PdM & Condition Monitoring (CM)
Condition Monitoring (CM) can be used as a stand alone discipline but works more effectively when incorporated into a Holistic Reliability Strategy. When front line staff are coached in the basic skills of CM it will highlight minor issues before they result in major unplanned downtime, it's not unusual to find a "big win" straight away that pays back the training costs immediately.
PdM/CM gives warning of impending failure whilst identify the need for lubrication and continuous improvement
- Learn PdM/CM from a practitioner with over a decade of experience formulating a world class PdM Strategy
- NOT based on theory and expensive data collection instruments I advise on the latest PdM technologies
- It will positively impact asset availability by targeting critical assets first to deliver the cost benefits
- Is a component of Autonomous Maintenance (AM) training for your front line operators
Uptime Consultant training covers the techniques relevant to your equipment to start your reliability journey whilst supporting your predictive maintenance strategy
- Condition Monitoring basics for Autonomous Maintenance
- Vibration
- Acoustic Emission
- Spectrum Analysis
- Ultrasound
- Thermography
- Oil Sampling/Tribology
- Continuous Monitoring
Front line operators and maintainers that work close to assets everyday provide the most effective route to delivering multiple benefits using a strategic PdM/CM approach
Uptime Consultant Ltd also works with preferred partners and suppliers of PdM equipment to suit your requirements
I constantly evaluate developments especially with regards to engaging front line staff with recent advances in technology
Make a request for more information or a proposal at andy@uptimeconsultant.co.uk
Introducing Vibration Condition Monitoring in a plant room to ENGIE Engineers in the Utility sector
Predictive Maintenance Articles
Reliability Driven Design
Using Predictive Maintenance to drive design and reliability improvements
Reliability is inherent and inbuilt at the design phase, this is where major decisions are made that can impact an assets reliability. A recent video feature from Doug Plucknette and Terrence O'Hanlon reminded me of an example that I share whenever I get the opportunity.
We have to accept that the design of all assets and equipment is affected by constraints, these come in the form of budget, footprint, accessibility, operating context, maintainability, ergonomics, power requirement, health and safety, the list is extensive. The main thing to note here is that the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) has a lot on their plate when conceptualising, specifying and building an asset to fit your operating context perfectly, it's little wonder that some items included may not suit the end users application, for a start we have to assume that the OEM has the end users intension in mind and understood.
Then there is the manufacture and assembly of the asset in question, what are the standards used to put this all together, most often these expensive pieces of equipment are a shopping list of sub assemblies that make up the whole asset. This means we now have a number of OEMs involved with different practices and standards adopted coming together. These sub systems interact with each other, sometimes not as perfectly as we would expect in service.
When these critical assets enter service one of the first things I can guarantee is that it will break down unexpectedly and everyone except the Predictive Maintenance guy will be shocked. Infant Mortality (or Early Equipment Failure as I prefer to call it) occurs more often than we would like and is sometimes due to the constraints I mentioned earlier, it can also be due to the operational context being different to the one understood at the design phase.
The equipment operator or operations manager may want this shiny new asset to run above the design envelope immediately, this is common and one I come across often, then they are concerned when it breaks down and ask the Maintenance function "What are you going to do about it?" or if they are feeling generous "Can you make it more reliable please?"
Then there is the manufacture and assembly of the asset in question, what are the standards used to put this all together, most often these expensive pieces of equipment are a shopping list of sub assemblies that make up the whole asset. This means we now have a number of OEMs involved with different practices and standards adopted coming together. These sub systems interact with each other, sometimes not as perfectly as we would expect in service.
When these critical assets enter service one of the first things I can guarantee is that it will break down unexpectedly and everyone except the Predictive Maintenance guy will be shocked. Infant Mortality (or Early Equipment Failure as I prefer to call it) occurs more often than we would like and is sometimes due to the constraints I mentioned earlier, it can also be due to the operational context being different to the one understood at the design phase.
The equipment operator or operations manager may want this shiny new asset to run above the design envelope immediately, this is common and one I come across often, then they are concerned when it breaks down and ask the Maintenance function "What are you going to do about it?" or if they are feeling generous "Can you make it more reliable please?"
Maintenance cannot make assets more reliable than their inherent design, maintenance can only maintain the original specification, only by redesign can change be achieved
The 30 minute presentation from Doug and Terrence looks at the often misused and poorly edited P-F Curve, if you have never heard of this I don't need to expand here, just go take a look at the video below where they both do a great job of explaining it in detail.
Above the D-I-P-F Curve.
Doug Plucknette has re-examined this whilst writing his latest book and added what I considered to be obvious (although I never thought of adding it!) The importance of the Design and Installation phases that happen before the Potential Failure point (P) is the zone where the real goal of Sustainable Reliability can be realised.
View the IMC 2017 video 'Before the P-F Curve' by clicking the image below:
Doug Plucknette has re-examined this whilst writing his latest book and added what I considered to be obvious (although I never thought of adding it!) The importance of the Design and Installation phases that happen before the Potential Failure point (P) is the zone where the real goal of Sustainable Reliability can be realised.
View the IMC 2017 video 'Before the P-F Curve' by clicking the image below:
I started my reliability journey in 2006 when I moved from being employed on wasteful reactive and planned maintenance tasks to specialising in Predictive Maintenance and Lubrication. I was challenged to build an integrated PdM and Lubrication Strategy in part of the PepsiCo International organisation in Snack Foods.
I was fortunate that the Engineering, Operations and Maintenance Managers gave me the time to search out and implement what I considered to be the best solutions, and then continuously change tack to drive from a Planned Reactive heavy site, to a Proactive and Predictive maintenance structure.
But we weren't finished like some may have been, I have seen this in practice with other organisations that are proud of their extensive PdM programs, they keep on catching future failures and 'saving the day' becoming the new 'firefighters' moving from a reactive breakdown mode to reactive predictive mode!
We were after the realm of Innovation, eradicating those repeat failures, bringing to the surface all the hidden niggles that add up to big numbers was the goal, Terrence refers to this near the end of the video, the non recorded events that are usually hidden out of sight.
The best Predictive Maintenance program in the world for me is one that makes itself redundant it's that good. You can only do this by chasing and eliminating every single weakness that is found in your assets, then go do it again, and again.
The early days of my journey in Predictive Maintenance were riddled with negative comments and disparaging remarks from colleagues, I empathised with their point of view but I didn't see it the same because I was never a Maintenance Engineer. These guys were proud of saving the operation from another catastrophic failure with collateral damage lying all around, they enjoyed it because they received plaudits from management and peers for it, something I always found to be very bizarre!
One of these excellent reactive maintenance engineers took issue early on and we had a discussion like adults of how I believed PdM would work if we all embraced it, he deferred and thought it was a waste of my and his time, that we had things to fix! We left the conversation amicably with me letting him know that my personal aim was to put him and others out of reactive maintenance work within a year. It took longer than that but in this case I later found an advocate, he came to me on several occasions to inspect motors, gearboxes or bearings he suspected. My work here was done.
The aim at the start of this article was to share the video presented by Doug Plucknette and Terrence O'Hanlon and then to explain how I experienced and drove a similar type of outcome... so here goes.
The scenario was a critical asset that ran on many of the production platforms that came under the most extreme operating conditions of all, hot oil fryers. When you look at a Fryer there's not a great deal to go wrong but when they do they cause multiple waste streams, they stop the complete production of the product, can cause recalls of product, produce waste on shutdown and startup, generate losses in labour, power and utility utilisation, it also can involve risky reactive maintenance, the list impacts many KPIs.
None of this is good, and then you still have to make the tonnage you missed, once that time is lost though you never get it back!
The elements that could be prone to failure were the main oil pump, pump motor, internal transport belts, control system, heat exchanger, fines removal, in/out feed conveyors, of all these the one from a PdM point of view that could not be inspected in operation were the internal belt assemblies, especially the bearings. These bearings were changed out routinely at PM intervals and failed sporadically in service, people weren't searching at the time for solutions, it was at best planned or reactive work and at worst major collateral damage, shafts ran in bearing journals, cages disintegrated, ball bearings found in sumps, it was what I refer to as 'custom and practice' the practice had been 'normalised', whilst everyone else talked about the latest grease or different bearing seals I asked:
"is this assembly fit for purpose or was there a constraint at the design phase that operations and maintenance were now paying for heavily?"
Fryers fry product with different types of oil at varying temperatures around 180ºC (356ºF), pumped through the fryer bed to create a directional wash, some bearings may sit out of the oil with others immersed, if the lubricant is up to it (and H1 Food Safe) and manages to keep the cooking oil out you may get away with it. H1 Food Safe Greases that operate at this temperature are rare and very expensive to purchase.
Periodically the whole fryer and system is boiled out with a procedure involving caustic agents, this gets into everything including the critical bearings. My strategy with PdM I considered to be a tool for driving improvements, not a discrete function in itself, this is where some I believe get it wrong, PdM should be there to make a difference and help eradicate reactive work completely.
After a while trawling the internet I found a company that provided the eventual solution to our extreme operating context, a bearing that uses zero grease, designed for hot oil fryers that I later found out was already being used by Frito Lay in the USA. The Engineering Manager could see the obvious benefits even when I explained the additional cost of changing a full set of bearings, but I did make the decision easier for him by presenting the historical failures recorded in the CMMS and the projected savings in removing expensive lubrication PMs, reducing unplanned downtime and the invaluable price of confidence in knowing this asset would be available to operations and be more reliable... if the plan worked.
Periodically the whole fryer and system is boiled out with a procedure involving caustic agents, this gets into everything including the critical bearings. My strategy with PdM I considered to be a tool for driving improvements, not a discrete function in itself, this is where some I believe get it wrong, PdM should be there to make a difference and help eradicate reactive work completely.
After a while trawling the internet I found a company that provided the eventual solution to our extreme operating context, a bearing that uses zero grease, designed for hot oil fryers that I later found out was already being used by Frito Lay in the USA. The Engineering Manager could see the obvious benefits even when I explained the additional cost of changing a full set of bearings, but I did make the decision easier for him by presenting the historical failures recorded in the CMMS and the projected savings in removing expensive lubrication PMs, reducing unplanned downtime and the invaluable price of confidence in knowing this asset would be available to operations and be more reliable... if the plan worked.
Left: Polymer bearings can provide solutions in extreme environments
We carried out a full bearing set change in a planned maintenance window and shared with the maintainers, asked them not to intervene but report any anomalies they found in the usual PM inspection routine, no failures were identified in the 18 months of the guaranteed period the bearing manufacturer recommended, we pushed the first change to 22 months mainly because of production demand. The original set was removed and I retained them for further inspection, a full new set was fitted, I later removed the metal shields from the used set and found them to be in excellent condition.
This work I followed up as a side project to my usual PdM work and managed the retrofit on four additional fryers in plant over the following three years, remember that reliability is a journey, more a marathon than a sprint!
This story came full circle when a new line and fryer were specified and I seized the opportunity to get reliability inbuilt at the design phase, to make this happen it took a lot of work, the product specialist, engineering and projects had to agree this was the right thing to do, there was push back because the OEM and Project believed they owed nothing to operations, maintenance and in-service reliability, they delivered equipment and this type of request was a new one to them. Eventually it was agreed and the new fryer entered service with polymer filled bearings as an OEM part.
This story came full circle when a new line and fryer were specified and I seized the opportunity to get reliability inbuilt at the design phase, to make this happen it took a lot of work, the product specialist, engineering and projects had to agree this was the right thing to do, there was push back because the OEM and Project believed they owed nothing to operations, maintenance and in-service reliability, they delivered equipment and this type of request was a new one to them. Eventually it was agreed and the new fryer entered service with polymer filled bearings as an OEM part.
If this sounds easy it's not, and if anybody tells you it is they are lying
It's hard, you need to be persistent, have constancy, form allies, leverage goodwill, prove the benefits (at least twice!) and be confident enough to challenge assumptions. Arm yourself with hard evidence and facts, thousands of £, $ or € in lost revenue usually makes waves and concentrates minds.
Hope this has given you a worthwhile example that touches on what Doug Plucknette and Terrence O'Hanlon presented, don't let your Predictive Maintenance lapse into Reactive Predictive, remember the aim of the game is to eliminate failures.
A big thank you also to the solution providers EDT Corp a great innovative company that the Timken Company liked so much they bought them out over a year ago. If you would like to specify any of their products for your assets in the UK I can help out with my EDT product knowledge.
Any comments please feel free to agree or disagree, if you think this article adds value then share it with your contacts.
If you would like to employ some of these and other Reliability Strategies then email me direct andy@uptimeconsultant.co.uk
Hope this has given you a worthwhile example that touches on what Doug Plucknette and Terrence O'Hanlon presented, don't let your Predictive Maintenance lapse into Reactive Predictive, remember the aim of the game is to eliminate failures.
A big thank you also to the solution providers EDT Corp a great innovative company that the Timken Company liked so much they bought them out over a year ago. If you would like to specify any of their products for your assets in the UK I can help out with my EDT product knowledge.
Any comments please feel free to agree or disagree, if you think this article adds value then share it with your contacts.
If you would like to employ some of these and other Reliability Strategies then email me direct andy@uptimeconsultant.co.uk
Criticality of Spares in Predictive Maintenance
Making sure your PdM strategy supports procurement and spares availability is crucial
Talking recently to a client about introducing Predictive Maintenance (PdM) some training and identifying the methods that would be best fit for their assets. The conversation came around to, why do PdM in the first place and how to make all that extra work pay back, I pointed out that one thing you must have is complete confidence in your spares readiness, he acted like I threw him a curve ball!
I'm a great believer that PdM can't exist in a bubble and to get the best results there are many other pieces that have to fit in place, it's a puzzle that some struggle with day after day, week on week.
Logically if I am going to invest in training people in Condition Based Maintenance (CBM), PdM technology, Total Productive Maintenance (I prefer Practice) and being Proactive then when these techniques do deliver we must make sure that stores and procurement are also proactive and not trapped in a reactive cycle. I find that this is where some PdM plans fail, if spares are not available to put that future reactive event into a planned controlled one then credibility can be lost, and the fingers will point at the PdM program not adding value!
Engineering should be the owners of the spares stock and oversee the procurement, I say oversee because purchasing have a role to play in producing the correct specification of spare in the correct location in a timely way.
Maintenance should always be very close to procurement to make sure that the specification and quality of the required parts is fit for purpose; I could have two identical bearings sat in front of me that look the same, smell the same but one is specified for it's operating context whereas the other may be sub standard and be prone to early failure.
Logically if I am going to invest in training people in Condition Based Maintenance (CBM), PdM technology, Total Productive Maintenance (I prefer Practice) and being Proactive then when these techniques do deliver we must make sure that stores and procurement are also proactive and not trapped in a reactive cycle. I find that this is where some PdM plans fail, if spares are not available to put that future reactive event into a planned controlled one then credibility can be lost, and the fingers will point at the PdM program not adding value!
Engineering should be the owners of the spares stock and oversee the procurement, I say oversee because purchasing have a role to play in producing the correct specification of spare in the correct location in a timely way.
Maintenance should always be very close to procurement to make sure that the specification and quality of the required parts is fit for purpose; I could have two identical bearings sat in front of me that look the same, smell the same but one is specified for it's operating context whereas the other may be sub standard and be prone to early failure.
You may need to justify the specification of your part to procurement, and you should as their job includes budget responsibilities
You can have the finest on line remote, internet of things, AI, labour intensive, trained predictive maintenance program, but without those critical parts available it adds no value.
So keep in mind the importance of keeping the stores people informed, help them by highlighting stock location anomalies, or low levels of critical spares, indicate if you are booking the last or penultimate part out, it all makes good sense to help each other out.
Stores personnel hold a lot of information about parts on systems and in their heads but they can't understand all the environmental and other conditions these items have to fulfil.
So keep in mind the importance of keeping the stores people informed, help them by highlighting stock location anomalies, or low levels of critical spares, indicate if you are booking the last or penultimate part out, it all makes good sense to help each other out.
Stores personnel hold a lot of information about parts on systems and in their heads but they can't understand all the environmental and other conditions these items have to fulfil.
Remember the consequences are multiple if you get caught out in this situation, the asset may not have entered a reactive phase (yet!) but now the procurement department goes into a reactive spasm of searching databases to see if the parts are in hand somewhere else, hoping their stockist has the part (or a similar one 'that will do' = future breakdown) or paying a premium for overnight shipping by courier.
Criticality of assets, lead time for spares, stock levels, specialist applications, high turnovers, rebuild times, shipping locations all of these impact spares availability to make sure we have the right spare at the right time and in the right place.
If you are fortunate to have this all covered so that right spare, time and place is a done deal don't leave it there, spares need to be looked after, some require maintenance themselves. Ensure that the best conditions possible are available, storage of spares in damp, dusty or vibration intense locations will be detrimental and only lead to premature failure when eventually fitted.
Large rotary items should be maintained periodically by rotating their shafts, I would always opt for 'dry' units that are replenished when put into service, it's no use having a gearbox sitting for years full of degrading oil. Vibration of floors or storage racks can damage bearing races in equipment through false brinelling, this causes bearing races to form damaging ridges due to fretting leading to early failure when in operation.
Some things to watch out for are mentioned above but others are bearings, seals and other parts removed from protective packaging and stored in open boxes, no systems for stock rotation, open free access to stores, prevalence of 'emergency orders', lack of stock controls i.e. no booking out system or one that is too hard to use, obsolete parts and duplication (I once found one bearing with eight part numbers!) These are just a few that spring to mind, I'm sure you can think of more.
In conclusion spares and procurement is a critical part if you aim to get the best from a PdM program, it's all part of a holistic engineering maintenance approach that I am keen on sharing at Uptime Consultant Ltd.
If you would like to know more, require advice, training or a helping hand then please get in touch with me at andy@uptimeconsultant.co.uk
Predictive Maintenance with Front Line Engagement
How to ensure payback from a Predictive Maintenance Strategy
It's the nature of my business that I get an insight into a wide range of industries including Food, Automotive, Utilities, Waste Recycling and FMCG.
The request is usually for an insight into introducing some predictive methods to move away from a totally reactive situation, or remove fixed time planned maintenance. Having a production background with experience of working not just with machinery but front line staff, gives me an insight into how to get the most from deploying PdM as part of the overall strategy.
This article is going to be too short to look at the bigger picture so apologies for not mentioning something you think should be included; remember if you want to cover that then you can write your own article! Rant over.
One of the things I ask clients to think about before I visit is the Who, What, Why, Where and When, also referred to as my 5Ws. By asking themselves these questions (and hopefully getting a reply) it gives me some great information about how far forward they are in their thinking and even if they have contemplated these issues.
I also always ask "What are the benefits you are targeting?" if there are no benefits then why bother investing time and money into PdM? It's best to identify the benefits up front before any program is started, this gets you to measure where you start in a point in time to track your future progress.
The much used and sometimes misrepresented P-F Interval above modified to display more readily what this Interval actually represents. P = Potential and F = Functional that exist on a timeline of an asset or item as it approaches the end of life on the far right, note the FAIL on here is not the F of the P-F Interval.
Potential for failure is shown here as a dotted line and by that I am trying to convey is that this is not fixed and neither is the Functional; functional is when your asset no longer performs at it's designed optimum run rate etc.
RCM II edition 2 by John Moubray states 'unable to fulfil a function to a standard which is acceptable to the user' slightly modified from the original print that states 'the inability of an asset to meet a desired standard of performance' so later including what the user required was added to the definition.
Lots of Reliability papers will set out that all you need to find out is the MTBF and action the asset before that point, this doesn't really add up though because over 80% of all failures are random in nature.
As shown by the six known failure patterns first identified by Nolan & Heap with RCM and here applied to other industries outside of aviation by Moubray. 'E' represents the flat line random failure at any point and 'F' shows high early mortality again with a random steady state following, both add up to 82%. Traditional time based wear is represented by the 2% shown in graph 'B'
For a PdM technique to provide benefit it simply has to identify the P-F interval as far ahead of time as is required for the asset to be restored in a planned event. Again this sounds easier than it is in the real world, for a start you have to deploy PdM closely allied to operations, scheduling and planning, without doing this you run the risk of missing an opportunity to action any found anomalies in a timely fashion.
There are a number of approaches that can be adopted that include; no PdM use, PdM contractor periodic visits, full time PdM specialist employed on site, a PdM action team, connected PdM solutions or a PdM enabled workforce.
They all can have their benefits depending on the appetite of an operation for risk, some may have a huge appetite and opt for no PdM at all and a traditional run to failure strategy, this might be justified by their budget constraints or the organisation being happy with the status quo.
The Uptime Consultant Ltd infographic above I produced to visualise optimised Maintenance Spend describes the different levels an organisation may find themselves in. It's not wrong in itself to be Reactive whilst overspending on parts, labour, time and resource, it's just where some companies operate; they may find that this is an unsustainable model. If you interested in finding out more have a read of my article 'The Maintenance Spend Conundrum' from back in June.
Opting for a PdM contractor may work if a small number of high value critical assets are targeted, these periodic inspections can prove to be too long between visits sometimes to identify the potential for failure.
Taking the PdM function in house has pros and cons in that the practitioner will require support with ongoing training and development, it's important that they are released from all other duties and that an investment in instruments and technology has to be factored in; remember that ROI has to be proven to return at least overall costs.
PdM teams sound like a good idea but can suffer from lack of focus and sometimes become an information gathering operation instead of a benefit providing solution.
PdM as a fully integrated solution is the holy grail and is the future, don't believe all the hype about IIoT, it's coming but still will take a shift in investment and thinking before we see it everywhere in the production environment. I have already published a couple of articles on this so will leave it at that.
'Predictive Maintenance with Front Line Engagement' as my title eludes to is the PdM enabled workforce, this is where real value is added with a little investment in awareness and training. This links back to my two previous articles on TPM and Autonomous Maintenance, the people that spend their time operating these assets should be empowered to become the owners and ultimately the decision makers regarding these assets, working within the overall mission of the operation.
The future as stated earlier I believe is in the totally connected facility, where machines feedback operating parameters allied with asset health information, integrated into scheduling, maintenance resources and procurement. Parts of this jigsaw already exist but at the moment it's like that second hand one you bought at a car boot with three jigsaws mixed together with half the pieces missing. I believe the untapped resource of the front line operator becoming a PdM evangelist is the way forward, until we can identify those missing pieces!
Condition Monitoring and the impact on Safety, Sustainability and Costs
Saving Time and Money with Condition Monitoring
Predictive Maintenance Matters
Why adopt Predictive Maintenance when we have Planned Maintenance ?
FLIR Image captured by Uptime Consultant Ltd ©2017
Predictive Maintenance (PdM) sometimes gets bad press and it's usually from the fire fighting brigade.
I'm not talking here about the ones that save your life when a building is burning down.
These are the fire fighting heroes of Reactive Maintenance, sitting like coiled springs awaiting the call to action stations!
Why bother with a Predictive outlook when we already have Planned Maintenance (PM), surely that covers all eventualities? At least until the next unplanned breakdown occurs and we call the emergency response!
Sometimes I just can't see why people are so anti predictive, after all it is reactive in essence, it's just that we are 'reacting' way ahead of the Functional Failure (F) in the P-F interval and can stop the assets hitting the deck. PdM is usually a Planned Maintenance activity as well, we take routine measurements based on criticality, risks, safety and ease of maintenance.
I see it as simple logic based on facts, things break, we don't know when, we would like to mitigate that risk or loss, let's use a technology that enhances our natural senses, we get an early warning, great now I can plan in a change activity to avoid the consequences.
I'm not talking here about the ones that save your life when a building is burning down.
These are the fire fighting heroes of Reactive Maintenance, sitting like coiled springs awaiting the call to action stations!
Why bother with a Predictive outlook when we already have Planned Maintenance (PM), surely that covers all eventualities? At least until the next unplanned breakdown occurs and we call the emergency response!
Sometimes I just can't see why people are so anti predictive, after all it is reactive in essence, it's just that we are 'reacting' way ahead of the Functional Failure (F) in the P-F interval and can stop the assets hitting the deck. PdM is usually a Planned Maintenance activity as well, we take routine measurements based on criticality, risks, safety and ease of maintenance.
I see it as simple logic based on facts, things break, we don't know when, we would like to mitigate that risk or loss, let's use a technology that enhances our natural senses, we get an early warning, great now I can plan in a change activity to avoid the consequences.
I always say if your business experiences consequences due to unplanned stoppages then you need to invest in becoming predictive
Most operations will sit somewhere on this time line of my 'Chaos to Control' infographic, some will accept where they are whilst others may want to move towards the right hand side.
To be on the far left is not wrong per se, it's just where you may find yourself today.
It will feel uncomfortable, disjointed, stressful, haphazard, hard to plan, but the fire fighters will love working there, heroes of the month on repeat.
Some organisations will sit right in the middle with lots of comfortable PMs that are managed and scheduled on an ever ongoing basis, they may get missed but those PMs will go on backlog, on and on they will go for ever adding no value, but at least it feels safe.
The fire fighters still get their days out with back slaps and hi fives all around
Far right, hold on what's happening here? We are operating in a planned way, operations are happy (who ever heard of that) availability is no longer a bottleneck, the PMs have been put to sleep, criticality has highlighted the major issues, RCA is adopted where triggered, front line operators are employed on TPM, predictive technologies are being deployed where risks or ROI have been identified, assets are maintained only 'On Condition' now, there's less stress is in the air and now there is even time for Continuous Improvement to take place.
Sounds too easy right?
That's true, no one gets a free ride to World Class Reliability, at the start it begins with a vision from the highest level in an organisation to take the journey to this future state.
Some talk of a change of culture on the shop floor, incorrect, it takes a change across the whole operation, it can't be administered in a silo.
Then there's that word 'culture' that can mean different things to different people, we need to be straight here and describe what we are really looking at. I'm going for the definition that describes 'the attitude and behaviour characteristic of a particular social group' some will instantly say that the 'attitude' needs changing, well I say good luck with that one.
For me the 'behaviour' or I prefer 'habits' are the best way to approach it.
This could make up a whole new post so I will leave it there for now.
What do you think?
Can you really change people when it comes to attitude?
I believe attitudes change when new habits and behaviours are adopted, that for me is the key.
Our people are our most valuable asset
A mantra often rolled out but often lacking in reality.
Within Process driven industries people and what they do day to day (habits) present the best opportunity to get ahead of the curve when adopting a Predictive culture.
The people close to the assets that drive the organisations bottom line are vastly undervalued in my opinion and can be a largely wasted resource.
Whenever I visit a new process or operation the operators are the people I head for, I often find they are hungry to be asked a simple 'what do you think' during the conversation and by me being a guest or third party they are usually more open to tell it how it is.
This is invaluable information that can provide real benefits very quickly.
These are the people that Predictive training in TPM/PdM should be aimed at, they are present, they 'operate' assets everyday, by simple changes in habit maybe we can allow them to 'care' for those assets each day, provide some ownership and they can influence the change to a Predictive operation.
Engineers from NISSAN Motor Manufacturing UK enjoying their UCL Introduction to Predictive Maintenance
I started this article like all of them with a thought and a blank white screen. My first option was to go down the path of PdM technologies and how they can be introduced, the ROI conversation, importance of criticality, safety, risks, all the usual stuff really.
Quite quickly I realised I wanted to rant about where the real journey to a Predictive organisation actually starts, with the front line employees who add value day in day out.
Some organisations will have already started on their journey, they will experience set backs, some hiccups along the way, some will carry on knowing this is all part of a bigger picture, and some may regress to the 'comfortable' status quo of reactive habits.
Quite quickly I realised I wanted to rant about where the real journey to a Predictive organisation actually starts, with the front line employees who add value day in day out.
Some organisations will have already started on their journey, they will experience set backs, some hiccups along the way, some will carry on knowing this is all part of a bigger picture, and some may regress to the 'comfortable' status quo of reactive habits.
The truth is that the Fire Fighters are all getting older, they are not being replaced, one day when the process hits the floor there will be no emergency response team
Like all of my articles I plan them by 'off loading' a list of thoughts about points I would like to cover, this one started like that and I usually delete the notes when I have finished.
In this case I have left them below for you to understand more about the key points I believe are important in getting to a better place, with more reliable assets, happier people and a sustainable operation.
Looking at them now I see a few more article subjects in there!
Reactive to Proactive to Predictive. Asset life cycle, why things fail, where to start, FMECA, Criticality, people, tools, training, investment, commitment, risks, aims, ROI, continuous improvement, hazards, horses for courses, why PdM fails, slow but sure, focus on the customer, be process driven, record everything, track reliability improvements, big wins, small events add up, RCM to target PdM, data blindness, don't get caught up in technology-it has to pay back, multiple benefits, report widely, connect with peer group, share learnings, reduce Labour, Revenue & Resource. Look for solutions, avoid reactionary work, educate others, connect with front line operators
In this case I have left them below for you to understand more about the key points I believe are important in getting to a better place, with more reliable assets, happier people and a sustainable operation.
Looking at them now I see a few more article subjects in there!
Reactive to Proactive to Predictive. Asset life cycle, why things fail, where to start, FMECA, Criticality, people, tools, training, investment, commitment, risks, aims, ROI, continuous improvement, hazards, horses for courses, why PdM fails, slow but sure, focus on the customer, be process driven, record everything, track reliability improvements, big wins, small events add up, RCM to target PdM, data blindness, don't get caught up in technology-it has to pay back, multiple benefits, report widely, connect with peer group, share learnings, reduce Labour, Revenue & Resource. Look for solutions, avoid reactionary work, educate others, connect with front line operators
Complementary Predictive Maintenance
What is complementary Predictive Maintenance and where does it exist in practice?
Complementary: combining in such a way as to enhance or emphasize the qualities of each other or another
Great image that I had to use, the Gullfiber Thermovision Service VW with a massive detector sticking out of a modified bus with a hatch in the roof. Assume this was just a publicity shot as any Thermographer may point out that a survey in what looks like blinding sunlight might not provide much value.
When I present and introduce PdM techniques I always try and emphasise that they are all just tools in a toolbox, they fit certain situations and some are best applied to particular assets. I also use a medical analogy that many CBM or PdM practitioners will recognise, for instance, an Oil Sample is similar to a blood sample and Ultrasound can be used to monitor babies or at a higher frequencies detect corona, tracking or arcing in electrics.
When I present and introduce PdM techniques I always try and emphasise that they are all just tools in a toolbox, they fit certain situations and some are best applied to particular assets. I also use a medical analogy that many CBM or PdM practitioners will recognise, for instance, an Oil Sample is similar to a blood sample and Ultrasound can be used to monitor babies or at a higher frequencies detect corona, tracking or arcing in electrics.
In the medical sphere if you present yourself to a GP he may prescribe a number of tests that in addition to blood tests could include scans or physical exams.
My own experience has included an inspection of my oesophagus through the nasal passage with a miniature borescope, great piece of kit and it only took about three minutes sitting in a chair. I now have a slightly larger version of a borescope for interior inspections of transmissions and other hard to see areas. My complementary medical therapy included a session on healthy lifestyle habits to look after my voice that included keeping well hydrated.
When we discuss PdM I advise that whilst it is great to use one technology to enhance our inspection it is best if you can complement it with another technique that adds more information. This use of a second technique can sometimes confirm or dispel the suspicions of an anomaly. I find that practitioners that prefer or only use one technology will favour that over all others, this is missing the point as far as I am concerned. We should treat these tools in a joined up fashion, they may be best suited to one mode of early equipment failure detection but can also enhance other methods.
I was asked recently by a colleague in the Lubrication industry to inspect four large transmissions that had shown some aeration on two of the units. The request was for samples to be sent to a laboratory for analysis to look for a cause before changing out the oil. To me it seemed only natural to add value and gather more evidence by using complementary inspections whilst I was there.
When we discuss PdM I advise that whilst it is great to use one technology to enhance our inspection it is best if you can complement it with another technique that adds more information. This use of a second technique can sometimes confirm or dispel the suspicions of an anomaly. I find that practitioners that prefer or only use one technology will favour that over all others, this is missing the point as far as I am concerned. We should treat these tools in a joined up fashion, they may be best suited to one mode of early equipment failure detection but can also enhance other methods.
I was asked recently by a colleague in the Lubrication industry to inspect four large transmissions that had shown some aeration on two of the units. The request was for samples to be sent to a laboratory for analysis to look for a cause before changing out the oil. To me it seemed only natural to add value and gather more evidence by using complementary inspections whilst I was there.
Above are the samples that over four hours later still showed air, gearbox one on the left was the worst offender with number four on the far right also showing suspended aeration.
I took several Thermal Images of the transmissions, Vibration samples of the motor drives and gearboxes along with Acoustic Emission spectra samples of the transmissions to look for internal anomalies.
These complementary inspections suggested that there were no mechanical issues with the assets; this gave me advanced information for when the Oil Samples came back from the laboratory.
These complementary inspections suggested that there were no mechanical issues with the assets; this gave me advanced information for when the Oil Samples came back from the laboratory.
FLIR image by Uptime Consultant shows an area of interest that shows an average reading of 27.7º centigrade with a high of 32.4º and low of 25.2º
A large part of my time previously as a practitioner was using Oil Sampling, Vibration, Thermal Imaging and AE. Although AE is closely associated with Ultrasound I was more interested in the structural frequencies at or above 1MHz, I had little experience of using the lower ranges mostly applied to airborne and fluid borne activity.
Thermal, Acoustic Emission and Tribology used as complementary techniques
I recently had the opportunity of taking an Ultrasound Level 1 course with IRISS and really enjoyed this 'new' aspect, the course materials opened up a lot of knowledge for me around the electrical effects of corona, tracking, arcing, partial discharge and airborne activity. This adds another complementary piece of PdM knowledge that I can now share with clients when discussing solutions for their industry.
None of these tools is the 'best' above any other method, it's horses for courses as far as I'm concerned, deploying more than one though will surely add more value to the search for an anomaly and expedite a solution.
What do you think, which is your 'best' PdM tool in your toolbox?
None of these tools is the 'best' above any other method, it's horses for courses as far as I'm concerned, deploying more than one though will surely add more value to the search for an anomaly and expedite a solution.
What do you think, which is your 'best' PdM tool in your toolbox?
Schematic Visual links Proactive & Predictive
Visuals are the best way of linking Proactive to Predictive Maintenance
The above schematic was produced for a customer to transfer knowledge and demonstrate the concept
So we ran the Criticality, looked at the CMMS history, put this together with the interviews with the front line guys and the spares used to arrive at where to start the Predictive Maintenance (PdM) journey.
There will be some 'bad actors' and then there will be the high risk assets that have been identified during the Criticality phase. We may or may not wish to use some Predictive instruments to give us an early warning of impending failure. Some may have been identified as RTF (Run To Failure).
Once this is decided I always start by planning any inspection route with an asset schematic. This will be a document that will cover many aspects as you will see below, it will tie together the Proactive and Predictive into one visual that is then used to transfer knowledge to the workforce who will implement the PdM process.
It usually ends up as a laminated work station job tool along with the Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) and Safe Working Practices (SWP)
For me it's the people not the technology that are the key to a robust pragmatic Proactive and Predictive strategy. Basic senses that can be enhanced over time with the introduction of easy to use condition monitoring tools is the most productive way to start.
The information included shows the Motor numbers (or other asset tags), a key for the Lubricants used, volume fills included where required on housings, intervals for sampling or oil change, SOP numbers for quick reference and some other special information; in this case for Polymer filled bearings that require no lubrication.
This is just part of a production line for a customer and the visual is useful to train the concept of PdM inspection and how it fits with a proactive strategy.
This tool also has multiple uses when displayed in the work area as it makes it easier to identify asset numbers of equipment without getting too close when in production.
Colour coding also works well and is tied into the lubrication regime with colour coded storage vessels.
NB. The 'yellow' Fryer is not full of G100 Hydraulic Oil!
The other use is for planning and developing a data-logger route for Condition Monitoring inspection:
Once this is decided I always start by planning any inspection route with an asset schematic. This will be a document that will cover many aspects as you will see below, it will tie together the Proactive and Predictive into one visual that is then used to transfer knowledge to the workforce who will implement the PdM process.
It usually ends up as a laminated work station job tool along with the Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) and Safe Working Practices (SWP)
For me it's the people not the technology that are the key to a robust pragmatic Proactive and Predictive strategy. Basic senses that can be enhanced over time with the introduction of easy to use condition monitoring tools is the most productive way to start.
The information included shows the Motor numbers (or other asset tags), a key for the Lubricants used, volume fills included where required on housings, intervals for sampling or oil change, SOP numbers for quick reference and some other special information; in this case for Polymer filled bearings that require no lubrication.
This is just part of a production line for a customer and the visual is useful to train the concept of PdM inspection and how it fits with a proactive strategy.
This tool also has multiple uses when displayed in the work area as it makes it easier to identify asset numbers of equipment without getting too close when in production.
Colour coding also works well and is tied into the lubrication regime with colour coded storage vessels.
NB. The 'yellow' Fryer is not full of G100 Hydraulic Oil!
The other use is for planning and developing a data-logger route for Condition Monitoring inspection:
Above is a screenshot from the Acoustic Emission inspection route for the assets
As you can see above this runs to 22 Points of interest to take readings in the data-logger; this is just for demonstration purposes but you can get the idea.
The POINT shorthand i.e. M11MTR, is the information displayed in the logger, you can see it is important to arrive at a standard shorthand to make things easy.
Hope you've enjoyed this short insight, get in touch if you would like to know any more about starting or modifying your Proactive and Predictive Maintenance journey.
I can always come along and see if this suits your process; basically anything that rotates and causes you pain and losses when it's down as an unplanned event can justify your return on investment.
The POINT shorthand i.e. M11MTR, is the information displayed in the logger, you can see it is important to arrive at a standard shorthand to make things easy.
Hope you've enjoyed this short insight, get in touch if you would like to know any more about starting or modifying your Proactive and Predictive Maintenance journey.
I can always come along and see if this suits your process; basically anything that rotates and causes you pain and losses when it's down as an unplanned event can justify your return on investment.