipment, and motor drives, UPS, and lighting controllers that contain rectifiers and inverters. There are no surprises in this chapter but those with the subject equipment should review it.

Chapter 4, “Installation Safety Requirements,” is a truncated version of the NEC. Here authors state that the requirements in Chapter 4 are based on the NEC and in the forward of the 70E document it states that this document is not intended to be used in lieu of the NEC.

Annexes A through M offer useful information including how to calculate flash protection boundaries.

What is the “general duty clause” and how does it relate to compliance?
This clause refers to a portion of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970:

5. Duties
(a) Each employer
(1) shall furnish to each of his employees employment and a place of employment which are free from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to his employees,

Section 5(a)(1) has become known as the “general duty clause.” It is a catch-all for citations if OSHA identifies unsafe conditions to which a regulation does not exist.

The NEC requires field labeling (above) on equipment where arc flash is a hazard. A future edition of the code may require more extensive labeling (inset) that includes flash hazard boundary and PPE levels.

Is compliance mandatory?
In 2002, the NEC referenced NFPA 70E for the first time.

NFPA 70-NEC Section 110.16 Flash Protection requires field labeling of switchboards, panelboards, industrial control panels, and motor control centers that are likely to require examination, adjustment, servicing, or maintenance while energized to warn the qualified person of the potential of an arc flash. In Fine Print Note No. 1 that follows 110.16 it refers the reader to NFPA 70E for assistance in determining severity of potential exposure, planning safe work practices, and selecting personal protective equipment.

It is possible and in fact likely that the 2005 NEC may strengthen the language in 110.16 to require specific information on the field labels such as flash boundaries and PPE requirements, which are addressed in 70E. If this happens, facilities complying with the 2005 NEC will need flash hazard analyses completed for all new equipment or will need to default to generic tables provided in 70E to determine the boundaries and PPE requirements.

OSHA regulation 29 CFR 1910 Subpart S Appendix A: Reference Documents also references NFPA 70E:

“The following references provide information which can be helpful in understanding and complying with the requirements contained in Subpart S:

NFPA 70-78 National Electrical Code

NFPA 70E Standard for the Electrical Safety Requirements for Employee Workplaces”

In a “Standards Interpretation” letter from OSHA in 2003 the following is from selected paragraphs:

“All your questions involve the NFPA 70E standard, which is one of many industry consensus standards developed by the National Fire Protection Association. NFPA 70E, which is titled ‘Electrical Safety Requirements for Employee Workplaces,’ is the NFPA’s consensus standard for workplace electrical safety. It covers employee protection from electrical hazards including shock, arc blasts, explosions initiated by electricity, outside conductors, etc.

“With respect to the General Duty Clause, industry consensus standards may be evidence that a hazard is ‘recognized’ and that there is a feasible means of correcting such a hazard.

“These provisions (1910.132(a) personal protective equipment) are written in general terms, requiring, for example, that personal protective equipment be provided ‘where necessary by reason of hazards…’ and requiring the employer to select equipment ‘that will protect the affected employee from the hazards…’.

“Industry consensus standards, such as NFPA 70E, can be used by employers as guides to making the assessments and equipment selections required by the standard. Similarly, in OSHA enforcement actions, they (70E) can be used as evidence of whether the employer acted reasonably.

“Under 1910.135, the employer must ensure that affected employees wear a protective helmet that meets either the applicable ANSI Z89.1 standard or a helmet that the employer demonstrates ‘to be equally effective’. If an employer demonstrated that NFPA 70E contains criteria for protective helmets regarding protection against falling objects and electrical shock that is equal to or more stringent than the applicable ANSI standard, and a helmet met the NFPA 70E criteria, the employer could use that to demonstrate that the helmet is ‘equally effective’.”

In September 1999 a major U. S. corporation experienced an electrical accident that resulted in serious burn injuries to an electrical apprentice employee. OSHA investigated the accident and issued a number of citations. The employer challenged the citations and the disagreement ended up before the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

As part of the citation OSHA contended that the employer violated a federal regulation because it did not provide or require that its electricians wear appropriate flame-resistant or retardant personal protection, specifically, flame-resistant coveralls and insulated gloves. OSHA also contended that the employer violated a regulation when it did not provide or require that its electricians wear appropriate face protection.

In the settlement the employer agreed to develop hazard analyses in accordance with the personal protective equipment provisions contained in NFPA 70E. OSHA agreed that given the present state of its standards and regulations, the hazard analyses would achieve compliance with its requirements.

Points to remember
To summarize, you should understand:

• Several of the OSHA regulations are written in general terms leaving the details up to the employer on how to comply. (An example is requirements for personal protective equipment and clothing in 1910.132(a).) The employer is expected to use consensus standards to help in the selection of the best method to achieve compliance with OSHA regulations. NFPA 70E is a “how to comply” standard for specific OSHA regulations.

• Although NFPA developed 70E for OSHA, OSHA has not officially adopted or incorporated it by reference into its regulations. Instead in 1990, OSHA promulgated new safety-related work practices in 1910.331 based on the information in 70E at that time. However, NFPA has made major changes to 70E based on better information and research since OSHA developed its standard. The bottom-line is that 70E is not a federal regulation; it is just a national consensus standard like hundreds of other standards that are not laws or regulations. But compliance with 70E will assure compliance with specific OSHA electrical regulations.

• Some OSHA state plans are more restrictive than federal OSHA and as such may have adopted or incorporated 70E; however, this is on a state-by-state basis and should be evaluated by employer location. After researching several states on this issue, the responses were too varied to incorporate into this article.

• In the event of an injury or death due to an electrical accident, if OSHA determines that compliance with 70E would have prevented or lessened the injury, OSHA may cite the employer under the “general duty clause” for not using 70E to protect the employee(s). (Shock and arc flash are recognized hazards that employers should be aware of because 70E is now referenced in both the NEC and OSHA regulations.)

• It is important to get training on NFPA 70E and to implement it into your electrical safety program. MT

John C. Klingler, P.E., is vice president–site specific training and an instructor for Lewellyn Technology, Inc., P. O. Box 618, Linton, IN 47441; telephone (812) 847-3525

Much has been written about lean manufacturing and the lean enterprise—enough that nearly all readers are familiar with the concepts as well as the phrases themselves. But what about lean maintenance?

Is it merely a subset of lean manufacturing? Is it a natural fall-in-behind spinoff result of adopting lean manufacturing practices? Much to the chagrin of many manufacturing companies, whose attempts at implementing lean practices have failed ignominiously, lean maintenance is neither a subset nor a spinoff of lean manufacturing. It is instead a prerequisite for success as a lean manufacturer. This article will explain why.

The definition
The best starting point is to define lean maintenance:

Lean maintenance is a proactive maintenance operation employing planned and scheduled maintenance activities through total productive maintenance (TPM) practices using maintenance strategies developed through application of reliability centered maintenance (RCM) decision logic and practiced by empowered (self-directed) action teams using the 5S process, weekly Kaizen improvement events, and autonomous maintenance together with multi-skilled, maintenance technician-performed maintenance through the committed use of their work order system and their computer managed maintenance system (CMMS) or enterprise asset management (EAM) system. They are supported by a distributed, lean maintenance/MRO storeroom that provides parts and materials on a just-in-time (JIT) basis and backed by a maintenance and reliability engineering group that performs root cause failure analysis (RCFA), failed part analysis, maintenance procedure effectiveness analysis, predictive maintenance (PdM) analysis, and trending and analysis of condition monitoring results.

That is lean maintenance in a nutshell, albeit a rather large nut (except for a few details that were omitted here but will be covered later in the article). Let’s discuss the highpoints of this definition to be sure everyone understands the terms used:

• Proactive. This is the opposite of reactive where the maintenance operation reacts to equipment failures by performing repairs. In the proactive maintenance operation the prevention of equipment failures through performance of preventive and predictive maintenance actions is the objective. Repair is not equivalent to maintenance.

• Planned and scheduled. Planned maintenance involves the use of documented maintenance tasks that identify task action steps, labor resource requirements, parts and materials requirements, time to perform, and technical references. Scheduled maintenance is the prioritization of the work, issuance of a work order, assignment of available labor resources, designation of the time period to perform the task (coordinated with operations/production), and breakout and staging of parts and materials.

• Total productive maintenance. TPM is the foundation of lean maintenance. It is an initiative for optimizing the reliability and effectiveness of manufacturing equipment. TPM is team-based, proactive maintenance and involves every level and function in the organization, from top executives to the shop floor. TPM addresses the entire production system life cycle and builds a solid, shop floor-based system to prevent all losses. TPM objectives include the elimination of all accidents, defects, and breakdowns.

• Reliability centered maintenance. RCM is a process used to determine the maintenance requirements of physical assets in their present operating context. While TPM objectives focus on maintaining equipment reliability and effectiveness, RCM focuses on optimizing maintenance effectiveness.

• Empowered (self-directed) action teams. Action team activities are task-oriented and designed with a strong performance focus. The team is organized to perform whole and integrated tasks, hence requiring multi-department membership. The team should have defined autonomy (that is, control over many of its own administrative functions such as self-evaluation and self-regulation—all with limits defined). Furthermore, members should participate in the selection of new team members. Multiple skills are valued. This encourages people to adapt to planned changes or occurrence of unanticipated events.

• 5S process. There are five activities for improving the work place environment: sort (remove unnecessary items), straighten (organize), scrub (clean everything), standardize (standard routine to sort, straighten, and scrub), and spread (expand the process to other areas).

• Kaizen improvement events. Kaizen is the philosophy of continuous improvement, that every process can and should be continually evaluated and improved in terms of time required, resources used, resultant quality, and other aspects relevant to the process. These events are often referred to as a Kaizen blitz—a fast turnaround (1 week or less) application of Kaizen improvement tools to realize quick results.

• Autonomous maintenance. This refers to routine maintenance (e.g., equipment cleaning, lubrication, etc.) performed by the production line operator. The maintenance manager and production manager will need to agree on and establish policy for where in the production processes autonomous maintenance will be performed, what level and types of maintenance the operators will perform, and how the work process for autonomous maintenance will flow. Specific training in the performance of designated maintenance responsibilities must be provided to the operators prior to assigning them autonomous maintenance responsibilities.

• Multi-skilled, maintenance technician. Multi-skilled maintenance technicians are becoming more valuable in modern manufacturing plants employing PLCs, PC-based equipment and process control, automated testing, remote process monitoring and control, and similar modern production systems. Maintenance technicians who can test and operate these systems as well as make mechanical and electrical adjustments, calibrations, and parts replacement obviate the need for multiple crafts in many maintenance tasks. The plant processes should determine the need for and advantages of including multiple skills training in the overall training plan.

• Work order system. This system is used to plan, assign, and schedule all maintenance work and to acquire equipment performance and reliability data for development of equipment histories. The work order is the backbone of a proactive maintenance organization’s work execution, information input, and feedback from the CMMS. All work must be captured on a work order—8 hours on the job equals 8 hours on work orders. The types of work orders will include categories such as planned/scheduled, corrective, emergency, etc. The work order will be the primary tool for managing labor resources and measuring department effectiveness.

• Computer managed maintenance system. The information (maintenance) management software system performs, as a minimum, work order management, planning function, scheduling function, equipment history accumulation, budget/cost function, labor resource management, spares management, and a reports function that utilizes key performance indicators (KPI). To be effective, the CMMS must be fully implemented with complete and accurate equipment data, parts and materials data, and maintenance plans and procedures.

• Enterprise asset management. The EAM system performs the same functions that the CMMS does but on a more organization-wide, integrated basis, incorporating all sites and assets of a corporation. Even broader enterprise systems incorporate fully integrated modules for all the major processes in the entire organization and offer the promise to effectively integrate all the information flows in the organization.

• Distributed, lean maintenance/MRO storeroom. Several stores locations replace the centralized storeroom in order to place area-specific parts and materials closer to their point-of-use. Lean stores employ standardized materials for common application usage. The lean stores operation also employs planning and forecasting techniques to stabilize the purchasing and storeroom management process. This method requires that a long-term equipment plan is developed and equipment bills of material (BOM) are entered into the CMMS as soon as the purchase order for new equipment is issued.

• Parts and materials on a just-in-time basis. Stores inventories are drastically reduced (as are the costs of carrying large inventories) through a strong supply chain management team that uses JIT suppliers, and practices such as vendor-managed inventories in which the vendor is given the responsibility for maintaining good inventory practices in replenishment, in ordering, and in issuing the materials. The vendor is charged with the responsibility of controlling costs and inventory levels, the sharing of information with the facility, and making improvements in the process.

The supply chain management team advocates day-to-day supplier communication and cooperation, free exchange of business and technical information, responsive win-win decision-making, and supplier profit sharing.

• Maintenance and reliability engineering group. Because statistics indicate that up to 70 percent of equipment failures are self-induced, a major responsibility of maintenance engineering involves discovery of the causes of all failures. Reliability engineering is a major responsibility of a maintenance engineering group.

Their responsibilities in this area also include evaluating preventive maintenance action effectiveness, developing PdM techniques/procedures, performing condition monitoring/equipment testing, and employing engineering techniques to extend equipment life, including specifications for new/rebuilt equipment, precision rebuild and installation, failed-part analysis, root cause failure analysis, reliability engineering, rebuild certification/verification, age exploration, and recurrence control.

Other terms
Here are descriptions of some of the terms related to the maintenance and reliability engineering group:

• Root cause failure analysis. One of the most important functions of the maintenance engineering group is RCFA. Failures are seldom planned for and usually surprise both maintenance and production personnel and they nearly always result in lost production. Finding the underlying, or root, cause of a failure provides an organization with a solvable problem, removing the mystery of why equipment failed. Once the root cause is identified, a fix can be developed and implemented.

There are many methods available for performing RCFA, such as the Ishikawa, or Fishbone, diagramming technique; the events and causal factor analysis; change analysis; barrier analysis; management oversight and risk tree (MORT) approach; human performance evaluation; and the Kepner-Tregoe problem-solving and decision-making process.

• Failed part analysis. Examination, testing, and/or analysis by maintenance engineering on failed parts and components, removed from equipment, determines whether the parts were defective or an external influence, such as operating conditions, faulty installation technique or other influence, caused the failure. Physical examination is often required in order to determine where to begin RCFA. For example, when a bearing fails the mode of failure must be determined by examining the bearing,. If electrical erosion/pitting is found, then stray ground currents (the cause of electrical pitting in bearings) must be found and eliminated.

• Procedure effectiveness analysis. Among the responsibilities of maintenance engineering for the establishment and execution of maintenance optimization is the use of CMMS-generated unscheduled and emergency reports and planned/preventive maintenance reports to determine high-cost areas, and establish methodologies for CMMS trending and analysis of all maintenance data to make recommendations for changes to preventive maintenance frequencies, corrective maintenance criteria, and overhaul criteria/frequency. It also must identify the need for the addition or deletion of PMs, establish assessment processes to fine-tune the program, and establish performance standards for each piece of equipment. The maintenance engineering group also establishes adjustment, test, and inspection frequencies based on equipment operating (history) experience.

Additional responsibilities include the optimization of test and inspection methods and the introduction of effective advanced test and inspection methods. Maintenance engineering performs periodic reviews of equipment on the corrective maintenance (CM)/PdM program to delete that equipment no longer requiring CM/PdM, or to add to the CM/PdM program any equipment or other items as appropriate. The maintenance engineering group also communicates problems and possible solutions to involved personnel and controls the direction and cost of the CM/PdM program.

• PdM analysis. A major role of maintenance engineering is optimizing maintenance. One of the most widely used tools in this regard is PdM to forecast necessary maintenance actions. Depending on the quantity and kinds of production equipment in a plant, the array of PdM techniques can range from as few as two or three to as many as 10 or more. Whether a PdM technique is outsourced or performed in-house, the results and recommendations must be analyzed by maintenance engineering and maintenance actions scheduled prior to predicted failure or out-of-specification condition.

• Trending and analysis of condition monitoring. Condition monitoring, actually a subset of predictive maintenance, usually involves the use of installed metrology (gauges, meters, etc.) to derive the equipment’s operating condition. Examples can be as simple as a differential pressure gauge across a filter or the head-flow characteristics of a pump.

Maintenance engineering must establish operating limits for the condition(s) being monitored and trend the observed data, obtained from a log sheet or planned maintenance procedure, to determine when the operating limits will be exceeded so that required maintenance can be performed. This is referred to as condition-based maintenance and can be both more effective and less costly than periodic or fixed frequency maintenance.

Leadership changes
The foregoing provides a good, basic definition of lean maintenance by describing the activities and job responsibilities of those involved in the lean maintenance operation. Lean maintenance is also about fundamental changes in attitudes and leadership roles. In the lean environment the shop floor-level employee is recognized as the company’s most valuable asset. Management and supervisory roles change from that of directing and controlling, to a role of supporting.

The lean maintenance organization is a flat organization with fewer layers of middle management and supervision because, with the establishment of empowered action teams, much of their direction comes from within. The remaining supervisors spend the majority of their time on the shop floor providing technical advice and guidance and identifying first-hand the problems and needs of the action teams.

The foundation elements, in particular TPM, must be in place before an organization can effectively build on the maintenance management pyramid with elements such as autonomous maintenance and before it can sustain continuous improvement.

A company transitioning to lean manufacturing will not have a sound basis of maintenance support without first implementing many of these necessary and fundamental changes in the maintenance operation. As the foundation of lean maintenance, TPM must be operating and effective, as shown by the key performance indicators, prior to launching a plant’s lean manufacturing initiative. MT

Ricky Smith is the executive director of maintenance solutions at Life Cycle Engineering, Inc., 4360 Corporate Rd., Ste. 100, North Charleston, SC 29405-7445; (843) 744-7110