What methods and tools are available
to support the ROAR™ model?
Three Reliability Engineering methods are designed to support ROAR™ modeling and optimal investment returns: 1) Maintenance, 2) Design and 3) Operations. When ROAR™ is diligently applied to all three, companies are able to effectively and accurately measure return on investment.
Reliability Engineering in Maintenance
There are five key Reliability Engineering Maintenance elements that can be applied to support a company’s continuous improvement initiatives:
- Optimized Preventive Maintenance (PM)
- FRACAS (Failure, Reporting, Analysis and Corrective Action System)
- Work Procedures/Job Plans
- Maintenance Materials
- CMMS (Computerized Maintenance Management System)
Benchmark studies indicate that Best in Class Performers use Best Practice Behaviors to deliver Best Practice results.
The following pharmaceutical case study is an example. Prior to a reliability initiative, the company’s product was coming off patent. After implementing a reliability initiative across several plants, the following results were realized:
- Reactive Maintenance 71% >>> 7%
- Overtime 22% >>> 5%
- Availability increased 12%
- Healthy Assets 35% >>> 85%
- Production Deviations to 1/10th of
previous levels
- Maintenance Budget reduced 40%
- Inventory reduced 33%
- Insurance Premiums
reduced 30%
Focusing on Asset Health allows Best in Class Performers to achieve these types of results. Asset Health is defined as a metric that quantifies the overall state of a piece of equipment relative to presence of an identifiable defect. Defects identified by using an Optimized Preventative Maintenance or Integrated Condition-based Monitoring are coded “Red”. Assets with no defects are coded “Green”. By applying a Failure Mode Driven Strategy, defects can be exposed earlier and subsequently eliminated which reduces costs and ultimately helps maintain a healthy asset.
Asset Health is on a short list of reliable indicators for plant maintenance expenditure. Planning, scheduling and precision execution of operations coupled with a consistently maintained continuous improvement process are hallmarks of Best in Class Performers.
It is notable that benchmark data reveals Best in Class Performers lowered “Maintenance Cost to %RAV” with less Preventative Maintenance activities (Figure 1) while applying more Predictive Maintenance activities (Figure 2). The life time cost of an asset (over a 40 year period; Figure 3) can be significant depending on which Maintenance strategy is deployed (Run to Failure, PM only, PdM only, or Optimized PM/PdM).
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Click here to continue...
|
