Reliability-centered maintenance and the use of templates

There is no doubt that Reliability-centered maintenance is finally being recognized as the central pillar of any asset management or maintenance function. What continues to perplex companies is how to implement RCM in a way that maximizes benefit creation, limits costs and time frames, and ensures adequate knowledge transfer without excessive resource impacts.

In trying to find a way through this maze many companies opt for a template style approach. Fundamentally this approach is sound and is one that I myself use and recommend in my training courses and consulting assignments. However, it is not something to be taken lightly.

One of the key dangers of templating is that it can become an exercise in populating a database, rather than an exercise in optimizing maintenance regimes.

I have now seen this a number of times and each time it is a little more frightening than the last. In extreme cases the templates and built at equipment level, inaccurate, and rolled out as a way of "getting something in" in the mistaken belief that this is better than nothing.

There is also, almost always, the belief that "we will come back later to improve on this".

Both of these assumptions are incorrect. As Nowlan and heap pointed out, as well as many other commentators since the original report, one of the main causes of equipment failure is over-maintenance, or incorrect maintenance. Not only as a cause of equipment failures but also as a cause of higher than required maintenance base line costs.

So, following from that, if a rapid approach of getting templates in has resulted in higher maintenance costs and poorer performance... What do you think the chances are of revisiting the process at a later date?

The last point is one of ownership. Like any other method a lot of work needs to go into event he data exercise that incorrect template application results in. This tends to get people "emotionally committed" to the work at hand. And if the opportunity does arise to do things correctly, they sadly do not take it.

(A dis-service to their employers and questionable in terms of engineering ethics if they do realize that what they are doing is deficient)

If a company is going to use analysis templates there are a few standard rules or procedures that will need to be in place to make sure that the integrity of the analysis is not compromised in any way. (The detail of this will come out in two months in a report I am working on at present)

1 - Ensure that all template are at an adequate system level where ever possible.

2- Ensure that there is a clear link between the system level analysis templates and the equipment level data templates.

3- Ensure that equipment can be graded into those requiring extensive reviews of the template due to changes in operating context or equipment types, those that require minor adjustments due only to minor changes in operating context, and those that will require little to no change. (Such as groups of lamp posts for example)

4- Ensure, (critical), that all hidden functions are treated based upon the specific consequences and probabilities of failure at each instance. Due to the potentially disastrous results of these items it is wise to make sure they are adequately reviewed or extremely serious errors could result.

Cheers,

Daryl...