APPLICATION OF COMPUTERIZED MAINTENANCE MANGEMENT SYSTEM IN INDUSTRY

APPLICATION OF COMPUTERIZED MAINTENANCE MANGEMENT SYSTEM IN INDUSTRY

Ali A. Majeed Ali

Department of Mechanical Engineering University of Aden, Faculty of Engineering

Yemen [email protected]

ABSTRACT Manufacturing companies are continually striving to achieve and maintain a high level of operational excellence, which means, a continual improvement of a company manufacturing process. To meet the goals of operational excellence, manufacturers must be able to fully utilize the information in all of their control and information systems. Achieving this level of utilization requires the ability to easily integrate various control and information systems. Recently, opportunities on the integration of operations and maintenance (O&M) related information has received a lot of efforts to make business operating decisions more reliable and cop with the fast changing manufacturing process environment, that depend on integrated O&M information. This paper aims to design a questionnaire to collect the necessary data to evaluate the existing maintenance management process followed in local industries, and to introduce CMMS as important integral part of the manufacturing system, then analyzing the response of maintenance managers and maintenance teams to CMMS implementation. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is used for the process of evaluation of CMMS comparing to Total Productive Maintenance TPM, Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM), and Condition Based Monitoring (CBM). The results derived from the evaluation process indicate that most maintenance managers are not aware of the developed maintenance techniques, the important of information systems to integrate operation and maintenance related activities. KEYWORDS CMMS, Maintenance Management, AHP, TPM, RCM, CBM and Information System. 1. INTRODUCTION The past two decades has seen the awareness of advancement in maintenance techniques, such

techniques as RCM, CBM, TPM and CMMS. The result of this awareness has been a great paradigm shift through the majority of industries where maintenance management is required. This is the new understanding about the function of maintenance, its obligations and its responsibilities in the modern industrial environment (Ivoncic, I., 1998). Also a vast increase in the knowledge of how equipment fails have been seen, and how, equally importantly, could it be detected. This along with the need for higher reliability in fixed and mobile assets has helped create an enormous advancement in condition monitoring tools and instruments. Lastly phenomenal advancements in the world of computers and communications technology implicate its effect to the maintenance function (Ayerbe, A., 1995). Among the greater advancements in these areas is the functionality afforded us today by Computerized Maintenance Management Systems (CMMS). Today’s CMMS can manage all of our possible requirements within the area of maintenance management. Not only that, but the ability to create computerized networks to transmit that information immediately anyway in the world where it is needed. This level of technology has been accompanied by the creation, at times integral to the CMMS, of a vast array of specialist systems to manage reliability and condition based information. Despite all of these great advances in our work environments the great majority of plants and industrial organizations continue to operate in a reactive state of maintenance., this is related to what can be said, that although the concepts and new paradigms implicit in modern reliability engineering are widespread, they are still not common practice. However, the knowledge of the existence of this information is widespread and the level of application in industry is growing. There are also other factors contributing to the malaise today; however, the one overriding factor out of all of the reasons for this is (Dartmout, 2002)

984

“The maintenance business processes and the management of them, has not kept pace with the rapid advances in technology” Today the functionalities of CMMS, or the technology to manage maintenance, have outstripped the abilities to do so in practice. It is for this reason primarily that there are so many reactive state maintenance departments, even within those operating with advanced reliability programs. In manufacturing systems, the objective of maintenance is to ensure that the underlying equipment performs regularly and efficiently, by reducing the possibilities of breakdowns or failures, and by minimizing the production loss resulting from them. Simply stated, maintenance management attempts to maximize the performance of a manufacturing system, while keeping overall maintenance efforts in terms of the associated time and/or costs at an acceptable level. Although this statement sounds relatively simple, maintenance management addresses a rich and complex problem area, (Mather, D., 2003) CMMS is a means to achieving world-class maintenance, by offering a platform for decision analysis and thereby acting as a guide to management (Labib et al., 1998). Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS) maintains a computer database of maintenance operations information to combine distinctive work flow and maintenance functions into an integrated, automated process which effects increased business responsiveness and return on assets, larger economies of scale, improved asset service delivery and lowered cost of ownership. As in almost every sphere of organizational activity, modern computational facilities have offered dramatic scope for improved effectiveness and efficiency. Maintenance is one area in which computing has been applied, and CMMSs have existed, in one form or another, for several decades. The capacity of CMMSs to handle vast quantities of data purposefully and rapidly has opened up new opportunities for maintenance, facilitating a more deliberate and considered approach to managing an organization’s assets. Maintenance activities are consequently more visible and open to scrutiny. Managers can rapidly discover which policies work, which machines are causing problems, where overspend is taking place, and so on, thereby revealing information that can be used as the basis for the systematic management of maintenance. Thus, by tracking asset “health” in an organized and systematic manner, maintenance management can start

to see how to improve the current state of affairs (Bagadia, K., 2006). 2. ANALYTIC HIERACHY PROCESS A multi - criteria decision making is a complicated process, generally involving a set of competing alternatives based on how well those alternatives are evaluated against various attributes. First, it may be difficult to conceptualize all different factors that results in a decision which may lead to exclusion of one or more factors, or inclusion factors that are not important in formulating the decision. Also, while prioritizing factors, it may be difficult to keep track of all previous priority rankings, which may lead to inconsistent priority judgment. To counter these problems, Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), was developed to provide a comprehensive framework. AHP allows decision makers to combine factual information with the knowledge, view and experience of experts. Therefore AHP can be defined as a theory of measurement concerning with deriving dominance priorities from paired comparisons of homogeneous elements with respect to a common criteria or attribute, [Saaty, 1986]. In a multi-criteria setting, AHP can be used to scale elements in hierarchy (feed forward) structure with mutually independent elements in each level, or in network (feed forward-feedback) systems of components. It enables one to cope with the intuitive, the rational and the irrational, in a multi-criteria, multi-actor environment. There are three principles which one can recognize in problem solving using AHP. These are the principle of decomposition, comparative judgment and synthesis of priorities. The decomposition principle call for structuring the hierarchy to capture the basic elements of the problem. In general the hierarchy structure is composed of four elements:

i. Goal: This is the purpose for which the competing alternatives have to be evaluated and decision to be taken as from which the choice to be made so as to attain the goal.

ii. Criteria: Sometimes called the objectives are the elements which comprise the goal.

iii. Lowest level: are the elements which derived from the criteria.

iv. Alternatives: The different solutions or choices that is available.

The principle of comparative judgment calls for setting up a matrix to carry out pair wise comparisons of the relative importance, or preference of a set of elements with respect to the element in the above level. AHP uses the fundamental scale of absolute values 1-9, to

985

Step 4: Compute the normalized comparison matrix a*ij

as: represent paired comparison judgment to keep measurement within the same order of magnitude. The scale of entering the judgment is given in Table 4.1. Comparison is usually top-down, both between elements and within elements. Since the process of making the comparative judgment is seldom, a consistent one a consistency ratio (CR) is used to measure the consistency of the comparative judgment, (if CR ≤ 0.1 the judgment is considered to be tolerable, but if CR > 0.1, then judgment is to be re-examined to improve the consistency). The synthesis of priorities principle is then applied to generate the global weights of the elements by combining the local priorities throughout the entire structure. This gives the overall priorities of the alternatives, thus providing the decision maker information on which alternative is the best choice.

ji, a

a = akj

n

=1k

ij*ij ∀

∑ (1)

Step 5: Compute the principle vector (Pi) using the formula:

i a n1 = P *

ij

n

1=ji ∀∑ (2)

Step 6: Compute [aij] x [Pi]T to find the vector S, Step 7: Compute the eigen value vector (Fi) Fi = S / Pi , Step 8: Compute Σ Fi / n (n is the size of comparison matrix) to find the maximum eigen value (λmax) ,

2.1 Algorithm of AHP

Step 9: Compute the Consistency Index (CI) CI = (λmax- n)/(n-1) ,

Steps of performing the Analytical Hierarchy Process as outlined by (Saaty, 1990) are given below:

Step 10:Compute the Consistency Ratio CR = CI/RI, where RI is a Random Consistency Index given in Table 2

Step 1: Define the problem and identify the goals Step 2: Structure the hierarchy from the top level goals, objectives, criteria, sub-criteria, and the alternatives. Step 3: Construct the pair wise comparison matrix [aij], which are estimated through use of the scale whose values are given in Table 1.

Table 1: Scale of Relative Importance

Intensity of importance Definition Explanation

1 Equal importance Two activities contribute equally to the objective

3 Moderate importance Experience and judgment slightly favor one activity over another

5 Strong importance Experience and judgment strongly favor one activity over another

7 Demonstrated importance An activity is strongly favored and its dominance is demonstrated in practice

9 Extreme importance The evidence favoring one activity over another id of the highest possible order of affirmation

2,4,6,8 For interpolation between the above values When compromise is needed

Table 2: Random Consistency Index

n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

RCI 0.0 0.0 0.58 0.90 1.12 1.24 1.32 1.41 1.45 1.49 1.51 1.48 1.56 1.57 1.59

986

Figure 1: Stepwise procedure of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)

3. PROPLEM FORMULATION The problem of selecting a best Maintenance Technique from among several available alternatives viewed as a multi criteria decision making optimization problem with five criteria that can be stated as follows: given a set of alternatives (A), A={ Ak | k =1,2,..,4 }, based on a set of criteria (C), C = { Ci | I =1,2,..,5 } and a set of sub-criteria (B), derived from each criterion B = { Bji | j =1,2,.. } for all i. The problem is decomposed at several levels and structured in hierarchical form.

The overall hierarchical structure representing the problem of selecting the best alternative is illustrated in Figure 2. The hierarchical structure consists of four levels. The first level representing objective of selecting the best Maintenance effectiveness Technique. The objective can be further decomposed into five criteria and represented as level two. Each of the criteria is assessed through a detailed set of

sub-criteria, which constitute the third level. The fourth level of the hierarchy consists of the alternative maintenance techniques.

Goal

4. ALTERNATIVES Identify Objectives The purpose of this study is to evaluate the industrial performance of Computerized Maintenance Management System in comparison to other techniques of maintenance engineering. The alternatives are:

Structure the problem into hierarchy levels

Construct the pair wise comparison matrix

1. Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS)

Input pair wise matrix 2. Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) 3. Total Productive Maintenance (TPM), and 4. Condition Based Monitoring (CBM). Compute the

consistency ratio

4.1 Computerized Maintenance Management Effective Computerized Maintenance Management Software (CMMS) that schedules preventive maintenance work orders on the equipment is an integral component of any efficient maintenance department. Preventive and scheduled maintenance, efficiently scheduled, will not only reduce your maintenance costs, but will minimize emergency repairs and downtime, resulting in an increase in overall profitability (Lofsten, H., 1999).

Consistency ratio ≤ 0.1

Compute the weights for alternatives based on the sub-

criteria and objectives

Rank the Alternatives Computerized maintenance management systems

(CMMS) help maintenance departments improve productivity by automating maintenance administration. These tools store records describing equipment and associated warranties, maintenance schedules, the labor and material costs for work performed over time, inventory needs and expenses, as well as procedures required to complete maintenance chores. They facilitate the creation of work orders and provide mechanisms for tracking work orders through to completion. 4.2 Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM) Reliability Centered Maintenance is “an approach to maintenance that combines reactive, preventive, predictive, and proactive maintenance practices and strategies to maximize the life that a piece of equipment functions in the required manner. RCM does this at minimal cost. In effect, RCM strives to create the optimal mix of an intuitive approach and a rigorous statistical approach to deciding how to maintain facility equipment.

987

Maintenance Effectiveness

Figure 2: Overall Hierarchical Structure of the selection process

Preventive Main. & Equipment Technology

Resource Management

Information Management

Planning & Scheduling

- Maintenance Staffed Enough - Logical Maintenance Structure - Maintenance Facilitation - Maint. Meet Production - Production helps Maint. - Resolve of Prod. & maint. Cross-functional - Maint. & Prod. Work together - Craftsmen training - Maintenance skilled - Maintenance team motivation - Safety policy - Proper maint. Department

- Computerized Maintenance - Equipment Coded - Updating Main. System - Craftspeople & CMMS - Records on Equipments - Computerized Stores - Decision based on CMMS - Total Maintenance Cost - M/C Downtime - Comparison of Main. Department & others - Main. Time Recorded - Industry Ratio Criterion

- Work Order - Maintenance Efficiency - PM Experts - Operators & PM - Equipment Monitoring - PM & PdM Costs - Easy Access to Maint - Breakdown Prevention - Operation & Maint. on equipment selection - Operation Training - Maintenance Training - Maintenance Cost

- Maintenance priorities - Work order - Work order effectiveness - Overtime control - Work order & equipment history - Specialized crew for maint. - Job planning - Overhauls scheduling - Skilled work contracting - Job planning & scheduling - Kitting & pre-picking jobs - Overhauls planning

Reliability Centered Maintenance

CMMS

Maintenance Support

- Inventory planning - Storeroom security - Store turnover ratio - Receipt & issue level mgt. - Inventory price & lead time - Shared of maint. Craftsmen - Mint. People involvement in goal setting - Qualified workmanship - Employee welfare - Performance reward - Performance & job security - Poor performance lead to termination

Total Productive Maintenance

Condition Based Monitoring

Proceedings of the 37th International Conference on Computers and Industrial Engineering,October 20-23, 2007, Alexandria, Egypt, edited by M. H. Elwany, A. B. Eltawil

5

The key to developing an effective RCM program lies in effectively combining the intuitive and statistical approaches. Intuition and statistics each have strong and weak points. A rigorous statistical approach has its limits, too. The first limit of the statistical approach is cost. Developing and/or analyzing an amount of data sufficient to provide a statistical basis is an expensive task. One may also fall into the “analysis paralysis” pitfall; the more one delves into a problem the more data it seems is required to solve it. The second limit of the statistical approach is applicability. Statistics often do not tell the whole story. Data does not always produce definite trends, since there may be none. 4.3 Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) is a process to maximize the productivity of the equipment for its entire life. Fostering an environment where improvement efforts in safety, quality, delivery, cost, and equipment operating performance are encouraged, through the participation of all employees; the goal of TPM is to maximize the Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) to reduce unplanned equipment downtime resulting in increased capacity and reduced costs (Shirose, K., 1996). 4.4 Condition Based Maintenance (CBM) CBM is a modern procedure, which uses the condition of equipment to determine what, if any, testing and maintenance procedures should be performed. CBM is similar to a preventive maintenance program that includes an extensive array of predictive maintenance procedures. Note however, that predictive maintenance tends to be equipment oriented while CBM is system oriented. Equipment is maintained as usual including all normal tests as well as visual mechanical adjustments and inspections. Both on-line and off-line procedures are performed and test data are collected into a computerized database. The test technician uses a notebook computer for this purpose. The data may be loaded by keyboard, or in some cases the test equipment will store the data directly (Cooney). The technician performing the work initially reviews the test results. This review may be via statistical analysis software and/or by simple

inspection and comparison. After the initial review, the data is uploaded to a central computer, where it is subjected to a more extensive review. The statistical analysis comprises two sections-statistical averaging/comparison and trending.

5. IDENTIFICATION OF CRITERIA and SUBCRITERIA

The criteria to carry out the process of selecting the best alternative Maintenance technique have been derived from the published literatures (Ralph, W. and P. Peters, 2002, Tsang et al., 1999, Dwight, R. 1999). These criteria are believed to cover the most important factors to make a meaningful and robust comparison for the given alternatives. Description of the criteria and the hierarchical structure of each criterion with the lower level sub-criteria are discussed in the following points.

5.1 Resource Management Resource Management controls labor and materials, including in-house labor, purchased labor and services, and materials management. Materials management includes work order bills of materials, parts inventory, inventory restocking requisitions, non-stock and service requisitions, and purchase status tracking and exception reporting for items outside of predetermined stocking levels. The initial system shall include provision for detailed capture and allocation of all in-house labor information and all transactions or summations of transactions involving materials, purchases, and outside labor. Labor information for each employee shall be recorded daily on a written form, entered into an error checking screen, stored, and automatically processed, or entered directly into the system.

5.2 Maintenance Information Management Several factors are driving the need for information to aid maintenance management. First, the amount of information available, even to quite modest organizations, continues to increase almost exponentially. What is more, there is an increasing requirement to have this data and information on hand and in real-time for decision-making. Secondly, data-life-time is diminishing as a result of the shop-floor realities, which are real-time in nature, and the rapid pace of change. The initiative now is to acquire data about individual machines,

989

based upon real interactions rather than deduced behaviour from historical data. Finally, the way that data is being accessed has changed. The days of legacy maintenance systems of large batch reports, where the focus was on data throughput, are being replaced by dynamic, online queries, and with answers in seconds rather than days.

5.3 Preventive Maintenance & Equipment Technology Preventive maintenance is a schedule of planned maintenance actions aimed at the prevention of breakdowns and failures. The primary goal of preventive maintenance is to prevent the failure of equipment before it actually occurs (Carnero, M.,2006). It is designed to preserve and enhance equipment reliability by replacing worn components before they actually fail. Preventive maintenance activities include equipment checks, partial or complete overhauls at specified periods, oil changes, lubrication and so on. In addition, workers can record equipment deterioration so they know to replace or repair worn parts before they cause system failure. Recent technological advances in tools for inspection and diagnosis have enabled even more accurate and effective equipment maintenance.

5.4 Planning and Scheduling The following definitions of tasks should be taken in to consideration in the planning and scheduling phase: • Maintenance is responsible for planning,

scheduling, and executing all viable maintenance work requests within their required completion dates. This work will include all predictive and preventive maintenance tasks and corrective work approved by production, maintenance, and engineering.

• Planning is the identification of needed resources and the order in which the resources are required to complete a requested job in the shortest time at the least cost. Once planned, work orders are placed into the ready work order backlog.

• Scheduling is the assignment of numerous planned jobs into a defined period of time to optimize the use of the resources. In scheduling, available man hours of maintenance personnel are allotted first to identify preventive and predictive maintenance work. The remaining

hours in each craft are maintenance hours which can be scheduled against the current backlog.

• Production is responsible for assisting maintenance in scheduling by identifying when the work can be performed and making the equipment available.

5.5 Maintenance Support Maintenance support responsibilities, documenting, and analyzing maintenance requirements for production equipment including Maintenance Activity Reporting and Scheduling system files management, Corrective Maintenance (CM) and Preventive Maintenance (PM), and maintenance equipment and stockroom inventories. This organization daily supports assigning work, recording maintenance activities, and analyzing performance, such as: • Tracking contract maintenance. • Developing, recording, and analyzing data on

utilization and performance of maintenance resources.

• Compiling data to help determine work hour requirements.

• Establishing and maintaining PM checklists and route sheets.

• Maintaining a work order system. • Coordinating with other maintenance areas the

assignment and scheduling of all preplanned maintenance.

• Rescheduling of workload to compensate for unplanned maintenance.

• Communicating to management elements on effectiveness and productivity.

• Planning for new equipment installations, overhauls, alterations, and authorized modifications.

• Maintaining a library of maintenance documents.

• Maintaining accountability and cataloging, ordering, issuing, and receiving equipment, repair parts, tools, and supplies.

5.6 The Sub – Criteria There are 12 sub – criteria structured under each alternative, these are listed as:

1- Maintenance Staffed Enough 2- Logical Maintenance Structure 3- Maintenance Facilitation 4- Maintenance Meet Production 5- Production helps Maintenance

990

6- Resolve of Production and maintenance cross-functional

7- Maintenance & Production Work together 8- Craftsmen training 9- Maintenance skilled 10- Maintenance team motivation 11- Safety policy 12- Proper maintenance Department 13- Computerized Maintenance 14- Equipment Coded 15- Updating Maintenance System 16- Craftspeople & CMMS 17- Records on Equipments 18- Computerized Stores 19- Decision based on CMMS 20- Total Maintenance Cost 21- Machine Downtime 22- Comparison of Maintenance Department &

others 23- Maintenance Time Recorded 24- Industry Ratio Criterion 25- Work Order 26- Maintenance Efficiency 27- PM Experts 28- Operators & PM 29- Equipment Monitoring 30- Preventive & Predictive Maintenance Costs 31- Easy Access to Maintenance 32- Breakdown Prevention 33- Operation & Maintenance on equipment

selection 34- Operator Training 35- Maintenance Training 36- Maintenance Cost 37- Maintenance priorities 38- Work order 39- Work order effectiveness 40- Overtime control 41- Work order & equipment history 42- Specialized crew for maintenance 43- Job planning 44- Overhauls scheduling 45- Skilled work contracting 46- Job planning & scheduling 47- Kitting & pre-picking jobs 48- Overhauls planning 49- Inventory planning 50- Storeroom security 51- Store turnover ratio 52- Receipt & issue level management 53- Inventory price & lead time 54- Shared of maintenance Craftsmen

55- Maintenance People involvement in goal setting

56- Qualified workmanship 57- Employee welfare 58- Performance reward 59- Performance & job security 60- Poor performance leads to termination

Data Collection A questionnaire has been designed and distributed to different local industries in Aden to collect data for the judgment process of criteria, sub-criteria sets and alternatives. 6. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Table 3 below illustrates the computations of the weights and consistency ration for the five criteria. The resulting comparison matrices were then solved and the relevant weights were extracted. The global weights for the major factor groups are as follows: Global weights for the criteria are shown in Table 4 Ranking of the alternatives indicates that CMMS were selected as the first technique for its benefits by using computer which will facilitate the accurate information recording process easy of extraction of the information for the design of work order, preventive maintenance plans and simplicity of the purchasing process. Figure 13 shows the distribution of the criteria weights which gave the maintenance Planning & Scheduling high weights then resource management and maintenance support at the same level followed by information management and preventive maintenance and equipment technology have the least weight this is may be due to the un-understanding of the role of information in industry and due to the unresponsiveness of maintenance facility to the introduction of new equipment technology. Figure 4 illustrates the sub-criteria weights. Figures 5 to 8 illustrate the weights variation of each alternative based on the sub-criteria. Figures 9 and 10 show the consistency measure for sub-criteria sets and the alternatives based on sub-criteria which are less than 0.1. Finally ranking of alternatives is shown in Figure 11, this indicate CMMS is first as already mentioned and the three other alternatives have almost the same weights. The results of the judgment process and the final selection of alternative is based maintenance managers and engineers who responded positively to the questionnaire.

991

6.1 AHP Computations Step 1 and step 2 already discussed in the problem formulation.

Step 3, construction of pair-wise matrix Matrix (aij) represents the comparison judgment of the alternatives

aij =

Step 4, Computation of Normalize Matrix By using equation 1, the Normalized Matrix is a*

ij = Step 5, The principle vector Pj is computed by using equation 2, Step 6, Computation of S vector ×

⎥⎥⎥⎥⎥⎥

⎦

⎤

⎢⎢⎢⎢⎢⎢

⎣

⎡

066.1942.1347.0600.0060.1

S = Step 7, Computation of eigenvalue vector F

⎥⎥⎥⎥⎥⎥

⎦

⎤

⎢⎢⎢⎢⎢⎢

⎣

⎡

00.150.000.300.200.100.200.100.500.300.233.020.000.150.033.050.033.000.200.150.000.150.000.300.200.1

F = ÷ = Step 8, Computation of maximum eigenvalue λ max = nF∑ =

5076.5044.5030.5000.5076.5 ++++ = 5.042

Step 9, Consistency index computation

Consistency Index (C.I.) = 1

max

−−

nnD

=

155042.5

−− = 0.0113

From Table 2 the random consistency index for n = 5 is R.C.I. = 1.12 Step 10, Consistency ration computation Therefore, Consistency Ratio (C.R.) =

0101.01200.10113.0

==RCICI

Therefore, C.R. < 0.1 or 10 %

⎥⎥⎥⎥⎥⎥

⎦

⎤

⎢⎢⎢⎢⎢⎢

⎣

⎡

210.0198.0214.0235.0210.0414.0400.0357.0353.0414.0068.0080.0071.0059.0068.0104.0130.0143.0118.0104.0210.0198.0214.0235.0210.0

⎢

⎣ 000.15.0000.3000.2000.1000.21000.5000.3000.2333.2.000.500.333.0500.0333.0000.2000.1500.0000.15.0000.3000.2000.1

⎢

⎣

⎡

066.1942.1347.0600.0060.1

⎢

⎣

⎡

213.0385.0069.0120.0213.0

⎥⎥⎥⎥⎥⎥

⎦

⎤

⎢⎢⎢⎢⎢⎢

⎣

⎡

076.5044.5030.5000.5076.5

⎥⎥⎥⎥⎥⎥

⎦

⎤

⎢⎢⎢⎢⎢⎢

⎣

⎡

213.0385.0069.0120.0213.0

⎥⎥⎥⎥⎥⎥

⎦

⎤

⎢⎢⎢⎢ 0010⎢

⎡

⎥⎥⎥⎥⎥⎥

⎦

⎤

⎢⎢⎢⎢⎢⎢

⎣

⎡

213.0385.0069.0120.0213.0

⎥⎥⎥⎥⎥⎥

⎦

⎤

⎢⎢⎢⎢⎢

⎢⎢

⎥⎥⎥⎥⎥⎥

⎦

⎤

⎢⎢⎢

992

Table 3: Consistency and weights of criteria

S. No. Criteria Weights

1. Resource Management 0.213

2. Information Management 0.120

3. Preventive Maintenance & Equipment Technology 0.069

4. Planning & Scheduling 0.385

5. Maintenance Support 0.213

Consistency Ratio C.R. = 0.0101

Figure 3: Weights of Criteria Figure 4: Weights of Sub-Criteria

Figure 5: Weights of CMMS based on Sub-Criteria

00.05

0.10.15

0.20.25

0.30.35

0.4

1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53 57

S u b - - C r i t e r i a

W e

i g

t h s

Figure 6: Weights of TPM based on Sub-Criteria Figure 7: Weights of RCM Based Sub-Criteria

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53 57

S u b - C r i t e r i a

W e

i g

h t s

00.05

0.10.15

0.20.25

0.30.35

0.40.45

1 2 3 4 5

Figure 8: Weights of CBM Based Sub-Criteria Figure 9: Consistency measure for Sub-Criteria sets

C

W e

i g

h t s

r i t e r i a

00.05

0.10.15

0.20.25

0.30.35

0.40.45

1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53 57

S u b - C r i t e r i a

W e

i g

h t s

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53 57

T o t a l N u m b e r o f S u b - C r i t e r ia

W e

i g

h t s

00.10.20.30.40.50.60.7

1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53 57

S u b - C r i t e r i a

W e

i g

h t s

00.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.080.09

1 2 3 4 5

S u b - C r i t e r i a S e t s

C o

n s

i s

t e n

c y

993

Figure 10: Consistency measure of alternatives based on Sub-Criteria Figure 11: Ranking of alternatives

Table 4: Ranking of Alternatives

S.No. Alternatives Weights Ranking

1. CMMS 0.391305 1

2. TPM 0.20729 2

3. RCM 0.200216 3

4. CBM 0.19829 4

7. CONCLUSIONS The results derived from the evaluation process indicate that most maintenance managers are not aware of the developed maintenance techniques, the important of information systems to integrate operation and maintenance related activities. Engineers from local industry reveal that cost for repair on an asset is important data, but cost of that equipment together with the cost of its downtime is also crucial, and this the main reason for implementing a CMMS. Another important issue is that, CMMS is a data base of information pertaining to equipment, work orders, work instructions, employees, drawings, vendors, accounting data, preventive maintenance schedules, and cost tracking. Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS) can increase the efficiency of maintenance activities, prevent system failures, minimize

unplanned downtime, and help to get a hand on inventories. Implementation of a CMMS consists of installation of software and fundamental modifications to behavior patterns.

0

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53 57

S u b - C r i t e r i a

C o

n s

i s

t e n

c y

REFERENCES Ayerbe, A., (1995); “ A Methodology for a

Maintenance System Integrated with the Control Modules of a Flexible Manufacturing System”, Proc., 12th . Conf., IMC, Competitive Manufacturing pp 113 – 120.

Bagadia, K., (2006), Computerized Maintenance

Management Systems Made Easy: How to evaluate, select and manage CMMS, first edition McGraw-Hill.

00.05

0.10.15

0.20.25

0.30.35

0.40.45

1 2 3 4

A l t e r n a t i v e s

W e

i g

h t s

Carnero, M., (2006), “An evaluation system of

the setting up of predictive maintenance programmes”, journal of Reliability Engineering & System Safety, Vol. 91, Issue 8, pp. 945-963.

Cooney, J., (2001); Development and Application

of Condition Based Maintenance and Management in Food Manufacturing, PhD Thesis, National University of Ireland, Cork, Ireland.

Dartmouth ([2002); http://www.dartmouth.edu/,

[2002-01-23]. De Wit B. & Meyer R., (1998); Strategy: Process,

Content; Context: An international perspective, 2nd edition, International Thomson Business Press, UK.

Dwight R., (1999); “Searching for real maintenance

performance measures”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol: 5 Issue: 3 pp. 258 – 27.5

Labib, A.W., G.B. Williams and R.F. O'Connor

(1998); “An intelligent maintenance model (system): an application of the analytic hierarchy process and a fuzzy logic rule-based controller” Journal of the Operational Research Society Vol. 49, pp 745 -757.

Labib A., (1998); “World-class maintenance using a

computerised maintenance management system”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol: 4 Issue: 1, pp. 66-75.

Labib A., R. Walmsley, and D. J. Petty, (2003);

“Quality and Reliability Corner: A Decision

994

Support Maintenance Management System, Development and Implementation”, Int. J. of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 20, No. 8, pp. 965-979.

Lofsten H. (1999); “Management of industrial

maintenance - economic evaluation of maintenance policies”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol: 19, Issue: 7, pp. 716 – 737.

Lopponen, P., (1998); “Maintenance Management

development program for 20 production line company”, Euromaintenance ’98 Conference Proceedings, CRO.

Mather, D., (2003), CMMS: A Timesaving

Implementation Process (Plant Engineering), first edition, CRC Press.

Mishra,R. P. and , G. A. R. Kodali (2007), “An

AHP model for quantification of benefits of World-class Maintenance Systems”, International Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering (IJISE), Vol. 2, pp. 166 – 194.

Olafsson S.V., (1990); An analysis for total

productive maintenance implementation, MSc Thesis, Virginia Polytechnic State University, USA.

Reliability Centered Maintenance,

http//www.cecer.army.mil/techreports/NorthrupRCMTR/

Saaty TL (1990). Multicriteria Decision

MakingÐThe Analytic Hierarchy Process-Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation. RWS Publications: Pittsburgh, USA.

Shirose, K., Ed. (1996) “TPM-Total Productive

Maintenance: New Implementation Program in Fabrication and Assembly Industries”, Tokyo, Japan, Japan Institute of Plant Maintenance.

Sherwin D. (2000); “A review of overall models for

maintenance management”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol: 6, Issue: 3, pp 138 – 164.

995