Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) in the Facilities Environment

The following article was originally published by Reliability Web. The original article may be found here

The role of RCM in the facilities (non – production) environment as expected varies dramatically with the age and type of facility being operated and maintained thus, the type of RCM to be applied must be carefully decided to ensure both tangible and intangible benefits will be realized within the budgetary constraints of the organization. In addition, the dynamics of the organization where RCM is being considered must be considered before selecting the optimum approach. For example, an organization involved in large scale construction and/or renovation will have substantially different requirements and resultant business case than one focused on sustaining the status quo via a maintenance and minor repair approach.

The business case for RCM implementation for the majority of existing facilities where the inventory is stable is primarily based on the following cost avoidance techniques:

  • Reduction in time based maintenance hours
  • Reduced catastrophic failures and resultant costs
  • Age Exploration – OEM recommendations for example

For organizations where new construction and major revitalization are occurring, the business case also includes using the following to identify, implement, and verify (quantification) reliability issues:

  • Failure Modes and Effects Analysis
  • Commissioning
  • Operations and Maintenance tasks
  • Initial tools and training
  • Age Exploration for revitalization

Note: This paper does not address the basics of RCM and is intended as an aid to deciding the applicability and portion of RCM to apply to your facility and operating environment.

Where to Start:

  1. Determine if there is any reason to change the way you do business

While RCM, is the paraphrase others, the only truly logical and empirical approach for establishing and maintaining a maintenance program it is not for everyone and should not be pursued unless there is a factual basis which offers either tangible or intangible benefits. These benefits include only the following:

  • Reliability issues in – terms of safety, security, and mission
  • Financial return both, direct and lost opportunity costs

Building the business case and implementation strategy should be based on both strategic (global) and tactical (event) key performance indicators regardless of the type of facility being considered.

Life Cycle

Choosing the Appropriate RCM Approach

There are several ways to conduct and implement an RCM program.  The program can be based on rigorous Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA), complete with mathematically-calculated probabilities of failure based on design and/or historical data, intuition or common-sense, and/or experimental data and modeling.  These approaches may be called Classical, Rigorous, Intuitive, Streamlined, or Abbreviated.  Other terms sometimes used for these same approaches include Concise, Preventive Maintenance (PM) Optimization, Reliability Based, and Reliability Enhanced.  All are applicable.  The decision of what technique to use should be left to the end user and be based on:

  • Consequences of failure
  • Probability of failure
  • Historical data available
  • Risk tolerance

Classical/Rigorous RCM

a.  Benefits

Classical or rigorous RCM provides the most knowledge and data concerning system functions, failure modes, and maintenance actions addressing functional failures of any of the RCM approaches.  Rigorous RCM analysis is the method first proposed and documented by Nowlan and Heap and later modified by John Moubray, Anthony M. Smith, and others.  In addition, this method should produce the most complete documentation of all the methods addressed here.

b.  Concerns

Classical or rigorous RCM historically has been based primarily on the FMEA with little, if any, analysis of historical performance data.  In addition, rigorous RCM analysis is extremely labor intensive and often postpones the implementation of obvious condition monitoring tasks.

c.  Applications

The classical approach should be limited to the following three situations:

  • The consequences of failure result in catastrophic risk in terms of environment, health, or safety and/or complete economic failure of the business unit.
  • The resultant reliability and associated maintenance cost is still unacceptable after performing and implementing a streamlined type FMEA.
  • The system/equipment is new to the organization and insufficient corporate maintenance and operational knowledge exists on its function and functional failures.

Abbreviated/Intuitive/Streamlined RCM

a.  Benefits

The intuitive approach identifies and implements the obvious, usually condition-based, tasks with minimal analysis.  In addition, it culls or eliminates low value maintenance tasks based on historical data and Maintenance and Operations (M&O) personnel input.  The intent is to minimize the initial analysis time in order to realize early-wins that help offset the cost of the FMEA and condition monitoring capabilities development.

b.  Concerns

Reliance on historical records and personnel knowledge can introduce errors into the process that may lead to missing hidden failures where a low probability of occurrence exists.  In addition, the intuitive process requires that at least one individual has a thorough understanding of the various condition monitoring technologies and failure mechanisms.

c.  Applications

The streamlined approach should be utilized when:

  • The function of the system/equipment is well understood.
  • Functional failure of the system/equipment will not result in loss of life or catastrophic impact on the environment or unit business.

For these reasons, the streamlined or intuitive approach is recommended for the majority of facilities. Exceptions are where single points of failure exist and the associated risk of failure cannot be mitigated.

The streamlined or intuitive approach is recommended due to the high analysis cost of the rigorous approach, the relative low impact of failure of most facilities systems, the type of systems and components maintained, and the amount of redundant systems in place.  The streamlined approach uses the same principles as the rigorous, but recognizes not all failure modes will be analyzed.  RCM users have reviewed the various processes in use and have determined that the most economical and efficient approach is to use a combination of rigorous (formal) and intuitive analysis depending on system criticality and failure impact.

A more rigorous analysis may be warranted for those systems and components where the streamlined or intuitive RCM process has been used and the resultant reliability is still unacceptable in terms of security, safety, cost, or mission impact.

Three Approaches to RCM

1.  Globally Dispersed – Large New Construction Effort

a.  Use of generic FMEA data to construct maintenance program tasks, interval, and training programs
b.  Commissioning developed using FMEA with a concentration on identifying and addressing single points of failure
c.  Criticality and probability of failure used to determine stocking plan
d.  Roving condition monitoring teams to determine priority and scheduling of repair and PM teams
e.  Root cause failure centrally located and coordinated by system experts
f.  Metrics developed to track availability, mean time between failure, and costs
g.  Significant overhaul of design and procurement process to implement RCM
h.  Process reengineering used to identify potential opportunities

2.  Dispersed – Aging and Diminishing Inventory

a.  No FMEA performed on standard facility equipment where sufficient redundancy existed. FMEA performed on a case – by -case basis for critical program equipment
b.  Immediate implementation of condition monitoring technologies appropriate to machinery type and mission
c.  Dispersed technologists at each location
d.  Minimum central management
e.  Virtual teams to shard information
f.  Commissioning limited to condition monitoring acceptance testing
g.  Metrics developed to track availability, mean time between failure, and costs
h.  Limited changes to building specifications

3.  Centrally Located (for the most part) – Limited Revitalization

a.  Generic FMEA used and all maintenance tasks revised
b.  RCM added to position descriptions and annual performance plans
c.  Spare parts switched to Just – In – Time
d.  Dispersed first line maintenance with centralized technologists
e.  Immediate implementation of condition monitoring technologies appropriate to machinery type and mission
f.  Limited use of acceptance testing
g.  Metrics developed to track availability, mean time between failure, and costs and reported to all levels of the organization on a monthly basis
h.  On -going training program implemented – 40 hours per employee per year

In closing, there are these basic rules:

  • Pick the appropriate level of sophistication based on a business plan which addresses implementation cost, time required, return – on investment, and risk mitigation
  • Create and apply the appropriate Key Performance Indicators and make them public
  • Communicate and train everyone
  • Be shameless in promoting your program – crow about your successes and acknowledge your failures in order to build and maintain credibility
  • Do not over analyze
  • Stay the course, RCM is not a program of the quarter
  • Design and use your management software to analyze and identify areas problems
  • Do not simply add a condition monitoring technology without understanding related changes

Article submitted by Alan K. Pride, Associate Director, Smithsonian Institute

Asset Life Cycle with Maximo for Transportation

This post originally was posted on the  IBM Asset & Facilities Management blog and was written by Vito DeMalteris.

 Asset Life Cycle with Maximo for Transportation

The Asset Life Cycle is an important process to monitor for any industry. All asset owners make some attempt at monitoring this cycle in order to develop enlightened, informed decisions regarding maintenance strategies, spare parts requirements, operational procedures and repair/replace options. The key requirement in making these decisions is knowledge and information. Some of this will come from the manufacturer, some from user experience but the most significant source is from the operating and maintenance history of the specific asset. As you read this document, review the features in theTransportation page.
Maximo for Transportation provides significant detail related to the asset history. The asset application contains information related to that specific asset so that it is made readily available for the user, and in one location in Maximo. Information about warranty coverage, a significant process in the transportation industry, is displayed so that the user will always know what the warranty status is for each asset without having to look for it in the warranty applications.
Advanced Metering capabilities enhance the usage and Preventive Maintenance processes to further the maintenance strategy for your assets. Each asset record has a history option which provides a view into the asset including Work, Preventive and Predictive schedules and history, meter readings history, status change history, condition status history, move history, usage history for motor pool assets, Telematics reading history, activity history, axle position reading history and a chronological history of activities. All of this information is made easily accessible.
Utilizing the Depreciation Schedule provided in the Asset application allows the user to track the monetary value of this asset up to the current date. This information, used in conjunction with the maintenance and meter history of the asset, can be used to help make the repair/replace decision that is inevitable in the transportation environment. 
To help the organization prevent unnecessary work, Maximo for Transportation will display any recent or repeat repairs on the asset whenever a work order against that asset is created. This feature not only helps eliminate duplicate work orders but also helps identify recurring problems which may be an indication of other issues related to the asset, its environment or perhaps training for the technicians performing the work. All of this helps extend the asset service life by pushing valuable information to the user. In summary, Maximo for Transportation provides detailed information concerning the asset to enable the user to extend the asset life cycle and provide the data needed when the time to replace that asset is near. Hear this information for yourself from one of our Transportation clients (Royal Boskalis Westminster). Link to video.

Don’t Go Mobile unless….

pulse14

What’s great about PULSE is it gets you re-energized, gives you a shot of adrenaline, and a kick in the butt to get back out there and fight the good fight. The use case presentations for those of us that have been around Maximo for many years help re-affirm what elements lead to successful and not so successful implementations and for those new to the game provide valuable advice on what rabbit holes to avoid.  Having recently been put in charge of a new Maximo implementation I had to test my temptation of avoiding just that.  One of those rabbit holes is Mobile.  Mobile is the hot topic but be aware that the consumer experience is very different from the enterprise business experience and mobile isn’t the answer when you haven’t clearly identified where you are and where you want to go with your business processes.  You need to pay close attention to what elements lead to a successful implementation before you ever say the word mobile.  I may be preaching to the choir but it bears repeating that the following elements always seem to be at the core of successful implementation experiences:

Partnership between IT and Users – These two groups must work together towards a common goal, but the measurement of success if very different between the two.  IT’s success can be measured in a more objective way in terms of getting the software installed and configured, debugged according to the technical and software performance specifications.  But it is a completely different situation with the users.  They measure success in a very subjective manner and their definition is based more on how they perceive the user experience regardless of how well the software is running and doing what it is supposed to do.    ently been put in charge of a new Maximo implementation I had to test my temptation of avoiding just that.  One of those rabbit holes is Mobile.  Mobile is the hot topic but be aware that the consumer experience is very different from the enterprise business experience and mobile isn’t the answer when you haven’t clearly identified where you are and where you want to go with your business processes.  You need to pay close attention to what elements lead to a successful implementation before you ever say the word mobile.  I may be preaching to the choir but it bears repeating that the following elements always seem to be at the core of successful implementation experiences:

Good Data – The foundation of success is rooted in clean, reliable, accurate, fact based data.  The credibility of your system depends entirely upon the accuracy of your data.  Spend the time it takes to really find out what information you need, why you need it, and who needs it.   Don’t collect data that doesn’t matter.  Remember the more you want the more it cost to get it.  Make sure is serves a useful purpose.

Business Process Analysis – Just as important as good data is the processes of getting that data into and out of the system. This requires really understanding how your operation performs the work, obtains the required information, and how it gets that in front of those that need it.  Assessing these workflows and streamlining these processes is critical in establishing configuration requirements in support of your business.

Managing Expectations – Someone needs to be in charge of defining the dance floor.  Typically this tends to be someone from IT.  This is just the opposite of what should be.  Operations/Users are the ones that have to use it, live with it, work with it, and have to own it. Truly successful implementations are driven by users with realistic expectations and a good technical support team.

To get the most from Maximo there is nothing more important than getting processes defined and streamlined in support of what management has set as the vision and direction for the organization.  Mobile smart devices become the tool of choice when you look to eliminating paper processes and making Maximo “work like we do” to get and deliver the data to those that need it, the way they need it.  High expectations base on our personal “There’s an App for That” experience sets the standard and becomes a challenge when trying to deliver a similar experience with an enterprise business mobile application.  The solution that is “right” can be a bewildering and a hotly contested debate between users and IT.  That is why it is so important that use cases are firmly rooted in well-defined business process requirements established by users.

A few obvious and not so obvious considerations when assessing your mobile solution include:

  • Platform for devices (IOS, Android, Windows Mobile)
  • Device Compatibility – what types of devices can be used on the platform
  • License Structure (named vs concurrent)
  • Online – Offline connectivity
  • Support services
  • User interface – ease of use
  • System Architecture
  • Configurability of applications
  • Skills required to develop applications
  • Administration and deployment of applications
  • Integration needs with other systems besides Maximo
  • Security and BYOD policies
  • Device management and hardware support

Mobile is hot, so be careful that you don’t get burned. Success depends on meeting user expectations.  Get your requirements act together, set realistic user expectations, and —–partner with IT to architect a solution that simplifies the user experience.

—————————————————

About Randy McDaniel:
Randy has a B.S. degree in Mechanical Engineering from the California State University at Fullerton and has spent over 35 years in the field of maintenance engineering, maintenance planning, capital projects construction, and facilities maintenance. His industry experience includes oil refineries, petrochemical plants, universities, steel mills, assembly plants, lumber mills, and utility plants.

He has spent time as a Maximo senior consultant providing business process re-engineering assessments and managing Maximo implementations. A vocal advocate of Maximo, Randy has been the Chairman of the Southern California Maximo Users Group since 1998 where he often presents best practices, tips and other real life Maximo experiences.

Currently Randy is the Maximo System Administrator and Facilities Management Information Systems Integration Manager at the University of California Los Angeles. He manages the implementation of Maximo and provides IT integration direction and vision for the General Services business unit.

This post originally appeared on the Tivoli User Community boards on March 3, 2014, and is reprinted with permission of the author

 

Why Fact Based Data is Critical to your Maximo Implementation

After attending Pulse 2013 you are overwhelmed with ideas and visions from every direction; Cloud, Security, Instrumented Assets, Analytics, Mobile, and Social Media.  Big data is a big priority for IBM.  In other words a Smarter Planet.  But it doesn’t take long to descend from the cloud, get back to where the rubber hits the road and to try to relate what all of that means to many of us just trying to implement the basics of Maximo.  Clean, reliable, accurate data is the single most important aspect of your EAM because your credibility and the credibility of your business depend on making informed decisions based on accurate data.  40% of all Maximo implementations fail because they are not rooted in objective fact based data.

Data that Matters
How many of us have been in the situation of defining requirements and we ask managers or users what data they want and invariable they say: we want it all, whatever the system can provide we want it. The better question to ask is:

What data drives the decisions and improvements that you need to do your job.  Having it all is a recipe for disaster unless you have multi-million dollar budgets, a business need, and the resources required to gather, secure, analyze, and act on large volumes of random data.   The more you want, the more it cost, and the more complicated it is to get it. Collecting data just for the sake of it is a waste of time for most of us.  Don’t load Maximo up with dirty data because it erodes system credibility and the trust of the users.  Less good data is better than more bad data. Of course that leads to the argument that one man’s junk is another man’s treasure.  Make sure that whatever data is deemed necessary is justified with a business case.  Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.  Don’t do things that don’t matter. Bad data leads to bad decisions.

Business Process Re-Engineering
When you finally define the data that matters, you need to determine how you currently get that data into the hands of those that need it.  Relentlessly scrutinize your business processes and get answers to the following questions:  Why you do, how you do, what you do, and who does it?

Analyze how you can do this better and streamline your business processes to support the data you need and the way you get that information to the right people.

“Things should be as simple as possible, but no simpler”

Albert Einstein

It is important to simplify the user experience.  If you don’t, you won’t consistently get the data that you need. Remove road blocks and meaningless steps in your processes.  Don’t make users do things that don’t matter to them. “Make it work like I do” by using smart phones, tablets, and configuring Maximo to support the user’s work processes.  Optimize the technology to take advantage of pushing/pulling data from users, reduce double entry, make it easy to capture what was done, and access what needs to be seen.

Realistic Expectations
My definition of success is if results meet expectations.  Having realistic expectations about the data is very important to how you interpret the successfulness of Maximo delivering what you need.  For example, you want to capture labor and material costs on a work order:

Case A –

  • User enters whatever hours and materials they want on the work order

Case B –

  • Labor hours entered in a time/attendance/payroll system integrated with Maximo work orders to capture labor hours/costs.
  • Materials are charge to work orders via issues from inventory
  • PO materials and contracts are charged to work order upon receipt

Two very different expectations in terms of the data being captured and the degree of accuracy.  Don’t expect Case B results if your data reality is Case A.  Remember the more you want, the more it cost, and the more complicated it is to get it.  You have to decide how important the data is, how much it will cost to get it, and set realistic expectations.

Why is this Important?
Because everything discussed above provides the design specifications for your Maximo Implementation:

  • Data requirements
  • Business processes needed to support data gathering
  • User expectations of the results to be delivered by Maximo

“If you don’t know where you are going, you will probably end up somewhere else”.

— Sidney Heyward

This is the foundation, roadmap, and the requirements for designing and building out Maximo to support your business needs.  As you build and test, you compare the functionality against the requirements and expectations.  “Going Live” is the reality check and of course never goes quite like we anticipate.  All of us have to deal with the changing winds, rough conditions, and political currents of our work environment that are constantly trying to take us off course.  Don’t lose sight of why we use Maximo:

  1. Asset Reliability – if your assets aren’t running you are out of business
  2. Improved Efficiency – streamline business processes to gather data
  3. Command and Control – your success depends on making informed decisions based on accurate data

____________________________________

About Randy McDaniel:
Randy has a B.S. degree in Mechanical Engineering from the California State University at Fullerton and has spent over 35 years in the field of maintenance engineering, maintenance planning, capital projects construction, and facilities maintenance. His industry experience includes oil refineries, petrochemical plants, universities, steel mills, assembly plants, lumber mills, and utility plants.

He has spent time as a Maximo senior consultant providing business process re-engineering assessments and managing Maximo implementations. A vocal advocate of Maximo, Randy has been the Chairman of the Southern California Maximo Users Group since 1998 where he often presents best practices, tips and other real life Maximo experiences.

Currently Randy is the Maximo System Administrator and Facilities Management Information Systems Integration Manager at the University of California Los Angeles. He manages the implementation of Maximo and provides IT integration direction and vision for the General Services business unit.

This post originally appeared on the Tivoli User Community boards on March 18, 2013, and is reprinted with permission of the author