A PRACTICAL FRAMEWORK FOR METRO MAINTENANCE …...14 The benefits of MMFs are discussed by Aalbregste et al. [15]. Further study into how ... 36 2.2 Terotechnology 37 38 For a metro

A PRACTICAL FRAMEWORK FOR METRO MAINTENANCE 1

MANAGEMENT 2

3

Paper submitted for the Transportation Research Board 92nd

Annual Meeting (2013) and for 4

consideration for the Transportation Research Record 5

6

Date submitted: 1st August 2012 7

Date revised: 13th

November 2012 8

9

10 Corresponding author: Richard Parasram 11 Research Analyst 12 Railway and Transportation Strategy Centre, Centre for Transportation Studies, Department of Civil and 13 Environmental Engineering, Imperial College London 14 E-mail: [email protected] 15 16 Robin Steel 17 Railway and Transportation Strategy Centre, Centre for Transportation Studies, Department of Civil and 18 Environmental Engineering, Imperial College London 19 E-mail: [email protected] 20 21 Rory J. Maxwell 22 Abellio Transport Holdings 23 E-mail: [email protected] 24 25 Richard Anderson 26 Railway and Transportation Strategy Centre, Centre for Transportation Studies, Department of Civil and 27 Environmental Engineering, Imperial College London 28 E-mail: [email protected] 29 30 Robin C d'A Hirsch 31 Railway and Transportation Strategy Centre, Centre for Transportation Studies, Department of Civil and 32 Environmental Engineering, Imperial College London 33 E-mail: [email protected] 34 35 Patricia C. Melo 36 Railway and Transportation Strategy Centre, Centre for Transportation Studies, Department of Civil and 37 Environmental Engineering, Imperial College London 38 E-mail: [email protected] 39 40

WORD COUNT : 41 Abstract: 190 42

Text: 4737 43

References: 675 44

Tables: 1000 words 45

Figures: 1250 words 46

Total: 7177 [without reference list] 47 7852 [with reference list] 48

49

mailto:[email protected]






Parasram, R., R. Steel, R. J. Maxwell, R. J. Anderson, R. C. d’A Hirsch and P. C. Melo

2

ABSTRACT 1

2 Although numerous Maintenance Management Frameworks (MMFs) exist in many 3

industries, a literature review failed to find a practical one developed specifically with urban 4

rail transit systems (metros) in mind. Using evidence and experience from a qualitative 5

survey of senior metro maintenance managers, the Railway and Transport Strategy Centre 6

created a descriptive, practical MMF building upon existing literature and Moubray’s ‘three 7

generations of maintenance’. The framework specifies three broad bandings, which indicate 8

the relative maturity and sophistication of different management practices and associated 9

analytical techniques. Metro managers may use it to map their maintenance maturity relative 10

to a group of technologically developed metros. The framework is linked to case studies 11

providing practical examples of changes made by metros in maintenance practices. Further, it 12

may be used to frame types of expected performance outcomes achievable by moving 13

through the defined stages of maintenance maturity. It also identifies key barriers and 14

enablers to this transition. The paper takes this framework as a basis to analyse the survey 15

results, which highlight that the metro industry has embraced planned preventive techniques, 16

but has yet to fully realise the possibilities of holistic and continuous improvement strategies. 17

18

KEYWORDS: Maintenance Management Framework, Rail Transit Systems, Metro, Subway. 19

20


3

1. INTRODUCTION 1 2

Urban rail transit operators (referred to in this paper as ‘metros’) are under increasing 3

pressure to deliver ever higher reliability, generally while being asked to reduce costs. 4

Maintenance quality is critical to this reliability [1]. In order to reconcile these seemingly 5

conflicting priorities, metros must manage the inter-related challenges of ongoing evolution 6

of maintenance capabilities and approach, control of expenditure, (internal and external) 7

barriers to change and technological and organisational developments which act as catalysts 8

for change. 9

10

At the same time metros face significant challenges due to a complex combination of factors. 11

The sheer number of passengers on metros leads to high safety and service quality impacts of 12

maintenance failures (as discussed by Pham [2]) and high public interest in reliability and 13

availability. Geographic diversity ensures many elements of their infrastructure (e.g. track or 14

tunnelling) are inaccessible during service hours, limiting time available for maintenance 15

operations. Their ‘output’ (essentially passenger kilometres) is specific to a time and location 16

– the ‘product’ has to be consumed when it is produced. Many of a metro’s assets are 17

bespoke due to unique or unusual operating environments. They also have highly 18

interdependent system dynamics, for example if a train breaks down in a tunnel or there is a 19

system-wide signalling fault, there will be wider ripple effects than in most conventional 20

systems that require maintenance. 21

22

A comprehensive understanding of metro specific maintenance practices and their output 23

effects is therefore essential for metro managers given that even marginal improvements to 24

maintenance efficiency and effectiveness can mean significant performance improvement and 25

/ or savings. Maintenance costs made up an average of 35.8% of “Community of Metros” 26

(CoMET) and Nova1 members’ total annual operating expenditure in 2011 [3]. Although 27

numerous Maintenance Management Frameworks (MMFs) exist in other industries [4], a 28

literature review failed to find a practical framework developed specifically with metro 29

maintenance managers in mind. 30

31

Using practical evidence and experience from a qualitative survey of senior metro 32

maintenance managers, the Railway and Transport Strategy Centre (RTSC) created a 33

descriptive, practical framework building upon a review of maintenance literature and 34

Moubray’s [5] three generations of maintenance: 35

36

1. First generation: fix it when it is broken 37

2. Second generation: scheduled overhauls and routine maintenance; systems for 38

planning and controlling work 39

1 CoMET and Nova are benchmarking groups facilitated by the Railway and Transport

Strategy Centre at Imperial College London. At the time of the analysis in this paper, the

CoMET and Nova groups comprised 27 metros. The CoMET group included major metros

from the cities of Beijing, Berlin, Hong Kong, London, Mexico City, Madrid, Moscow, New

York, Paris, Santiago, Shanghai and Sao Paulo. The Nova group comprised small to medium

sized metros from Buenos Aires, Barcelona, Bangkok, Brussels, Delhi, Lisbon, Milan,

Montréal, Naples, Newcastle, Rio de Janeiro, Singapore, Sydney (the urban rail operator),

Taipei and Toronto. The groups were initiated in 1994 and are focused on using

benchmarking to identify and share best practices in metro operations and management.


4

3. Third generation: condition monitoring; hazard studies; effects analyses or expert 1

systems. 2

3

The study set out with the following objectives: 4

5

Examine the organisation and development of maintenance practices and asset 6

management strategy required as metros introduce new and advanced technology 7

Create a structure to aid maintenance managers’ thinking in dealing with the 8

dimensions affecting metro availability and reliability, such as organisational 9

arrangements and maintenance practices 10

Frame types of expected performance outcomes that can be achieved as a metro 11

develops more sophisticated maintenance techniques. 12

13

The MMF developed in this paper synthesises and maps a series of themes with recorded 14

metro practices and operational output (in terms of reliability and availability) and provides 15

context for balancing these with the efficient management of resource inputs. The framework 16

also provides a context of broad bandings which indicate the relative maturity and 17

sophistication of different management practices and associated analytical techniques 18

employed. It may be used by metro maintenance managers to: 19

20

Map their maintenance maturity relative to the practices of technologically developed 21

metro peers 22

Frame types of expected performance outcomes achievable by moving through the 23

defined stages of metro maturity 24

Link to case study examples of how metros have made changes to more mature 25

practices. 26

27

The rest of this paper is structured as follows: Section 2 of the paper reviews the literature in 28

this area and Section 3 describes data selection and methodology. Section 4 sets out the basis 29

of the practical MMF drawing upon the literature review and developed specifically for 30

metros, and links it to the metro survey results. Section 5 draws on the results of the paper to 31

make conclusions. 32

33

34


5

2. THREE GENERATIONS OF MAINTENANCE, MAINTENANCE MODELS AND 1

THEIR RELEVANCE TO METRO MANAGEMENT 2

3 Several maintenance management frameworks and models have been developed: as a series 4

in Wireman’s book on maintenance indicators [6]; Campbell and Reyes-Picknell’s Uptime 5

Pyramid of Excellence [7]; and those by Waeyenbergh and Pintelon [8] and Soderholm et al 6

[9]. 7

8

There have been also several general reviews of maintenance models / frameworks including 9

those by Campos [10], Sherwin [11], a historical overview by Dekker [12], a survey of 10

preventive techniques by Valdez-Flores and Feldman [13], a review of overall maintenance 11

strategies by Pintelon and Gelders [14] and a synthesis of frameworks by Mishra et al [4]. 12

13

The benefits of MMFs are discussed by Aalbregste et al. [15]. Further study into how 14

maintenance organisations evolve to cope with technological advances is undertaken by 15

Vanneste and Wassenhove [16] as well as the limitations created by their environment; either 16

physical or political. 17

18

A review of this work provides the basis for this section and to examine elements of other 19

selected maintenance models in the literature, exploring their relevance to metro management 20

in the context of Moubray’s three generations of maintenance [5]. 21

22

2.1 The Improved Deming Wheel 23 24

Vanneste and Van Wassenhove [16] defined effectiveness as “doing the right thing” and 25

efficiency as “doing the thing right”. Their integrated approach to using these concepts in 26

maintenance is shown in Figure 1. Specific metro characteristics mean that they often 27

struggle to develop a clear picture of the efficient and effective balance of inputs to 28

performance outputs, particularly across a wide range of interacting asset types, and as stated 29

in Section 1, the effects of downtime can be very severe. The continuous improvement 30

element of this improved Plan Do Check Act cycle is “third generation” maintenance. 31

32

33 FIGURE 1 Vanneste and Van Wassenhove’s Improved Deming Wheel [16] 34 35

2.2 Terotechnology 36 37

For a metro a general Terotechnology process would be to design, specify, procure and then 38

operate and maintain a wide range of assets / infrastructure covering most engineering 39

disciplines [17-19]. This process includes all three generations of maintenance. Good record 40

keeping in the operational phase is a foundation for progressing through the generations of 41

maintenance. Implementation of the US military’s Test Analyse And Fix (TAAF) process 42

[20] and strong data analysis are typical second generation techniques, including scheduled 43


6

overhauls, routine inspection and maintenance frequencies, and systems for planning and 1

controlling work. There are also elements of third generation maintenance including Failure 2

Mode, Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA, see [21]) and an optimisation loop focusing 3

on design and function in metro operation and maintenance. 4

5

2.3 Kelly’s policy ranking 6 7

Kelly wrote about several elements of maintenance and ranked maintenance policy [22]. The 8

generation of the different elements is shown in brackets. 9

10

(1) Operate to failure 11

(2) Age/block preventive maintenance 12

(2) Condition-based (condition determined by inspection while stopped) 13

(2) Condition-based (condition determined with machine running) 14

(3) Design out if economically possible. 15

16

The policies identified here as second generation and also a key basis of the transition to third 17

generation are particularly relevant, as metros are conventionally highly constrained as to 18

when they are able to carry out inspections. This puts a higher level of importance on the 19

benefits from predictive maintenance and self-diagnosis of assets. 20

21

2.4 Crespo Marquez et al.’s practical framework for maintenance management 22 23

Crespo Marquez et al. have carried out a lot of research into MMFs (for example: creating an 24

MMF based on the (International Asset Management) PAS 55 standard [23, 24] and carrying 25

out a full review and analysis of frameworks [10]). Their generic maintenance framework 26

based on an overall review of literature is shown in Figure 2. They highlighted at a general 27

level elements of maintenance execution that are of particular relevance to metros. The 28

survey of metro maintenance managers identified that most metros are operating in the 29

‘Efficiency’ and Assessment’ phases of Crespo Marquez et al.’s framework. Although many 30

were maturing from rules based / fixed interval practices to more sophisticated planned 31

preventive stages of second generation maintenance, very few metros were questioning their 32

own ‘Effectiveness’, and embracing a ‘Continuous improvement’ drive. These last two 33

factors are features of expert practitioners, building on ‘third generation’ maintenance 34

techniques. Preventive maintenance itself is currently evolving on the basis of more 35

sophisticated analysis, as explained by Zhao [25]. 36

37


7

1 FIGURE 2 Crespo Marquez et al.’s maintenance management model [26] 2 3

For many metros understanding of the first three phases of the model in Figure 2 is so far 4

superficial, with progress in many cases constrained by limited data and knowledge of 5

historic assets of a variety of disciplines. 6

7

2.5 Mishra et al.’s proposed framework for world-class maintenance systems 8 9

Mishra et al. [4] carried out an exhaustive review of maintenance frameworks and attempted 10

to identify the distinguishing elements in world-class systems (shown in Figure 3). They 11

proposed that leadership and change management were the foundation for a world-class 12

system. The process improvement aspect includes elements of Total Productive Maintenance 13

[27] including having small groups devoted to devising and implementing improvements, 14

traits of more third generation maintenance procedure. All elements within this collation 15

could be related to metros, but the focus on human factors in creating barriers and enablers to 16

improvement was considered particularly important. 17

18


8

1 FIGURE 3 Proposed framework for world-class maintenance systems following a 2

review by Mishra et al [4] 3 4

2.6 The current literature in relation to metro maintenance management 5

6 This literature was reviewed to form the basis of an analysis of a survey into metro 7

maintenance management practices. Although several frameworks with factors highly 8

relevant to the challenges for metros were discovered, the review found a lack of: 9

10

A practical MMF created specifically with metros in mind, identifying and setting out 11

a structure to deal maintenance management issues facing them. 12

Linkage between theory and examples of practical improvements in metro practice 13

A framework expressed in metro specific terminology rather than complex jargon 14

15

The knowledge of these issues informed the development of the questionnaire that was sent 16

out to metros, as discussed in Section 3. 17

18

3. DATA AND METHODOLOGY 19

20 Following discussion with the CoMET and Nova metros to establish requirements and 21

parameters a scope was prepared. The study set out to carry out a high level questionnaire-22

based review of: 23

24

General maintenance management strategies employed for each of the wide range of 25

key asset classes deployed by metros 26

Influences on the organisation of the maintenance function 27

Governance models used and their implementation 28

Management of relationship between projects and maintenance teams. 29

30

27 member metros were requested to complete a structured mini-report explaining how they 31

approached the issues mentioned above for a series of asset types: rolling stock; signalling 32

and control; communications; stations; permanent way; civil engineering; and a more general 33

approach. Case Study examples of practices implemented by metros were sought, to provide 34

an understanding of why changes in approach had been taken and the benefits yielded. 35


9

Respondees were specifically asked to provide explanations that best illuminated the impact 1

of maintenance management approaches and policy. 2

3

Table 1 below shows the instructions given to metros for a selection of the requested factors. 4

Metros were encouraged to provide as detailed a response as possible and to provide 5

supporting materials wherever possible. 6

7

FACTOR INSTRUCTIONS

Aims of asset

management and

maintenance

State the primary aim(s) of asset management and maintenance

policies for each key category of asset and how multiple aims are

prioritised, if at all.

Methodological

approach to

maintenance

State the balance of maintenance approach for each class of asset

between “run-to-fail”, corrective, preventive (planned cycle),

preventive (proactive – changing operating conditions) predictive,

risk-based, condition-based, reliability-centred (several may apply).

Asset lifecycle

approach

Please describe the typical interventions during the whole asset life

cycle from commissioning to replacement. Please explain if you take

a total lifecycle costing and total systems approach

Organisation of

maintenance teams

How do you deliver the key interventions described? For example:

1. In-house team totalling x staff working at y depots on z

number of assets, OR

2. Contract maintenance covering the whole life cycle? OR

3. Contract maintenance for heavy maintenance only? AND

4. Line-based teams or teams based on location of assets?

Mini case-study

examples of changes

in maintenance

practices

Please provide examples of changes in maintenance practices you

have introduced covering a range of asset types. Please include

details of the specific change made, the rationale for this change, key

steps in the change process and the cost of implementing the changes

and the (quantified) impacts from them. Please include detail of any

key challenges and difficulties you face and of how these were

overcome.

TABLE 1 Questionnaire Structure for Maintenance Approaches 8

9 17 responses were received and analysed by the RTSC to identify gaps and inconsistencies 10

across the group. Structured follow-up questions were sent to all participants to add depth to 11

and clarify responses, ensuring a consistent, comparable and reliable set of information. 12

These questions requested further detail about why specific approaches were chosen, probed 13

motivations behind unusual or interesting practice and sought to understand localised factors 14

behind decision making. 12 of the respondees were interviewed by telephone, to further 15

discuss and elucidate ideas presented, including structured case study interviews. 7 of these 16

metros were then interviewed again. The combination of structured questionnaires and 17

follow-up interviews was chosen to maximise the comparability and depth of the responses. 18

19

As identified by Trompet and Graham [28], a main contributing factor of good data quality in 20

benchmarking groups is strict confidentiality as it encourages an open and honest information 21

sharing environment. For this reason, although the CoMET and Nova members agreed that 22

this study’s findings should be shared through this paper; graphs, tables and text have been 23

anonymised where appropriate. 24

25


10

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 1

2 Responses to the questionnaire were collated, compared and synthesised to provide 3

complementary insights and detailed examples based on the experiences and practices 4

provided by metros. 5

6

In identifying those processes, measures and factors that contribute most to metro 7

maintenance management, a generalised framework was developed. This employs metro 8

terminology to guide managers’ thinking and structure stages in maintenance practice 9

maturity, as well as reflecting key barriers and enablers to development through these stages. 10

This was linked to the case study examples provided by metros. 11

12

The framework specifically addresses the gaps in previous literature highlighted in Section 13

2.6, adding a practical management element to it, but builds on Moubray’s three generations 14

of maintenance and a number of other relevant features identified in other models. 15

16

4.1 The MMF 17 18

The MMF (Figure 4) illustrates the evolution of metro maintenance management and the key 19

progression stages of organisations through awareness and towards expert management of 20

their maintenance needs. The basic approaches exhibited are shown in Table 2. A small 21

sample of the more than 30 examples, provided by metros in their mini case studies, of 22

changes to a more mature level of maintenance practice are given in tables 3 and 4. These are 23

followed by a discussion of the survey results and conclusions including the key barriers to, 24

and enablers of development. 25


11

• May be suitable for some short-lived

electrical and mechanical equipment e.g.

light bulbs

• Stations

Holistic regime change and

predictive

• Data driven analysis

• Predictive

• RCM (Activities / Frequencies / Management)

• Lean ‘Six Sigma’

Dynamic / Continuous improvement / Empirical

analysis

Planned preventive

techniques

• Multi-disciplinary mechanism for continuous

improvement

• Holistic maintenance

• Review of regime effectiveness

• Self-diagnosis of E&M assets

Condition-Based Maintenance

Rule Based (Fixed Plan) Maintenance

Corrective (Run to Failure)

•Often suit a single objective

•Rules may become enshrined

as ‘standards’

• Often long applied to historic

assets

• Inspection (STDS, Condition)

• Fixed frequency

• Rule based actions

• Real-time ACM

• Diagnostic inspections

• Root-cause / risk-based analysis

•Intelligent monitoring tools

E&M assets e.g. (Rolling stock, escalators, track and signalling

components) tend to start with time or distance based rules.

For fixed assets the regime tends to be condition based.

At the lower stages of

maturity fixed assets (e.g.

Civil infrastructure or track)

tend to have fixed time based

inspection cycles, which then

may or may not result in work

Aware Expert

Barriers to development of maintenance management practices

Lack of

data

Entrenched

Stakeholders

Poor

incentives

Inflexibility

of standards

Risk averse

leadership

Reliability of

technology

Enablers for development of maintenance management practicesTechnology

platform

changes

LeadershipContract

reviewsBenchmarking New assets

Asset info.

systems

A more sophisticated fixed-asset maintenance practice is to

automate the inspections by having built in sensors. E.g. for

civil infrastructure or station assets

Repair based

•Interval-based frequency

• Usage-based

• Balanced for resources,

not finances

Metros’ further analysis-based Proactive process redesign

1 2

FIGURE 4 The Maintenance Management Framework 3


12

As the surveyed metros have matured, all have moved from repair based, run to failure 1

maintenance (except where these remain appropriate for typically short life, low safety / 2

service critical assets) to more sophisticated regimes. This initial shift generally first took the 3

form of time or rules-based maintenance regimes drawing on suppliers’ recommendations 4

and / or maintenance management’s experience. Greater awareness, together with advances 5

in asset information systems and analysis techniques, then allowed metros to move towards 6

undertaking analyses specific to their own assets and data to improve maintenance regimes. 7

More recently, as real-time Asset Condition Monitoring (ACM) has become more common 8

and included in new assets (See [2], and [29] for a reliability centred approach to remote 9

ACM), a few metros have started to become expert in maintaining some or all of their assets. 10

This has allowed them to become both efficient and effective through: the accurate use of 11

predictive maintenance, complete changes in the way in which maintenance organisation is 12

structured and fundamental and continuously improving reviews of historically established 13

maintenance regimes. 14

15

Study responses evidenced multiple barriers and enablers affecting the rate of progress in this 16

evolution for some metros and these are discussed throughout this section. 17

18

Table 2 summarises the broad approaches to maintenance at different maturity levels, on a 19

generalised level. It also lists some advantages and disadvantages of these approaches. The 20

three approaches are shown with reference to the MMF in Figure 4. Despite the host of 21

advantages to advanced maintenance strategies, most metros surveyed exhibited largely 22

planned preventive techniques, although the majority evidenced progress from ‘rule based’ 23

towards further analytical practices based on metros’ own experiences. 24

25

Table 3 and Table 4 summarise a small sample of case studies and examples of changes in 26

maintenance practice collected and their respective results, as reported by the metros. They 27

indicate that the majority are operating within the growing ‘awareness’ elements of the 28

maintenance management framework (marked in blue on the framework and shown in Table 29

3). Only a few metros (and often for only a limited number of asset classes) have evolved 30

practices at the ‘expert’ levels of predictive and / or dynamic condition-based monitoring 31

(Table 4). This was most often achieved through implementing fundamental maintenance 32

regime reviews, resulting in improved performance as well as significant cost efficiencies. A 33

key to this was to focus on questioning the effectiveness of maintenance, through 34

organisation functions with a specific remit to promote continuous improvement, in addition 35

to looking for ways to improve efficiency in practice. These examples provide a context for 36

the following discussion about barriers and catalysts that were outlined for metro 37

maintenance development. 38


13

Approach /

Strategy Advantages Disadvantages

Repair Based

(Least mature) On failure

• Low short term maintenance costs

• Longer intervals between maintenance checks

• Can be inefficient

• More frequent train or service

critical asset failures with

potentially greater delay impacts

• Unplanned maintenance

• Increased total life cycle costs

• Stress & wear on other components

Preventive

(Aware)

Range from

crude ‘rules

based’ to

metros’ own

risk, reliability

or criticality

based analysis

• Minimise total life cycle costs

• Improved efficiency and effectiveness of

maintenance activity

• Higher levels of fleet utilisation and

availability

• Increased short term maintenance

cost

• Increased labour resources

• More frequent maintenance checks

• Tends to be single output focused

(targets a specific improvement /

efficiency)

Holistic and predictive

(Expert)

Full-scale

regime review

• Targets holistic / multiple outcomes and

balanced objectives; likely to be most

efficient overall

• Improved rolling stock and other service

critical asset reliability and availability

• Optimised maintenance schedules

• Avoid unnecessary maintenance : extended

maintenance frequencies based on condition

monitoring – reduction in (planned) service

disruption

• Increased cost effectiveness (long term)

• Dynamic condition-based and predictive

monitoring tailor maintenance interventions

to specific requirements just before they are

needed

• Rigorous data collection required

• Requires dedication of staff as well

as advanced training and skill-level

• May be dependent on deployment

of more sophisticated technological

platforms

• Can be difficult to overcome

organisational inertia : requires

strong leadership from a group

whose role is to challenge based on

continuous review of regime

effectiveness

TABLE 2 Key features of metros’ maintenance at the different maturity levels 1


14

Region Metro’s change Reported results

South

America

Initially preventive periodic maintenance of station-based assets

undertaken on a semi-annual, annual and biennial basis by 7 teams of

3 employees

Studies carried out to investigate increasing efficiency and to increase

the competitiveness with international and domestic KPIs. Monitoring

intervention frequency and component repair cycles were adjusted.

The teams that performed the semiannual, annual

and biennial maintenance have been reduced from

3 to 2 employees per team, enabling a reduction of

9% in the quantity of employees for escalators

maintenance.

Pacific

Rim

Improved train door motor defect tagging process following Six

Sigma analysis (See Antony [30]).

The Problem

Body-side doors were one of the top 5 causes of peak incidents,

causing about 5% of rolling stock incidents per year. In 07/08 these

doors accounted for: 33 peak incidents, 28 peak delays and 206 24hr

incidents.

Key Findings / Recommendations

Door adjustments (motor, speed, height, and track) were critical. The

following tasks were carried out:

• Lubrication of door motors to reduce friction and door tack wear.

• A mid-cycle general inspection of doors improved door

performance and reliability. A function check during the 15 day PR

inspection picked up poor performing doors before failing.

• Solenoid spool valve was life expired

• Improved door motor defect tagging process

• Replaced life expired solenoid spool valves

• Improved defect reporting forms for general

inspections (GI’s)

• Additional door inspection tasks were added to

Technical Maintenance Plan (TMP).

• A 37% improvement in reliability since the

project started

• A 60% reduction in solenoid spool valve

failures in first half of 2010


15


South

America

Since 2003, the metro has been developing a Daily Rolling Stock fleet

Work Routine Management programme, through which all working

processes are reviewed and standardised. Indicators and metrics have

been created based on Root Cause Analysis of critical points and

targets have been established in order to measure performance.

Peak fleet utilisation has increased from 87% to

98% since 2003.

A rate of failure repeatability report is released

three times a week in order to provide information

regarding the recurrence of failures by car, by train

and by cause which had caused failure within the

last seven days.

Based on these data it is possible to verify the

effectiveness of reactive maintenance and also

define strategies, studies and actions to eliminate

the recurrent failures.

TABLE 3 Examples of metros moving from rules-based maintenance approaches to more metro / asset specific analysis 1


16

1


Pacific

Rim

Adopted comprehensive long term asset strategy on

the basis of a ‘fleet life extension protocol’ based

on condition based maintenance practices and

analysis that has been developed into asset life

extension strategies.

• Rolling stock fleet life expectation more than doubled from initial

design life through condition based maintenance and monitoring

and life extension investments

• Extended intervention frequencies significantly reduce service

disruption

• Peaks in long term rolling stock fleet asset expenditure smoothed

and deferred on the basis of detailed asset condition knowledge,

allowing other infrastructure asset expenditure priorities also to be

addressed.

South

America

Set up special team to analyse the functions, failure

modes, effects and risks of failure, and elaborated

proposals for changes in maintenance processes for

Signalling assets.

• 31% decrease in human resources required for maintenance,

representing a reduction of 2,025 man-hours or US$ 87,685.35 per

year.

• The mean time between failures also increased by 30% to 143,195

hours, over a period of 4 years.

Europe

Progressively deployed a new model of

maintenance management, harnessing the ACM

capabilities of new Electrical and Mechanical asset

equipment and re-organising maintenance staff into

multi-disciplinary, geographically dispersed, teams.

• Around 80% of maintenance is dealt with at the newer multi-

functional line-based centres, where they are available. The more

technical or larger problems are sent to the specialist centres that

exist for lines that have not moved to the newer system yet.

• Multi-functional locations are able to deal with issues at stations

more quickly

• Far more comprehensive understanding of asset performance than

at other metros

TABLE 4 Examples of metros moving from planned preventive to more holistic maintenance approaches2


17

4.2 Barriers and enablers to metros’ development of maintenance management practices 1 2

Metros’ responses and case studies identified several key barriers constraining their progress 3

towards more mature maintenance practices, as well as illustrating key catalysts that had enabled 4

development. These were classified under generic headings and included in the MMF (Figure 4). 5

6

Many metros, particularly older ones, performed maintenance management practices according 7

to a “Rules-Based (Fixed Plan) Maintenance” scheme (see Figure 4) mid-way between the repair 8

based and planned preventive approaches. Key attributes of maintenance organisations in this 9

position included: 10

11

Maintenance interventions based on rigid rules (e.g. mileage) that may have been 12

specified and enshrined many years earlier and are potentially no longer appropriate, 13

given developments in inspection technology or asset design. Intervals driven by the 14

availability of legacy resources, rather than a desire to minimise cost and / or maximise 15

reliability; the maintenance regime was often also focused on a single goal (e.g. Mean 16

Distance Between Failure) rather than planned to balance the objectives of multiple 17

stakeholders 18

For many historic assets, pre-dating the advance in asset information management 19

systems, deficiencies in available data hampered the analysis g required to challenge well 20

established ‘rules’. 21

22

Metros in this position found themselves with the technology and capability to advance towards 23

more efficient processes such as Terotechnology [19], but progress could be constrained or 24

delayed by a variety of barriers. 25

26

4.2.1 Barriers to maintenance practice development 27

28

Inflexible standards 29 30

Metros stated that inflexible or overly-prescriptive standards made it difficult to develop more 31

sophisticated planned preventive maintenance techniques, particularly when the standards were 32

input rather than output-based, and / or where rules-based fixed-plan maintenance schedules had 33

become embedded within them. They reported that the more difficult it is to change a standard, 34

the less likely it will happen – meaning that future actions are based on the past, rather than 35

developing the best regimes for a given set of (often changing) circumstances. 36

37

Risk-averse leadership 38 39

Moving away from inspection-based planned-preventive techniques poses a safety risk that must 40

be managed. Metro leadership reported an unwillingness to do this, as the pressure to minimise 41

risk outweighs the need for continual improvement (or their mandate to deliver it). This resulted 42

in maintenance techniques remaining at more labour-intensive and costly phases. 43

44


18

Poor incentives 1 2

Poor incentives also served as a barrier to development. If correct incentives are not in place, this 3

can also hamper progress to maintenance maturity. Examples given by metros included: 4

5

Funding based on duration of tasks rather than their outcome 6

Slower career progression for those who made themselves redundant through efficiency. 7

8

Entrenched stakeholders 9 10

Entrenched stakeholders and competing vested interests also had significant impacts on progress 11

to maintenance maturity, often exacerbating the impact of other barriers, for example making the 12

standards change process incremental and / or attritional. Examples given by metros included: 13

14

Section budgets being defended rather than efficiencies rooted out 15

General management inertia 16

Lack of skills and/or flexibility required to implement new techniques 17

Labour union resistance to any change that might entail job losses or changes to 18

employee flexibility or working patterns. 19

20

Lack of data 21 22

Many of the more mature maintenance techniques depend on detailed analysis of well-23

maintained and structured asset data, in order to identify service critical issues and opportunities 24

for more efficient or effective maintenance. As mentioned above, knowledge about older assets 25

is constrained by lack of data, especially asset history records, which makes the application of 26

analysis based techniques a significantly more challenging task than for newer systems and 27

assets for which the required data has been captured from the outset. 28

29

Reliability of technology 30 31

Without available information and where reliability of assets is critical to service delivery, 32

metros reported that it was often deemed safer to stick with a process that had worked in the past. 33

The need to protect reliability, or an unwillingness to trust the reliability of new technology or 34

practices was evidenced as a barrier to taking on holistic regime change and predictive 35

maintenance. 36

37

4.2.2 Enablers of Maintenance Practice Development 38 39

A variety of ‘Enablers’ (see Figure 4) have helped metros succeed in overcoming these barriers. 40

41


19

Benchmarking 1 2

Benchmarking can act as a catalyst when it is used by proactive leadership to understand and 3

highlight: 4

5

Organisation (internal and external) strengths and weaknesses 6

Where improvements are most likely achievable 7

What has/has not worked elsewhere 8

How good ideas can be implemented 9

10

The ‘drill-down’ study commissioned by (European) Metro E as a follow-up to an asset specific 11

management study indicated that their practice was at variance and more costly than the majority 12

of its peers. The study’s detailed findings revealed substantial differences between metros in 13

technology specification and supply chain management, maintenance and refurbishment 14

practices, including condition monitoring and productivity management. They stated that: 15

16

“This study has led to a radical new strategy for managing escalators and other assets in 17

[Metro E] and to a significant change in culture. We now expect that it will lead to 18

savings in the region of 0.6 billion USD across the entire [Metro E] escalator fleet. The 19

recent procurement for the next 50 escalators is beginning to realise these benefits (48.2 20

million USD capex and 29.4m opex) at the level expected in the benchmarking study” 21

22

Contract reviews 23 24

Effective contract reviews proved an enabler of development. (European) Metro A’s major 25

outsourcing contracts for a Public Private Partnership required the development of incentives, 26

measurement and reporting of all aspects of asset stewardship. This served as a significant 27

catalyst to greater awareness of maintenance practices and effectiveness and was supported by 28

extensive benchmarking to identify opportunities in comparison with current practice. 29

30

New assets / technology platforms 31 32

Several metros used the introduction of new assets as a catalyst for moving away from basic 33

planned preventive techniques. This occurred due to the obsolescence of older techniques for 34

new assets, through lack of equipment; lack of technical expertise in the workforce; and more 35

‘black boxes’ in technologically advanced assets. 36

37

Evidence of new assets having this effect can be seen in (European) Metro F’s general asset and 38

data management centre or and in (European) Metro G’s line-specific maintenance system, 39

where a mix of new and different technologies led them to vary their conventional organisational 40

approach to maintenance management. 41

42

Shifts away from conventional practices also occurred when new assets were used to bring in 43

new standards, or new maintenance planning regimes. It is essential that when new assets are 44

brought in, old maintenance standards are not merely translated to them, but a full analysis is 45


20

carried out to streamline and optimise the maintenance process, whilst ensuring an acceptable 1

level of availability and reliability. 2

3

Asset information systems 4 5

The major developments in asset information systems and information technology have been a 6

critical factor in metros’ ability to adopt more mature maintenance management techniques that 7

depend on detailed recording, understanding and knowledge of asset condition and performance 8

and analysis of the impact that maintenance activities have upon these key outputs. 9

10

Metros reported that new assets are increasingly being delivered with accurate real time Asset 11

Condition Monitoring (ACM) systems which, combined with advanced diagnostic inspections 12

and risk analysis, enables them to further eliminate unproductive maintenance interventions 13

while maintaining, or improving, reliability. 14

15

Making this change can be difficult and must be managed carefully. Some metros found that the 16

sheer volume of information generated by ACM systems overwhelms staff at first, rendering 17

them unable to identify the important messages in a deluge of minor fault codes. To avoid this, 18

those staff who are going to be asked to work with new technologies and maintain new assets 19

should be involved in the specification and planning process as early as possible. 20

21

A formalised technique for challenging existing maintenance practices and institutionalising a 22

level of awareness and preventive practice based on the metro’s own analysis is Reliability 23

Centred Maintenance [31]. It demands highly accurate data, especially on the failure experience 24

of existing assets, so asset information systems often enable the collection of such data. 25

26

However, Sherwin raises a number of concerns regarding RCM in his review of maintenance 27

models [11] and in his critique of it [32]. He is concerned principally that reliability (and 28

efficiency in achieving it) whilst highly important should not be the sole aim of maintenance. 29

This is reflected by placing it in Figure 4 as a key ‘Preventive technique based on metro’s own 30

analysis’, but it would also have a place in a more holistic practice, which would balance this 31

within wider reviews of overall process effectiveness. 32


21

0

1

2

3

4

5

Millio

n C

ar

Kilo

me

tre

s p

er

Ro

llin

g S

toc

k F

ailu

re (>

5 M

ins

)

CoMET and Nova metros (Anonymised)

MDBF: Car Kilometres Between Rolling Stock Failures (2008)

10.2 7.1

Metros using Reliabilty Centred Maintenance (RCM)

Unspecified or no RCM

1 FIGURE 5 Mean Distances Between Rolling Stock Failures in Car Kilometres [33] 2 3

Figure 5 shows how among the 12 leading metros in terms of reliability, all but 2 use RCM, 4

whereas of the 20 lagging metros, only 2 use RCM. This is not proof of a causal relationship or 5

the effectiveness of RCM, but it is certainly a striking correspondence. 6

7

4.3 Adopting and sustaining ‘Expert’ maintenance practice 8

9 A small number of metros were identified as having moved out of the ‘Planned Preventive’ zone, 10

becoming expert in the deployment of predictive maintenance and implementing holistic change 11

in their maintenance organisations for some or all of their asset classes. 12

13

Condition Based Maintenance (CBM), which generally proved an essential stepping-stone for 14

this development, builds on some form of ACM. When this monitoring was sufficiently frequent 15

and thorough, CBM could take the place of normal planned preventive maintenance in certain 16

cases. But in most cases, ACM is used as a trigger to fine-tune the timing of corrective or 17

preventive maintenance [34], as well as asset replacement, using risk-based analyses to minimise 18

failure effects at low cost. 19

20

Despite the difficulties noted above in managing the information generated by Condition Based 21

Maintenance systems, an international survey of 157 organisations in sixteen different industries 22

found that surveyed organisations that had adopted CBM regarded it as a positive development. 23

77% of organisations surveyed reported that CBM had met or exceeded expectations and goals 24

and only 4% of survey respondents reported a negative experience in the deployment of CBM 25

[35]. 26


22

Metros that presented more developed practices also employed more in-depth asset knowledge to 1

undertake whole-life analyses when weighing up the costs and benefits of initiatives, thus 2

maximising economies and minimising risks. 3

4

Another critical characteristic of more expert maintenance practice was the culture of continuous 5

improvement, including the mechanisms allowing this to happen. A good example of this is one 6

metro’s mechanism for allowing shop-floor suggestions to be implemented quickly. 7

8

This challenge of remaining expert is shown within the third zone of the Maintenance 9

Management Framework. Organisations must have mechanisms in place to drive continuous 10

improvement, to react to the information generated by ACM systems, and to continually review 11

processes and practices as new information becomes available. Thus, an appropriate 12

organisational structure becomes central to sustaining expertise and efficiency in maintenance. 13

14

Where continuous improvement has been observed in action at CoMET and Nova metros, one of 15

two general approaches has been taken to support this process: 16

17

Specialist teams, challenged to make improvements and empowered to change working 18

practices 19

Clear client/delivery relationships that are structured in a way that drives ongoing 20

improvement and changes. 21

22

The structure of (European) Metro O, for example, includes technical groups which constantly 23

monitor and adjust maintenance practices, aiming to improve both efficiency and service 24

reliability. Recently, the technical group noted that the regular “10,000Km” preventive periodic 25

maintenance check for some rolling stock types was not finding many faults. Following analysis 26

of the data, the inspection frequency was changed from 10,000Km to 15,000Km. 27

28

At (Asian) Metro P, continuous improvement is supported by an explicit client/delivery 29

relationship between operations and maintenance, with clear aims, targets and measures which 30

provide the basis for ongoing evolution. 31

32

With the operating department (the client) demanding that the maintenance department 33

simultaneously improve the reliability of assets whilst reducing costs, the maintenance 34

department is forced to continuously reappraise and renew their procedures to reflect the latest 35

technologies and techniques. 36

37


23

5. CONCLUSIONS 1

2 A Maintenance Management Framework has been developed with specific reference to metros, 3

linking together different characteristics and practices of metro management and analysis. This 4

positions different techniques within broad ‘maturity’ bandings and also indicates associated key 5

enablers, as well as potential barriers to change. The framework has potential value to metros to 6

position where their practice is, identify opportunities for further development, and to understand 7

possible results. The framework is supported by a selection of case study examples of metros’ 8

experiences and achievements in implementing different techniques. 9

10

Of the 17 metros analysed in this study, most metros have achieved valuable efficiencies through 11

the employment of planned preventive maintenance techniques to improve elements of fixed-12

plan maintenance regimes. A smaller number of metros have evidenced further development 13

towards the potentially more significant opportunities arising from holistic regime review and 14

change and / or the deployment of dynamic condition-monitoring-based maintenance, building 15

on new opportunities provided within new assets and technology platforms linked to investment 16

and the implementation of enterprise asset information systems. Leadership and the deployment 17

of an organisation function with a specific remit to challenge the effectiveness of current 18

practice, and to pursue continuous improvement, was the other key factor identified in metros 19

that had matured and had adopted and were sustaining more expert maintenance management 20

practices. 21

22

The metro Maintenance Management Framework addresses a number of key deficiencies 23

identified from a practical metro perspective in a review of previous literature. The surveyed 24

metros have welcomed the framework as a practical tool and route map to support improvements 25

in their maintenance management practices. 26

27

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 28 29

The authors thank the members of CoMET and Nova for their cooperation in the research project 30

and willingness to share anonymised data and experiences with the wider transport industry and 31

academic world. 32

33


24

REFERENCES 1

2 1. Kelly, A. and M.J. Harris, Management of industrial maintenance. 1978: Newnes-3

Butterworths. 4

2. Pham, H. and H.Z. Wang, Imperfect maintenance. European Journal of Operational 5

Research, 1996. 94(3): p. 425-438. 6

3. CoMET, Key Performance Indicator Report. 2012. 7

4. Mishra, R.P., G. Anand, and R. Kodali, Development of a framework for world-class 8

maintenance systems. Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Systems, 2006. 5(2): p. 141-9

165. 10

5. Moubray, J., Reliability-centered maintenance. 1997: Industrial Press Inc. 11

6. Wireman, T., Developing performance indicators for managing maintenance. 2005: 12

Industrial Press Inc. 13

7. Campbell, J.D. and J.V. Reyes-Picknell, Uptime: Strategies for excellence in 14

maintenance management. 2006: Productivity Pr. 15

8. Waeyenbergh, G. and L. Pintelon, A framework for maintenance concept development. 16

International Journal of Production Economics, 2002. 77(3): p. 299-313. 17

9. Söderholm, P., M. Holmgren, and B. Klefsjö, A process view of maintenance and its 18

stakeholders. Journal of quality in maintenance engineering, 2007. 13(1): p. 19-32. 19

10. Campos, M.L. and A.C. Márquez, Review, classification and comparative analysis of 20

maintenance management models. Journal of Automation, Mobile Robotics & Intelligent 21

Systems, 2009. 3(3). 22

11. Sherwin, D., A review of overall models for maintenance. Journal of quality in 23

maintenance engineering, 2000. 6(3): p. 17. 24

12. Dekker, R., Applications of maintenance optimization models: a review and analysis. 25

Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 1996. 51(3): p. 229-240. 26

13. Valdez‐Flores, C. and R.M. Feldman, A survey of preventive maintenance models for 27

stochastically deteriorating single‐unit systems. Naval Research Logistics (NRL), 1989. 28

36(4): p. 419-446. 29

14. Pintelon, L.M. and L. Gelders, Maintenance management decision making. European 30

Journal of Operational Research, 1992. 58(3): p. 301-317. 31

15. Aalbregtse, R., J. Hejka, and P. McNeley, TQM: how do you do it? Automation, August, 32

1991: p. 30-32. 33

16. Vanneste, S. and L. Van Wassenhove, An integrated and structured approach to improve 34

maintenance. European Journal of Operational Research, 1995. 82(2): p. 241-257. 35

17. Kelly, A. and K. Eastburn, Terotechnology. A modern approach to plant engineering. 36

Physical Science, Measurement and Instrumentation, Management and Education-37

Reviews, IEE Proceedings A, 1982. 129(2): p. 131-136. 38

18. Husband, T.M., Maintenance management and terotechnology. 1976: Saxon House. 39

19. Parkes, D., Terotechnology Handbook. 1978: HM Stationery Office. 40

20. Force, U.S.A., Army, and Navy, The TAAF Process. HQ AMC/QA, OASN S&L, HQ 41

USAF/LE-RD, 1989. 42

21. Bowles, J.B. and R.D. Bonnell. Failure mode, effects, and criticality analysis. 1995. 43

22. Kelly, A., Maintenance Planning and Control. 1984, Oxford: Butterworths. 44


25

23. Campos, M.A.L. and A.C. Marquez, Modelling a Maintenance Management Framework 1

Based on PAS 55 Standard. Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 2011. 2

27(6): p. 805-820. 3

24. Institute, B.S., 55-1: Asset Management. Part 1: Specification for the optimized 4

management of physical assets. 2008: London. 5

25. Zhao, Y., On preventive maintenance policy of a critical reliability level for system 6

subject to degradation. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2003. 79(3): p. 301-7

308. 8

26. Marquez, A.C., et al., The maintenance management framework: A practical view to 9

maintenance management. Safety, Reliability and Risk Analysis: Theory, Methods and 10

Applications, Vols 1-4, 2009: p. 669-674. 11

27. Nakajima, S., Introduction to TPM. 1988, Cambridge, MA.: Productivity Press. 12

28. Trompet, M. and D.J. Graham. A Balanced Approach to Normalizing Bus Operational 13

Data for Performance Benchmarking Purposes. in 91st Transportation Research Board 14

Annual Meeting. 2012. Washington. 15

29. Garc a M rquez, F.P., F. Schmid, and . Conde Collado, A reliability centered approach 16

to remote condition monitoring. A railway points case study. Reliability Engineering & 17

System Safety, 2003. 80(1): p. 33-40. 18

30. Antony, J., Some pros and cons of Six Sigma: an academic perspective. The TQM 19

Magazine, 2004. 16(4): p. 303-306. 20

31. Nowlan, F.S. and H.F. Heap, Reliability-centered maintenance. 1978, DTIC Document. 21

32. Sherwin, D.J., A constructive critique of reliability-centered maintenance. Annual 22

Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, 1999 Proceedings, 1999: p. 238-244. 23

33. Findlay, N. and R.J. Anderson, Practices to Increase Peak Fleet Utilisation and 24

Availability, RTSC, Editor. 2008, Imperial College London. p. 260. 25

34. Budai, G., D. Huisman, and R. Dekker, Scheduling preventive railway maintenance 26

activities. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 2005. 57(9): p. 1035-1044. 27

35. Higgs, P., Parkin, R. et al. A survey on condition monitoring systems in industry. in 28

Proceedings of EDSA 2004, 7th Biennial ASME Conference Engineering Systems Design 29

and Analysis. 2004. Manchester, UK. 30

31 32

A PRACTICAL FRAMEWORK FOR METRO MAINTENANCE …...14 The benefits of MMFs are discussed by Aalbregste et al. [15]. Further study into how ... 36 2.2 Terotechnology 37 38 For a metro

Documents