RCM-2009 BrochureInsideMove Forward with Dynamic Performance
MeasuresUPTIME MAGAZINEDECEMBER/JANUARY 2009Using the Right
Performance MeasuresFind Your Eccentric MotorsDriven Nuts by
Squirrel Stores The Neverending Vibration Problemthe magazine for
maintenance & reliability professionalsdec/jan 09Dec_Jan
Cover.indd 1 12/19/08 10:59:10 AMUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 2
11/13/08 10:41:12 PMWeb: books.mro-zone.comToll Free:
1-888-575-1245Uptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 3 11/13/08 10:54:48 PMUptime
Dec-Jan_2008.indd 4 11/13/08 10:54:52 PMUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 5
11/13/08 10:55:05 PMUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 6 11/13/08 10:55:16
PM84844uptimecontentsupfrontupclosebreakthrough performance using
dynamic kpis6824upload1824283438444852 566234upgradefind the mvp
for your plant56www.uptimemagazine.cominformation technologygoing
3d on your pmsinfraredthe lasting value of
windowslubricationexercise your rightsmaintenance managementthe
right measuring stickmotor testingexploring eccentricity in the air
gapprecision maintenancedont get squirrelly with
partsreliability(re)searching for pump mtbfultrasoundtwo is better
than onevibrationstumped...the problem that wouldnt end
38521828Uptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 7 11/15/08 9:33:39 PMWe do a lot
of measuring in maintenance and reliability.Not only do we measure
the physical properties of equipment, the environment in which the
equipment operates and the processes that equipment provides, we
also measure the management of all this equipment and process
(KPIs).In fact, in his Maintenance Management article explaining
the need for metrics standardization, author Walter Nijsen points
out in that the Society of Maintenance and Reliability
Professionals has targeted nearly 100 KPIs that will eventually be
published for companies to use as they see fit.In this maelstrom of
measurement, it is quite easy to get caught up in the numbers for
which our individual unit is responsible.Or, to paraphrase our
feature article author, Dr. Peter Martin, it is easy to become
trapped in our own organizational silo.We concentrate so fully on
what our unit is responsible for producing that we can lose sight
of the only goal that really matters, the overall performance of
our organization.As Dr. Martin points out, it is critical to take a
step back from all the measuring that we do, and simply make sure
we are using the right yardstick.It is of paramount importance that
whatever we measure, we make sure those measurements are pointing
us all in the same direction - that everyone in the organization
has the same over arching goal.According to Martin, where many
organizations fall short is in defining which measurements are used
to grade performance.If different units (operations and
maintenance, for example) in an organization are measured upon
goals that are actually in conflict, that makes it quite difficult
to form a cohesive team.It is a fascinating article, and one that I
hope will provide an impetus for us to examine the yardsticks we
use to measure ourselves.Also, please take a look at the
information in this issue about the Reliability Centered
Maintenance/Enterprise Asset Management Conference, RCM/EAM-2009,
in Daytona Beach, FL, which is taking place March 23th-26th.This
event will also include M-Train, which focuses on helping you build
the most effective maintenance and reliability training program for
your company.It is an outstanding opportunity to hone your skills
and improve your professional understanding.These days, I know full
well that many training and education budgets are very tight and
under scrutiny, but this event will be well worth the time and
money invested.I hope you enjoy this issue.As always, thank you for
reading.We appreciate your support, and hope you find value within
these pages.If you have any questions, comments or suggestions that
will make Uptime more useful to you, please let us know.upfrontThe
Right Yardstick uptimePUBLISHERTerrence OHanlonEDITOR IN
CHIEFJeffrey C ShulerEDITORIAL ADVISORS/CONTRIBUTING
EDITORSADVERTISING SALESBill Partipilo888-575-1245 x
[email protected] INFORMATIONPlease address
submissions of casestudies, procedures, practical tipsand other
correspondence to Jeff Shuler, Editor In ChiefUptime MagazinePO Box
60075Ft. Myers, FL 33906888-575-1245 x
[email protected] subscribe to Uptime,
log onwww.uptimemagazine.comUptime(ISSN1557-0193)ispublishedmonthly
by Reliabilityweb.com, PO Box 60075, Ft. Myers, FL 33906,
888-575-1245.In the U.S. Uptime is a registered trademark of
Reliabilityweb.com.No partofUptimemaybereproducedinanyform by any
means without prior written consent from
Reliabilityweb.com.Uptimeisanindependentlyproduced
publicationofReliabilityweb.com.Theopinions
expressedhereinarenotnecessarilythoseof
Reliabilityweb.com.Copyright2008byReliabilityweb.com.All rights
reserved.volume 4, issue 32Ron EshlemanGreg StocktonRay
ThibaultJack Nicholas, Jr.Dr. Howard PenroseJames HallAlan
JohnstonJay Lee, PhDJohn MitchellJason Tranterdecember/january
20096POSTMASTER:Sendaddresschangesto:
UptimeMagazinePOBox60075,Ft.Myers, FL 33906.All the best,Jeff
ShulerEditor In [email protected] association
for maintenance professionalsUptime Magazine is a founding member
ofUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 8 11/17/08 10:32:28 AMCopyright 2008,
IOtech. All trademarks are property of their respective holders.
For a complete listing of IOtech worldwide sales offices, see
www.iotech.com/sales. 081003. UT.T H E L E A D E R I N D A T A A C
Q U I S I T I O N S O L U T I O N STake control of your Predictive
Maintenance.iotech.com/eZtomas(888)[email protected]
interface software for rotating machine monitoring &
analysisNEW eZ-TOMAS Remote Rotating machine analysisand monitoring
from anywhere on your network Up to 32 TOMAS installations can be
monitored simultaneously Multiple remote locations may monitor a
single acquisition systemContact us today!Uptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd
9 11/13/08 10:57:46 PMby Dr. Peter G. MartinOut of
Many...december/january 2009Pointing the Whole Organization in the
Same Direction8OneUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 10 11/15/08 9:41:21
PM9www.uptimemagazine.comlthoughhugequantitiesoftechnologyandintellectual
property have been invested into the efficient and
ef-fectiveoperationofindustrialplantsoverthepast century, many
plants are still not operating to full po-tential. At least part of
the reason for this has been the lack of focus on the value that
the human assets can generate given a supportive,
collaborativeandempoweringenvironmentinwhichtoperform.
Mobilizingthevaluablehumanassetstoapproachtheirfullper-formance
potential has been proven to result in a new operational
paradigmwhichmaximizesthebusinessperformancethroughall plant
assets.This new paradigm is labeled asset performance
man-agement.Dealing with LaborA considerable contributing factor in
the engine that can drive toward effective asset performance
management is a fundamental change in mindset and culture that is a
holdover from the industrial revolution. Changing such a mindset
requires that we first understand what it is and where it
originated.As industrialization started to ramp up in North America
and Western Europe, one resource that was abundant was people to
work the plants and factories.Unfortu-nately, the vast majority of
the available human resources were uneducated and unskilled.From
the perspective of todays cultureitmaybehard to
re-latetohowuneducatedthesepeoplereallywere.Mostcouldnot read,
write or do even basic arithmetic.This led to a huge industrial
challenge how to take advantage of such a resource.This challenge
was met by Frederick Taylor, who developed an approach called
Sci-entific Management, which focused on gaining maximum value from
an uneducated workforce.In todays vernacular, Scientific
Manage-ment essentially turned people into minimally functional
robots, each
performingawellcontainedandwelldefinedfunctionwithinthe context of
the operation of the entire plant or factory.For example,
apersonmayhavebeentrainedtowatchagaugeandkeepitina certain
range.When the needle moved out of the range, the worker would turn
a hand valve in one direction.When the needle moved out of range in
the other direction, he turned the valve in the other
direction.This person might join the workforce of the factory at 16
years old and retire 50 years later having performed that contained
task his entire career.This led to the concept of a labor force in
in-dustrial companies which was so unskilled that management
believed it could not be trusted to perform duties beyond menial
tasks.In es-sence, the laborers were almost treated as a kind of
industrial
slave.Thisviewofthelaborforcewasexacerbatedwiththeintroduction
ofautomationtechnologies.Inmanycases,theautomationtech-nologiesweredevelopedtoperformthesamefunctionslaborers
had performed.For example, automatic controllers providing direct
manipulation of control valves essentially were replacing the
laborer whohadpreviouslybeenstationedatthatvalve.Earlyautomation
advancementsmayhaveallowedasinglelaborertoperformthe scope of
functionality that six or eight laborers had previously been
doing.As computer-based automation systems were in-troduced,single
operators may have been able to over-see functionality thatAUptime
Dec-Jan_2008.indd 11 11/16/08 1:17:36 PMdecember/january
2009information technologies, organizational silos
haveworkedtodestroyanypotentialvalue that may have been created by
the technolo-gy.I was recently attending an industrial
con-ferenceinwhichanengineerestimatedthat over 80% of all advanced
control that has been implementedinindustrialplantshasbeen
turnedoffbytheprocessoperatorsbecause
theoperatorsdonttrustit.Ifengineering and operations had a better
working relation-ship, based on common goals and objectives,
thismightnotbethecase.Organizational
siloshavetendedtosub-optimizeplantper-formancebysub-optimizingthehumanper-formance
within the plants.Perhaps it is time
forindustrytostartmovingawayfromlong
over-wornprejudicesandconsiderusingthe valuable human resources
more effectively to drive better plant performance.Measuring
PerformanceYouareprobablyfamiliarwiththecommon adage is: people
perform to their measures. Ibelievethatthisisverytrue.Mostpeople
wanttobeevaluatedpositively,andifthey
knowthatmeasuresofperformanceexist for which they will be held
accountable, they willstrivetomakethosemeasuresmovein
thecorrectdirection.Thisistruewhether the measures are driving
desired behaviors or not.For example, measuring maintenance on
asset availability and operations on asset
uti-lizationdoesnotencouragethecooperative
behaviorsmostindustrialleaderswouldlike to see.In the early periods
of industrialization, prior to the many inventions that drove the
indus-trial revolution, most shops measured
perfor-manceaseachproductwasproduced.Pro-ductionwassoslowthataccountingforthe
business on the basis of piecemeal production was easily
achieved.Management and opera-torsofthesefirmsknewexactlyhowthey
wereperformingcomparedtotheirplanat all times.But with the
introduction of tools,
suchasthepowerloominthetextileindus-try,thepaceofproductionincreasedtothe
pointthatpiecemealaccountingwasnolon-ger feasible.The result was
that industrial op-erationscompromisedandbeganmeasuring
thebusinessperformancethroughmonthly
accountingmethods.Theprimaryoutputof
thesesystemsformeasuringmanufacturing performance was, and in most
cases today still is, the variance report.Variance reports
basi-cally report the cost per unit product made for
eachproductproducedoverthepastmonth and displays this against a
previously predict-ed expected value, referred to as the standard
10viewed as the unskilled, uneducated laborers of the early
industrial revolution. Organizational
SilosHavingworkedwithindustrialorganizations for over three
decades, I have frequently heard
therejoinderthatislandsofautomation
aretoblameforthedifficultiesindevelop-inghigherperformingoperations.Although
thereiscertainlymuchtruthtothis,Ihave found that islands of
organization within in-dustrial companies present a much more
for-midable barrier to performance improvement.
Asindustrializationtookholdandgrew,the
complexitiesintroducedtomanufacturing businesses became very
challenging.In early industrial plants the same person might
oper-ateandmaintaintheequipment,designand
commissionnewproductionareasandeven
accountforthebusiness.Asmorecomplex manufacturing systems have
evolved, this lev-el of generalization is just not feasible, which
has led to the era of specialization.
Professionalsspecializedinengineering,ac-counting,management,purchasingofmate-rialsandshippingoffinishedproductswhile
frontlinelaborspecializedinoperationsand maintenance of the
equipment.This naturally resulted in separation of departments by
func-tion which, in turn, led to organizational silos. The
development of specialists was necessary
totheoperationoftheincreasinglycomplex plants, but the development
of organizational silos resulted in huge inefficiencies across
or-ganizations.Todayitisnotunusualtofind maintenance departments
that never directly communicatewithoperationsorproduction teams.In
some organizations they dont even like or trust each other.Adding
to this, many IT organizations dontlike or trust engineer-ing, and
the feelings are mutual.And nobody seems to get along well with
accounting.Inmanycases,theperformancemeasures
usedtoevaluatetheperformanceofone group are in direct conflict with
those of a sec-ond group.For example, maintenance teams are often
measured on the availability of criti-cal equipment assets while
operators are mea-suredontheutilizationoftheassets.Asset
availabilityandassetutilizationareinverse
functions.Thatis,toincreaseutilizationof-ten requires the sacrifice
of some availability andviceversa.Underthisscenario,itisno
wonderoperationsandmaintenanceteams seldom get along well.As
industry has invested huge amounts of cap-ital into
efficiency-increasing automation and
wouldhaverequiredfiftypeopleinthepast.
Thebasicvaluepropositionfortheintroduc-tionofautomationtechnologywastypically
basedonheadcountreductionsthatcouldbe
achieved.Manymanufacturesseemtohave viewed these reductions as a
double benefit to the company.First was the cost reduction for not
having to pay the displaced laborers.But
secondwasthethoughtthattherewouldbe less of the low-level laborers
to have to manage and worry about.
Theculminationofthetechnologyreplacing
peopletrendtookplaceinthe1980swhen
anumberofmanagementscientistsanden-gineerssupportedanotionreferredtoas
lights-out manufacturing.The thought
pro-cessbehindthistrendwasthattechnology
mayhaveadvancedtothepointatwhichno
frontlineworkerswouldberequiredatall, and without people in the
plants there would benoneedtoturnonthelights.Thiswas
ashort-livedmovementduetothefactthat the technologists found they
could not antici-pate every possible issue or problem that may
arise in a plant and that at least some number of people must be in
the plant, if for nothing else, at least contingency responses.All
of this has left a residual mindset in both
industrialmanagementandengineeringthat
frontlinepersonnelareanecessaryevilthat
wouldbeeliminatedifpossible.Thishas further led to an attitude
prevalent across in-dustry that the actions and activities of these
frontline laborers have to be contained to only those essential to
keep the plant operating.A goodexampleofthismindsetcanbefound in
the design approach taken to the software
inindustrialworkstations.Thissoftwareis
designedaroundtheconceptofoperation by exception, which basically
means that the
processoperatorisnotsupposedtodoany-thingiftheprocessisoperatinginareason-able
manner (except, perhaps read the sports page).When something
unexpected happens, analarmwillcausetheoperatortofollowa
predefinedprocedurethatshouldbringthe alarm condition under
control.Once the alarm conditionhasbeenaddressed,theoperator
goesbacktothenewspaper.Additionally,
engineershavedevelopedanddeployedad-vance control and other
advanced techniques designed to operate the plant better than the
operators could by themselves.The attitude
ofprotectingtheplantfromthefrontlinela-borers has continued, even
while the average education and skill level of the labor force has
beensteadilyrising.Ihavebeenincontrol
roomsinwhichthefrontlineprocessopera-tors all had college
educations, and were still Uptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 12 11/14/08
6:59:44
PM11www.uptimemagazine.commonthlymeasures,frontlinepersonneloften
finddailymeasurestoolongatimeframeto
offeractionablefeedback.Asingleoperator
maymakehundredsofspecificactionseach
day,andanoveralldailymeasuredoesnot provide the timeliness for them
to understand theperformanceimpactofanyspecificac-tion.
Tomakemattersworse,KPIstendtohave
littlecredibilitywithaccountants,whosejob
itistomeasurethebusinessperformance.
AlthoughmanyKPIsmayreportinmonetary terms, accountants often have
great difficulty reconcilingthevaluesreportedthoughthe KPIs with
the values in the accounting reports.
Whenthishappens,theaccountinginforma-tion clearly takes precedent.I
actually heard one CFO say, If one more engineer comes to
mewithonemoreKPItellingmehowmuch value he has created, Ill fire his
$&*! OneotherdeficiencywithKPIsisthatthey have evolved to
support management report-ing rather than actionable
feedback.Report-ing measures are used to report performance
tomanagers,whileactionablemeasuresare
usedtoprovideguidancetopeoplesothey
cantakebetteractionsthroughbetterdeci-sionmaking.Bothreportingmeasuresand
actionablemeasuresareimportanttoplant operation.However, the
actionable measures have been found to drive positive changes in
behavior,whichresultsinperformanceim-provements,whichwill,inturn,improvethe
reporting measures.Dynamic Performance
MeasuresThevalueofaneffectiveandcomprehensive
performancemeasurementsystemcannot
beoverstatedwhenitsworkingtodrivein-creasedlevelsofperformancefromplantas-sets.Industryhasreachedthepointwhere
theperformancemeasuresthatencourage
theorganizationalsilomentalityhavetobe abandoned in favor of
measures that drive col-laborationbetweentraditionallycompeting
functions.Anewapproachtoperformance
measurementisrequiredthatcombinesthe goodness of accounting and
operational mea-sures, provides performance measures for
ev-erypersonintheoperation,withinthetime
frameinwhichtheydotheirjobandforthe same domain for which they are
responsible. Such performance measures are referred to as
dynamicperformancemeasures(DPMs,See Figure 1, next page).The first
issue that has to be addressed in de-veloping a DPM approach is the
availability of costfortheproductclass.Thisinformation
maybeacceptableforreportingmanufac-turingperformance,butithaslittlevaluein
enablingtheplantpersonneltochangetheir behaviors to improve the
performance of the operation.Theinformationinthevariance
reportsisbothtoolittle(providingabroad
plant-wideperspective)andtoolate(after
themonthisover)tobeofanyvaluetothe
peopleactuallyworkingtokeeptheplants
operating.Monthlyaccountingsystemsforreportingof manufacturing and
business performance
rep-resentedacompromiseintroducedtoindus-tryoutofnecessity.Thetoolsjustdidnot
existtomeasureplantperformanceasthe plant was running.Over many
years, industry got lulled into believing that monthly financial
reporting was a best practice that should
nev-erbechallenged.Accountingprofessionals earned Masters Degrees
on how to do month-ly accounting.Once degrees are conferred on how
to do any practice, it is very challenging
toeverquestionthevalidityofthepractice
again.Therefore,whendigitalcomputers were generally introduced into
industrial op-erations during the 1960s and 1970s, nobody
seemedtoraisethequestionastowhether
accountingandperformancemeasurement systems might be able to be
developed to ac-countforoperationsasoriginallyintended as the
products are made - in real
time.Sincemonthlyaccountingmeasuresfromin
costaccountingsystemsprovedtobefairly useless in directing the
actions of the opera-tionsandmaintenanceteams,anumberof leading
industrial companies started to
devel-opadifferentsetofoperationsperformance
measurementstosupplementtheaccount-ingsystemsbyprovidingmoreactionable
feedbacktoplantpersonnel.Themeasures produced by these systems are
commonly re-ferred to as key performance indicators (KPIs). These
KPIs were not developed to replace the accounting measures, rather
they were devel-oped because engineers and managers did not
viewthemeasuresproducedintheaccount-ing systems as adequate for
directing perfor-manceandimprovingactionsintheplant. KPIs were
typically developed to measure dif-ferent operational silos within
plants, such as maintenance, operations and engineering.By
focusingonspecificfunctions,theytendto offer better resolution, as
well as better time-liness,thanaccountingmeasures.However, by being
functionally focused, they also tend to discourage cooperation
between organiza-tionalgroups.Eventhoughdailymeasures provided a
great leap forward from traditional Uptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 13
11/14/08 6:59:46 PMCIOs. CTOs. CHIEF ENGINEERS. O&M, CAPITAL
ASSET AND PROJECT MANAGERSDiscover the Most Innovative Ideas,
Practices and Technologies at the Worlds Leading Plant Asset
Lifecycle Management Event.15TH ANNUALA must-attend forum for users
and sellers of 3D imaging technologyNew for 2009! PLANT ASSET
SCANNING SUMMITImage courtesy of COADE, Inc.February 23-25, 2009
Hilton AmericasHOUSTON, TX NEW, LARGER downtown venue in the heart
of the Global Energy IndustryDont miss our biggest conference
program ever for O/Os and EPCs in: Chemicals/Petrochemicals Oil
& Gas Energy/Power
ShipbuildingSPONSORSEXHIBITORSSynergisSoftwareAceCadSOFTWAREREGISTER
by December 31stto get the best rates at www.daratechplant.com or
call Jill Dean at 832-242-1969, ext. 316Sponsoring
Organization:Organized by:3DS ArTrA CAD Schroer CAXperts GmbH CSA
ECE Design GSN Technologies PlP Total CAD Systems vR Context Z+F UK
LTDUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 14 11/13/08 10:58:40
PM13www.uptimemagazine.comoperation.This information can then be
presented on a performance dash-board contextualized to each
persons responsibility.These are the DPMs of the frontline
operators.Developing these DPMs requires a real
timecomputerenginethathasbuilt-in modeling capability. This is
exactly whatastandardautomationsystem
is.TheseDPMsmustthenbeaggran-dizedtoprovideperformancemea-sures in
real time for every other func-tionwithintheplant.Thiscaneasily
beaccomplishedbyusingastandard
processhistorianwhichcanalsode-velophourly,shift,daily,weeklyand
monthlyaccumulationsoftheDPMs. Theavailabilityofacomprehensive,
real time, bottom to top performance measurement system provides
the po-tential to drive improved performance
inanumberofwayspreviouslyun-available to industrial operations. The
basicvalueimprovementthatcanbe realized through better individual
per-formance of frontline personnel, who can immediately see how
their actions impact
plantperformance,hasbeenproventopro-videhugeperformancegains.However,this
is only a starting point.A New Perspective on Asset Performance
ManagementThe availability of DPMs enables asset
perfor-mancemanagementinwayspreviouslyun-available.Aspreviouslymentioned,
traditionalassetmanagementin-volves operators driving the assets to
maximizeassetutilizationandmain-tenancemaintainingtheassetsto
drivemaximumassetavailability.It
isimportanttounderstandthatnei-therassetavailability,norassetutili-zation,isameasureofthebusiness
objectivesofanyplant.Sincethey areinversefunctions,operatorsand
maintenanceteamsarefrequentlyat odds with each other.So, in
essence, traditional performance measurement
systemstendtodiscouragecoopera-tion and collaboration.
Itsquiteusefultouseananalogy from the world of sports since nearly
allprofessionalsportsareperfor-mance-driven.Inautomobileracing,
thedriverisanalogoustotheopera-torsinindustrialplantsandthepit
crewsareanalogoustothemainte-a database that provides real time
input data.Fortunately, in most industrial plants, such a database
is readily available intheformofplantsensors.
Plantsensorscontinually
measurephysicalandchemi-calproperties,suchasflow,
level,temperature,pressure, speedandcompositionof process variables
in real time. Theyaretypicallyaccessible bytheinstalledautomation
systems and are used to mon-itorandcontroltheprocess.
Sincebothaccountingand operationalmeasurescan
bedefinedviaequations,an experienced engineer can de-velop models
of the equations in the automation system and determine which
sensors can be used to populate the mod-elsneededtocalculatethe
DPMs.The net result is a set ofperformancemeasuresfor each process
unit or work cell in the plant. In most plants there are simply too
many mea-sures for any one frontline person to deal with in real
time.When working in real time
envi-ronments,suchasdrivingacaroroperating
aplant,ergonomicresearchhasdetermined that most people can only
consider up to four competing measures at a time.The question is
which four measures are most appropriate
foreachpersonintheoperation.Thiscan bedeterminedbytaking
thecurrentmanufacturing strategyintoconsideration.
Dr.ThomasVollmannde-velopedastrategyanalysis approachthatcanbevery
helpfulindeterminingthe DPMs for each person in the
operation.TheVollmann Triangle diagram (See Figure
2)ishelpfulinunderstand-inghisapproach.Hepoints
outthateveryplantshould beworkingtoastrategy designedtomaximizethe
economic value of the plant outputwithintheexternal and internal
environment in which the plant is operating. Each manufacturing
strategy should be defined by a set of
actionablestrategicobjec-tives for the plant.An action
plan,inwhicheachaction stepismeasurable,shouldbedevelopedfor each
objective.The measures that fall out of the action steps are the
strategic performance measures of the plant.These measures can be
decomposed through the physical areas, units
andmajorassetsoftheplanttodetermine
themostimportantmeasuresforeachpro-cessunitaccordingtothecurrentstrategy.
Thiscanthenbeusedtoprioritizethereal
timeKPIandaccountingmeasuresforeach
personthatimpactstheperformanceofthe Figure 1 - Creating Dynamic
Performance MeasuresDynamic Performance MeasuresDynamic
PerformanceMeasures1.Line Performance/OEE2.Energy
Costs3.Contribution Margin4.Perfect OrderOEECycle
TimeWaste/ProductionFirst Pass YieldContribution MarginEnergy1
CostEnergy2 CostMaterial1 CostProduction ValueBusiness
GuidanceProduction ProcessManufacturing StrategyReal TimeKPIsReal
TimeAccountingFigure 2 - Using the Vollman Triangle to Apply
Strategic Decomposition ProcessStrategic DecompositionProduction
ProcessCorporatePlantDivisionUnitStrategyAction MeasureVollman
TriangleAreaUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 15 11/14/08 7:01:17
PMdecember/january 200914nance teams. In interviewing a NASCAR
driver and a pit crew chief, I noticed how well they
tendedtocooperate.Iaskedthemif,asis common in industrial plants,
the pit crew was measured on the availability of the car and the
operatormeasuredontheutilization.They
toldmethatalthoughutilizationandavail-ability(ormaintainedstate,whichmaybea
much better measure than classic availability) are important, the
primary measure of both is winningtherace.Iaskedthepitcrewchief if,
upon detecting a problem with the car that might negatively impact
the maintained state, hewouldcallthecarintothepit.Hesaid, Only if
the problem means we wont win the race.Then I asked the driver if
he would re-fusetocomeintothepitifcalledinbythe
crewchief.Hesaid,noway,Iknowheis calling me in because Ill lose the
race if some-thing is not done.You see, for both parties, the
primary focus is winning.And since they have a shared focus, they
not only trust each other, but they cooperate extremely well.So
howcanwedefinewinningforfrontline
maintenanceteamsandoperatorsinindus-trial plants to engender the
same level of co-operation and even collaboration?Most plant
management teams are measured ondrivingthemaximumproductionvalue
from the plant assets over an extended period of time.Certainly the
utilization and availabil-ity of each plant asset impacts business
value, but neither should be treated as the primary measure of
performance of any industrial
op-eration.Therealvictoryinindustrialplants
isdrivingthemaximumbusinessvaluefrom each plant asset over time.If
every operator andmaintenancepersonhasaprimarymea-sure based on
this win, the behaviors of each will change drastically and the
behavior of the plantwillfollowsuit.Industrialcompanies must
empower frontline teams with the infor-mation, in the form of DPMs,
which will drive bothcollaborationandcontinuouslyimprov-ing
business value from all plant
assets.AssetPerformanceManagement(APM)driv-enbyDPMsresultsinoperationsandmain-tenanceworkingtogethertobalanceplant
operationsforoptimalbusinessvalueinall circumstances.The primary
measure of both
frontlineteamsisbusinessvalue.Second-arymeasuresformaintenanceincludethe
maintainedstateoftheequipmentandthe probability of a failure over
time.Secondary measuresforoperationsincludeoperation
tomaintainedstateandtheprobabilityofa
failureovertime.WithallDPMsprioritized to the manufacturing
strategy in place, every personintheorganizationwillbepullingin
thesamedirection.Theywillallbefocused on winning. They will all be
focused on do-ingtheirpart,but,evenmoreproductively, doing it
within the context of the overall per-formance of the
operation.Aninterestingsymmetrydevelopsbetween
operationsteamsandmaintenanceteams
whenatrueassetperformancemanagement approach is taken.Both
operations and main-tenancehaveadvancedinthreestepswith the
evolution of technology in each area over
time.Technologyimpactedoperationsby first providing regulatory
control, followed by advancedcontrol,thenfollowedbyprocess
optimization.Maintenance had a similar pro-gression from reactive,
to preventive and then topredictivemaintenance.Aseachprogres-sion
was underway, the KPIs for each function were used to measure
progress.The next step, asset performance management, occurs when
thetwofrontlinefunctionsconvergearound
newmeasuresofperformancethatcombine
accountingandoperationalmeasuresinto
acomprehensive,prioritizedperformance measurement system called
DPM.This is the pointatwhichcrosssilocollaborationtakes hold and
breakthrough levels of performance are attained.SummaryIndustry is
on the verge of a major new wave
inperformanceimprovementdrivenbycol-laborationacrossorganizationalsilosguided
byDynamicPerformanceMeasures.Forthis new wave to really take hold,
industrial man-agement and engineering have to escape from
theresidueoftheindustrialrevolutionand stop thinking of operations
and maintenance teams as an unskilled, uneducated labor force.
Frontlinepersonnelareresponsibleformak-Uptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 16
11/14/08 7:01:22
PMwww.uptimemagazine.com15Amidstreamcompanyinthenaturalgasbusinesshasalarge
gathering network throughout the Southwest.Operating in the
U.S.,CanadaandEurope,thenaturalgaswholesalerdealsin trading,
marketing, transmission processing and distribution of both natural
gas and electricity.
Anextremelycompetitivemarketandhigh-volumedemand
haveforcedmidstreamcompaniestopushtheirtransmission and gathering
systems to full capacity.Pushing aging systems
tomaximumproductioncausesariseinsystembreakdowns and compressor
failures.Balancing maximum production with minimum machine failure
is essential to optimizing asset perfor-mance.In other words, this
company needed to get as much to-tal running time out of its eld
equipment and reduce the mean time between failure or scheduled
maintenance.The user knew
thatthesetwoobjectivesutilizationandoptimizationare
functionalopposites,andtheyrequirenewmethodstodeter-mine the ideal
mix for operations.They needed a system that
combinedbothofthesefunctionstoprovidereal-timeasset performance
management.
Previously,maintenancemanage-mentwasjustschedulingemer-gency repair
with periodic service. Inaddition,theoperationsgroup
wasreactingtomachinefailure as it happened, without regard for
planned production schedules. Op-erationsneededtondawayto
manageitsassetsforthegreatest uptimetoproducegasmoreef-ciently and
to minimize equipment failure and subsequent
costs.MaintenanceandOperationsman-agerscouldutilizeriskmanage-menttoolstodeterminehowto
act, if machine health and the time to failure could be
estimated.This key informationwould allow main-tenance and
operation managers to answer key questions such as: Can the machine
make it to the next scheduled PM? and
CanImeetmyproductionschedulewiththemachineinthis condition?Process
operators could then manage their process and determine how to act
to minimize losses and optimize eco-nomic benets.Another customer
challenge came from the shear competitive-ness of the market.Gas
gathering and delivery is a
commod-itymarket,requiringmaximumthroughputatmaximumasset
utilization and absolute low cost.Any technology upgrade must have
a measurable and sustainable Return on Investment.A lim-ited staff
to maximize prots has also strained the maintenance organization,
which further complicated production efforts. The customer had
invested in data systems that are useful for condition monitoring,
but had not closed the loop from data to diagnostics to maintenance
planning to operations forecasting. They had the data, but it was
difcult to correlate across their manysystemsintheeld.
Asystemthatwouldintegrateall the different inputs to actually
analyze and generate actionable
resultswasacriticalneed.Thechallengewastodetermine preventable
downtime leading to lost opportunity from pipeline production.They
also needed to estimate the production time they could recover from
this improved use of the data. THE SOLUTION
AnEnterpriseControlSystem(ECS)provideanumberofben-ets to this
customer.Perhaps the most important element that
yieldsrealassetperformancebenetsistheuseofreal-time
processdata.DynamicPerformanceIndicatorsweregenerat-ed by taking
inputs from a variety of real-time measurements from plant oor
devices.A key element to the solution for this company is the
ability of the Invensis InFusion ECSto model typical machine
behavior through all operating conditions and
generatealertsthatidentifythedeviationoffailingcompo-nents from
normal operation.An incident alarm, based on multiple sensor
condition rules, denes the machineconditionandprovides diagnostics
for failure mode anal-ysis.Sensor alert tolerances
inci-dentandalarmrulesaredened by the user.Thecompanywasdoingallit
couldtomanagetheinputsfrom thesensorsandtosubsequently
makeeducateddecisionsbased
onitsprocessknowledge.How-ever,theInFusionECSallowed
theusertotakethereal-time controlinformationandpushit
through.Ultimately, the InFusion
ECSfunctionedinatrulycollab-orative method, with these major
improvements: Asset Performance Management Leads to Major
Improvements for Gas Field OperatorAsset Performance Management
Balances Utilization and AvailabilityUTILIZATIONAVAILABILITYAsset
Economic ValueAsset Performance ManagementProcess OptimizationAsset
Management1. Real-time process control data brought in critical
measurements2. Multiple protocols and multiple devices were easily
cong-ured by the InFusion Distributed Control System layer using
the InFusion Engineering Environment 3. Real time process
measurements were fed into Avantis soft-ware, Invensys asset
intelligence system, to predict critical and non-critical
failures4. Dynamic Performance Measures were generated from a Watch
List which created an Asset Optimization result5. Corrective
maintenance activities were acted upon based on a nancial impact
basis 6. Work orders were automatically delivered to
MaintenanceengineersUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 17 11/14/08 7:01:31
PM16december/january 200916ing, or losing, most industrial
opera-tions more money minute by minute than any other group in
industry.It is time we start treating them as the
performancemanagerstheyareby empowering them with DPMs.
Ontopofthis,industrialmanage-mentmuststarttobreakdownthe
organizationalsilosthathaveex-istedinplantsfordecadeswhile
simultaneouslypreservingthespe-cialized knowledge and capability of
eachteamintheplant.Again,this can be achieved by empowering the
teams with the correct performance measuresthatdefinethewinfor
thebusiness.Whenthisisaccom-plished,theresultisanewperfor-mance-generatingcollaborative
approachtoplantoperationcalled asset performance management.As-set
performance management is the industrial performance wave that is
just starting to crest. Those industrial concerns that catch this
wave willbetheperformanceleadersofthisnew millennium.Peter G.
Martin, PhD, D. Eng., joined The Foxboro Company in the 1970s and
has worked in a variety of positions in training, engineering,
product planning, marketing and strategic planning.He left Foxboro
to become Vice President at Intech Controls and also at Automation
Research Corpora-tion before returning to Invensys in 1996.Since
his return, he has been VP of Marketing for Foxboro and Chief
Marketing Officer for Invensys Manufacturing and Process Systems
prior to moving into his current position, VP Strategic Ventures.He
has written two books: Bottom Line Automation and Dynamic
Perfor-mance Management: The Pathway to World Class
Manufacturing.Dr. Martin holds multiple patents, including the
patent for Dynamic Performance Measures, Real-Time Activity-Based
Costing, Closed-loop business control, and Asset and Resource
Modeling, which are the basis for Fortune recently naming him a
Hero of U.S. Manufacturing.He was also recently named as one of the
50 Most Influential Innova-tors of All Time by the Instrument,
Systems and Automation Society (ISA).Dr. Martin has BA and MS
degrees in Mathemat-ics, an MA degree in Administration and
Man-agement, a Master of Biblical Studies degree, and a D. Eng in
Industrial Engineering and a PhD in Biblical Studies.ISO-Based
Training & CertificationVibration Institute follows ISO 18436:2
for certification and ISO/DIS 18436:3 for trainingThe Vibration
Institute began training vibrationanalysts in 1973. Certification
of vibration analystsbegan in 1993.Each of the Institutes certified
instructors havemore than 25 years of field experience.Analysts
trained by the Vibration Institute arealways welcome to contact the
Institute for expertadvice from an individual, not a
computer.Vibration Institute6262 South Kingery Highway, Suite
212Willowbrook, Illinois 60527For more information call
630/654-2254 orvisit our website at www.vibinst.orgFigure 3 - Asset
Performance Management ProcessAsset Performance
ManagementProduction ProcessAsset
ManagementDynamicPerformanceMeasuresMaintenanceKPIsOperationsManagementAssetPerformanceManagementOptimization
PredictivePreventiveReactiveProcessControlAdvancedControlProductionKPIsUptime
Dec-Jan_2008.indd 18 11/14/08 7:01:34 PMVisit www.maintenance.org
to join the fastest growing professional maintenance
organization.Its free.Markthe dates for theseAMP events planned in
2009 on your calendarAs part of its mission to facilitate and
support learning, networking and real world examples of reliability
in action, the Association for Maintenance Professionals (AMP)
hosted a Breakthrough Learning Exchange at the Timken Campus in
Canton, Ohio and a plant tour and at the nearby Faircrest Steel
mill on October 19th.Over 50 maintenance professionals gathered to
meet new friends in the maintenance profession, hear three
enlightening presentations and get a behind the scenes look at a
plant producing high-end steel.Presenters included:Terrence
OHanlon, Publisher of Reliabilityweb.com and Uptime magazine, Jason
Tranter, Managing Director of the Mobius Institute and Steve Smith,
Timken Steel Maintenance Manager.The day was full of learning,
exchange and community building, all of which AMP will continue to
facilitate throughout 2009 and beyond.The Association of
Maintenance Professionals would like to extend a special thanks to
Timken for your generous support of the maintenance and
reli-ability community.April 14thWind Energy ReliabilityTimken
Campus Canton, OhioThis learning/networking event will introduce
reliability management concepts to wind energy operators.Watch for
more program details and registration information at:
http://www.maintenanceconference.comJune 16thGreen
ReliabilityTimken CampusCanton, OhioThis learning and networking
event will focus on quick payback areas for reducing industrial
plant energy usage such as compressed air, steam, building leaks
using ultrasound, infrared etc...September 22ndExecutive Level
Plant Asset Reliability ForumTimken CampusCanton OhioThis event is
a business level event geared toward Directors, Vice Presidents and
C-Level executives to discuss competitive business ad-vantages and
the strategic benefts of reliability improvements as well as
provide an executive roadmap they can use to begin the process
within their own companies.Thank YouMost of the group at Timkens
World HQFaircrest Steel MillUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 19 11/14/08
2:11:45 PMdecember/january 2009The Third Dimension Optimizing Your
PMs in 3-Dby Ed Stanek, Jr and Tibor Jung information
technologyuploadwide variety of conditions have elevated visibility
of the term PMOptimization, and it is now on everyones reliability
radar.Whether its the demand for greater asset reliability,
survival of impending maintenance reductions, or searching for the
perfect complementary effort to partner with an RCM program,
PMOpti-mization may be the missing link in your reliability
efforts.The question isnt so much Is PMOptimiza-tion the right
path?, but what to do once youve begun. The term itself,
PMOptimization evokes a feeling of established process evolution,
control, and confi-dence (implying that we all should be doing it
to some degree), but defining PMOptimization may be more difficult
than it appears.Few maintenance and reliabil-ity initiatives have
had such a clear and direct title with such an undefined process
behind it, as the definition differs greatly depending upon whom
you ask.Ranging from individual efforts to scrubbing PMs, to a
less-painful version of RCM (RCM-Lite), each optimize to some
degree but miss the totality in which Optimiza-tion can be
implemented.To completely optimize means targeting both the
effec-tiveness (failure avoidance), of which we are all familiar,
as well as the often overlooked efficiency opportunities hidden
within the existing PMs.This picture is com-pleted in a formal,
eleven-step 3-dimensional approach which takes full advantage of
all opportunities found within the PM.PM, typically short for
Preventive Maintenance, has many varying definitions, but for the
sake of this article, we will refer to PM as Regularly scheduled
activities performed on equipment to prevent, detect or predict
failure, and maintain operating parameters as required by the
user.The abbreviation PM is expanded here to include any activity
that fits this definition, includ-ing Preventive Maintenance,
Predictive Maintenance (or Condition-based Monitoring), Operator
tasks & inspec-tions (sometimes part of a TPM program),
etc.While PMs can come in many different forms from checklists, to
paragraphs of procedures and detailed instructions; in order to
optimize a PM, individual tasks within the PM text must be
isolated.A PM task protects required equipment functions against
specific failure modes.In short, you cannot optimize a whole PM.You
can only optimize individual PM tasks within a PM.It is also
important to understand that while failures happen to the function,
they typically happen at a component level.The definition of PM
Optimization then is to ensure that PM tasks provide the required
protection at the component level as defined above, using minimal
required resources.3-Dimensional PMOptimizationSM is a process
which first opens capacity and elevates effectiveness through
Initial Optimization (the 1st dimension), and continues to dial in
the process through an ongoing PM Task Pass/Fail Analysis (the 2nd
dimension) and Equipment Reliability Analysis (the 3rd
dimension).It requires only a fraction of the time and resources of
other methods, and typically results in: 40% Reduction in PM Labor
Hours 35% Reduction in Scheduled Downtime 50-100% Increase in PM
CoverageWhy arent PMs optimized today?There are many rea-sons
contributing to the very conditions we are trying to improve, some
of which are: PMs that are developed from equipment manuals Highly
visible failures can lead to more & more PM activities PMs
copied across many pieces of equipment (generic PMs) CMMS
limitations which dont provide the ability to develop, manage or
optimize PMs.They simply provide a space to place them, assuming
they were built in an optimized manor, and have limited abil- ity
to analyze the PM Effectiveness at a task level. We already have a
backlog, so staff 18AEditors Note: We published this article with
specifc references to 3Dimensional PMOptimizationSM software in
order to tell more people about potential solutions as maintenance
and reliability information management evolves.We did not want to
make it generic.There are other unique software products that we
will also be presenting to you in Uptime.In order to bring you the
full impact of the capabilities of some of these new technologies -
we have decided to allow product specifcity - not as an endorsement
- but to create an enhanced understanding of the rapidly changing
landscape of Infor-mation Technology.Uptime is comfortable stepping
out of the limited and traditional etiquette of magazine publishing
and we hope you see the value in our decision.We certainly invite
your feedback as we continue to move forward.Uptime
Dec-Jan_2008.indd 20 11/14/08 5:02:12 PM doesnt have time because
this work would be additive. Does 3-Dimensional PMOptimizationSM
Fit With Other Existing Efforts?
Therearefew,butcommon,approachesto-wards optimizing the existing PM
program. Common approaches found throughout the in-dustry
include:Craft feedback on completed PMs, PM Data Scrubbing manually
performed by a team who compares history to the PM content and
analytical processes such as RCM and FMEA.The good news is that you
dont havetochoose,astheyallhavetheirplace in the journey and are
all intended to provide the right task with the right frequency
(Figure 1).But the important thing is not only to per-form the
right task at the right frequency, but
dosowiththeoptimumuseofmaintenance
resources,whichisdependentuponthede-gree of difficulty or how easy
is the process is to
implement.Mostorganizationsthathaveutilized3-Di-mensionalPMOptimizationdidsobecause
theystruggledwithobtainingtheoptimum
benefitfromasingleinitiative.Theamount of labor required, coupled
with all of the his-toricaldataneeded,makeRCMandFMEA tools that
should be reserved for high critical-ity equipment that warrants
the additional ef-fort.EnablingtheapplicationofPMOptimization on
all equipment, even after an RCM exercise
(forefficiency)providesanapproachacross the entire asset base.This
data should drive andgrowthesystemsothatitcanbelever-aged across
the organization, and even across languages.1st Dimension: Initial
OptimizationThe first step of Initial Optimization, prior to
beginningtooptimizeindividualtasks,isto determine if the existing
tasks add value.We have found that on the average up to 20% of the
existing PM tasks do not add value, or are so generic that they
cannot be deciphered!A majorcontributortothisisthatPMsareof-ten
copied from either the vendor manual or
otherequipmentPMswithoutactuallybeing verifiedattheequipment.Not
onlyaresomeofthesecopied tasksinaccurate,evenaccurate tasks might
not be warranted due to the criticality of the equipment
beingreviewed.Furthermore, PMsoftencontaintasksthatare
redundantwithotherPMtasks,
eitherintheCMMSunderdif-ferenttradesorfrequencies,or other systems
such as Lubrication routes,PredictiveMaintenance
routes,OperatorchecksorTPM, etc.Ofthetasksthatremain,
somecanevenbedesignedout (MaintenancePrevention)with
onlyminorequipmentmaintain-www.uptimemagazine.com19ability/accessibility
modifications.Next, it must be determined if the remaining tasks
are, indeed, the best tasks to protect
re-quiredequipmentfunctionsagainstthespe-cific failure modes.A
process of Task Promo-tion assists the user in determining if there
is a better task to give the same or greater level
ofprotection.PromotiontoahigherTask
Typeoftenprovidesseveralbenefits,includ-ingreducedlabor,taskduration,downtime,
materials cost, etc.Here are the specific Task Types:Task Type 1:
Action-based PM Task (e.g. replacement, cleaning, lubrication,
adjustment, calibration)Task Type 2: Subjective Inspection
Condition as perceived by the inspectorTask Type 3: Objective
Inspection Condition as measuredTask Type 4: Condition MonitoringAs
a final step of Task Promotion, the equip-ment should be reviewed
to determine if ex-ecutionofataskcanbemadesimplerwith minor
equipment maintainability/accessibility
improvementssuchasmodifyingguarding,
pipingoutlubricationorinspectionpoints,
providingvisualconditionindicators,etc. This could allow further
promotion to an even better task.
Oncetheoptimumtaskisselected,thePM tasks are further scrutinized
for the best way toexecute.Forexample,isthetaskbeing performed by
the person with the lowest ap-propriateskillset?Ifataskiswrittentoa
levelofdetailthatincludestheprotected
equipmentfunction,failuremodes,andPM
activities(particularlyifpromotedtoaType
2or3Inspection),itoftendoesnotrequire
atopleveltechnician.Infact,itbecomes
agreattoolfortrainingnewtechnicians. Figure 1 - 3-Dimensional
PMOptimization can be applied on its own or in combi-nation with
other maintenance initiatives.RCM /
PMOptimizationPartnershipResources Required (Labor &
Material)Equipment QuantityEquipment Criticality Low
HighRCM/FMEAhOOtMntinFCraft Feedback/Data ScrubbingLeverage
Zone3-Dimensional PMOptimizationSMFigure 2 - Automatic calculation
of time savings and downtime savings.Uptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 21
11/14/08 5:07:24 PMdecember/january 200920Would a job plan help to
ensure quick task ex-ecution with consistent results, particularly
if resourcesorspecificconditionsarerequired to execute the
task?Could some of the tasks
beperformedwithoutinterferingwithPro-duction?Lets face it, the
equipment exists to makesomeformofproduct.Wheneveritis down for PM,
we are not making product, and likely not making money!Finally, the
optimal frequencyofeachPMtaskshouldbedeter-mined.In most cases, the
data to make this decision does not exist because failures have not
been tracked accurately nor in enough de-tail.Yet frequency is
often the first place peo-ple look when they consider optimizing a
PM: Can I do the task less often?3-Dimensional
PMOptimizationaddressesfrequencyonly
afterapplying14techniquesthatverifythe task is legitimate, that it
is the optimum task, and that we are performing it in the best way.
Furthermore, reducing a frequency carries the potential of
introducing additional risk.While this risk must be weighed against
the poten-tialbenefits,considerthatthefrequencyas-signed to a
particular task is often determined based upon when we are already
scheduled to do other tasks.If we have a monthly PM and
theneedforanewtaskarises,wetypically also include it in the monthly
PM.PM Optimization Example using Multiple Optimization Techniques:
PM on an Air Handler Unit Original PM Task: Change 8 HEPA filters
on an Air Handler Unit quarterly (Figure 3) Optimization: The
client installed a magnehe-lic gauge to measure pressure drop
across the filters(modification)&determinedthepres-sure at
which the filters required replacement
(nowanObjectiveInspection)basedonair
volumerequirements&filterspecifications.
Theyalsomarkedthewarningzoneonthe gauge in red (visual
workplace).This allowed TaskPromotionfromType1RReplacement
Tasktotwonewtasks:the1stisaType3 Objective Inspection and the 2nd
is a Type 2 Subjective Inspection.These inspections can
nowbeperformedbytheoperatorwhilein the area, and are actually
checked three times moreoften.Thenewtasksalsodonotre-quire
equipment downtime to perform.This example is provided for
illustration pur-poses because it utilizes multiple techniques of
PM Optimization.Although the results shown in Figure 4 are typical,
there are other items to consider.For example, the filters will
still have to be changed eventually; how-ever, it will be based
upon condition and the replacement will be performed as a planned
& scheduled corrective maintenance job.Please note also that
the cost savings of the Web: www.datastick.com/utEmail:
[email protected] to an actual human being:Toll-free in USA
888 277 5153 or call 408 987 3400 2008 Datastick Systems Inc.
Patents pending. Datastick is a registered trademark and SiteConnex
and VSA are trademarks of Datastick Systems, Inc.Two Barriers to
UsingVibration Analysis:Cost. Know-How.Datastick BreaksBoth
Barriers.Datastick Breaks the Cost Barrier:We could say, Datastick
breaks the price barrier, and with handheld systems from around
$6,000 thats true. But what about your total cost of ownership?
Datastick keeps it low be-cause theres no mandatory annual fee. If
you want an optional service or support agreement, youll nd theyre
designed and priced to help you, not scare you away.Datastick
Breaks the Know-How Barrier:You can learn to use the handheld
device in a couple of hours. If youre short on in-house vibration
expertise, dont worry. The included Datastick Reporting System
software for your PC is based on Microsoft Excel. That means that
you can share your data, graphs, and reports with any in-house
vibration analyst or outside consultant. And with our new
smartphone-basedSiteConnex VSA-2215, you can even email vibration
data directly from the eld.FREE White Paper: Breaking the Barriers
to Affordable Vibration Analysiswww.datastick.com/nobarriersSee us
at IMC 2008 Dec. 910 Bonita Springs, FloridaFigure 3: HEPA Filters
on Air Handler UnitUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 22 11/14/08 5:02:20
PMwww.uptimemagazine.com21filters was not included in this example.
Added Effectiveness for
GreaterReliabilityAtthispointwemustreviewtheequipment history for
indications of failure on functions that should have been protected
by the origi-nal PM.A failure may indicate that the PM is not fully
effective.Although many companies The optimization of the existing
PMs for effi-ciency, combined with failure review, typically
provides the optimal results based on current data systems
available for PM content and
fail-urerecording.Whileperformingtheabove
PMoptimizationforefficiencytofreeupla-bor,invariablyadditionalopportunitiesfor
greater effectiveness in the PM are uncovered. These can be
anywhere from failure modes on
existingcomponentsthathavenotbeenad-dressed adequately, to
components that have not been addressed at all, to entire functions
that have not been included in the PM previ-ously.These are
potential failure mode items that can take PM effectiveness to the
next lev-elforevengreaterreliability.Companiesare
typicallyidentifyingfrom50-100%additional PM coverage for likely
failure modes as com-pared to the original PMs!
BecausetheaddedPMtasksarefullyopti-mized during development, the PM
efficiency gains are not reduced significantly due to the
addedPMcoverage.Forthosemaintenance
organizationsthathaveanexistingRCMor
FMEAeffortinplace,analysisoftheseaddi-tionalitemsareanexcellentopportunityto
partnerwiththeseotherefforts,makingPM
Optimizationacomplementaryinitiativeto
oftendonothaveanaccurateformalequip-ment history documented to an
adequate lev-elofdetail,anundocumented,informalhis-tory usually
does exist.This is the history in the experience of the people that
have oper-ated & maintained the equipment in the past,
includingequipmentoperators,maintenance technicians, engineers,
even vendors and con-tractors.Task Description Labor Production
DowntimeTask(Failure Modes __)Task TypeFreq.(X/Yr)Skill/Craft 1 X
(Min)Annual (Min)1 X (Min)Annual (Min)Original PM TaskChange 8 HEPA
Filters 1R ReplaceQ 4XHVAC Tech 240 960 300 1200Optimized PM
TasksCheck Magnehelic Gauge (Filter Dirty __)3 Obj. Inspect.M
12XOperator 2 24 0 0Visually inspect flters via window (Damaged__)
(Blown through__)2 Subj.Inspect.M12XOperator 2 24 0 0Optimization
Results3X300%No Crafts Reqd.Reduced 236 Min98%Reduced936
Min97%Reduced 300 Min100%Reduced 1200 Min100%Figure 4 - Simple
example of an optimized PM task using multiple PM Optimization
techniquesUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 23 11/14/08 5:02:25 PMreading
can then be used to trend equipment
condition,effectivelyturningaType3Objec-tive Inspection into a Type
4 Condition Moni-toringtask.Whatiscurrentlydonewiththis
gathereddata?Withlimitedtechnology,the most common answer
unfortunately is to put it in a file system or create an additional
spread-sheet.Either of these choices demonstrates a
disconnectbetweenPMDataandfurtherdy-namic Optimization. Because
this process is very data-intensive (i.e.
numberofmachines,timesnumbersoffunc-tions,timesnumberofcomponents,times
numberoffailuremodes/likelycauses),itis recommended that the
process be automated (Figure 5), or it wont happen.CMMS software
packages,whetherpartofanERPapplication
orstand-alone,areinvaluabletoaMainte-nanceorganization.However,veryfewtreat
PM tasks as individual live records at the failure mode
level.Rather they provide a place to put the PM tasks as part of an
overall PM.3rd Dimension: Equipment Reliability AnalysisThe final
aspect of 3-Dimensional PMOptimiza-tion is the ability to
communicate with day-to-day-events from the equipment to an ongoing
evaluation of the PM activities.The basic ques-tion is, Are the
failures or undesirable events ontheequipmentpreventablethroughPM
and what gaps exist in the data?Again, when
completed,thistaskistypicallyperformed manually, outside the PM
data as there is a dis-connect between the failure under review and
the PM data intended to preserve the
compo-nent.Thisdataresidesindatasystemssuch as the CMMS , equipment
downtime tracking, OverallEquipmentEffectivenessmonitoring,
SCADAsystems,PLCfaulttracking,etc.Each
ofthesethatexistatthesiteshould provide feedback to the PM system
as an indication of equipment reliability,
againallowingreal-timemonitoring oftheeffectivenessofthePMtasks.
Such a process links existing informa-tionsystemswithasystemusedto
changebehaviorinhowwecarefor our equipment
assets.Theprocessof3-DimensionalPMOp-timizationSM takes the PM
program to previouslyunreachablenewlevelsby
fusingcommonsense,reliabilitydis-ciplines, and automation powered
by ReliabilityFusionTM,theworldsfirst 3-D PMOptimization
system.Edward J. Stanek, Jr. is the Co-Owner / President ofLAI
Reliability Systems, Inc.Ed has been involved in the development of
reliability and maintenance systems for the past 22 years, and has
worked extensively on TPM implementation and process develop-ment
with small to medium-sized compa-nies.Building shop floor
involvement and maintenance support systems, his projects set
record-breaking performance improve-ments.As Co-Owner and President
of LAI, Ed leads the organization with ongoing product development
and unique processes.Combin-ing the concepts of constraint
management and reliability, Ed, who is a past chairman of STLE, has
redefined how Maintenance Optimization and Continuous Improvement
are implemented.Tibor L. Jung is the Co-Owner / VP / Senior Project
Leader for LAI Reliability Systems, Inc. Tibor has over 25 years of
experience in the maintenance & reliability field as a
represen-tative of LAI.His vast equipment reliability experience
was the foundation that allowed him to develop a side of LAIs
offerings that focuses on the business processes of mainte-nance
& reliability.His expertise in optimiz-ing both key Production
processes as well as Maintenance & Reliability processes allows
him to provide more holistic solutions to clients needs that are
geared towards bring-ing together previously conflicting factions
within clients organizations, with the focus of greater reliability
to get more product out the door and to lower costs.LAI Reliability
Systems , PM Optimization, 3-D PM Optimization, 3-Dimensional PM
Optimization, and Reliability Fusion are service marks of LAI
Reliability Systems, Inc., Antioch, Illinois (with regional offices
in Franklin, Tennessee).All rights reserved.16december/january
200922RCM & FMEA, rather than a compet-ing initiative (Figure
1).Optimization at the PM LevelAftereachofthePMtasksisopti-mized
and assigned accurate
schedul-ingcriteria(e.g.frequency,skill/craft, run status, etc.),
the tasks are grouped back together into PMs according to
thesecriteria.Atthispoint,thePM tasks can be further optimized by
ap-plying more efficient means to execute them as groups of PM
tasks.Examples include issuing PM tasks as part of an
organizedroute,separatingdown PMtasksfromrunningPMtasks, scheduling
PMs only after all required resourcesareavailable,andschedul-ing
for the lowest skill level required.
OptimizationofthePMprocessisalsoad-dressedatthispoint.SomePMtasksthat
areinspections(Type2SubjectiveorType3
Objective)aresometimeswrittenasInspect
&changeifnecessary.Whensomethingis found to be wrong during one
of these PM in-spection tasks, dont immediately fix it (unless it
meets predefined criteria).Often times when a craftsperson finds
something wrong during a PM, he feels he has not done his job if he
walks awaywithoutmakinganattempttofixit.Is the work required to
correct the identified item planned?Does he have the parts, special
tools, manuals, etc. in hand?Does he have time?If the answer to any
of these is no, he is likely doingREACTIVEmaintenancewithinthePM.
AcrucialroleofgoodPMtasksistoidentify
abacklogofworkthatcanbemademoreef-ficient through good planning and
scheduling. Create a corrective or repair type work order to
document the item and put it in the system to be planned and
scheduled.2nd Dimension:PM Task Pass/Fail AnalysisOnce the Initial
PM Optimization is complete, it is critical to get feedback from
the PM process as confirmation of the decisions made, as well as to
look for additional opportunities for fur-ther optimization.Since
the PM tasks exist to protectrequiredequipmentfunctionsagainst
specific failure modes, dynamic feedback must be provided for
either the failure mode and/or its root cause.This is referred to
as PM Task Pass/FailAnalysis.Thresholdssetforpass/fail for each
failure mode, cause or reading taken,
makeitpossibletomonitortheeffectiveness
ofthePMtasksreal-time.Also,ifataskex-ists for gathering a reading
from a gauge, the Figure 5 - PM Task Pass/Fail Analysis allows
real-time monitoring of the PM Tasks.Uptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 24
11/14/08 5:02:33
PMwww.uptimemagazine.com27www.uptimemagazine.comSolution Partners
for Efective SAP Plant MaintenanceThe best in independent solutions
for your SAP-Plant Maintenance systemLooking for help with
SAP?Providers of Expert Reliability Methodogies, RCM Turbo and SOS
(Spares Optimization System)North America: 508.359.1966
Australasia: +61 3 9455 2211www.strategicorp.comAvailability
Workbench - Powerful Simulation Software for Maintenance
Optimization1.949.502.5919www.availabilityworkbench.com Operator
Inspection, Predictive Maintenance, Reliability
Software604.984.3674www.desmaint.comPractical Daily Scheduling in
SAP Plant Maintenance1.866.515.DTSI
(3874)www.sapscheduling.comSuccessful Implementations Through
Reliability Data Enhancement+1.203.264.0500www.mrginc.comDeveloping
Reliability Solutions to Improve People, Processes & Technology
770.717.2737www.pcaconsulting.comAsset Performance Management
Solutions for SAP EAMToll Free 1.877.746.3787www.ivara.comSAMI - A
Knowledge Transfer Company for Industrial
Organizations+1.860.675.0439www.samicorp.comLeveraging Maintenance
& Reliability to Improve Customer
Performance877.234.6756http://usservice.abb.com/Reliability
Improvement Software That Interfaces Via Netweaver+613
93150330www.pmoptimisation.com.auWell...look no further.SAP and
other SAP products and services mentioned herein as well as their
respective logos are trademarks or registered trademarks of SAP AG
in Germany and in several other countries all over the world.
SAPCenter.com is in no way connected to nor endorsed by SAP
AG.Uptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 25 11/13/08 10:59:53 PMdecember/january
2009oftheprimaryswitchgearintheirelectricaldistribution system
which feeds one paper machine and several smaller
operationswithintheplant.Animpendingten-dayshut-downincreasedthesenseofurgencysinceallwindows
could be fitted for one machine during that period.IRISS, inc. was
commissioned by the paper mill to conduct a pre-site inspection to
ascertain the optimal position and
quantityofwindowswhichwouldgivethermographers
thoroughvisibilityofdesiredtargets.Theconclusions from the initial
inspection are noted in Table 1.The customer ordered 200 units of
assorted 3-inch diam-eterand4-inchdiameterInfraredInspectionWindows
tocompletetheinstallation.197windowswerelaterin-stalled.Investment197infraredinspectionwindowstotaled$42,050.00.
IRISSwasalsoretainedtosupplyaninstallationteamto
performtheinstallationoftheIRwindows.Installation costs sited in
Table 2 were calculated using the following assumptions: Two-man
installation team at $625.00 each per day (total cost $1,300 per
day) x 10 Days = $13,000.00$30.00 per window installation chargex
197 Windows = $5,910.00paper mill in South Carolina had a very
successful infrared inspection program that management wanted to
ex-pand.However, the requirements of NFPA 70E were causing them to
re-think their strategy since inspections of energized equipment
was becoming more restrictive, more time consuming and more costly.
Furthermore, 8% of the mills applications had never been surveyed
due to either switched interlocks (which automatically deenergize
the equipment upon opening, thereby preventing access to energized
components), or to incident energy calculations in excess of 100
cal/cm2 on certain equipment (which exceeds personal protective
equipment [PPE]] ratings, and would place personnel in extreme
danger and open the company to OSHA fines).In search of alternative
methods of conducting safer, stan-dards-compliant inspections, the
corporate Reliability
Engi-neerinvestigatedhowinfraredinspectionwindows(com-monly
referred to as IR windows, viewports or sightglasses) might be
utilized. It was determined that:Use of Infrared Windows for
routine inspections of healthy equipment did not require the
elevated levels of PPE required in 70E, since as stated in 70E 100:
Under normal operating conditions, enclosed ener-gized equipment
that has been properly installed and maintained is not likely to
pose an arc flash hazard.In NFPA terms, an IR window maintains an
enclosed state for the switchgear, MCC, Transformer, etc., and
maintains energized components and circuit parts in a guarded
condition.Therefore, the hazard/risk cate- gory would be equal to
that of reading a panel meter, using a visual inspection pane for
lockout/tagout confirmations, or walking past enclosed, energized
equipment.Use of IR windows or sightglasses would eliminate the
need for a supporting cast of electricians to remove and reinstall
panel covers.Those critical personnel would then be available to
perform other tasks which were often being outsourced.Use of
infrared windows would provide an efficient method to perform
inspections.This would make more frequent inspections feasible for
critical or sus-pect applications to ensure plant uptime.Use of IR
windows would provide non-intrusive access to electrical
applications; therefore, surveys could be conducted without
elevating risk to plant assets and processes, meaning that
inspections could be conducted during peak hours for the best
diagnostic data.Use of IR windows and closed panel inspection would
eliminate high-risk tasks during inspections and thereby increase
safety for thermographers.The focus of the mills initiative was to
facilitate inspection infrareduploadWindows Open the Door to
Savings A Study of a Positive, and Growing, Return on Investment by
Martin Robinson A24Application Quantity13.8 kV Primary
Switchgear15Secondary Switchgear 22Transformers (13.8 kV) 27MCCs
2Miscellaneous Switchgear 2Generators 2Total Assemblies
70Inspection Compartments 147IR Windows 197Table 1 - Equipment
ListUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 26 11/16/08 2:01:49
PMwww.uptimemagazine.com 13C-RangeInfrared SightglassesARC
RESISTANT FOR SAFE ELECTRICALINFRARED INSPECTIONSANY VOLTAGE,ANY
CAMERA,ANYWHERE50kA Arc Res|stant Des|gnUL/cUL/CSA ApprovedOutdoor
& Indoor Cert|edInfrared, V|sua| & Fus|on Capab|eHawk IR
Internat|ona| Inc.5309 Monroe RoadCharlotteNC 28205United
StatesEmail. [email protected] FREE.
1-877-4-HAWKIRwww.hawk-|r.comCLIRVU II QUADRABANDTMVISUALLY CAPABLE
FUSION CAPABLE AUTOGROUNDINGTMMOISTURE RESISTANT
ARC-RESISTANTUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 27 11/13/08 11:00:49
PMdecember/january 200926The
InstallationInstallationoftheinfraredinspectionpanes
wasconductedduringthreenightsandthree
daysduringtheten-dayshutdown.Somein-stallationswerecompletedonlivegearus-ingadditionalsafetymeasures;however,the
vastmajoritywereconductedondeenergized equipment in what NFPA terms
an electrically safe work condition.
Althoughtheplanallowedfortwelve-hour shifts, installers were
quickly and safely moving at a rate of approximately six window
installa-tions per hour, and were finishing the plant on
thenightshiftswithinsixhours.Installations
duringnormalbusinesshoursallowedmuch more flexibility; therefore
all live works were completed during these periods. When the
cli-ents electricians assisted with the installations,
theinstallationrateswerealsofasterthan
originallyplanned(7to8windowsperhour).
Allwindowinstallationswerecompletedwell within the allotted
timelines.Inspection Cost AnalysisPrior to the installation of the
IR windows, all infrared inspections were completed on open,
energized gear. Therefore, PPE, live works
pro-cedures,riskassessments,permits,etc.were
requiredforallinspections,andasnotedear-lier,severalapplicationshadneverbeensur-veyed
due to safety restrictions. Thepapermillhadpreviouslyinvestedinits
own infrared camera and an on-staff
thermog-rapher.Thethermographerwastrainedand qualified to assist in
opening panels on ener-gizedgear.Therefore,someefficiencieswere
alreadyinplacewhencomparedtoatypical crew of a single thermographer
+ two electri-cians. Consequently, the man-hour calculations
forthetraditionalinspectionareactually conservative.Table 3 details
the man-hour costs for infrared
surveysusingin-housestaffwithoutinfrared
windowsorviewports.Thefollowingassump-tions are made:Total
man-hours per inspection of inspec-table equipment: 331 hours (23
days)Staff electrician internal charge-out rate $125.00 per
hourStaff thermographer assists with panel removal, etc (two-man
task)PPE suit-ups twice per day, per man (30 minutes per man per
suit-up)One man-hour per compartment panel for safe removal, etc.
(x two for two-man team)147 individual panels to inspect (per Table
1)After the infrared windows were installed and there was no
requirement to remove panels or wear increased levels of PPE, the
task became aone-manjob.Theincreasedefficiencyand
economiesofmotionandman-power,which
infraredwindowsprovided,significantlyde-creased the time required
to complete a survey tojusttwo,eight-hourdaysforatotalofjust 16
man-hours. The costs associated with an in-frared survey using the
IR windows are detailed in Table
4.Comparedtothecostsoftraditionalinspec-tions(Table3),thepapermillnowsaves
$39,375 per inspection cycle because of the ef-ficiencies they have
gained through the use of infrared windows.Return On
InvestmentTable5combinesthedatafromthe
previoustablestoillustratetheROI for the paper mill based on the
initial investment of the IR windows, the in-vestment in
installation and the costs
toperformsurveysusingthewin-dows,comparedwiththemillstra-ditionalcostsofusingtheirin-house
team while not using any windows.Usinginfraredwindowsisshownin this
example to pay dividends as early
asmid-wayintothesecondinspectioncycle,
yieldingalmost$18,000insavingswhichcan be put back into the budget
by the end of the second cycle. In just five inspection cycles the
mill shows a savings of over $135,000. Moreover, because
inspections can be complet-ed with greater ease and without
increased risk to personnel, plant and processes, the
frequen-cyofinspectioncycleshasbeenincreasedto
quarterly,reflectingbest-practicesrecommen-dations which were
previously not feasible, and
thoughttobeunattainable.Thenewinspec-tioncyclebringsROItotheplantinjustone
quarter, while reducing the risk of catastrophic
failureamongtheplantscriticalpowerdistri-butionsystems,whichwill,inturn,minimize
production losses due to equipment failure.Future
InstallationsAdditionalwindowinstallationshavebeen planned and
scheduled to occur during the fa-cilitys next shutdown. Because the
customers in-houseelectriciansweretrainedtoinstall
infraredwindows,theinstallationcostsfor IR Windows Suppy &
Installation Investment197 Infrared Windows $42,050Installation
Costs for 197 Units $18,910Total Assemblies $60,960Table 2 - Total
CostsTotal Cost of Traditional Inspection with In-House Team Hours
CostTraditional Inspection Time (Hrs x 2 per team)294 $36,750PPE
Suit-up Time (0.5 Hrs x 2 per day x 2 per team)37 $4,625Total Cost
$41,375Table 3 - Costs for Traditional Infrared SurveysTotal Cost
of Inspection with IR WindowsHours CostInspection Time16 $2,000PPE
Suit-up Time0 $0.00Total Cost $2,000Table 4 - Costs for Infrared
Surveys Using IR WindowsFigure 1 - Installation of IR WindowFigure
2 - Traditional inspection using PPEUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 28
11/14/08 2:43:42 PMwww.uptimemagazine.com 27future installations
will be a frac-tion of the cost paid for the origi-nal
installation, saving even more moneyandacceleratingtheROI for
additional windows. ConclusionThismillrealizedareturnon
investmentveryquicklywhile benefitting from the other
intan-giblesofinfraredwindows.Spe-cific achievements are:The
ability to inspect the previously un-inspectable equipment The
ability to inspect critical applications more frequently The
ability to more aggressively monitor any applications which are
suspected to be running to failureIncrease in safety for
personnelDecrease in risk to plant assets and op-erations due to
non-invasive nature of inspection safeguarding profitabilityFreeing
up critical personnel who can be utilized for other valuable jobs
in the plant rather than removing and reinstalling
panelsAportionofthefinancialsavingswereused
tocontinuetobuildandstrengthenthePdM
ProgramthroughthepurchaseofasecondIR
cameraforthemaintenanceelectricians,fur-therunderscoringthemillscommitmentto
practicaluseoftechnologytoensureuptime while enhancing the safety
of its workers.Infra-red windows provide a cost-effective and safer
alternative to traditional inspections. Martin Robinson, I
Eng,MInstD, is a highly sought after trainer and speaker for
top-ics including infrared windows and general thermography,
electrical preventative main-tenance, condition based monitoring,
green energy, and electrical safety standards.With over 15 years of
practi-cal field experience, Martins expertise is also valued on
various committees, such as the British Institute for
Non-Destructive Testing - InfraRed Training Working Group (which
for establishes the training standards and working prac-tices for
Thermographers in the UK).In 1997, he founded Global Mainte-nance
Technologies, which provides Condition Monitoring, and energy
management services to some of the most recognizable and
presti-gious landmarks, organizations and businesses in London and
Southeast England.Martin also formed IRISS, Inc, which produces the
worlds only industrial-grade infrared windows capable of passing
durability and impact requirements, the worlds first ultrasound
ports; emissiv-ity standardization landmarking tags, and the worlds
only transmissive PDU panels; and other groundbreaking solutions
released continually.Residing in Sarasota, FL, Martin is a devoted
husband and the proud father of 8.He can be contacted at
[email protected] on Investment (ROI) Windows Traditional
ROI197 IR WIndows $42,050 - -$42,050IR Window Installation $18,910
- -$60,960Cost of First Inspection Cycle $2,000 $41,375 -21,585Cost
of Second Inspection Cycle $2,000 $41,375 $17,790Cost of Third
Inspection Cycle $2,000 $41,375 $57,165Cost of Fourth Inspection
Cycle $2,000 $41,375 $96,540Cost of Fifth Inspection Cycle $2,000
$41,375 $135,915Total Cost for 5 Cycles $70,960 $206,875
$135,915Table 5 - Return on Investment Calculations(running total
in far right column)THE ULTRASOUND APPROACHThis is one technology
conference you cant afford to miss!Visit UESystems.com for
presenter information or call 800.223.1325 today.Taking place at
the Hilton Clearwater Resortin Clearwater Beach, Florida
fromJanuary 18th to January 21st, 2009Youll learn how to:s
)NCREASEPROlTABILITYs $ECREASEYOURCARBONFOOTPRINTs
5SE5LTRASOUNDTOQUICKLYANDACCURATELYDIAGNOSEFAULTYEQUIPMENTIntroducingA
new CMMS/EAM software package that gives companies a complete and
accurate maintenance picture.Our software helps you stay
competitive by identifying where time and money is being lost and
where you should focus your eforts in order to maximize operations
ef ciency and minimize maintenance costs.This allows you to focus
on delivering customer satisfaction.Contact us today at
312.863.6500 for more information or to schedule a
demo.www.cmmsdatagroup.com312.863.6500info@CMMSdatagroup.comUptime
Dec-Jan_2008.indd 29 11/14/08 5:32:41 PMdecember/january
2009Building A Lubrication ProgramBy Using the Five Rights, You
Wont Go Wrongby Ray Thibault, CLS, OMA I & II his article will
examine the use of the five rights of lubrication - which are Right
Type, Right Quality, Right Amount, Right Place and Right Time - all
of which are important in the development of a highly effective
lu-brication program.Many companies fail to realize the importance
of lubrication and the application of these five basic concepts to
achieve world class machinery reliability.Each will be examined in
detail, along with a summary of best practices, including
procedures in the selection of the optimal lubricant supplier.Right
Type Asafirststepinthelubricationofequipment,refer
totheOEMmanual.TheOEMshouldbecontactedif there are any
questions.With old equipment the OEM manual may be outdated and
better lubricants may be
available.Whenindoubt,utilizeyourlubricantsup-plier along with the
OEM. Twomajorclassesoflubricantsareoilandgrease.
Theselectionofthetypeisbasedontheapplication. Greases are used
extensively in the lubrication of small
bearings.Asaruleofthumbuseoilwherepossible because it can be cooled
and filtered but this is not pos-sible for many applications where
grease is the better choice.The following are applications for
grease: To decrease drippage and splattering, as the grease acts as
an additional seal to reduce leakage To reach hard to get to
lubrication points where lubrication frequency is important and
when oil circulation is impractical To seal in the lubricant and
assist in sealing out contaminants such as water, dirt and damaging
corrosives To protect metal surfaces from rust & corrosion To
lubricate machines with intermittent operation To suspend solid
additives such as moly or graphite To lubricate sealed-for-life
applications When extreme or special operat- ing conditions exist
When machine parts are badly worn When noise reduction is important
Greasesarecomposedmainlyofoil dispersed in a thickener with
additives. Typical grease is about 85% oil.It is the oil which does
thelubricatingingrease.TheNLGIclassifiesgreases according to
consistency with the following grades
in-creasinginhardness:000,00,0,1,2,3,4,5,and6.
ThemostcommonNLGIgradeis#2.Athighspeeds
#3maybeusedandatlowtemperaturesandincen-tralized systems a 0 or 1
is used. Most large equipment is oil lubricated and selection of
therighttypeiscriticaltoreliability.Twomajorfac-tors in selection
of an oil based lubricant are the correct
viscosityandadditivesintheformulation.Foramore
completediscussionofviscositypleaserefertoBasic Principles of
Viscosity and Proper Selection Techniques
publishedinLubrication&FluidPower(LFP).Fora more complete
discussion of additive types, please re-fer to All Lubricants are
not Created Equally (Basic Con-cepts in Formulation of Finished
Lubricants) which was published in LFP in 2006. OEMs will recommend
the correct ISO viscosity grade
fortheirequipmentbasedontheoperatingtempera-ture. Table 1
classifies kinematic oil viscosity in centi-stokes for industrial
lubricants based on the ISO grade which is the midpoint of a
viscosity range +/- 10%.lubricationuploadT28ISO VGMid Point Limits,
KV 40CISO VGMid Point Limits, KV 40 CKV 40C,mm2s-1Min. Max.KV
40C,mm2s-1Min. Max.ISO VG 2 2.2 1.98 2.4 ISO VG 100 100 90 110ISO
VG 3 3.2 2.88 3.52 ISO VG 150 150 135 165ISO VG 5 4.6 4.14 5.06 ISO
VG 220 220 198 242ISO VG 7 6.8 6.12 7.48 ISO VG 320 320 288 352ISO
VG 10 10 9 11 ISO VG 460 460 414 506ISO VG 15 15 13.5 16.5 ISO VG
680 680 612 748ISO VG 22 22 19.8 24.2 ISO VG 1000 1000 900 1100ISO
VG 32 32 28.8 35.2 ISO VG 1500 1500 1350 1650ISO VG 46 46 41.4 50.6
ISO VG 2200 2200 1980 2420Table 1 - Kinematic Oil Viscosity in
CentistokesUptime Dec-Jan_2008.indd 30 11/14/08 3:22:34 PM
Sincegreaseisprimarilyoilwhichdoesthe
lubricating;thecorrectviscositymustbe
selectedinthegreaseformulation.Table2
providesguidelinesontheselectionofthe correct viscosity in
grease.Oncethecorrectviscosityhasbeendeter-mined,thecorrectlubricanttypebasedon
additivecompositionneedstobeselected.
Lubricantformulationsconsistofabase
stockandadditives.Mostbasestocksare mineral oils from refining of
crude oil.Table 3summarizeslubricantcompositioninvari-ous lubricant
types.Lubricants in Table 3 with o signify the addi-tive is not in
all formulations but is optional for specific applications. Right
Quality Once the right type of lubricant has been se-lected, it is
important to select a high quality
lubricant.Qualityisboththeabilityofthe
lubricanttomeetOEMspecificationsbased on performance on ASTM tests
and the clean-liness of the fluid which is delivered.You can
havethehighestqualitylubricant,butifis not handled properly during
delivery or stor-age it will not perform as expected. Product data
sheets provide useful
in-formationonlubricantsandtheirbe-havioronASTMtestswhichprovides
informationontheirperformanceon
equipment.Thebesttestforalubri-cantishowithasperformedinyour
plant,buttherearesomesituations wherealubricantisselectedonlyon
specification tests.A series of articles
waspublishedin2005inLFPontur-bine,hydraulic,andgearoilspecification
tests.Pleaserefertothesearticlesforan
in-depthcoverageoflubricantspecification tests and how they can
help in the selection of the right quality lubricant.
Thefollowingsummaryisbestpracticesto apply in maximizing lubricant
quality: Utilize specification tests on product data sheets to
compare lubricants Contact OEMs for minimum specifica- tion
requirements Set minimum lubricant specifications with suppliers
Set standards on new lubricant deliver- ies but be
reasonable.During the delivery process it is difficult to main-
tain high levels of cleanliness. Most hydraulic oils need to
filtered before use Utilize certificates of analysis for water
content and viscosity on delivered lubricants Routinely run more
extensive tests with an oil analysis laboratory to determine if
supplier ismeeting minimum requirements Dont utilize price as main
criteria in supplier selection Establish return criteria in
lubricant contracts Right Amount Grease Lubrication More is not
better.Too muchlubricantinasys-temcanbeasdestruc-tiveasnotenough,as
evidencedbytheover greasingofelectricmo-tors,whichhappensto be a
major failure mode. Theuseoftheformula inFigure1willassistin
greasing rolling element bearingswiththecor-rect amount.
www.uptimemagazine.com29 Thiscalculationwillgiveyouthenumber
ofouncestoaddtoabearingduringgreas-ing.This is especially important
when greas-ing electric motors because of the tendency
toovergrease.Inordertoaddthecorrect
amount,greasegunsneedtobecalibrated on their delivery of number of
shots /ounce. Thiscanbecompletedbyusingapostage scale to weigh out
one ounce of grease.An easiermethodistocountthenumberof
shotstofilla35mmfilmcanister,which is approximately one ounce of
grease.Once the guns have been calibrated, try to use the
samegreaseguntypeconsistentlyforthe
sameapplication.Someofthenewerguns will indicate the amount being
added. Oil Lubrication Centralized oil systems add the right amount
at the right time.This dis-cussionwillfocusonthehavingthecorrect
levelinoilbathsandsplashlubricatedgear boxes. Many small pumps are
lubricated by oil baths asillustratedinFigure2.Thecorrectlevel for
a bottle oiler bath should be at the mid-dle of the lowest ball.ISO
Viscocity ApplicationISO 100 and LowerHigh speeds > 3600 rpm and
low loads such as electric motorsISO 150/220 Moderate speeds !VC
TechncIcies is swilLly becominq Lhe leader in PdM and advanced
indusLrial diaqnosLics.As a pioneer in PredicLive MainLenance and
hiqhLech services, lVC presenLs iLs Lechnoloqies in Lhe lorms ol
rouLebased condiLion moniLorinq services, leld LroubleshooLinq and
repair assiqnmenLs, commissioninq, and various lorms ol
mulLichannel daLa acquisiLion Lo include analysis ol various
machinery and process orienLed problems LhaL plaque indusLries.We
are lookinq lor capable and independenL individuals Lo |oin our
Leam ol successlul
AnalysLs.HlXc`\[ZXe[`[Xk\jj\e[i\jld\1ZXi\\i7`mZk\Z_efcf^`\j%ZfdfiZXcc/''%,),%()-01
it may be as small as 0.87 or as large as 1, so as a rough rule of
thumb, the MTTF is roughly equal to h.You need to know the beta
values to get the correct medicine because everyone will tell you
things wear out, although,
unfor-tunately,wekillmorethingsthaneverlive long enough to wear
out.(Note: On another
website2,Dr.RobertAbernethyprovidesad-ditionalinsightintothedifferencesbetween
MTBF and MTTF.Consulting his website may be important for students
of the Weibull method.)MIL-HDBK-338onpage46givesyoua
simpleandcleardefinitionoffailure: The event, or inoperable state,
in which any item or part of an item does not, or would not,
perform as previously speci-fied.Reliability (lack of failures)
always terminates in a failure (loss of the func-tion when you
needed it).Many other detailsaboutfailuresarealsoincluded in pages
46-47.Finally,downloadthetechnicalpaper #2 from Paul Barringers
website at the bottom of the page called:Where Is My
DataForMakingReliabilityImprove-ments.It gives other source
documents andshowshowtomakethecalcula-tions.Consider Feedback from
an Asset Management Expert Severalcommentswerealsoobtainedfrom
JohnS.Mitchell,aself-describedadvocate of change whose Asset
Management Hand-book(ISBN0-971-7945-1-0)islistedinour essential
library3.John believes a meaningful
comparisonofMTBFmustconsidertheser-vice.Some, because of the fluid
and/or oper-ating conditions, will have shorter life expec-tancies
than others.Mitchell uses the analogy of a coal miner who smokes;
the miner prob-ably has a shorter lifetime than a non-smoker office
worker. JohnMitchellhasbeentrying--withoutsuc-cess so far -- to
find a parameter that will, with one number, describe the
distribution around anaverage.Distributionaroundanaverage might be
the percentage or number of the to-tal population more than 20%
below the aver-ageMTBF.Asanexample,supposeaplant reports an MTBF of
48 months.This would be showing performance a bit below best in
class in Table 1, from Pump Users Handbook: Life Extension (ISBN
0-88173-517-5), but doesnt say much beyond that.Knowing also that
2% of the total population was below 36 months would be useful
information because it would tellusthattheplantwasawareofcertain
pumps that failed more often than others.(In
manyrefineriesthatnumberissomewhere
between7and10percent).However,sup-poseonefoundoutthattheMTBFof25%-
30% of the population was below 36 months,
ourdiagnosismightbequitedifferentand the opportunities for
improvement would be shifting to a new focus. More Experience-based
Advice You Can Use TodayThe explanations offered by Paul Barringer
and John Mitchell will have to be weighed by seri-ous reliability
professionals.Some of their sug-gestions were certainly considered
in the mid-1970s when we wrote about calculating pump MTBF based on
actual operating time.Yet, in-dustry soon decided that the numbers
looked betterwhenthecalculationencompassedall installed pumps,
irrespective of running or not running.Moreover, we have always
advocated pickingfirsttheripe,low-hangingfruitand hasten to note
that not everyone has heeded this advice.We are where we are and
the pic-tureisnotrosy.Repeatfailuresaboundand continue to be
tolerated.Repeat failures are warning signs; they are the
inevitable precur-sorstoextremefailureswhichveryoftenkill people.To
this day, we see CMMS (computer-ized Maintenance Management
Systems) soft-ware that allows log entries in words such as bearing
replaced.To be of use to devotees
ofequipmentuptime,asystemmustrecog-nizethataccuratefailureanalysisisrequired
for failure avoidance.The entries must prop-erly identify why a
bearing failed and diligent failure analysis is absolutely
necessary.Failure avoidance should be the ultimate goal because it
means asset preservation and curtailment of money wasted on repeat
repairs, not to men-tioncostlyremedialactionafteranextreme
failure.All too often, persistent repeat failures are evidence of
seriously flawed reasoning.Theengineeringstudentemployedasanin-tern
at that refinery probably would not wish
tolosetheopportunityforeasytrackingof pump failures.He was probably
searching for answers to tasks assigned to him by oth-ers.We can
only speculate that persons unknown are often looking for ways to
burytheunacceptableperfo