Sometimes maintenance software updates become so cumbersome
that a plant disregards obvious fundamentals due to work overload. For example,
the bill of material for equipment isn't always up to date in the old system,
and it will not be up to date in the new system unless an effort is made to
improve the data. It is a common argument that it costs too much to update the
bill of materials, yet we accept the cost of having each crafts person use a
significant amount of time every day looking for parts.
In some plants, training is reduced to a minimum and often
performed several months before the system is put in use. The result is that,
at best, about 30% of the CMMS functionality is used and that only 30% of the
people know how to use it effectively. This results in a 9% usage of the
system.
If your organization is ready to implement a new CMMS, make
sure you update the bill of materials, standard job plans, equipment numbering,
and asset numbering in the old system. Also, ask yourself if you plan and schedule
jobs well today. If not, the problem is usually not the software. People will
blame the software because it can't talk back, but the real problems are lack
of discipline in backlog management, prioritization issues, and the inability
of operations and maintenance to coordinate production and maintenance
schedules.
Legend 7: "Equipment criticality decides inspection
frequency"
It is common to see plants base component inspection
frequency on a criticality analysis study. At first, it may seem sensible to
base inspection frequency on criticality of equipment, but let's
illustrate the misconception with an example.
Let's assume we are setting the inspection frequency for a
very simple component such as a bolt. Let's assume the bolts 36 in question are
holding a mechanical seal on a pump. The Management must deal with
underperforming people. If you have a decent relationship with your union or
your nonunion workforce, they are usually receptive to discussing these
matters. Poor performers are a big problem for them as well. It is also true
that people cannot be more effective than the system in which they work allows
them to be. Management can minimize the amount of wasted time and energy by
implementing good maintenance and reliability processes. Pump and seal are very
critical according to the criticality study. The inspection frequency for the
highest criticality score is often recommended to one inspection every shift.
Intuitively, you notice that it doesn't make any sense to
inspect a bolt every shift. Why? Because the inspection frequency must be based
on how long, on average, it takes to develop a failure in a component. The bolt
in our example will not fail from one shift to another unless there is a
completely random event. The most likely failure is that the bolt comes loose
over a 2-6 month period. We should therefore set the inspection frequency
according to the Failure Developing Period (FDP), by estimating the FDP, and
set the inspection frequency to FDP over two. In our example, we estimate an
FDP of 4 months and set the inspection frequency to 2 months.
Conclusions:
- Maintenance cost cannot be reduced quickly because it
takes time to improve equipment reliability. Improved reliability will
reduce cost, but reduced cost will not improve reliability.
- People love change - they just don't want to be changed
by someone else.
- The right people are a company's biggest asset, and the
wrong people are liabilities.
- If you have a multitude of problems in your plant, you
need to find out why and fix the source of the problems.
- Pride matters more than overtime pay.
- Improvements will be a synthesis of the implementation
and execution of better work processes, behaviour changes, and higher-quality
data from the software.
- The inspection frequency must be based on how long, on
average, it takes to develop a failure in a component.
About the Author:
Authors are students of DKTES Textile & Engineering
Institute, Ichalkaranji
Originally
published in Textile Review : March
2010
