Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Tim. C. Claypole.
Design
Manufacture
Operation
Maintenance
Tim. C. Claypole.
Reliability
Assumes
Initial Performance > Desired Performance
Otherwise fails immediately!
Failure
Tim. C. Claypole.
Tim. C. Claypole.
Tim. C. Claypole.
Sources of System
Information
Most Accurate
Most Costly
Testing elements cheaper than testing whole
More basic the component, less valid
Results increasingly out of context
Analysis
Least accurate
Can direct testing to make it more effective
Tim. C. Claypole.
Applied to:
Design
Process
Planning
Maintenance (FMECA)
Tim. C. Claypole.
Cause of failure
Effect on system
Tim. C. Claypole.
Tim. C. Claypole.
Design FMEA
Assumes all parts are correctly
manufactured
Considers only problems associated
with Design or materials specification
Tim. C. Claypole.
Design FMEA
Tim. C. Claypole.
Current Status
t No.
ame
sue
Function or
process
Failure
Mode
Effect of
Failure
Cause of
Failure
Current
Controls
OCC
SEV
DET
RPN
1234
tom
cket
ue A
To provide
engine front
support
Buckling
failure of
bracket
vertical walls
Engine drop
(cooling fan
fouls
radiator)
Incorrectly
specified
material
thickness
Stress
Report
SR100
72
Test to TR
150
Tim. C. Claypole.
Corrosion
Gradual loss
of strength
leading to
structural
failure
Service
loads in
excess of
design loads
Not yet
established
288
Inadequate
protective
treatment
specified
Protective
treatment
& salt
spray tests
are
specified
TR 150
32
Status
Rating of 1 (lowest) to 10 (most severe)
OCC - occurrence
SEV - severity
DET - detection
RPN - Risk Priority Number
=(OCC)*(SEV)*(DET)
Highlights priorities
Estimate new RPN to justify actions
Tim. C. Claypole.
Current Status
Revised Status
t No.
ame
sue
Failure
Mode
Effect of
Failure
Cause of
Failure
OCC
SEV
DET
RPN
Recommended
Corrective
Action
Action Taken
OCC
SEV
DET
RPN
1234
tom
cket
ue A
Buckling
failure of
bracket
vertical walls
Engine drop
(cooling fan
fouls
radiator)
Incorrectly
specified
material
thickness
72
Tests to be carried
out to TR 150 to
verify stress
report SR 100
Tests to specified
load proves
adequate static
strength
32
Service
loads in
excess of
design loads
288
Verification by
road load
data/ test bed
required &
drawing controls
established
48
Inadequate
protective
treatment
specified
32
Installation to be
reviewed after
road and
laboratory tests
Laboratory &
Road tests were
carried out & no
corrosion was
evident
32
Corrosion
Gradual loss
of strength
leading to
structural
failure
Tim. C. Claypole.
Process FMEA
Assumes product design is correct
Analyses failures due to planning or
operation deficiencies
Tim. C. Claypole.
Tim. C. Claypole.
Tim. C. Claypole.
Current Status
t No.
ame
sue
Function
or process
Failure
Mode
Effect of
Failure
Cause of
Failure
Current
Controls
OCC
1234
tom
cket
ue A
Drill holes
Holes out of
position
Difficult assy
of engine
mounting
Incorrect
location in
drill fixture
Operator &
Inspection
measurement
with vernier
on frequency
basis
Drill holes
Holes
undersize
Unable to
assemble to
engine
Incorrect drill
size used
Operator &
inspection
check with
plug gauge
Form
bracket
Incorrect
grade of
material used
Structural
failure
Poor raw
material
identification
& storage
Operator
local
knowledge
Tim. C. Claypole.
SE
V
DET
RPN
210
18
432
Current Status
t No.
ame
sue
Function
or process
Cause of
Failure
Current
Controls
OCC
1234
tom
cket
ue A
Drill holes
Incorrect
location in
drill fixture
Operator &
Inspection
measurement
with vernier
on frequency
basis
Drill holes
Incorrect drill
size used
Operator &
inspection
check with
plug gauge
Form
bracket
Poor raw
material
identification
& storage
Operator
local
knowledge
Tim. C. Claypole.
SE
V
Revised Status
DET
RPN
Recommended
Corrective
Action
Action Taken
OCC
SEV
DET
RPN
210
Positive location
on fixture & final
acceptance gauge
Fixture location
modified &
acceptance gauge
in use
28
18
Recommended
actions
implemented
12
432
Identify raw
material location
racks and colour
coding
Recommended
actions
implemented
144
Function or process
Failure mode
Effect of Failure
Cause of Failure
Current Controls
Current Status
OCC
SEV
DET
RPN
Tim. C. Claypole.
Recommended
corrective action
Action taken
Revised Status
OCC
SEV
DET
RPN
Tim. C. Claypole.
Tim. C. Claypole.
FTA of a brake
Cant stop!
Faulty
Master
Cylinder
Broken
pipe
Tim. C. Claypole.
Leaking Cylinder
Loose Bleed
Example of and
Lever wont retract
No
lubricant
Tim. C. Claypole.
Weak
Springs
Why Maintain?
Tim. C. Claypole.
Tim. C. Claypole.
Maintenance Costs
Tim. C. Claypole.
Works Management(1991)
UK maintenance spending
5% of annual sales turnover
Twice UK trade deficit
Three times the value of new plant
investment
18% of book value
Tim. C. Claypole.
Tim. C. Claypole.
Courtesy of Shell
Incorrect lubrication
Foreign material
Corrosion
Bearing failure
Inadequate maintenance
Continuous or shock overloading
Tim. C. Claypole.
Courtesy of Shell
What Is Failure?
A gear box operating in a continuous process plant production
line
The Safety Office
Tim. C. Claypole.
Evolution of maintenance
Industrial maintenance parallels health care development
Period
Strategy
1930s
1950s
Preventive
By-pass surgery
1970s
Predictive
Disease detection
1980s
Pro-active
Performance monitoring
Contamination control
TPM (Total Productive Maintenance)
Tim. C. Claypole.
Machine care
Maintenance Strategies
Breakdown
Restorative
Preventative
Condition
Monitoring
Pro-active
Tim. C. Claypole.
Tim. C. Claypole.
Failure Consequences
Hidden failures
Safety and Environmental
Operational
Tim. C. Claypole.
Hidden failures
In themselves harmless
Can leave organisation expose to
potential catastrophe
Risk must be eliminated or minimised
Tim. C. Claypole.
Tim. C. Claypole.
Operational Consequences
Economic decision
Loss of productivity
Loss of quality
Loss of service
Tim. C. Claypole.
Breakdown maintenance
Tim. C. Claypole.
Loss of availability
Tim. C. Claypole.
Preventative maintenance
Planned shutdown
Avoids breakdowns
Tim. C. Claypole.
Performance
Performance of system
Failure
Desired
Performance
Time
Tim. C. Claypole.
e.g. wear
Tim. C. Claypole.
of Failure
Probability
Time
Tim. C. Claypole.
failures
Burn
in or infant mortality
Constant
risk
Slightly
rising probability
Normal operating region
Wear
out
Replacement
Tim. C. Claypole.
zone
Tim. C. Claypole.
of Failure
Probability
Tim. C. Claypole.
Time
Constant
14%
failure rate
Probability
68%
Tim. C. Claypole.
Tim. C. Claypole.
Tim. C. Claypole.
Condition Monitoring
- extraction of information from
machines to indicate their condition
Tim. C. Claypole.
Condition monitoring
Detect faults early when time & cost
to corrective is lowest
Condition-based Maintenance
Principal Requirements:
DETECTION
DIAGNOSIS
DETERMINATION
Tim. C. Claypole.
Lubricant monitoring
condition
chemical composition
wear debris
Tim. C. Claypole.
Performance monitoring
Pumps
Presses
Tim. C. Claypole.
Vibration Monitoring
Misalignment
Looseness
Oil whirl :
Gear damage
Imbalance
Tim. C. Claypole.
Thermal imaging
-200C to 2500C
Hot spots in systems
Influence of cooling,
drying etc ..
Condition monitoring
Hot bearing
Failing systems
Tim. C. Claypole.
Lubricant Analysis
Lubricant properties :
Form a fluid film between loaded surfaces
Act as a coolant
Carry away contaminants (solid, liquid
and gaseous)
Act as a hydraulic medium
Protect against rust and corrosion
Tim. C. Claypole.
Tim. C. Claypole.
COST
COSTBENEFIT
BENEFITANALYSES
ANALYSES
Case
Casestudy
study11
1992
1992--US
USAir
AirForce
Forceoil
oilanalysis
analysisprogram
program
reported
reported190
190serious
seriousproblems
problemsin
inaircraft
aircraftcomponents
components
prior
priorto
tofailure.
failure.Five
Fivefindings
findingsresulted
resultedin
inremoval
removalof
of
engines
enginesfrom
fromF-16
F-16aircraft
aircraftprior
priorto
toserious
seriousengine
engine
damage
damage--total
totalcost
costavoidance:
avoidance:$15,000,000.
$15,000,000.
Case
Casestudy
study22
US
USnavy
navyoil
oilanalysis
analysisevaluation
evaluationconcluded
concludedthat
that
just
justthree
threeaircraft
aircraftsystems
systemsresulted
resultedin
inaareturn
returnon
on
investment
investmentof
ofmore
morethan
than178%
178%over
overoil
oilmonitoring
monitoring
costs
costs
Tim. C. Claypole.
W
U1
U2
Foreign Debris
(Contaminated)
SEM
Elemental Analysis
Composition
Material
Tim. C. Claypole.
Wear Debris
Morphology vs.
Wear Mode
Pitting
Fatigue
Time
Active Wear
(decreasing)
Reactive
Zone
Proactive Zone
Trend monitoring
and diagnostic
capability
Reactive
Zone
Diagnostic capability
requirement
Benign Wear
Active Wear
(increasing)
Time
Tim. C. Claypole.
Tim. C. Claypole.
Used by
Tim. C. Claypole.
Tim. C. Claypole.
Tim. C. Claypole.
Description
Mild or
Rubbing
Cutting
Laminar
Fatigue
Spheres
Severe
Sliding
Tim. C. Claypole.
Pro-active maintenence
Tim. C. Claypole.
Cost of maintenance
Early replacement
Monitor
Production loss
Maintenance team on stand by
Cost of equipment
Monitoring
Tim. C. Claypole.
Tim. C. Claypole.
Maintenance Strategy
For each element strategy depends on:
Life
Failure Consequences
Hidden failures
Loss of productivity
Loss of quality
Loss of service
Tim. C. Claypole.
Operational Consequences
Economic decision
Loss of productivity
Loss of quality
Loss of service
Tim. C. Claypole.
Benefits of Maintenance
Programme
Less unplanned stops
Tim. C. Claypole.
Companies with
Maintenance System
Run faster
Press Speed
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
<25
25 - 40
40 - 60
60 - 70
70 - 80
80 - 90
90 - 100
Maintenance System
Tim. C. Claypole.
All
Never
1 per year
1 per quarter
1 per month
1 per week
Maintenance System
Tim. C. Claypole.
All
1 per year
1 per quarter
1 per month
1 per week
Everyday
Maintenance System
Tim. C. Claypole.
All
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
External service
Once a week by
maintenance
Once a shift by
maintenance
Once a shift by operator
Maintenance
System
Tim. C. Claypole.
All
Continuously
Some
Maintenance System
Tim. C. Claypole.
Procedures
precisely
All
Sheet fed
Do more
Replace Parts
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
When breaks
Output declines
Inspection
Supplier recommended
Maintenance
System
Tim. C. Claypole.
All
Tim. C. Claypole.
In order of most
importance
Stock key parts
Monitor KPI
Very High
Involve departments
40%
External suppliers
High
50%
Low
Standard procedure
60%
Publish checklists
Very low
Part of production
Matching tasks
to skill level important
100%
90%
80%
70%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Management System
Tim. C. Claypole.
Management System
Tim. C. Claypole.