You are on page 1of 27

A

B
B

P
I

U
K
Oil, Gas &
Petrochemicals
Cement, Minerals,
Mining
Chemicals Marine &
Turbocharging
Metals &
Foundry
Pulp, Paper &
Printing
Life Sciences
A Guide to Effective
Maintenance
Strategy
Implementation
Putting theory into
Practice


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
The Maintenance Challenge
To Deliver :
T Regulatory compliance
T High plant availability
T Reliable equipment
T Cost-effective & targeted
maintenance
T Statutory / HSE compliance
Delivering sustainable
improvements is hard !
T Little time available
T Resources reducing
T Priorities changing


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Maintenance Strategy Model
ASSET
PERFORMANCE
MANAGEMENT
Integrated Maintenance
Strategy
WORK
MANAGEMENT
PEOPLE &
ORGANISATION
Manufacturing
Strategy
Business
Strategy
LEGISLATIVE
COMPLIANCE
ENGINEERING
RESOURCES
MANAGEMENT
FINANCIAL
CONTROL
ASSET
PERFORMANCE
MANAGEMENT
Integrated Maintenance
Strategy
WORK
MANAGEMENT
PEOPLE &
ORGANISATION
Manufacturing
Strategy
Business
Strategy
LEGISLATIVE
COMPLIANCE
ENGINEERING
RESOURCES
MANAGEMENT
FINANCIAL
CONTROL


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Asset Performance Management
T Critical equipment prioritised; issues known?
T Maintenance routines reviewed cost-effective,
technically effective?
T Asset condition monitored; condition known?
T Spares critical spares identified; spares holding
& management optimised?
T Asset life known; asset replacement planned &
costed?
T Effective Task Management processes in place?
T Efficient data storage; handling processes and
information retrieval?
Where to start?


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Sources of Unreliability
Operations
30 - 50%
Assets
30 - 40%
Maintenance
10 - 30%
Unreliable
Plant
Poorly defined operating
procedures & training
Ineffective cross functional
team-working
Lack of measures / targets
Inconsistent operation
Lack of training
Inaccurate initial specification
Poor design for maintenance
or operation
Change of use / modification
Ageing assets
No or inadequate strategy
Inadequate monitoring /
knowledge of condition
Poor / no rebuild specifications
Lack of technical skills / training


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Performance and Practices the current position
0 100%
100%
PERFORMANCE
PRACTICE
WORLD
CLASS
AVERAGE
ESSENTIAL TO
IMPROVE
POTENTIAL
TO IMPROVE
NEED
TO IMPROVE
PROMISING


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Value Gap Analysis examining the losses
Waterfall Diagram
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Total Hours
Available
No Demand Maximum
Operating
Time
Time Lost to
Equipment
Availability
Available
Hours to
Make Product
Time Lost
Making
Product
Slowly
Hours at
Maximum
Rate
Time Lost in
Quality
Problems
Hours of
Good
Product at
Max Rate


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Tackling Current Problems
Typical downtime pareto is this enough?
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
C
o
m
p

1
C
o
m
p

2
C
e
n
t
r
i
f
C
r
y
s
t
A
g
i
t

1
A
g
i
t

2
D
r
i
e
r
R
o
t

v
/
v
S
t
r
i
p
p
e
r
R
e
a
c
t

A
R
e
a
c
t

B
F
i
l
t
e
r
C
.
T
o
w
e
r
Days Lost Production by Plant Equipment Failure


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Risk-Based Approaches
T Clear need to anticipate future
problems
T Identify future risks and
opportunities
Increasing number of applications
T Pressure Systems
T Equipment maintenance
strategies
T Critical spares
T Maintenance & calibration
routines
T Critical trips and alarms
T Validation


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Knowledge & Understanding
Design & Construction
Operation : Normal / Excursions
Inspection / Maintenance History
Failure Mechanisms / Rates
Incidents
Nature / Definition Defects
Criticality
Detection techniques
Risk Based Inspection (RBI)
Rigorous Approach to Managing Pressure System Risks
Probability
of
Failure
Consequence
of
Failure
Optimum
Inspection
Regime
Design
Operations
Implications
+


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Typical Benefits from RBI
2 6 Unforeseen Shutdown Repairs
17 18 Predicted Repairs
47 81 Shutdown Event Inspections
188 80 Non-invasive Inspections
232 157 Items Studied (RBI)
2002 1997
YEAR


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Typical Benefits from RBI
Study A Study B Study C Study D
Average inspection
interval before & after
RBI study
31 to 44
months
No data
54 to 85
months
48 to 65
months
Vessels moved to non-
invasive inspection
16 out of 26 76 out of 157 90 out of 179 41 out of 82
Reduction in inspection
costs
58% 49% 61% 81%


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Targeted Approach
T Select areas for improvement (unit; plant; systems)
T Use techniques for Screening / Prioritisation
T To gain most benefit
T To minimise cost, time and resource
T Identify the most appropriate tools for the job
T Time; resources; cost
T A one size fits all policy usually fails
Criticality
Analysis /
Opportunity
Assessment
Detailed
Assessment
Rapid
Assessment
(80 / 20
Analysis)
Generic
Assessment
Decision
Process
Task
Definition
Document
Strategy
HIGH
MEDIUM
LOW
Criticality
Analysis /
Opportunity
Assessment
Detailed
Assessment
Rapid
Assessment
(80 / 20
Analysis)
Generic
Assessment
Decision
Process
Task
Definition
Document
Strategy
HIGH
MEDIUM
LOW


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Targeted Approach Criticality Analysis
T Prioritise & identify
vulnerabilities
T To pre-select items
for further analysis
T Quick method
T Can be tailored to
suit individual
requirements
T Range of uses
Overall Criticality Score Frequency
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
<50 <100 <150 <200 <250 <300 <350 >350
Overall Criticality Scores
N
o
.

E
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t

I
t
e
m
s


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Targeted Approach - Screening
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Time %
N
u
m
b
e
r

%
Step 1:
Screening Process
Step 2:
Criticality Analysis
Process
Step 3:
Selective Detailed
Analysis Processes


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Performance Improvement
T Increasing equipment reliability
T Reducing HSE consequences of failure
T Reducing Customer consequences of failure
T Reducing the Production Cost of failure
T Reducing Outage Time
T Reducing Repair Cost
S
t
u
d
y

R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
U
n
i
t


K
e
y
:

1
=
U
n
i
t

1
,


2
=
U
n
i
t

2
,


U
=
U
t
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
P
l
a
n
t

I
t
e
m

N
u
m
b
e
r
Plant Item Description
O
p
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
y

S
c
o
r
e
Improve MTBF
Reduce the HSE
consequences of
failure
Reduce the
customer
consequences of
failure
Reduce the
production cost
rate of failure
Reduce
outage time
Reduce repair
cost
46 1 P123 Transfer Pump 65 Limited benefit Limited benefit Limited benefit Consider Limited benefit Consider
47 1 D434 Rotary Drier 480 Yes Limited benefit Limited benefit Consider Consider Consider
48 1 A223 Agitator 152
Limited benefit,
low chance of
success
Consider Limited benefit Consider Consider Consider
Identify opportunities for performance improvement


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Select appropriate tools
T Failure Mode Analysis Tools
T FMEA / FMECA
T Rapid FMEA using Generics
T Risk Based Inspection
T Statistical analysis / Designed experiments
T Remaining life assessment
T Spares optimisation
T Safety Integrity Level Determination
T Reliability Analysis Tools
T Root Cause Analysis
T Cause & Effect Diagrams with Additional Cards
(CEDAC)
T Changeover Time Reduction (SMED)
T Reliability modelling


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Defining Equipment Strategies
Criticality
Analysis /
Screening
Process
Failure Mode
Analysis
Processes
Rapid FMEA
using Generic
Equipment
Modules
Generic
Strategies
-by equipment
type or activity
Maintenance
Decision
Process
Maintenance
Task
Definition
Other Processes :
Spares Review;
Contingency
Planning
Document
Equipment
Maintenance
Strategy
HIGH
MEDIUM
LOW


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Rapid FMEA using Generics
T Rapid FMEA approach using Generic modules for
Medium Criticality equipment
T Rapid process by :
T Using generic FMEAs developed at a range of
levels to identify Maintenance Options
T Reviewing most significant failure modes only
T Reviewed for any differences in type or duty
application
T Maintenance Decision using identified
Maintenance Options as a guide
T Focus and time is shifted to the decision process
rather than the analysis


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Generic FMEA Application
Analysis
Required
Asset Assembly 3
Generic
Subassembly
FMEA
Subassembly 2
Generic
Component
FMEA
Component 2
Analysis
Required
Component 1 Subassembly 1 Asset Assembly 2
Generic
Assembly
FMEA
Asset Assembly 1


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Maintenance Strategy Decision
TPlanned Maintenance
T Preventive :
T Scheduled or Fixed Time Maintenance (FTM)
- Time interval based
T Condition Based or Predictive Maintenance
(CBM) - Equipment condition based
T Routine Asset Care (RAC)
- Regular running maintenance eg servicing,
adjustments, level checks
T Proactive or Design Out Maintenance (DOM)
- Improvement based
T Corrective Maintenance
TUnplanned Maintenance
T Corrective Maintenance or Operate to Failure (OTF)
- Reactive or breakdown


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Maintenance Decision Diagram
Would Routine
Service extend life
to failure?
Is the rate of
deterioration or
time to failure
predictable and
consistent?
Is there a reliable
indication / early
warning of failure?
Is the interval
between detection
and failure
sufficient to
act on?
Is there a suitable
condition monitoring
routine that is cost
effective to implement
and operate?
CONDITION
BASED
MAINTENANCE
OPERATE TO
FAILURE
FIXED TIME
MAINTENANCE
Is Maintenance
likely to be cost
effective?
Is Routine
Service
Cost effective?
ROUTINE
ASSET CARE
Agree
Maintenance
Policy
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N Y N


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Document Maintenance Strategy
T Requirement to document the equipment
strategies
T Collect together relevant routines
T Installation; start-up & pre-shutdown routines
T Running routines
T Shutdown routines
T Quality build issues
T Critical spares
T Live & accessible electronic
document
T Requires little updating


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Example Criticality Analysis
Problem
T Study to identify potential risks of extending time
between shutdowns
Process
T Step 1 studied 1328 items
T Step 2 studied 221 items (17%)
T Step 3 studied 82 items (6%)
T Focus on key problems using Risk Based Approach
Outcome
T 6 items needed action to operate within acceptable
risk boundaries
T 20 others were acceptable, but simple actions reduced
risks further
T Overall project done in less time and significantly less
cost


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Example Reliability Baseline Approach
Background
T Pharmaceutical vial capping line
T High availability / reliability required
T Problematic machine frequent stoppages
Problem
T Improve reliability until a new machine can be
purchased / installed
T No planned maintenance schedules
T Maintenance currently seen as reactive
T Poor equipment condition
T No standard set up procedure
T On the job training
T Machine very clean!


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Improvement Process
Solution
T Baseline study compared current to historical data
T Recovery plan
T Machine refurbishment
T Set and operate machine to standard procedures
T Establish maintenance strategy
T Daily / weekly set up
T Longer Term maintenance monthly / 6 monthly
T Annual overhaul
T Communication, training and further improvement
Benefits
T Weekly downtime reduced from 8 hours to 30 minutes
T Vial change time reduced from 2 days to 1.2 hours


A
B
B

P
I

U
K
Contact Information
Martin Brown
Asset Management Services
ABB Eutech
Tel : +44 1925 741074
e-mail : martin.brown@gb.abb.com

You might also like