Clearly understanding this concept is one of the key elements of maintenance and reliability, and the key reason why rationalisation methods will never really be able to challenge correct application of Reliability-centered Maintenance.
Almost every single analysis I do I come across the example of assets being managed based on what they are.
A pump receives the "basic standard" of maintenance that you would expect for a pump, a centrifuge is overhauled every 18 months as you would expect and no one asks any questions.
Yet costs are far higher, return to service failures are higher, and a preponderance of redundant maintenance tasks.
WHy? Because they are not focussing on the function of the assets!
A three unit sulphide pumping system receives regular vibration analysis on the duty unit.
When pushed further it becomes very clear that
Almost every single analysis I do I come across the example of assets being managed based on what they are.
A pump receives the "basic standard" of maintenance that you would expect for a pump, a centrifuge is overhauled every 18 months as you would expect and no one asks any questions.
Yet costs are far higher, return to service failures are higher, and a preponderance of redundant maintenance tasks.
WHy? Because they are not focussing on the function of the assets!
A three unit sulphide pumping system receives regular vibration analysis on the duty unit.
When pushed further it becomes very clear that
- if it fails the stand by will start automatically without any operational impact,
- if allowed to fail there will be no additional secondary damage, and
- if it is predicted and replaced it will take 4 days to restore the function, and if it fails in an unplanned fashion restoring the function will also take 4 days!
So why is this task even being done? Proponents of the "back to the 50's" maintenance thinking try to tie this to risk. But as can be seen above there is no additional risks at all.
Sure, if we are talking about one or two motors then not doing it will have a negligible impact.
But when we are talking about a plant with 5,000 pump sets, and this thinking threads through everything..... then this is a game changing move.
Always, ALWAYS, consider what it is you want the asset to do, what the operating context is, and what the full ramifications are before blindly managing it as you do any other asset of its type.